I became interested in penguins after I heard that the penguin is in danger because of global warming. “Over the past 50 years, the population of Antarctic emperor penguins has declined by 50 percent due to global warming” (Roach, 2001, para. 1). Also penguins are losing their habitats because the ice is melting even now. The penguins eat krill or lantern fish, but they are going to die, which means there is not enough food for penguins anymore. According to Eccleston (2007), most krill, which are penguin’s food, are going to die, because of high temperature of the sea. They also must live in colder climates; like penguins, they now face extinction. The penguins need to live in really cold weather but the climate has been changed by global warming to warmer than before. It is a very serious thing for penguins; one author said, “One of the coldest environments in the world is actually seeing some of the fastest rates of global warming, and unless action is taken to reduce global CO2 emissions, the future of many Antarctic species looks bleak” (Aldred, 2007, para. 4). These days, not many people care about global warming, because they do not really feel it is serious. However, this event is going to be more serious, so from now on we need to care about environmental problems.
There have been some problems with penguins, so we need to protect them as soon as possible. What we can do is we should prevent global warming, provide them their food, which is krill, and make their nests.
First, now we should not make global warming worse. In “Global Warming” the author states “Global warming is climate change that causes the average temperature of the Earth's lower atmosphere to increase” (n.d, para. 2). In addition, global warming comes from human activity actually. It means a lot of living organisms are going to die because of us. Many people do not know whether they make pollution. They need to realize quickly what they are doing wrong. Global warming comes because of the greenhouse effect. Many people know that global warming is becoming more serious, but they do not try anything, because if they try, their living will be uncomfortable. Moreover, in “Cars and Global Warming: What's the Link? RFF Scholar Proposes CO2 Emissions Labels on All New Cars” the author says, “The United States is the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases in general, and CO2 in particular. Fully 23 percent of all CO2 emissions come from the United States. One-third of these emissions come from the transportation sector” (2006, para. 7). However they do not really care about CO2 emissions, because car dealers do not tell buyers anything about that. Nowadays, our living style is very comfortable, but it has caused global warming. Actually the greenhouse effect is not bad, because it has made the earth warm enough to live on. However, greenhouse gases absorb too much sunlight, and then it brings global warming. Greenhouse gases come from many things, especially the cars. As a result, we need to reduce greenhouse gases by using our own cars less and using less of things that include carbon dioxide.
Second, I suggest that we should support penguins with their food. They usually eat krill, which is similar to shrimp, but the krill is almost dead because of the high temperature of the sea. The krill cannot live in warmer sea, so just little of krill is surviving. Unfortunately, penguins are not only becoming homeless but also going to starve. According to Aldred’s article, he states “Some colonies of chinstraps have seen reductions in numbers of up to two-thirds because less food has made it more difficult for youngsters to survive” (2007, para 8). So we should help them, because it is our fault. They have never destroyed anything; we made almost everything that is harmful for the earth. So we should have a responsibility about that. I think it is possible to rear krill for them. It also can create jobs for poor countries, and then we can protect the environment, because I have heard that poverty is one of the pollutants in core class. This problem is also one that we made, so everyone should join this project. I do not mean everyone should work to rear krill; I mean we should help in some way that we can do, even if it is a little thing.
Finally, we should make a place which is kept at a low temperature and is at a specific place. Penguins are losing their home now because glaciers are melting now. According to Guodong’s article, “Warmer temperatures and stronger winds mean the penguins had to raise their chicks on increasingly thinner sea ice. For many years, sea ice has broken off early and many eggs and chicks have been blown away before they were ready to survive on their own” (2007, para. 5). It means they cannot take care of their chicks, because sea ice has broken down many places and they need to move to a fine place to live continually. In fact, they are still fine to stay, but they will not have any places to stay in a short time. So we need to help them as soon as we can. It will be expensive to make something such as that thing, but we should keep every living organism as we do human beings, because we have made them like that. Perhaps some people have already tried to make them homes, for example, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), but it could not be done because it cannot be done by minor people. So, if we want to be successful to do that, we need to help them as much as we can. However, one thing we have a problem with is that many people do not know how we can participate. For example, I would like to help them, but I do not know how to help or how to participate to help them. So WWF or an organization like it needs to let us know the way to help them and participate.
Many people think that it is unnecessary to help penguins, because they think it is hard for even them to live now. They just care about their family and friends or someone who is around them. It is absolutely unfair, because penguins also have their lives and their family and they did not destroy the environment. Almost every person thinks that is not their business, so they are becoming selfish now. The most serious thing is that people always think there are a lot of environmentalists, so many people think environmental problems will be solved by the environmentalists. Global warming comes because of all the people; however, why do people just think the environmentalists should do that? The problem has come because of all the people, so everybody should solve the problems together. However they do not want to even try to realize. One thing they do not know is that if other organisms were gone, human also will be gone. In addition, some people know how serious it is but they do not try because they do not feel they need to help penguins. In my opinion a lot of harmful factors are caused by human activities, due to our convenient life, so from now on we should help them and we need to help them live without worrying.
In conclusion, they are going to die due to human activity actually, so I would like to say we have to, but I know it is not going to work, so we ought to help them even with a little thing. I think the government should do something as soon as possible; it is not only my opinion but also Guodong’s opinion that “After such a long march to Bali, ministers must now commit to sharp reductions in carbon emissions for industrialized countries, to protect Antarctica and safeguard the health of the planet” (2007, para. 12). Global warming is becoming more serious, so we should reduce what is causing global warming to get worse, we should start to rear krill as soon as possible, and we need to know how we can help them, and then we should participate to help them.
Reference
Aldred, J. (2007, November 11). Bleak future for Antarctic penguins, report warns. Guardian. Retrieved on June 10, 2008 from http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/dec/11/endangeredspecies.conservation
Cars and Global Warming: What's the Link? RFF Scholar Proposes CO2 Emissions Labels on All New Cars. (2006, March 23). WWF Resources. Retrieved on June 18, 2008 from http://www.rff.org/rff/News/Releases/2006Releases/Cars-and-Global-Warming.cfm
Du G. (2007, December 11). WWF: Climate warming threatens Antarctica Penguins.Xinhua. Retrieved on June 19, 2008 from http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-12/11/content_7230273.htm
Eccleston, P. (2007, November 12). Penguins now threatened by global warming. Telegraph. Retrieved on June 10, 2008 from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/Content/displayPrintable.jhtml;jsessionid=2PFWTF5YFYOJ5QFIQMFSFGGAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/earth/2007/12/11/eapeng111.xml&site=30&page=0
Global warming . (n.d). Chicagotribune. Retrieved on June 19, 2008 from http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/environmental-issues/global-warming/06011000.topic
Roach, J. (2004, September 13). Penguin decline due to global warming? NationalGeographic. Retrieved on June 10, 2008 from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/09/0913_040913_penguins.html
Friday, June 20, 2008
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Internet style language
These days, we cannot live without the Internet; that means the Internet has become part of our cultures now. There are many good things about using the Internet; however, there are also bad things about using it for people, especially for high school students. Nowadays high school students use the Internet for playing games, chatting with friends and reading unnecessary articles. One of the articles said that “Their abilities to write clearly have deteriorated appreciably in the past four or five years” (2008, para. 35).
So, even though the Internet is useful, I disagree that high school students should use the Internet a lot, because it can cause serious problems. There might be some students who use the Internet in a good way, but some others might not. Using the Internet a lot brings some problem to high school students, so their parents should control it for their children.
First, high school students have lost their writing skills because of Internet style language. They usually use informal language such as slang, or they make words shortly. According to Weeks, “the things that suffer most are spelling and punctuation. They put a comma, not a period, where there is a pause” (2008, para. 36). Nobody thinks it is serious, but it is very serious because language is one part of the big culture. If we let them use language like this now, the academic language will slowly go away. As long as they are learning writing skill at school, there should be a time limit on using computer before they graduate.
Second, the online game is an issue recently, because some students play the online game most of their days. They just stay at home and play online games. This situation can bring them death or give them mental disorders. They usually skip classes; they stay alone and they do not talk with family much. It is common for game addicts. In Asia, many people have died because of game addiction. So parents should not let them do that if they really care about their children.
Finally, nowadays they use a lot of slang and they use shortcuts. I think there are a lot of websites, where I can read unnecessary articles. The articles are mostly stories about celebrities and pictures. As you know there are a lot of slang words and shortcuts. High school students can access that website easily online and most of them like celebrities’ stories. When they read those articles and they find some new word, they will try to use that word. Because of that reason, their writing skill is going bad. In Lee’s article, she says that “some teachers find the new writing style alarming”. “First of all, it’s very rude, and it’s very careless”(2008, paras. 37-38). It is getting more serious now, so the people who wrote the celebrity articles should not write articles which include slang and shortcuts.
In my opinion, the Internet is very useful for our lives, but it can cause serious problems for high school students. Nowadays nobody can live without computer, so let them use computer with a time limit. In addition, someone should teach them how to use Internet effectively. Writing skill is very important, but high school students do not realize that writing can show the writer’s personality.
Reference
Lee, J. (2002, September). Nu shortcuts in school R2 much $ teachers. NY Times. Retrieved on June 17, 2008, from http://tinyurl.com/5p7vtb
Weeks, L. (2008, June 15). The fate of the sentence: is the writing on the wall? Washington Post. Retrieved on June 17, 2008, from http://tinyurl.com/6bp4kz
So, even though the Internet is useful, I disagree that high school students should use the Internet a lot, because it can cause serious problems. There might be some students who use the Internet in a good way, but some others might not. Using the Internet a lot brings some problem to high school students, so their parents should control it for their children.
First, high school students have lost their writing skills because of Internet style language. They usually use informal language such as slang, or they make words shortly. According to Weeks, “the things that suffer most are spelling and punctuation. They put a comma, not a period, where there is a pause” (2008, para. 36). Nobody thinks it is serious, but it is very serious because language is one part of the big culture. If we let them use language like this now, the academic language will slowly go away. As long as they are learning writing skill at school, there should be a time limit on using computer before they graduate.
