The earth is having problems caused by human activities. In order to solve that, I think that we should try to be greener.

Firstly, we should try to waste less energy, for example, we could have a shower instead of having a bath. With this measure, at the end of the year we have saved lot of water. Another thing we could do is wasteing less heating at home, for example, I think that we could wear a pullover instead of  a T-shirt with a higher heating. I'm not saying that we have to live like 50 years ago, but we can live well wasting less energy.

Secondly, I think that there are a lot of products which are made for a certain periode of time and after that they broke up. An example is  in this times, Christmas, are electronic toys. They are newer and coller than the others, so many childrens want them for Christmas, but after a year more or less they broken and the childrens want another one. This is a bussines estrategy because,  like this, bussines men earn more money. In my view, I think we could solve tis problem buying another kind of toys, for example puzzles, construction games or  handmade toys.

To sum up, the best way to help the earth the  three "R": reduse, reuse and recycle.

Júlia Fàbregues Pons (exam essay).

Should we try to be greener? (FINAL VERSION)

Nowadays words like "greenhouse effect" or "global warming" appear everywhere. It's said that fossil fuels are running out or that water and air pollution are increasing and there's lots of people who don't realize about it and don't do anything. In my opinion, we can avoid it and we have to be concerned about it. 

First of all, we are the owners of our planet and if we don't do anything in order to look after it, we will end up living in a place full of rubbish. As I see it, everybody should try to be greener because the action of ten people maybe doesn't have a big effect but the actions of people all over the world can help and improve the situation. The first thing we can do is the three  "R"s: recycle, reuse and reduce. Plastic is the one who causes many problems such as contamination or animals' death. So, if we use the three  "R"s with plastic, we will be doing a good action. In addition, not only because we're doing a good thing for our planet but also we can satisfy ourselves. To my mind, being satisfied is an important thing. Secondly, we can be part of organizations who prepare activities, on the one hand, to try to help the planet, and on the other hand, to show people which are the environmental problems and how we can solve them.

To sum up, to be green is a personal decision and you have to choose if you are really concerned about it. I believe that people have to do what they want as it gives you more satisfaction. 

Marina Cervera 2n B

WE SHOULD ALL TRY TO BE GREENER

Nowadays people aren’t concerned about global warming. People aren’t recycling at all. We should try to be environmentally friendly. In my opinion it is easy... reduce our carbon footprint.

Firstly, we could produce less emissions taking the bus more often. Our cars are one of the most harmful things to the earth and the ozone layer. Another option is ... buy a bike! In addition, you’ll be fitter and healthier without emitting anything harmful. In my opinion, this would be perfect. The way I see it, we are destroying our house and the house of the future generations.

Secondly, I think that we are buying things with a lot of packages which are not biodegradable instead of buying organic food in a local market. However we want to pay cheaper things in the big supermarket.

To sum up, I want you to think more of the Earth problems before doing something harmful for everyone because this issue affects everybody.

Some people believe that the Earth is damage by human activity

What has human activity done to the Earth? Are there any problems or is the situation acceptable? How can we let it?

On the one hand, some people believe that the Earth is being damaged by human activity, due to they don’t think plant life or animal life, because these don’t give money. So it isn’t important to them. Consequently, they don’t control the emission of CO2 into the atmosphere; they dump waste at sea, etc. And this causes the death of many animals and plants.

On the other hand, some people feel that human activity makes the Earth a better place to live. Because, it’s considered that the technology has let us to go forward and the possibility to change our society, and to be bigger.

In my opinion, both arguments are correct. But it’s true that the Earth is being damaged by us. It’s possible to build a better place for all, while we are able to solve the Earth. 

Make the world greener

Nowadays, pollution is one of the bigest problems for the earth that the humans cause. In my opinion, this situation is also bad for us, and to stop using things that pollute will be a very good initiative for us and for our planet.