Second, the online game is an issue recently, because some students play the online game most of their days. They just stay at home and play online games. This situation can bring them death or give them mental disorders. They usually skip classes; they stay alone and they do not talk with family much. It is common for game addicts. In Asia, many people have died because of game addiction. So parents should not let them do that if they really care about their children.
Finally, nowadays they use a lot of slang and they use shortcuts. I think there are a lot of websites, where I can read unnecessary articles. The articles are mostly stories about celebrities and pictures. As you know there are a lot of slang words and shortcuts. High school students can access that website easily online and most of them like celebrities’ stories. When they read those articles and they find some new word, they will try to use that word. Because of that reason, their writing skill is going bad. In Lee’s article, she says that “some teachers find the new writing style alarming”. “First of all, it’s very rude, and it’s very careless”(2008, paras. 37-38). It is getting more serious now, so the people who wrote the celebrity articles should not write articles which include slang and shortcuts.
In my opinion, the Internet is very useful for our lives, but it can cause serious problems for high school students. Nowadays nobody can live without computer, so let them use computer with a time limit. In addition, someone should teach them how to use Internet effectively. Writing skill is very important, but high school students do not realize that writing can show the writer’s personality.
Reference
Lee, J. (2002, September). Nu shortcuts in school R2 much $ teachers. NY Times. Retrieved on June 17, 2008, from http://tinyurl.com/5p7vtb
Weeks, L. (2008, June 15). The fate of the sentence: is the writing on the wall? Washington Post. Retrieved on June 17, 2008, from http://tinyurl.com/6bp4kz
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Friday, June 6, 2008
Threatened Penguin
In Bryan Walsh’s (2008) article, “Is it too warm for penguins?” he states that penguins are threatened by global warming now. In this article, the author says that penguins still have an acceptable population; however, they are not sure after decades. They are hardly surviving now because global warming brings big events; for example, global warming changes the temperature of the sea, which removes their food, which is lantern fish or krill. So their chicks going to die due to not being supplied feed. Also many researchers say that the penguins need ice to live, but rising temperature continues getting higher as ice melts.
As the world has developed, our lifestyles have become so comfortable now. However, do you know the environment is being destroyed even right now? Carbon dioxide is the biggest reason to bring greenhouse effect, so we need to know about it and make it gone. Now I will illustrate some solutions.
First, nowadays human activities are harmful even for humans. They do not realize that we cannot survive without the environment. They just want to be more comfortable. People always drive their own car, and do not use the public transportation. I know we cannot live without any transportation. However, we need to control it now. The gas from cars mostly consists of carbon dioxide, so from now on we should use the public transportation instead of using our own cars.
Second, recently there are some places where they use alternative energy in many countries. It was really good to try, but now not many people prefer it, because using alternative energy is more expensive. But if we think of our future, we ought to do that without thinking about money. The nuclear power makes energy a lot of energy with a little bit of resources. However while making energy, the carbon dioxide is much more than with other kinds. And also it is hard to clean up after using nuclear resources. We should change to make our energy system to use natural resources.
Third, as everyone knows, trees change carbon dioxide to oxygen. However, people have been logging uncountable trees these days for their own benefit. The carbon dioxide is continually coming out of everywhere, but humans are taking trees away. I read some articles and they said that we should keep planting many trees right now. Also the government should create a law that makes a limit on logging trees.
In conclusion, I realize as I am writing this, that now not only penguins or any other organisms but also humans are in danger. Nevertheless, nobody cares about that, as if that is not their business. In my opinion, the most important thing is to notice many times how serious it is. In addition, every student should be required to learn about global warming. What we need to do is do it first from myself.
Reference
Walsh, B. (2008, February 12). Is it getting too warm for penguins? Time. Retrieved June 3, 2008 from http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1712518,00.html
As the world has developed, our lifestyles have become so comfortable now. However, do you know the environment is being destroyed even right now? Carbon dioxide is the biggest reason to bring greenhouse effect, so we need to know about it and make it gone. Now I will illustrate some solutions.
First, nowadays human activities are harmful even for humans. They do not realize that we cannot survive without the environment. They just want to be more comfortable. People always drive their own car, and do not use the public transportation. I know we cannot live without any transportation. However, we need to control it now. The gas from cars mostly consists of carbon dioxide, so from now on we should use the public transportation instead of using our own cars.
Second, recently there are some places where they use alternative energy in many countries. It was really good to try, but now not many people prefer it, because using alternative energy is more expensive. But if we think of our future, we ought to do that without thinking about money. The nuclear power makes energy a lot of energy with a little bit of resources. However while making energy, the carbon dioxide is much more than with other kinds. And also it is hard to clean up after using nuclear resources. We should change to make our energy system to use natural resources.
Third, as everyone knows, trees change carbon dioxide to oxygen. However, people have been logging uncountable trees these days for their own benefit. The carbon dioxide is continually coming out of everywhere, but humans are taking trees away. I read some articles and they said that we should keep planting many trees right now. Also the government should create a law that makes a limit on logging trees.
In conclusion, I realize as I am writing this, that now not only penguins or any other organisms but also humans are in danger. Nevertheless, nobody cares about that, as if that is not their business. In my opinion, the most important thing is to notice many times how serious it is. In addition, every student should be required to learn about global warming. What we need to do is do it first from myself.
Reference
Walsh, B. (2008, February 12). Is it getting too warm for penguins? Time. Retrieved June 3, 2008 from http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1712518,00.html
Friday, May 30, 2008
Penguin in danger
In Paul Eccleston’s (2007) article, “Penguin now threatened by global warming,” he explains that the penguins have lost their place to live because of global warming. Global warming causes climate change and overfishing, which is harmful for penguins. Warmer weather condition makes some penguins gone. In addition, the temperature of the sea is higher and sea ice has been melting. Then, some species are dead, especially the prey of penguins. Therefore, penguins that can live in a warmer climate cannot avoid death because they are in deficiency of their feed. They usually eat krill but krill is dying now because of the high temperature of the sea. Nowadays, people try to protect penguins from global warming.
Now, we need to protect penguins before they are exterminated. What we can do for them is we can make them their nest, supply them with food, and try to prevent global warming.
First, we should make the place, which is kept at a low temperature at a specific place. They are losing their home now because glacier is melting now. In fact, they are still fine to stay, but they will not have any places to stay in a short time. So we need to help them as soon as we can. It will be expensive to make something such as that thing, but we should keep every living organism as we do human beings. Perhaps some people have already tried to make them homes, but it could not be done because of cost. So if all people are paid, a little bit, it would be a lot of money and then we could make that for them.
Second, they are in trouble that is worse than losing their home. They usually eat krill, which is similar to shrimp, but the krill is almost dead because of the high temperature of the sea. The krill cannot live in warmer sea, so just 15% of krill is surviving. Unfortunately, penguins are not only becoming homeless but also going to starve. However, if we tried to help them, it could work. Actually, I want to help them but I do not know how do it. Therefore, if someone noticed how to help them, many people who are animal lovers would do that.
Third, now we know that every problem comes from global warming. In addition, global warming comes from human activity actually. It means a lot of living organisms are going to die because of us. Many people do not know whether they make pollution. They need to realize quickly what they are doing wrong. For example, the air pollution comes from many kinds of gas, especially gas from the cars. In this day, almost everyone has their own car instead of using public transportation. We should know that if environment was destroyed, we would not survive anymore.
In conclusion, global warming is serious for not only penguins but also all the living organisms. Now, I am interested in penguins so I am looking for many articles about penguins. Penguin is one of the most endearing symbols of animals, so we need to protect them by figuring out solutions so that penguin can survive. We should not care of just ourselves; we should care about every living organism that we are living together with.
Reference
Eccleston, P. (2007, November 12). Penguins now threatened by global warming. Telegraph. Retrieved on May 29, 2008 from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/Content/displayPrintable.jhtml;jsessionid=2PFWTF5YFYOJ5QFIQMFSFGGAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/earth/2007/12/11/eapeng111.xml&site=30&page=0
Now, we need to protect penguins before they are exterminated. What we can do for them is we can make them their nest, supply them with food, and try to prevent global warming.
First, we should make the place, which is kept at a low temperature at a specific place. They are losing their home now because glacier is melting now. In fact, they are still fine to stay, but they will not have any places to stay in a short time. So we need to help them as soon as we can. It will be expensive to make something such as that thing, but we should keep every living organism as we do human beings. Perhaps some people have already tried to make them homes, but it could not be done because of cost. So if all people are paid, a little bit, it would be a lot of money and then we could make that for them.
Second, they are in trouble that is worse than losing their home. They usually eat krill, which is similar to shrimp, but the krill is almost dead because of the high temperature of the sea. The krill cannot live in warmer sea, so just 15% of krill is surviving. Unfortunately, penguins are not only becoming homeless but also going to starve. However, if we tried to help them, it could work. Actually, I want to help them but I do not know how do it. Therefore, if someone noticed how to help them, many people who are animal lovers would do that.
Third, now we know that every problem comes from global warming. In addition, global warming comes from human activity actually. It means a lot of living organisms are going to die because of us. Many people do not know whether they make pollution. They need to realize quickly what they are doing wrong. For example, the air pollution comes from many kinds of gas, especially gas from the cars. In this day, almost everyone has their own car instead of using public transportation. We should know that if environment was destroyed, we would not survive anymore.
In conclusion, global warming is serious for not only penguins but also all the living organisms. Now, I am interested in penguins so I am looking for many articles about penguins. Penguin is one of the most endearing symbols of animals, so we need to protect them by figuring out solutions so that penguin can survive. We should not care of just ourselves; we should care about every living organism that we are living together with.
Reference
Eccleston, P. (2007, November 12). Penguins now threatened by global warming. Telegraph. Retrieved on May 29, 2008 from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/Content/displayPrintable.jhtml;jsessionid=2PFWTF5YFYOJ5QFIQMFSFGGAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/earth/2007/12/11/eapeng111.xml&site=30&page=0
Antarctica Wilkins ice
According to P. Spotts (March 28, 2008) in this article “Antarctica’s Wilkins Ice Shelf eroding at an unforeseen pace” Antarctica's ice shelf has collapsed and been destroyed because of global warming recently. This article says that its erosion would not directly affect the sea level. However, glaciologists are worried about Antarctica`s ice shelves because if this would be melted, it could make the sea level definitely higher, and another reason is the glaciers are melting faster than before now. So one of the researchers says that scientists need to find why events like that happen and then they can anticipate what will happen next.
I am going to write about why global warming has come; it is because of gas from the car, the Freon gas and gas from waste treatment.
First, these days there are many cars in the world now and many people use the cars now. The global warming is going to be more serious, but nobody cares about that. The gas from cars destroys the ozone. As we know the ozone is important for our lives; we should protect that. The way we can protect the ozone is we need to use public transportation instead of our own car. If we do that, we can not only protect the ozone but also save our money.
Second, we ought to control the use of air conditioner because it is really harmful for the environment. When we use air conditioner the Freon gas will come out from there. It also destroys the ozone as a gas from car. Some people turn on the air conditioner all day. It can not only waste money but also destroy the environment. If you really knew what will happen next because of global warming, just try to control the use of air conditioner.
Third, I did not know this before, but when we treat waste, some harmful gas comes out of there. But I heard that if we use recyclable things or organic things, the gas will be reduced a lot. Nowadays there are a lot of recyclable things and organic things, but many people do not purchase those things because of price. It is true those things are more expensive than the other things, but we need to buy them for the environment. The pollution is going to be more serious in 10 years, which means we will not be able to live the same as now. Many people do not realize how serious it is. when they realize it, that will be too late. Even from now on, we try to change to purchase things that are recyclable things and organic things.
In my opinion, the global warming did not seem to be so serious for me. However I read some articles, and then I realized that I was wrong. I knew that if the ozone is destroyed, it can become the most serious thing ever. We could have skin cancer if it was more serious than now. Everyone needs to realize this as soon as possible and they should try what they can do. What we can do are we can use public transportation instead of our own car, try to control the use of air conditioner and finally we can buy recyclable and organic things instead of non-recyclable things.
Reference
Spotts, P. (2008, March 28). Antarctic’s Wilkins Ice Shelf Eroding at an Unforeseen Pace. The christian Science Monitor. Retrieved May 26, 2008 from http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0328/p25s10-wogi.htm
I am going to write about why global warming has come; it is because of gas from the car, the Freon gas and gas from waste treatment.
First, these days there are many cars in the world now and many people use the cars now. The global warming is going to be more serious, but nobody cares about that. The gas from cars destroys the ozone. As we know the ozone is important for our lives; we should protect that. The way we can protect the ozone is we need to use public transportation instead of our own car. If we do that, we can not only protect the ozone but also save our money.
Second, we ought to control the use of air conditioner because it is really harmful for the environment. When we use air conditioner the Freon gas will come out from there. It also destroys the ozone as a gas from car. Some people turn on the air conditioner all day. It can not only waste money but also destroy the environment. If you really knew what will happen next because of global warming, just try to control the use of air conditioner.
Third, I did not know this before, but when we treat waste, some harmful gas comes out of there. But I heard that if we use recyclable things or organic things, the gas will be reduced a lot. Nowadays there are a lot of recyclable things and organic things, but many people do not purchase those things because of price. It is true those things are more expensive than the other things, but we need to buy them for the environment. The pollution is going to be more serious in 10 years, which means we will not be able to live the same as now. Many people do not realize how serious it is. when they realize it, that will be too late. Even from now on, we try to change to purchase things that are recyclable things and organic things.
In my opinion, the global warming did not seem to be so serious for me. However I read some articles, and then I realized that I was wrong. I knew that if the ozone is destroyed, it can become the most serious thing ever. We could have skin cancer if it was more serious than now. Everyone needs to realize this as soon as possible and they should try what they can do. What we can do are we can use public transportation instead of our own car, try to control the use of air conditioner and finally we can buy recyclable and organic things instead of non-recyclable things.
Reference
Spotts, P. (2008, March 28). Antarctic’s Wilkins Ice Shelf Eroding at an Unforeseen Pace. The christian Science Monitor. Retrieved May 26, 2008 from http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0328/p25s10-wogi.htm
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Starbucks cup
A Starbucks cup is not recyclable, but now “Starbucks, the Seattle coffee company, plans to announce Wednesday that it will start stocking its store with cups made with 10 percent recycled material” (Warner, 2004, para. 2). Starbucks is one of the famous coffee shops, so they use a lot of cups. According to Warner (2004), Starbucks uses an estimated 1.5 billion cups annually. It is incredibly a lot, but they do not switch to recyclable material, because the cost is too high. Also Warner (2004) said, “The higher cost is one reason that other food companies have not switched to recycled cups” (para. 7). Some people think it is good to try even 10 percent, but some other people think this is too little to recycle. “Anna Kim-Williams, Starbucks spokeswoman, said she encourages customers to bring their own mugs, which she said helped North American Starbucks customers save more than 674,000 pounds of paper in 2006. Bringing one’s own cup to Starbucks scores a 10-cent discount on coffee” (Adewumi, 2007 para. 6). The real problem is people never care about whether the environment is being destroyed or not. Today, nobody thinks about how they can protect the environment, they just think how they can live well. We would find out how much the environment is important to live for us, when the environment is destroyed.
There would be some problems if they tried to switch to recyclable cups, but they did not try, because it is expensive. They need to announce to bring customers’ own mugs to save paper. Now they use large amount of paper; if they tried to find a method to help the environment, customers would be glad to know that Starbucks is green even if that is pretending.
First, I believe that Starbucks earns a lot nowadays as everyone knows, but I don’t understand why they care about money too much to change to recycled cups. According to one article, “Chaplin said Solo has fully recyclable cups in development that use plant-based resins made from corn. These recyclable cups are expected to be able to be available in early 2008, but Chaplin said the corn demand is high now, which may drive up the cost of the cups for potential buyers like Starbucks” (Adewumi, 2007, para. 10). I just think negatively, because I believe they don’t care whether the environment is destroyed or not. I mean they just do that because they want to show us that Starbucks is really worried about the environment in a commercial. If they really are worried, they ought to switch to more than 10% recyclable material or to fully recyclable cups. In my opinion people will spend more time at Starbucks when people think Starbucks is really eco-friendly. There are some people who do not care whether Starbucks is green or not, but some other people do. So even if a fully recycled cup is expensive, they ought to change for the environment and us. At first, they might earn less than before, because they spend a lot of money for fully recyclable cups, but as time goes on, they will not only earn a lot but also become more famous than before because they’ve tried to be green and done it. The coffee price should increase, because cups are expensive, but people will drink at Starbucks, because they are greener. I think it is good for both Starbucks and the environment, because of that reason.
Second, Starbucks uses a lot of paper cups annually, and such a large amount of paper is becoming garbage now. “Starbucks, which uses an estimated 1.5 billion cups annually, currently puts recycled paper into its cardboard cup sleeves, napkins and cardboard carriers” (Warner, 2004, para. 4). “Starbucks, which goes through 1.9 billion cups annually, plans to eventually increase the recycled-fiber content of its packaging” (Anderson 2006, para. 2). If they are really eco-friendly, they should find a method to help the environment. But they do not do anything at this moment; they do not appear to care whether a large amount of paper is becoming garbage. And there is one more problem that “Amy Schirf, Centre Country Solid Waste Authority education counselor, said the county does not accept the coffee cups, and said she was not aware of any waste management group in Centre County accepting them” (Conrad, 2007, para. 2). As the author says, the cups are not accepted, so where they are going? I am sure that neither anyone knows nor anyone cares about that. Almost nobody knows whether Starbucks cups are recyclable, even some who worked or are working at Starbucks (Adewumi 2007, para. 9). Also this article says that Starbuck also looks at what happens after the cup is used (2007, para. 14). They know they cannot throw their cups away anywhere. But they do not care about that. However someone who works at Starbucks feels guilty about dropping their cup anywhere.
Now, it is time for them to do something for everyone including employees, customers and the environment.
Third, if Starbucks tries to announce that if consumers bring their own mugs, cost will be down, more people will bring their own mug than now. According to Conrad (2007), “Customers in the United States and Canada took that offer more than 17 million times in 2006, saving 674,000 pounds of paper, said Starbucks spokeswoman Valerie Carborg” (para 17). But just few people bring their own cup, because people think bringing a cup is annoying. And also some people do not know that the price will go down if they bring their own mugs. I think if more people try to bring their own mugs, we can save incredibly a lot. I tried to bring my own mug and then I told them. I didn’t know how much cost would go down; however, it went down only 10 cents. After that I did not try to bring my mug any more, because it is annoying and price goes down too little. In my opinion Starbucks needs to discount more than 10 cents if customers bring their own mugs, and announce more clearly that bringing one’s own mug will make the price go down.
Some people say that Starbucks was first to include even 10 percent recycled material, so it is really good. However I strongly disagree about that. 10 percent-recycled materials are too little to make the environment better. “’Anything can be recycled, but the system is not designed to take the individual Starbucks cups’, said Steve Sargent, director of recycling for Rumpke Recycling, Columbus’ largest recycler” (Adewumi, 2007, para. 6). I think this means anything can be recycled, but in fact it is not practical to recycle Starbucks cups. The author says the Starbucks said that it was just first step, but they have not taken another step yet. I believe that they just wanted to attract consumers for selling their products by pretending to be going green.