Firstly, the worst cause of pollution is transport, like cars, airplanes and motorbikes, I think that we have to stop using this type of transport, and start to use public transport, like buses, or try to walk a bit more. Secondly, to use plastic bags is another way to destroy our planet because they don't desintegrate, they will be with us for a long time, Consequently, I think that we must use fabric bags to reduce the number of plastic bags. Finally, to recycle could be a good way to reduce pollution.

In conclusio, I think that we should all try to be greener, because it will be good for ud and for our planet.

Alejandro Tudurí Sintes

Some people believe that the Earth is being damaged by human activity, but others feel that human activity makes the Earth a better place to live.

Things like the environment are one of the problems of the Earth, others are the humans, but are humans destroying the Earth?

On the one hand, I think that humans damage the Earth, for example, the environment, the temperature of the Earth is growing up because of the greenhouse effect, we're cutting down the forests and some animals have become extinct because the don't have place to live, and they haven't got food to eat, we're kill our world.
But, on the other hand, I agree that humans make the Earth a good place to live, there's lot of technology, we've just improved a lot. So, what can we do?

We can reduce the carbon dioxide emissions, we can reduce our footprint, we can use renewable energy instead of using fossil fuel energy, this produces a lot of dioxide carbon, we can stop cutting down trees, and let animals live, we can do so many things to save the Earth, and keep living in a good place. Now, we only have to do it.

Should we be greener?

Nowadays lots of people are concerned about the planet, but there are also the ones who think that our planet has no problems with us and we don't have to be greener.

In my opinion, we all should be greener. The arguments of the ones who think our planet has no problems are that it doesn't matter if animals become extinct, jungles disapear or if the little islands disapear, but in my opinion, if animals become extinct, the ones which eat them become extinct too and eventually us.
We are our planet, if it runs out on fossil fuels and natural resources, what will we do? If we don't have land for agriculture, what will we eat? If the water is poisoned, what will we drink? We have to be greener, but for a selfish feeling.

In conclusion, we need our planet and if don't become greener, we won't have it in the future.

Is the Earth damaged by human activity?

Nowadays, there are a lot of human activity in the Earth. Some people think that it is bad for the Earth, but other people think that human activity makes the Earth a better place to live in.
On the one hand, human activity is a good thing because it makes possible to live in the Earth having a good conditions. I think that without all the buildings, roads, bridges, etc. we won't be able to have the same live conditions.
On the other hand, the excess of human activity damages the Earth because that activity produces pollution, residues and a lot of things that are bad for the planet.
To sum up, human activity can have good effects on our daily life but it can also have negatives effects with time.

Should we all try to be greener?

The Earth is being damaged by human activity. As a result, the weather is changing, some species are in danger of extinction, and habitats are being destroyed. So, why don't we try to be greener?

First of all, if we recycle, for example, we throw away less things, and these things are used to make other things, like recycled paper. Consequently, we use less resources, which can be renovated.

Secondly, if we use renewable energy, like wind power, we don't emit poisonous gases, which are the reason for the hole in the ozone layer and global warming.

Finally, if we reduce our waste, we don't produce as much pollution as we produce without this waste reduction.

The Earth is the place where we live, and it is our responsability to protect it for the future generations. In my opinion, if all humans try to be greener, we can do it.

The earth is being damaged by human activity. The humans beings have over the years contunually destroyed our habitat.


In my view we could reduce the massive construccion, because some species are endangered and we have destroyed his natural habitat. Moreover we must cut down the deforestation, as that produces streams and the soil erosion. As a result of the deforestation, temperature of the earth will increase. Besides of the melting ice caps,  also the animals and plants who lives  there may die. Wheras the level of oceans will rise and soon will have more water than earth.
To save our planet we have to recycling to avoid thousands of mountains of garbages. We have to put all container on his correct place.

To sum up we have to aware to assess all our effects on our planet, if we don't want to dissapear our planet.


                                                                                                                     Carolina Melia           2n C

EFFECTS OF GLOBAL WARMING

 

The planet is warming, from North Pole to South Pole, and everywhere in between. Globally, the mercury is already up more than 1 degree Fahrenheit (0.8 degree Celsius), and even more in sensitive polar regions. And the effects of rising temperatures aren’t waiting for some far-flung future. They’re happening right now. Signs are appearing all over, and some of them are surprising. The heat is not only melting glaciers and sea ice, it’s also shifting precipitation patterns and setting animals on the move.

Some impacts from increasing temperatures are already happening.

• Ice is melting worldwide, especially at the Earth’s poles. This includes mountain glaciers, ice sheets covering West Antarctica and Greenland, and Arctic sea ice.
• Researcher Bill Fraser has tracked the decline of the Adélie penguins on Antarctica, where their numbers have fallen from 32,000 breeding pairs to 11,000 in 30 years.
• Sea level rise became faster over the last century.
• Some butterflies, foxes, and alpine plants have moved farther north or to higher, cooler areas.
• Precipitation (rain and snowfall) has increased across the globe, on average.
• Spruce bark beetles have boomed in Alaska thanks to 20 years of warm summers. The insects have chewed up 4 million acres of spruce trees.

Other effects could happen later this century, if warming continues.

• Sea levels are expected to rise between 7 and 23 inches (18 and 59 centimeters) by the end of the century, and continued melting at the poles could add between 4 and 8 inches (10 to 20 centimeters).
• Hurricanes and other storms are likely to become stronger.
• Species that depend on one another may become out of sync. For example, plants could bloom earlier than their pollinating insects become active.
• Floods and droughts will become more common. Rainfall in Ethiopia, where droughts are already common, could decline by 10 percent over the next 50 years.
• Less fresh water will be available. If the Quelccaya ice cap in Peru continues to melt at its current rate, it will be gone by 2100, leaving thousands of people who rely on it for drinking water and electricity without a source of either.
• Some diseases will spread, such as malaria carried by mosquitoes.
• Ecosystems will change—some species will move farther north or become more successful; others won’t be able to move and could become extinct. Wildlife research scientist Martyn Obbard has found that since the mid-1980s, with less ice on which to live and fish for food, polar bears have gotten considerably skinnier.  Polar bear biologist Ian Stirling has found a similar pattern in Hudson Bay.  He fears that if sea ice disappears, the polar bears will as well.

DEFORESTATION

     

Introduction to Deforestation

---

Deforestation is the permanent destruction of indigenous forests and woodlands. The term does not include the removal of industrial forests such as plantations. It has resulted in the reduction of indigenous forests to ⁴/₅ of their pre-agricultural area.

Deforestation is a problem that is caused largely by greed and want for property, money and possibly status. In many parts of the world the forest is taken for granted as a replenishable resource, which it is. The problem is that the trees cannot be regrown and replanted at the rate at which they are being cut down.
For this reason the forests are declining at an incredible rate and there is no forseeable future for places like the Amazon which remained untouched for 20 000 years and now could be destroyed in less than a human's life time.

Deforestation is a problem with far reaching consequences ranging from a barren landscape to a higher Carbon Dioxide levels in the air. The underlying point is that we have to pull together to stop the destruction of the world's woodlands and forests.

 Causes of Deforestation

---

Deforestation can be attributed to various causes. The obvious one is logging, however the reasons extends a lot further than that. The forests are cultivated, cleared and burned every year for international ranchers and local farmers. Every year certain factors influence the amount of forest area:

• fires
• logging
• farming
• population expansion
• growth of cities
• roads and highways
• politics
• shifting cultivators

In a lot of third world countries the population is involved in various primary activities, one of these being logging. The native peoples in an area are put under a lot of pressure to make a living to support their families, and get jobs as loggers, often illegally so.
The people are often uneducated and know nothing other than logging practices. In many countries the logging trade is the biggest foreign money-earner and therefore governments try to exploit the forests for all they can take, and more.