In conclusion, they do try what other shops do not, because they brewed up the first FDA approved recycled cup (GreenBiz, 2004). Perhaps it is a really big deal with the environment, as many people thought at that time. However, even if they used approved recycled cups, recycling the cups was not practical in fact; I think it was just competition, not being worried about the environment, and they just wanted to get more money using a green icon. I can understand why other coffee shops have not changed yet. The reason they have not switched is they do not earn as much as what Starbucks earns. Perhaps, even if they want to switch, they cannot, because of money. However Starbucks has a lot of money to change to fully recyclable cups that are made from corn. If Starbucks tried to switch, customers would be more impressed and would go to Starbucks more. Nowadays, when people purchase something, some people check if the things are green or not, which means green is more important than ever. I am angry that they know their cups are not recyclable and they know nowhere accepts their used cups. They must find a method as soon as possible. I think it is not only Starbucks’ problem but also the problem of every place that uses non-recyclable cups. In Epps’ article “Craft Ideas for How to Recycle Starbucks Cups” (2008), he explains how to recycle non-recyclable cups. He says, we can get them and we can make something with them. It is really good to challenge, but the problem is how many people are doing it with them. I do not think many people try. I think it is a fantastic method to reduce paper, but I do not really think it has become popular. A lot of people do not know that bringing their own mugs will lower their price. So they need to announce their consumers to bring their own mugs and they need to discount more than 10 cents, because it is so little. They just want to show people they are doing so many things for the environment. I didn’t know anything about this before I read this article, so people don’t know what problems Starbucks actually has. Everyone should know and realize, and then they should make them consider the problems they have. I am sure that we will regret about this someday.
Reference
Adewumi, D. (2007, September 27). Starbucks, local coffee shops’ cups not recyclable. Collegian. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2007/09/27/starbucks_local_coffee_shops_c.aspx
Anderson, D. (2006, September 19). Creating the eco-cup. CNN. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_achive/2006/10/02/8387528/index.htm
Conrad, D. (2006, September 19). Creating the eco-cup. CNN. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://www.organicconsumers.org/article/article_7176.cfm
Epps, P. (2008). Craft Ideas for How to Recycle Starbucks Cups. Associated content. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://www.associatedcontent.com/pop_print.shtml?content_type=article&content_type_id=448666
Starbucks Brews Up First FDA-Approved Recycled-Content Cup. (2004, November 18). Greenbiz. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://www.greenbiz.com/news/printer.cfm?NewsID=27395
Warner, M. (2004, November 17). Starbucks continues to Greenwash with Weak Environmental Policy. New York Times News Service. Organic Consumers Association. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://www.organicconsumers.org/starbugs/recycle.cfm
There would be some problems if they tried to switch to recyclable cups, but they did not try, because it is expensive. They need to announce to bring customers’ own mugs to save paper. Now they use large amount of paper; if they tried to find a method to help the environment, customers would be glad to know that Starbucks is green even if that is pretending.
First, I believe that Starbucks earns a lot nowadays as everyone knows, but I don’t understand why they care about money too much to change to recycled cups. According to one article, “Chaplin said Solo has fully recyclable cups in development that use plant-based resins made from corn. These recyclable cups are expected to be able to be available in early 2008, but Chaplin said the corn demand is high now, which may drive up the cost of the cups for potential buyers like Starbucks” (Adewumi, 2007, para. 10). I just think negatively, because I believe they don’t care whether the environment is destroyed or not. I mean they just do that because they want to show us that Starbucks is really worried about the environment in a commercial. If they really are worried, they ought to switch to more than 10% recyclable material or to fully recyclable cups. In my opinion people will spend more time at Starbucks when people think Starbucks is really eco-friendly. There are some people who do not care whether Starbucks is green or not, but some other people do. So even if a fully recycled cup is expensive, they ought to change for the environment and us. At first, they might earn less than before, because they spend a lot of money for fully recyclable cups, but as time goes on, they will not only earn a lot but also become more famous than before because they’ve tried to be green and done it. The coffee price should increase, because cups are expensive, but people will drink at Starbucks, because they are greener. I think it is good for both Starbucks and the environment, because of that reason.
Second, Starbucks uses a lot of paper cups annually, and such a large amount of paper is becoming garbage now. “Starbucks, which uses an estimated 1.5 billion cups annually, currently puts recycled paper into its cardboard cup sleeves, napkins and cardboard carriers” (Warner, 2004, para. 4). “Starbucks, which goes through 1.9 billion cups annually, plans to eventually increase the recycled-fiber content of its packaging” (Anderson 2006, para. 2). If they are really eco-friendly, they should find a method to help the environment. But they do not do anything at this moment; they do not appear to care whether a large amount of paper is becoming garbage. And there is one more problem that “Amy Schirf, Centre Country Solid Waste Authority education counselor, said the county does not accept the coffee cups, and said she was not aware of any waste management group in Centre County accepting them” (Conrad, 2007, para. 2). As the author says, the cups are not accepted, so where they are going? I am sure that neither anyone knows nor anyone cares about that. Almost nobody knows whether Starbucks cups are recyclable, even some who worked or are working at Starbucks (Adewumi 2007, para. 9). Also this article says that Starbuck also looks at what happens after the cup is used (2007, para. 14). They know they cannot throw their cups away anywhere. But they do not care about that. However someone who works at Starbucks feels guilty about dropping their cup anywhere.
Now, it is time for them to do something for everyone including employees, customers and the environment.
Third, if Starbucks tries to announce that if consumers bring their own mugs, cost will be down, more people will bring their own mug than now. According to Conrad (2007), “Customers in the United States and Canada took that offer more than 17 million times in 2006, saving 674,000 pounds of paper, said Starbucks spokeswoman Valerie Carborg” (para 17). But just few people bring their own cup, because people think bringing a cup is annoying. And also some people do not know that the price will go down if they bring their own mugs. I think if more people try to bring their own mugs, we can save incredibly a lot. I tried to bring my own mug and then I told them. I didn’t know how much cost would go down; however, it went down only 10 cents. After that I did not try to bring my mug any more, because it is annoying and price goes down too little. In my opinion Starbucks needs to discount more than 10 cents if customers bring their own mugs, and announce more clearly that bringing one’s own mug will make the price go down.
Some people say that Starbucks was first to include even 10 percent recycled material, so it is really good. However I strongly disagree about that. 10 percent-recycled materials are too little to make the environment better. “’Anything can be recycled, but the system is not designed to take the individual Starbucks cups’, said Steve Sargent, director of recycling for Rumpke Recycling, Columbus’ largest recycler” (Adewumi, 2007, para. 6). I think this means anything can be recycled, but in fact it is not practical to recycle Starbucks cups. The author says the Starbucks said that it was just first step, but they have not taken another step yet. I believe that they just wanted to attract consumers for selling their products by pretending to be going green.
In conclusion, they do try what other shops do not, because they brewed up the first FDA approved recycled cup (GreenBiz, 2004). Perhaps it is a really big deal with the environment, as many people thought at that time. However, even if they used approved recycled cups, recycling the cups was not practical in fact; I think it was just competition, not being worried about the environment, and they just wanted to get more money using a green icon. I can understand why other coffee shops have not changed yet. The reason they have not switched is they do not earn as much as what Starbucks earns. Perhaps, even if they want to switch, they cannot, because of money. However Starbucks has a lot of money to change to fully recyclable cups that are made from corn. If Starbucks tried to switch, customers would be more impressed and would go to Starbucks more. Nowadays, when people purchase something, some people check if the things are green or not, which means green is more important than ever. I am angry that they know their cups are not recyclable and they know nowhere accepts their used cups. They must find a method as soon as possible. I think it is not only Starbucks’ problem but also the problem of every place that uses non-recyclable cups. In Epps’ article “Craft Ideas for How to Recycle Starbucks Cups” (2008), he explains how to recycle non-recyclable cups. He says, we can get them and we can make something with them. It is really good to challenge, but the problem is how many people are doing it with them. I do not think many people try. I think it is a fantastic method to reduce paper, but I do not really think it has become popular. A lot of people do not know that bringing their own mugs will lower their price. So they need to announce their consumers to bring their own mugs and they need to discount more than 10 cents, because it is so little. They just want to show people they are doing so many things for the environment. I didn’t know anything about this before I read this article, so people don’t know what problems Starbucks actually has. Everyone should know and realize, and then they should make them consider the problems they have. I am sure that we will regret about this someday.
Reference
Adewumi, D. (2007, September 27). Starbucks, local coffee shops’ cups not recyclable. Collegian. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2007/09/27/starbucks_local_coffee_shops_c.aspx
Anderson, D. (2006, September 19). Creating the eco-cup. CNN. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_achive/2006/10/02/8387528/index.htm
Conrad, D. (2006, September 19). Creating the eco-cup. CNN. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://www.organicconsumers.org/article/article_7176.cfm
Epps, P. (2008). Craft Ideas for How to Recycle Starbucks Cups. Associated content. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://www.associatedcontent.com/pop_print.shtml?content_type=article&content_type_id=448666
Starbucks Brews Up First FDA-Approved Recycled-Content Cup. (2004, November 18). Greenbiz. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://www.greenbiz.com/news/printer.cfm?NewsID=27395
Warner, M. (2004, November 17). Starbucks continues to Greenwash with Weak Environmental Policy. New York Times News Service. Organic Consumers Association. Retrieved on April 29, 2008, from http://www.organicconsumers.org/starbugs/recycle.cfm
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Wikipedia
These days, almost every person uses the net for gathering information, because you can find information easily. There are a lot of websites where you can find whatever information you want. Among those sites, Wikipedia is one of the famous sites, because “Wikipedia is an encyclopedia complied by the voluntary contributions of hundreds of writers and editors”. And also “Anyone can write an article and post it to the Wikipedia” (Lengel, 2006 para. 6). However some people do not believe Wikipedia, because sometimes there is wrong information.
There might be wrong information, but Wikipedia is a very useful website. Even if there is some wrong infomaion, I strongly agree that Wikipedia is necessary for our lives.
First, if you use Wikipedia, you can get information easily. Byers said, “Approximately 38 million people visited the English language version of the site in December 2006. Wikipedia is also easy to find; it frequently appears at the top of many Google searches and access is completely free” (2007, para. 3). As he said, it is free and you can access easily. So many people use Wikipedia and Wikipedia has become one of the most famous websites. And also Wikipedia has accepted a lot of counties’ languages, which is another reason people use Wikipedia a lot.