Another cause is fires. In Kenya and the Amazon and various other countries there are large plantations of exotic plants in the places where there used to be indigenous forests. The exotic trees often are not suited to the environment and shed a lot of leaves. This makes the area a huge fire hazard. If a fire starts the dry leaves act like fire lighters and cause huge amounts of damage to the local area.

Human settlement is a big problem in many areas. People who have left the city to live in the rural areas claim pieces of land as their own and slash and burn the surroundings, using wood for fuel and also selling it on roadsides etc.
Some people who have been displaced by large ranchers or plantations have to move further into the indigenous forests because they do not know how to live off the exotic plants. By doing this they remove trees from yet more of the forest.

The construction of roads and highways is a bit problem in wooded areas. In the Amazon they propose to build a 960km highway called the BR-163 from Curiaba in the middle of South America to Santarem in the top right corner of Brazil. The BR-163 will allow giant grain producers in the Matto Grosso region to export their crops to Europe via Santarem far more quickly and cheaply. It is estimated that 49 000km2 of forest will be destroyed during constructon
This is not the only worry though. When the road is built there will be a wave of squatters and farmers etc. vying for land on the superhighway. This could be the single most devastating assault on the Amazon ever.

The growth of the world population is also a problem because more ground has to be cleared in order to feed the ever-growing populations. As the population grows there is a need for food. People take the initiative and buy large pieces of land that they cultivate with single crops. They have to cut down trees and bush etc. When they harvest their crop they leave the ground open to erosion.

Deforestation's effect on the environment

---

Deforestation is by no means a restricted problem. It can play havoc with the local community and even the country it occurs in. As with erosion, deforestation is not only caused by ignorant people. Therefore it is unfair to blame the nomads, shifting cultivators and farmers for destroying the countryside.

Deforestation is a contributing factor to the green house effect. The trees are large Carbon dioxide stores, and when the trees are burnt they release this gas. This leads too an increase in the Carbon dioxide levels in the air. Carbon dioxide is the major contributor in the green house effect.

Trees draw water up through their roots and release it into the atmosphere (transpiration). In the Amazon, half of the water is contained in the trees. If the trees are removed, the region cannot hold as much water and will become drier.

In areas where deforestation occurs the community as a whole suffers. If there are no trees, the land becomes far more unstable than before. The roots from the trees no longer exist and therefore it leaves the forest floor open to erosion and mudslides etc.

The land also becomes sandy and dry as the sun can now penetrate deep into the forest, where before, the tree-cover blocked out the damaging rays. When this occurs plants living near the cut down tree die and wither in the sun. It is believed that with every tree felled another 40 are destroyed in the process.

The local animals are effected just as much as the people. Thier natural habitats are destroyed and species, possibly unknown to man become extinct, because they have nowhere to live. When the bull dozers knock the trees down,

• buck
• monkeys, and
• birds

are all caught in the destruction. The animals either end up in the cities and are killed, or they starve to death in their new surroundings.

Native people living in forest areas are pushed out of their homes and have to encroach on more of the forest. They cannot go anywhere else because they only know how to survive on the plants in the forest. In this way more forest is destroyed and the cycle will probably continue until all forests are destroyed.

To prevent deforestation is a personal undertaking, where you do your best to conserve the wood you use. You can also get involved at your school and try to get some money together and use it to buy trees to plant. You might like to write to your municipality to ask them to hold back on the cutting down of trees. You must tell everyone that you know about the effects of deforestation and explain how they can help. If you need guidance as to how to go about preserving nature, ask an adult or teacher. Always try to limit the wood etc, that you use. Do not by excessive amounts of wooden items as this only encourages the people who own timber mills and logging companies.

EFFECTS OF OVERPOPULATION ON THE ENVIRONMENT

6.5 billion…This is not a whole lot of bacteria, but when it comes to humans, it is a very formidable number. The human population has been increasing at an extremely high rate in the last century and unfortunately, not much has been done to slow down this process. Undoubtedly, overpopulation is a global issue. It is global because it pertains to all of humanity, but global also means that it affects the whole world, i.e. the environment. Almost all human activities impact negatively the environment in one form or another, and as human population expands, the damaging effects on the environment multiply. Here are some of the most imminent environmental problems that results from human population growth:

1. Water supply. Water is one of the basic elements of live, and it is needed to preserve the balance of every ecosystem. It cools down and cleanses the environment and is used by plants and animals to carry out vital functions. As human population increases, so does the consumption of water. In the past fifty years, the per capita availability of fresh water has decreased by one third.* Fresh water supply is a problem in most of the developing countries, especially those located in arid climates such as in Africa, South America and Asia. In some African countries, fresh water needs to be carried daily from sources more than two hours walking distance. Water supply is an issue in urban areas as well. In Beijing, the water table falls down with as much as two meters annually.*

2. Water pollution. The problem with water is not only overconsumption, but also pollution. "More than 95% of urban sewage in developing countries is discharged untreated into the nearest waterway or field."* The main contributors to water pollution are factories and open mines, discarding waste water with heavy metals, toxic substances and solid waste, which are virtually impossible to purify. The situation is even worse when it comes to ocean exploitation and pollution. Overfishing changes the balance in coastal ecosystems and decreases fish populations. Sometimes it might even lead to extinction of certain marine species. Overfishing also damages coral reefs, because it allows algae to overgrow them. It turns out that the ocean is "the ultimate garbage dump "* because eventually all of the sewage, sediment from forest clearing, fertilizer and pesticide run-off flow into it. It is important to preserve the ocean, not only because it is an important source of food, but also because it plays a major role in climate regulation. The circulation of cold and warm water protects the earth from extreme temperature fluctuations. In addition, oceans absorbs between 30 and 40% of the CO2 given off as a result of human activity, thus keeping global warming at stake.

3. Soil Degradation. Population growth results increases the demand for food production. Since the arable land in many of the overpopulated regions is limited, farmers begin to cultivate dry, hilly, nutrient-poor areas that are not very suitable for farming. Exploiting such lands makes them easily susceptible to erosion and loss of nutrients. For example, in search for farmland in Indonesia, peasants have been planting their crops on steep slopes. As a result, almost one half of Java's land is now in danger of erosion.* Globally, the statistics are even more frightening. It is estimated that 1.2 billion hectares of land, approximately the size of Europe, U.S. and Mexico combined, have lost much of their agricultural output capability in the last 50 years.*

4. Deforestation. The search for more farmland causes other damaging agricultural practices such as slash-and-burn cultivation. Basically, a forest area is burned and converted into pasture, but due to poor soils, it looses its productivity in about three years.* This initiates a vicious circle which results in the deforestation of large areas, mostly in tropical regions. Deforestation is also caused by the use of wood as fuel, since 9 out of 10 African households use wood for cooking and heating. This is the reason why Ghana lost almost a third of its dense forest from 1938 to 1980.* In addition, the building of roads and the expansion of residential areas have contributed to the loss of primary forest.

5. Loss of biodiversity. All of the previously described effects of overpopulation on the environment lead to the destruction of the natural habitat of many wildlife species. The natural flora and fauna have been under constant pressure to adapt to a quickly changing environment. Since they have been unable to do so, they have been displaced from their natural ecological niche. The constant clearing of the Amazon forest has had devastating effect on many rare tropical species. It has been estimated that 10% of the species in the region have become extinct.*

IMPACT OF OVERPOPULATION

What impact does overpopulation have on the economy?

Overpopulation has a definite effect on a country’s economy.  First of all, when countries are overpopulated, the hardly have enough food to support themselves, never mind the hope of having a surplus to sell.  This can contribute to a low GDP per Capita which is effect overpopulation has on the economy.  In an attempt to save the people from the starvation, the government will most likely have to rely on foreign debt.  This puts the country in debt at stretches the government’s already meagre resources.  Furthermore, when a country is overpopulated, there is a high rate of unemployment because there just aren’t enough jobs to support the population.  This results in a high level of crime because the people will need to steal things in order to survive. 