Second, there is no limit to using wikipedia, which means anybody can not only write and post to it but also edit wrong information. So even if someone posts wrong information, anyone can edit that information. Wolverton said, “While encyclopedias and journals are generally authored by scholars and peer reviewed before publication, Wikipedia articles can be written and edited by anyone at anytime, bringing about a debate over the risk of giving those outside academia the power to create and contribute to articles on scholarly subjects. Furthering this, users can add, alter, or remove information” (2007, para. 7). Using Wikipedia is free and you can do whatever you want, but you should not post wrong information on purpose.
Third, Wikipedia has a lot of information from everyone in the world, so it is probably exact. 38 million people use Wikipedia, which is the English version. It means a lot of information is being posted and edited by uncountable people, even at this moment. Of course there is wrong information, because of some bad people. Nobody can defend them, but we can edit it as soon as we can. So it does not really matter whether there is wrong information or not, because it would have been edited perhaps the next day.
In my opinion, in fact I did not know what Wikipedia was before I cam to writing class. But after I have found some information about Wikipedia, I think it is a very good system for every person. I agree that Wikipedia is necessary and really useful. It is free and if you want to write and edit something, you can do that at anytime.
Reference
Byers, M. (2007, March 8). Controversy over use of Wikipedia in academic
papers arrives at Smith. Sophian. Retrieved April 23, 2008, from http://media.www.smithsophian.com/media/storage/paper587/news/2007/03/08/News/Controversy.Over.Use.Of.Wikipedia.In.Academic.Papers.Arrives.At.Smith-2765409.shtml
Lengel, J. (2006, July 2). Authority. Teaching with Technology. Retrieved April
23, 2008, from http://www.powertolearn.com/articles/teaching_with_technology/article.shtml?ID=12
Wolverton, J. (2007, Jan 22). Wikipedia Wisdom. Valley Vanguard. Retrieved
April 23, 2008, from http://www.svsu.edu/clubs/vanguard/stories/1141
There might be wrong information, but Wikipedia is a very useful website. Even if there is some wrong infomaion, I strongly agree that Wikipedia is necessary for our lives.
First, if you use Wikipedia, you can get information easily. Byers said, “Approximately 38 million people visited the English language version of the site in December 2006. Wikipedia is also easy to find; it frequently appears at the top of many Google searches and access is completely free” (2007, para. 3). As he said, it is free and you can access easily. So many people use Wikipedia and Wikipedia has become one of the most famous websites. And also Wikipedia has accepted a lot of counties’ languages, which is another reason people use Wikipedia a lot.
Second, there is no limit to using wikipedia, which means anybody can not only write and post to it but also edit wrong information. So even if someone posts wrong information, anyone can edit that information. Wolverton said, “While encyclopedias and journals are generally authored by scholars and peer reviewed before publication, Wikipedia articles can be written and edited by anyone at anytime, bringing about a debate over the risk of giving those outside academia the power to create and contribute to articles on scholarly subjects. Furthering this, users can add, alter, or remove information” (2007, para. 7). Using Wikipedia is free and you can do whatever you want, but you should not post wrong information on purpose.
Third, Wikipedia has a lot of information from everyone in the world, so it is probably exact. 38 million people use Wikipedia, which is the English version. It means a lot of information is being posted and edited by uncountable people, even at this moment. Of course there is wrong information, because of some bad people. Nobody can defend them, but we can edit it as soon as we can. So it does not really matter whether there is wrong information or not, because it would have been edited perhaps the next day.
In my opinion, in fact I did not know what Wikipedia was before I cam to writing class. But after I have found some information about Wikipedia, I think it is a very good system for every person. I agree that Wikipedia is necessary and really useful. It is free and if you want to write and edit something, you can do that at anytime.
Reference
Byers, M. (2007, March 8). Controversy over use of Wikipedia in academic
papers arrives at Smith. Sophian. Retrieved April 23, 2008, from http://media.www.smithsophian.com/media/storage/paper587/news/2007/03/08/News/Controversy.Over.Use.Of.Wikipedia.In.Academic.Papers.Arrives.At.Smith-2765409.shtml
Lengel, J. (2006, July 2). Authority. Teaching with Technology. Retrieved April
23, 2008, from http://www.powertolearn.com/articles/teaching_with_technology/article.shtml?ID=12
Wolverton, J. (2007, Jan 22). Wikipedia Wisdom. Valley Vanguard. Retrieved
April 23, 2008, from http://www.svsu.edu/clubs/vanguard/stories/1141
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Starbucks cup
I became interested in Starbucks cups after studying green living. The Starbucks cup is not recyclable, but now “Starbucks, the Seattle coffee company, plans to announce Wednesday that will start stocking its store with cups made with 10 percent recycled material” (warner, 2004, para. 2). Starbucks is one of the famous coffee shops, so they use a lot of cups. According to Warner (2004), Starbucks uses an estimated 1.5 billion cups annually. It is incredibly a lot, but they don’t switch to recyclable material, because the cost is too high. Also Warner (2004) said that “The higher cost is one reason that other food companies have not switched to recycled cups” (warner, 2004, para. 7). Some people think it is good to try even 10 percent, but some other people think this is too little. Adewumi (2007) said that if we bring our own mugs it saves about 674,000 pounds of paper. The real problem is people never care about whether the environment is being destroyed or not. Today, nobody thinks how they can protect the environment.
There would be some problems if they tried to switch to recyclable cups, but they didn’t try, because it is expensive, Starbucks cups make a lot of wasting paper and the environment is being destroyed, because of logging lots of trees to make paper cups.
First, I believe that Starbucks earns a lot nowadays as everyone knows, but I don’t understand why they care about money too much to change to recycled cups. I just think negatively, because I believe they don’t care whether the environment is destroyed or not. I mean they just do that because they want to show us that Starbucks is really worried about the environment in a commercial. If they really are worried, they ought to switch more than 10%.
Second, Starbucks uses more than 1.5 billion paper cups annually, and such a large amount of paper becomes garbage now (Anderson, 2006). If they are really eco-friendly, they should find a method to help the environment. Also Starbucks needs to announce that if consumers bring their own mug, it will be cheaper to consumers. Actually that way is the best way to reduce wasting paper and to save money. I think what Starbucks should do is to make price reduced more if consumers bring their own mugs.
Third, paper is made from virgin trees, and virgin trees require too many ways. However, the paper is not recyclable, so we need to keep logging incredible number of trees. As everyone knows, the trees are limited and the most important thing is we cannot live without trees. Nevertheless, Starbucks wastes more than 1.5 billion paper cups a year. In fact, nobody can tell Starbucks to switch, but Starbucks ought to consider about that if they care about the environment strongly.
Some people say that it is really good to try to include even 10% recycled material. However I strongly disagree about that. !0% is too little to make the environment better. It is recyclable actually, but it is not practical. Starbucks said that it was just first step, but they have not taken another step yet. I believe that they just wanted to attract consumers for selling their products.
In conclusion, they do try what other shops don’t, but I think it is just competition, not being worried about the environment. They just want to show people, they are doing so many things for the environment. I didn’t know anything about this before I read this article, so people don’t know what problems Starbucks actually has. Everyone should know and realize, and then they should make them consider the problems they have.
Reference
Adewumi, D. (2007, September 27). Starbucks, local coffee shops’ cups not recyclable. Collegian. Retrieved on April 16, 2008, from http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2007/09/27/starbucks_local_coffee_shops_c.aspx
Anderson, D. (2006, September 19). Creating the eco-cup. CNN. Retrieved on April 16, 2008, from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_achive/2006/10/02/8387528/index.htm
Warner, M. (2004, November 17). Starbucks continues to Greenwash with Weak Environmental Policy. New York Times News Service. Organic Consumers Association. Retrieved on April 16, 2008, from http://www.organicconsumers.org/starbugs/recycle.cfm
There would be some problems if they tried to switch to recyclable cups, but they didn’t try, because it is expensive, Starbucks cups make a lot of wasting paper and the environment is being destroyed, because of logging lots of trees to make paper cups.
First, I believe that Starbucks earns a lot nowadays as everyone knows, but I don’t understand why they care about money too much to change to recycled cups. I just think negatively, because I believe they don’t care whether the environment is destroyed or not. I mean they just do that because they want to show us that Starbucks is really worried about the environment in a commercial. If they really are worried, they ought to switch more than 10%.
Second, Starbucks uses more than 1.5 billion paper cups annually, and such a large amount of paper becomes garbage now (Anderson, 2006). If they are really eco-friendly, they should find a method to help the environment. Also Starbucks needs to announce that if consumers bring their own mug, it will be cheaper to consumers. Actually that way is the best way to reduce wasting paper and to save money. I think what Starbucks should do is to make price reduced more if consumers bring their own mugs.
Third, paper is made from virgin trees, and virgin trees require too many ways. However, the paper is not recyclable, so we need to keep logging incredible number of trees. As everyone knows, the trees are limited and the most important thing is we cannot live without trees. Nevertheless, Starbucks wastes more than 1.5 billion paper cups a year. In fact, nobody can tell Starbucks to switch, but Starbucks ought to consider about that if they care about the environment strongly.
Some people say that it is really good to try to include even 10% recycled material. However I strongly disagree about that. !0% is too little to make the environment better. It is recyclable actually, but it is not practical. Starbucks said that it was just first step, but they have not taken another step yet. I believe that they just wanted to attract consumers for selling their products.
In conclusion, they do try what other shops don’t, but I think it is just competition, not being worried about the environment. They just want to show people, they are doing so many things for the environment. I didn’t know anything about this before I read this article, so people don’t know what problems Starbucks actually has. Everyone should know and realize, and then they should make them consider the problems they have.