What impact does Overpopulation have on the environment?

Overpopulation does not just affect the standard of living, but also the environment. Every person on the planet takes up space, but space is needed for farmland, and forests. People excrete wastes and pollution that flow into water systems, and animal habitats, polluting water, and killing wildlife. Many people cannot bathe or brush their teeth because of the status of the water in their land.

         Forests are being torn down as more wood and land is needed to support our ever-growing population. The loss of these forests leads to extinction of plants and animals. These plants could contain cures for diseases that will never be found.

         Urban areas are expanding, polluting the air and water systems. These areas deplete the Earth’s resources, and over 2 billion hectares of arable land have already been lost, with 16 million more hectares being removed each year. In Nigeria alone, 351 000 ha of land are being removed every year.

51% of the fossil fuels on Earth are being used by USA and China alone, leaving less than half for the remaining countries, including those in Africa. In fact, most of those remaining fossil fuels go to other developed countries, leaving a dismal amount for Africans.

What impact does overpopulation have on politics?

 Governing an overpopulated country presents problems. The economy is stretched beyond belief, and civil wars break our  left, right, and centre. These civil wars are fought over farmland, and the people spend so much time fighting, that the farmland is not even put to use. Important fossil fuels need to be traded away for pitiful amounts of cash used to no avail. The government of an overpopulated country falls into constantly increasing debt, and cannot climb back up out of the hole they have dug.

GREEN TECHNOLOGIES

TODAY'S GREEN TECHNOLOGIES THAT COULD CHANGE OUR WORLD TOMORROW

With carbon emissions from traditional energy sources contributing heavily on the global warming effect all around the world and the demand for energy growing rapidly, the energy crisis is real. The demand for energy will soon be greater than supply and we all will have a problem. In the past, renewable energy projects proved difficult to sustain long term due to operational costs, so the costs were passed on to consumers. Now, thanks to the European Union’s agreed 2020 renewable energy targets, governments are taking the matter more seriously and setting aside larger budgets to support cutting edge green energy projects.

On the 29th January, 2009, the European Commission proposed spending Euro 3.5 billion on carbon capture and storage investments and a further Euro 500 million is to be used on renewable energy projects, specifically offshore wind projects. President Obama’s gargantuan economic stimulus also has green alternative energy production at its heart, with the United States pushing solar energy production hard in the coming years.

Hovever, operational cost still remains a major bugbear for institutions researching alternative energy sources, but fortunately some technological breakthroughs are showing signs that cost may not be an issue for too much longer.

1. Offshore Wind Farms
The humble wind turbine has been around for some time. Travel across Europe and you are bound to see several wind farms along the way. Traditionally the same design and technology used on land has been used in offshore wind turbines; however, these designs were not sufficiently durable for the harsh conditions of the sea. This equated to high maintenance costs and an expensive alternative energy source.

Fortunately, the tides are about to change. Areva, a French energy company, recently announced that they were about to launch what is perceived to be the toughest wind turbine ever built. Designed specifically to be deployed in remote offshore wind farms where harsh climatic conditions are prevalent, Areva claim that operational costs will be significantly reduced as the simplified design of the Multibrid M5000 means that they are easier to install and require fewer maintenance visits.
These giant wind turbines will stand approximately 90 metres above the water and will have a blade diameter of around 120 metres. They should prove highly efficient as well: each of the 5MW turbines is said to be able to generate enough electricity to supply 5,000 homes.

With the launch project off the coast of Germany imminent, we won’t have long to wait before we see proof that large scale offshore wind farms are a truly viable means of cheap energy production.

2. Energy from Waste
The debate around whether energy from waste is a good alternative source of energy has been ongoing for many years. The leading arguments against this technology have been the potential risk to health from the fumes produced during the conversion process and that the production of waste undermines the recycling initiative.

But the harsh reality is that waste will always be produced, even when recycling meets government targets. Is it not better to use the waste for energy production than for it to lie in landfills? As for the risk to health, there is no scientific evidence to prove that burning rubbish leads to ill health.

The proof of how green and cost efficient this energy source can be has been proven by the UK’s first waste gasification plant built on the Isle of Wight. This small, community sized plant is said to be able to generate 2.3MW of energy from the 30,000 tonnes of residual waste not being recycled. This should be enough to provide around 3,000 homes with electricity.
Energos, the Norwegian company building the plant, use a technology designed to minimise emissions when converting waste residue into steam, making it environmentally friendly while also addressing the costly landfill problem. Clearly we should still be reducing, reusing and recycling, but where there is waste there is also an opportunity to create clean energy and minimise the use of landfill.

3. Marine Energy: Wave and Tidal Stream
It is well known that being able to harness wave energy is one of the most sustainable and cleanest sources of renewable energy available. And as long as there are oceans and seas, there will always be waves and tides from which energy can be captured and converted.

Even though the planet’s oceans offer massive potential in terms of clean energy, there have been major challenges in developing this elusive technology. One of the biggest problems has been the requirement to locate large facilities on rugged but beautiful coastlines, which is often passionately opposed by locals who would rather not have such an eyesore. This is further compounded by the fact that these power plants need exposure to consistent and powerful swells, which typically means building a plant in an unspoilt area. On top of this, the equipment has to be able to withstand constant and powerful ocean conditions.

SeaGen, the first commercial scale tidal stream turbine developed by Marine Current Turbines, seems to have overcome these obstacles and has a turbine installed and finally operating at full capacity in Strangford Lough, Northern Ireland. Previously the maximum output of a tidal stream system was 300kW, achieved by their earlier SeaFlow system in 2004. SeaGen has out-performed this by achieving a 1.2MW output, said to be able to provide enough electricity for 1,000 homes.
The Pelamis wave energy system is another ingenious example of harnessing energy from the ocean. These mechanical snakes can be placed in open ocean where the rising and dropping motion of passing swells are used to generate clean electricity, which is then sent back to the mainland via submarine cable. This relatively new system gets around the problem of visually spoiling coastlines as they are located a distance offshore. The northern Portuguese town of Aguçadoura was the first to install a commercial-scale wave power station using the Pelamis system, where it produces enough clean electricity to power 1,000 homes.

4. Geothermal Energy Sources
Geothermal power generation was first successfully tested in 1904. Let that sink in for a while: clean, abundant energy has been a real possibility for over a century, yet it accounts for less than 1% of current power generation. That is quite frankly unacceptable when you take into account the environmental policies of many governments. This currently-available and widely tested method of power production is typically focused around tapping into steam vents, which is used to turn conventional turbines. However, there are also more experimental cyclic designs called Enchanced Geothermal Systems, where cold water is reintroduced through porous rock, then heated and converted to steam.

In the US alone, those boffins at MIT estimate [PDF] that geothermal has the potential to generate an impressive 100 gigawatts of electricity or more with just $1 billion investment, but unless the government decides to step up the pace it won’t be possible until approximately 2050. The USA is currently the largest producer of geothermal energy, which highlights how far the rest of the world has to play catchup!

5. Energy Saving Light Bulbs
They may be slightly more expensive but they are said to last up to 10 times longer. Amazingly, in January 2009, scientists at Cambridge University announced that they have developed an energy saving light bulb that can last up to 60 years! At around £2 / $4 per bulb, you certainly couldn’t get better value for money and they estimate that using these bulbs could cut lighting bills by up to 75%.

It is said that if energy saving light bulbs were installed in every home and office in the UK, it could cut the entire country’s electricity consumption used in lighting by up to 20% – a massive saving from something so small.
So even if you don’t want to install solar panels, heat pumps, small scale hydro or wind systems, you can still reduce your impact on climate change with very little effort or expense. Simply replace your old light bulbs with energy saving bulbs.