Reference
Adewumi, D. (2007, September 27). Starbucks, local coffee shops’ cups not recyclable. Collegian. Retrieved on April 16, 2008, from http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2007/09/27/starbucks_local_coffee_shops_c.aspx
Anderson, D. (2006, September 19). Creating the eco-cup. CNN. Retrieved on April 16, 2008, from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_achive/2006/10/02/8387528/index.htm
Warner, M. (2004, November 17). Starbucks continues to Greenwash with Weak Environmental Policy. New York Times News Service. Organic Consumers Association. Retrieved on April 16, 2008, from http://www.organicconsumers.org/starbugs/recycle.cfm
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Starbucks' cup
In David Adewumi's (2007) article, “Starbucks, local coffee shops' cups not recyclable,” he explains that Starbucks' cups are not recyclable. Nowadays we waste a lot of paper cups that are not able to recycle. The author says Starbucks customers save about 674,000 pounds if they bring their own mug. There are fully recyclable cups that are made from corn, but if Starbucks uses that cup, the price will go up, because the cups are expensive in fact. Starbucks goes through between 2 and 3 billion paper cups a year. And its cups boast 10% post-consumer recycled fiber and its sleeves are 60%. Those cups can be possible to recycle, but it is not practical actually. However Starbucks is for the first time using 10% recycled material, it is really good even if it is only 10%, because other coffee shops don't even try or even know whether they use recycled cups.
I know they try to be a good company, but I think they can try harder than what they are doing. Actually they can try to use more than 10%, they can make their price much lower if customers bring their own mug, and if it is hard to use more than 10% recycled material, they can switch to recycled cups that are made from corn.
First, I think everyone knows that 10% is too low to make the environment better. I don’t understand why just 10% material is used, because if they really think about how serious pollution is because of non-recycled cup, they would improve that. If I were CEO, I would use at least 50% recycled material. It wouldn’t make the environment better, but it wouldn’t make it worse than now.
Second, I heard that if I bring my own mug, the price goes down a little bit. It is really good to do that, but normally almost nobody does it, because the price goes down just a little bit. So I think they should make the price down more than now, or just prepare mugs for drinking inside the shop. I think it is the best way to reduce the waste of paper cups.
Third, in this article, it explained about cups that are made from corn shortly. The author says the cup can be recycled, but it is high cost. In my opinion, they have enough money to change to that cup. But I don’t know why they don’t change and they still use only the cup that includes just 10% recycled material. There are lots of Starbucks shops in every country, so their income might be incredibly a lot. But they still use paper and they pretend that they are really worried about the environment.
In conclusion, they do try what other shops don’t, but I think it is just competition, not being worried about the environment. They just want to show people, they are doing so many things for the environment. I didn’t know anything about this before I read this article, so people don’t know what problems Starbucks actually has. Everyone should know and realize, and then they should make them consider the problems they have.
Reference
Adewumi, D. (2007, September 27). Starbucks, local coffee shops’ cups not recyclable. Collegian. Portland State University. Retrieved on March 31, 2008, from http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2007/09/27/starbucks_local_coffee_shops_c.aspx
I know they try to be a good company, but I think they can try harder than what they are doing. Actually they can try to use more than 10%, they can make their price much lower if customers bring their own mug, and if it is hard to use more than 10% recycled material, they can switch to recycled cups that are made from corn.
First, I think everyone knows that 10% is too low to make the environment better. I don’t understand why just 10% material is used, because if they really think about how serious pollution is because of non-recycled cup, they would improve that. If I were CEO, I would use at least 50% recycled material. It wouldn’t make the environment better, but it wouldn’t make it worse than now.
Second, I heard that if I bring my own mug, the price goes down a little bit. It is really good to do that, but normally almost nobody does it, because the price goes down just a little bit. So I think they should make the price down more than now, or just prepare mugs for drinking inside the shop. I think it is the best way to reduce the waste of paper cups.
Third, in this article, it explained about cups that are made from corn shortly. The author says the cup can be recycled, but it is high cost. In my opinion, they have enough money to change to that cup. But I don’t know why they don’t change and they still use only the cup that includes just 10% recycled material. There are lots of Starbucks shops in every country, so their income might be incredibly a lot. But they still use paper and they pretend that they are really worried about the environment.
In conclusion, they do try what other shops don’t, but I think it is just competition, not being worried about the environment. They just want to show people, they are doing so many things for the environment. I didn’t know anything about this before I read this article, so people don’t know what problems Starbucks actually has. Everyone should know and realize, and then they should make them consider the problems they have.
Reference
Adewumi, D. (2007, September 27). Starbucks, local coffee shops’ cups not recyclable. Collegian. Portland State University. Retrieved on March 31, 2008, from http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2007/09/27/starbucks_local_coffee_shops_c.aspx
Monday, March 31, 2008
Starbucks and environment
In Melanie Warner’s (2004) article, “Starbucks continues to Greenwash with Weak Environmental Policy,” she explains that Star bucks will use recycled cups, but just 10% of its material. Many people say that 10% is too little, but Starbucks uses more than 1 billion cups each year, so it costs too much to switch to recycled cups. Some places have switched but some other companies have not changed yet, because of cost. Starbucks decided to visit FDA and then Starbucks received approval from FDA.
I don’t think Starbucks really cares about environment actually, because I think they earn enough to switch to recycled cups. And also in Korea we have Starbucks, but if we drink inside they give me what I order in a mug cup, so they reduce the waste of cups. Starbucks has 10% recycled cups, but they don’t care if customers give cups back.
First, I believe that Starbucks earns a lot nowadays as everyone knows. But I don’t understand why they care about money too much to change recycled cups. I just think negatively, because I believe they don’t care whether the environment is destroyed or not. I mean they just do that because they want to show us that Starbucks is really worried about environment in a commercial. If they really are worried, they ought to switch more than 10%.
Second, Starbucks in the USA never uses mug cups when customers drink inside. If they used them, they would have been able to reduce a lot the amount of cups. I don’t know why they use just plastic cups. In Korea there are also many Starbucks there, but we have already changed to mug cups for people who drink inside Starbucks. They don’t produce any paper in Korea, so we did need to change. Here they need to change as soon as possible.
Third, in fact people who are working in Starbucks now never care about whether customers give back cups. They need to explain why they need to give back exactly. But nobody does it now, so even if I drink coffee in a recycled cup, I just throw the cup away. It is the most important thing that they need to explain to customers when they give customers what they order on recycled cups.
In my opinion there are too many problems in Starbucks, but they still don’t realize what the problems are. They need to switch more cups, and they need mug cups for customers who drink inside. And they need to tell and explain why they need to receive cups.
Reference
Warner, M. (2004, November 17). Starbucks continues to Greenwash with Weak Environmental Policy. New York Times News Service. Organic Consumers Association. Retrieved on March 26, 2008, from http://www.organicconsumers.org/starbucks/recycle.cfm
I don’t think Starbucks really cares about environment actually, because I think they earn enough to switch to recycled cups. And also in Korea we have Starbucks, but if we drink inside they give me what I order in a mug cup, so they reduce the waste of cups. Starbucks has 10% recycled cups, but they don’t care if customers give cups back.
First, I believe that Starbucks earns a lot nowadays as everyone knows. But I don’t understand why they care about money too much to change recycled cups. I just think negatively, because I believe they don’t care whether the environment is destroyed or not. I mean they just do that because they want to show us that Starbucks is really worried about environment in a commercial. If they really are worried, they ought to switch more than 10%.
Second, Starbucks in the USA never uses mug cups when customers drink inside. If they used them, they would have been able to reduce a lot the amount of cups. I don’t know why they use just plastic cups. In Korea there are also many Starbucks there, but we have already changed to mug cups for people who drink inside Starbucks. They don’t produce any paper in Korea, so we did need to change. Here they need to change as soon as possible.
Third, in fact people who are working in Starbucks now never care about whether customers give back cups. They need to explain why they need to give back exactly. But nobody does it now, so even if I drink coffee in a recycled cup, I just throw the cup away. It is the most important thing that they need to explain to customers when they give customers what they order on recycled cups.
In my opinion there are too many problems in Starbucks, but they still don’t realize what the problems are. They need to switch more cups, and they need mug cups for customers who drink inside. And they need to tell and explain why they need to receive cups.
Reference
Warner, M. (2004, November 17). Starbucks continues to Greenwash with Weak Environmental Policy. New York Times News Service. Organic Consumers Association. Retrieved on March 26, 2008, from http://www.organicconsumers.org/starbucks/recycle.cfm
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Problems about UN summit
In Jo Twist’s (2005) article, “Controversy blights UN net summit, “ she explains what happened at a UN summit. There was an assembly, because of a solution for the information society in Tunisia, because poor countries do not have enough money. So UN net summit said that they were going to support them with money. But not everyone agreed about freedom in cyberspace, because the Chinese vice premier said that a few controls were necessary, however, the secretary general of International Telecommunication Union gave the opposite point of view. In my opinion, the net perhaps will be abused, so online restrictions should be instituted.
First, there are too many hackers in this world now. They are really dangerous people, because they can have a look your private information and they can also copy and then sell the information to somebody for criminal purposes. So you have to install the program that can prevent hacking.
Second, there is too much information that is not true. For example when you use the internet, you can easily find pictures of celebrities those are fiction. Nobody knows who makes those unreal pictures and rumors. So do not believe every piece of information on online.
Third, when you use the internet, you can get good information, but you can find bad information as well. For instance, perhaps your kids already have been at some sexual website, because it is easy to find sites like that. So if you really are worried about that you can install the program that intercepts people who are entering websites like that. And cyber police should more care to catch them who upload bad information.
I think we need more online restrictions. We do have some now, but there are still a lot of awful things online. It would be uncomfortable, if there were too many restrictions. Unless we want such like that we should control ourselves and have responsibility.
Reference
Twist, J. (2005, November 18). Controversy blights UN net summit. BBC News. Retrieved March 19, 2008, from Http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4450474.stm
First, there are too many hackers in this world now. They are really dangerous people, because they can have a look your private information and they can also copy and then sell the information to somebody for criminal purposes. So you have to install the program that can prevent hacking.
Second, there is too much information that is not true. For example when you use the internet, you can easily find pictures of celebrities those are fiction. Nobody knows who makes those unreal pictures and rumors. So do not believe every piece of information on online.
Third, when you use the internet, you can get good information, but you can find bad information as well. For instance, perhaps your kids already have been at some sexual website, because it is easy to find sites like that. So if you really are worried about that you can install the program that intercepts people who are entering websites like that. And cyber police should more care to catch them who upload bad information.
I think we need more online restrictions. We do have some now, but there are still a lot of awful things online. It would be uncomfortable, if there were too many restrictions. Unless we want such like that we should control ourselves and have responsibility.
Reference
Twist, J. (2005, November 18). Controversy blights UN net summit. BBC News. Retrieved March 19, 2008, from Http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4450474.stm
Friday, February 29, 2008
To spank is not the only a way to deal your children
In “Our view on corporal punishment: To spank or not to spank?” the author writes about corporal punishment. Fifty years ago, a lot of children were spanked, but nowadays it has been changed. It is a form of violence and that causes psychological harm. There are some places where corporal punishment is still allowed. So government should change the law. I am going to write about the ways to care for children. Parents can control them by giving advice and letting children know how much the parents love them,; conversation is the most important thing.
First, when children do a bad thing, parents might give them punishment. But I think that is not the only a way to make them realize they did a bad thing. The parents can give them advice. When I was a child, my parents never spanked me, even once. They just gave me advice; then I didn’t do the same thing again.
Second, all parents need to show children how much they love them. Most children don’t know whether their parents love them or not. So if they shout or give advice, they think just that their parents don’t love them. So a more important thing is that parents need to show them how much they love them first.
Third, conversation is really important, not only between family but between every relationship. There are not many children who talk to parents and spend much time. I also have not spent time, or had conversation a lot with my family, because my parents were so busy. I was lonely, so I thought of everything bad at the moment. Even if you are busy, you need to make time and have a conversation with your children. Then your children would be smart without spanking.
Corporal punishment is a big problem in the world. I don’t think children are animals. They also are able to think and understand. So if you really want your children be a good person without corporal punishment, you ought to say them how much you love them, have a conversation a lot even if you have much time, and also you can give them advice instead of spanking.
Reference
Our view on corporal punishment: To spank or not to spank? (January 25, 2007). USA TODAY. Retrieved on February 28, 2008, from http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/01/post_35.html
First, when children do a bad thing, parents might give them punishment. But I think that is not the only a way to make them realize they did a bad thing. The parents can give them advice. When I was a child, my parents never spanked me, even once. They just gave me advice; then I didn’t do the same thing again.
Second, all parents need to show children how much they love them. Most children don’t know whether their parents love them or not. So if they shout or give advice, they think just that their parents don’t love them. So a more important thing is that parents need to show them how much they love them first.
Third, conversation is really important, not only between family but between every relationship. There are not many children who talk to parents and spend much time. I also have not spent time, or had conversation a lot with my family, because my parents were so busy. I was lonely, so I thought of everything bad at the moment. Even if you are busy, you need to make time and have a conversation with your children. Then your children would be smart without spanking.
Corporal punishment is a big problem in the world. I don’t think children are animals. They also are able to think and understand. So if you really want your children be a good person without corporal punishment, you ought to say them how much you love them, have a conversation a lot even if you have much time, and also you can give them advice instead of spanking.
Reference
Our view on corporal punishment: To spank or not to spank? (January 25, 2007). USA TODAY. Retrieved on February 28, 2008, from http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/01/post_35.html
Survey - underage drinking
1.Introduction
Are you under 21 years old? Do you drink alcohol although you are underage? What do you think about underage drinking? Should the law be changed? Today drinking by underage people is increasing, and also underage problems are increasing. Underage youths who drink alcohol have many problems normally, such as driving after drinking, fighting and skipping school. Although a lot of underage people know these facts, they still want to drink alcohol. This is a serious problem in society, because drinking alcohol has a bad effect on underage students.
In “Alcohol Use by Persons Under the Legal Drinking Age of 21” the author claims that “underage drinkers who drive after drinking are at greater risk of fatal crashes than older drinkers because of their lack of driving experience and over-confidence” (The NHSDA report, 2003 P. 1).
So it is dangerous to drink for underage youth because they have not completely grown up psychologically. Many underage people, however, are drinking even now, and problems also keep increasing. Whatever the nation decides, it is sure that underage drinking will continue.
2.Purpose
Our group, EAP1-A, decided to find out how people feel about underage drinking in Carbondale. I wanted to examine whether they drank when they were underage or not. Also I wanted to know the relationship between gender and when they started drinking.
3.Hypotheses
I had three hypotheses about drinking. First, I believed that males started drinking sooner than females. Second, I believed that males drink more than females. Third, I believed that both males and females would think that drinking should be legal for people who are over 18.
4.Methods and Procedures
Our group has 11, and were to ask 6 people each who were different gender and age. And we only were asking Americans. Also we decided to ask SIUC students. We prepared a survey that had nine questions. And the questions are really simple, so it was easy for respondents to answer the questions.
5. Data + Chart
connect here http://eap1.blogspot.com/2008/02/practice-survey-results_27.html
6. Results
In fact, SIUC students said they began to drink at over 21 years old. Thirty-two out of thirty-six, 88.8 %, started drinking over 21 years old. 88 % students drink who are male and 78.9 % students drink who are female. Most students who are both male and female are not binge drinkers. We found that females started drinking sooner than males. More than 80 % students (84.7 %) don’t think too much drink is a problem in Carbondale. 69.2 % students answered that the drinking age should not be lowered.
7. Conclusion and Discussion
I believed that students started drinking underage more than over 21 years old. But it is not true, because our survey showed that more of them started drinking at over 21 years old than underage. I could not believe that because I also used to drink when I was underage, so I thought people usually started drinking underage. And I was surprised because I didn’t know that females started drinking sooner than males. A more interesting thing was that there were not many binge drinkers here; I thought American people had a lot of parties. In Carbondale there were not many problems because of drinking alcohol, so results were the same as what I thought. Since I came here I thought the drinking age was so high, because in Korea we can drink if we are over 18 years old. However American people think different from what I think, so 69.2 % students said that drinking age should not be lowered.
If I get another chance to do this survey again, I want to ask more people who are over 21-year-old, because most students were 18 to 21-year-old. I think if I ask many people, results would be different from now perhaps. This time I was not polite when I asked to do the survey, because I was nervous. So I would be more polite if I could get the chance again.
8. Reference
Alcohol Use by Persons Under the Legal Drinking Age of 21. (2003, May 9). The NHSDA Report. Retrieved February26, 2008, from http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/2k3/underagedrinking/underagedrinking.htm
9. Appendix
Connect here http://eap1.blogspot.com/2008/02/practice-survey-results.html
Are you under 21 years old? Do you drink alcohol although you are underage? What do you think about underage drinking? Should the law be changed? Today drinking by underage people is increasing, and also underage problems are increasing. Underage youths who drink alcohol have many problems normally, such as driving after drinking, fighting and skipping school. Although a lot of underage people know these facts, they still want to drink alcohol. This is a serious problem in society, because drinking alcohol has a bad effect on underage students.
In “Alcohol Use by Persons Under the Legal Drinking Age of 21” the author claims that “underage drinkers who drive after drinking are at greater risk of fatal crashes than older drinkers because of their lack of driving experience and over-confidence” (The NHSDA report, 2003 P. 1).
So it is dangerous to drink for underage youth because they have not completely grown up psychologically. Many underage people, however, are drinking even now, and problems also keep increasing. Whatever the nation decides, it is sure that underage drinking will continue.
2.Purpose
Our group, EAP1-A, decided to find out how people feel about underage drinking in Carbondale. I wanted to examine whether they drank when they were underage or not. Also I wanted to know the relationship between gender and when they started drinking.
3.Hypotheses
I had three hypotheses about drinking. First, I believed that males started drinking sooner than females. Second, I believed that males drink more than females. Third, I believed that both males and females would think that drinking should be legal for people who are over 18.
4.Methods and Procedures
Our group has 11, and were to ask 6 people each who were different gender and age. And we only were asking Americans. Also we decided to ask SIUC students. We prepared a survey that had nine questions. And the questions are really simple, so it was easy for respondents to answer the questions.
5. Data + Chart
connect here http://eap1.blogspot.com/2008/02/practice-survey-results_27.html
6. Results
In fact, SIUC students said they began to drink at over 21 years old. Thirty-two out of thirty-six, 88.8 %, started drinking over 21 years old. 88 % students drink who are male and 78.9 % students drink who are female. Most students who are both male and female are not binge drinkers. We found that females started drinking sooner than males. More than 80 % students (84.7 %) don’t think too much drink is a problem in Carbondale. 69.2 % students answered that the drinking age should not be lowered.
7. Conclusion and Discussion
I believed that students started drinking underage more than over 21 years old. But it is not true, because our survey showed that more of them started drinking at over 21 years old than underage. I could not believe that because I also used to drink when I was underage, so I thought people usually started drinking underage. And I was surprised because I didn’t know that females started drinking sooner than males. A more interesting thing was that there were not many binge drinkers here; I thought American people had a lot of parties. In Carbondale there were not many problems because of drinking alcohol, so results were the same as what I thought. Since I came here I thought the drinking age was so high, because in Korea we can drink if we are over 18 years old. However American people think different from what I think, so 69.2 % students said that drinking age should not be lowered.
If I get another chance to do this survey again, I want to ask more people who are over 21-year-old, because most students were 18 to 21-year-old. I think if I ask many people, results would be different from now perhaps. This time I was not polite when I asked to do the survey, because I was nervous. So I would be more polite if I could get the chance again.
8. Reference
Alcohol Use by Persons Under the Legal Drinking Age of 21. (2003, May 9). The NHSDA Report. Retrieved February26, 2008, from http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/2k3/underagedrinking/underagedrinking.htm
9. Appendix
Connect here http://eap1.blogspot.com/2008/02/practice-survey-results.html
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
underage drinking
Recently, many drinking problems have become common among underage students. There are some problems like car accidents because of driving under the influence of alcohol, fighting, skipping school, etc. On the other hand, drinking is not always bad; sometimes it can be good for everyone, including underage students. I agree with lowering the drinking age, because those problems are not for only underage students.
The law should allow underage students who have graduated high school to drink alcohol, because they can make their own life and take responsibility.
Not allowing them to drink is not reasonable, because after they graduate from high school, most students live alone because of university. Some people are provided what they need from their parents, but some others aren't. So they work for buying what they need. While they work, they meet a lot of people and they may try to have a good relationship with them. But they are underage, so they cannot drink with them; they drink illegally then. And in Korea we say “A drinking manner has to be learned from older people, who are like parents” because it is important; they need to learn about a drinking manner early from older people.
Another reason is that drinking makes us healthier than if we don’t drink; as researchers said, one drink a day is good for health, because they found that if we drink alcohol moderately, it will decrease our risk by about 30 percent. The Director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism wrote that “Numerous well-designed studies have concluded that moderate drinking is associated with improved cardiovascular health” (Hanson, 2007, para. 3).
Some people have different thoughts from mine. The officer Morrison said, "We are talking about vandalism, we are talking about rape, we are talking about destruction of property, we are talking about theft. All those calls for service are alcohol related. Now, the amount of teenagers involved in this, this is about two-thirds of your calls for service on Friday and Saturday night" (Swicord, 2007, para. 12). But they are wrong, because those problems are also caused also by drink people who are adults. So the problem is not underage drinking, the problem is just when people drink too much alcohol.
In conclusion, I don’t think drinking alcohol by underage people is a serious problem. They just want to drink because it is illegal and they don’t know how to control when they drink alcohol. So if high school teaches them how to control themselves, there will be fewer underage drinking problems and they will be able to control drinking. I am sure underage problems are not just their faults; most adults ought to think about and understand first underage people's side.
Reference
Hanson, D. J. (2007) Alcohol and Health. Retrieved February 6, 2008, from http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansonjd/arcohoandhealth.html
Mulcahey S. (2002. January 30). Lowering drinking age is not solution. Western Courier, Western Illinois University. Retrieved February 6, 2008, from http://media.www.westerncourier.com/media/storage/paper650/news/2002/01/30/opinion/lowering.drinking.age.is.not.a.solution-443723.shtml
Swicord J. (2007. August 6). Underage Drinking Serious Problem in the US. VOA NEWS. Retrieved Febraury 6, 2008, from http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2007-08/2007-08-06voa37.cfm?cfid=196687263&cfoken=36292678
The law should allow underage students who have graduated high school to drink alcohol, because they can make their own life and take responsibility.
Not allowing them to drink is not reasonable, because after they graduate from high school, most students live alone because of university. Some people are provided what they need from their parents, but some others aren't. So they work for buying what they need. While they work, they meet a lot of people and they may try to have a good relationship with them. But they are underage, so they cannot drink with them; they drink illegally then. And in Korea we say “A drinking manner has to be learned from older people, who are like parents” because it is important; they need to learn about a drinking manner early from older people.
Another reason is that drinking makes us healthier than if we don’t drink; as researchers said, one drink a day is good for health, because they found that if we drink alcohol moderately, it will decrease our risk by about 30 percent. The Director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism wrote that “Numerous well-designed studies have concluded that moderate drinking is associated with improved cardiovascular health” (Hanson, 2007, para. 3).
Some people have different thoughts from mine. The officer Morrison said, "We are talking about vandalism, we are talking about rape, we are talking about destruction of property, we are talking about theft. All those calls for service are alcohol related. Now, the amount of teenagers involved in this, this is about two-thirds of your calls for service on Friday and Saturday night" (Swicord, 2007, para. 12). But they are wrong, because those problems are also caused also by drink people who are adults. So the problem is not underage drinking, the problem is just when people drink too much alcohol.
In conclusion, I don’t think drinking alcohol by underage people is a serious problem. They just want to drink because it is illegal and they don’t know how to control when they drink alcohol. So if high school teaches them how to control themselves, there will be fewer underage drinking problems and they will be able to control drinking. I am sure underage problems are not just their faults; most adults ought to think about and understand first underage people's side.
Reference
Hanson, D. J. (2007) Alcohol and Health. Retrieved February 6, 2008, from http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansonjd/arcohoandhealth.html
Mulcahey S. (2002. January 30). Lowering drinking age is not solution. Western Courier, Western Illinois University. Retrieved February 6, 2008, from http://media.www.westerncourier.com/media/storage/paper650/news/2002/01/30/opinion/lowering.drinking.age.is.not.a.solution-443723.shtml
Swicord J. (2007. August 6). Underage Drinking Serious Problem in the US. VOA NEWS. Retrieved Febraury 6, 2008, from http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2007-08/2007-08-06voa37.cfm?cfid=196687263&cfoken=36292678
Thursday, January 31, 2008
'Road Rage' effects.
Kyoko Altman (July 18, 1997) in “‘Road Rage’ runs rampant in high-stress U.S. society”, explains about effects of road rage. In the present day, a lot of people have died from car accidents even right now. A more important thing is that over 50% of people who have been killed, have been killed because of road rage. Brenda Fraser said that a car on a highway is like a loaded gun. So every driver must think of other drivers, because if you don’t, it would cause a huge accident. Dr. Arnold Neremberg said that not only is road rage a mental disorder, but also every driver should recognize their problem. Most states in U.S. have been clamping down and giving road ragers punishment. I am going to write about why road rage comes. Road rage comes because of traffic jams, reckless driving and when we have to stop often.
First, road rage comes from traffic jams. For instance, when you drive at rush hour, you won’t move even a little bit. Then you will get angry. If you get angry, it would cause an accident. So you should solve your stress problem with other methods, but you shouldn’t release your stress on the road.
The second one is, road rage comes from reckless driving. For example if some driver drives violently around you, you will get stress, then you will also drive violently. So every driver has to have consideration for other drivers.
Finally, road rage comes when you have to stop often, because of traffic signal, railroad train or cross walks. For example, you are really in a hurry, but you have to stop so many places, after that you are stressed out. And you will not stop, or drive violently. It will definitely cause an accident to happen. So you should have time when you drive; never make haste.
Road rage has been killing us even now. For this reason, what we have to do is never solve stress problems by driving, drive violently or we need to make haste. If all drivers keep these things, accidents will decrease a lot.
Reference
Altman, K. (1997, July 18). ’Road Rage’ runs rampant in high stress U.S. society. CNN. Retrieved on January 29, 2008 from http://www.cnn.com/us/9707/18/aggressive.driving
First, road rage comes from traffic jams. For instance, when you drive at rush hour, you won’t move even a little bit. Then you will get angry. If you get angry, it would cause an accident. So you should solve your stress problem with other methods, but you shouldn’t release your stress on the road.
The second one is, road rage comes from reckless driving. For example if some driver drives violently around you, you will get stress, then you will also drive violently. So every driver has to have consideration for other drivers.
Finally, road rage comes when you have to stop often, because of traffic signal, railroad train or cross walks. For example, you are really in a hurry, but you have to stop so many places, after that you are stressed out. And you will not stop, or drive violently. It will definitely cause an accident to happen. So you should have time when you drive; never make haste.
Road rage has been killing us even now. For this reason, what we have to do is never solve stress problems by driving, drive violently or we need to make haste. If all drivers keep these things, accidents will decrease a lot.
Reference
Altman, K. (1997, July 18). ’Road Rage’ runs rampant in high stress U.S. society. CNN. Retrieved on January 29, 2008 from http://www.cnn.com/us/9707/18/aggressive.driving
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
College student
The article “College students screaming for stress relief” says that a lot of universities’ students have stress that is from life in university recently. When they are really stressed out, they do something to work out their problems. For example, at some universities students do scream, and others do a run without their clothes. There are so many other ways to relieve stress, like jumping and playing dodgeball. Also some other universities offer “midnight breakfast” while they take exams. Most students have many kinds of stress nowadays, so universities need to care and understand their students more.
Reference
The Associated Press. (2007, DEC. 12). College students screaming for stress relief. Retrieved on January 23, 2008 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22219591/
Reference
The Associated Press. (2007, DEC. 12). College students screaming for stress relief. Retrieved on January 23, 2008 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22219591/
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Food
I hate the food that makes me feel bloated, like fast food. They are, of course, more convenient than cooking, but it is going to be seriously mortal for your health. The most important thing is everyone knows that would be harmful; they can’t stop eating fast food, however. On the other side, I like the food that I cook. It is not really delicious but I always think about my health while cooking. But one thing wrong is that I don’t really like vegetables. I try to eat vegetables recently for my health, but it’s quite more difficult than I thought. The most difficult thing is that I can not eat Korean foods that tastes like what I eat in Korea. It will be fine, if I cook much better than now. So I am going to learn how to cook better,from now on.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Cash flow
Ed Ewing and Rachel Jasper (Monday April 4, 2005) in “Cash flow not debt causes student stress, scientists told”, explain why most university students have negative minds. Since university tuition has increased, students have gotten a high amount of debt. Dr Scott, who is from the University of Bath, questioned over 200 students about debt and how to manage debt. From the survey, most students have stress from not only a lot of debt but also they don’t borrow the amount money that students really need. This circumstance comes from he fact that few of them really know how to manage money. So this description tells us, we ought to learn how to spend and handle money when we are younger. It means most parents provide everything to their sons and daughters. So it results in their not knowing how to manage money.
Reference
Ewing, E. & Jasper, R. (2005, April 4). Cash flow not debt causes student stress, scientists told. Guardian Unlimited. Retrieved on January 18, 2008 from http://education.guardian.co.uk/students/finance/story/0,12728,145200,00.html
Reference
Ewing, E. & Jasper, R. (2005, April 4). Cash flow not debt causes student stress, scientists told. Guardian Unlimited. Retrieved on January 18, 2008 from http://education.guardian.co.uk/students/finance/story/0,12728,145200,00.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)