cars killing coral reef?

[RIDIVER501]

Good points. Take the Caribbean for example. The majority of tourists in the Caribbean are NOT from the United States. Europeans, Canadians and others make up the majority of tourists. Additionally other tropical destinations where reef destruction is a problem are visited in even lesser proportions by US citizens. Pacific and Indian Ocean destinations are dominated by European and Asian tourists.

Don't get me wrong I don't take blame away from US tourists either just wanted to point out that we are not the majority.

My own pet peeve is the behavior of Japanese tourists which is atrocious.

DSDO

Alan

Good point as well, but I did not mean for this to evolve into a "Let's slam another country for their enviromental irresponsibility." To cover for Americans.
I am just trying to make the points:
1. present all the data
2. don't over generalize... X-country is responsible.

If you are alive you are part of this problem. Some of us are less guilty then others ie the people who recycle who try to minimize their enviromental impact but even those people are contributing to the problem. it is inevitable.

not saying to throw in the towel and give up...just trying to avoid setting up scapegoats.

 

[fgray1]

I have to go get my boots on.
It's getting deep.

 

[archman]

For those in disagreement about tourism demographics, please supply hard numbers or cite links to such numbers. Anecdotal claims are well... anecdotal.

Here are my numbers, which are not superbly robust but generally considered accurate, although I err on the conservative side as a rule. Some are a bit out of date.

1. Caribbean tourism statistics 1992. This one's a bit old.
U.S. citizens: 58%
Europe 17%
Canada 7%
Central & South America, plus other countries 17%
Intra-regional: 9%

These figures are reported from the Caribbean Tourism Organization. At that time there was a rising trend noted for the Europeans; that may still be true.

***new update***
I pulled up the 2002 Caribbean tourism figures. There's a nice new website with downloadable documents.
http://www.onecaribbean.org/information/documentview.php?rowid=1059

The U.S still retains the dominant market share, with Canada and Europe lagging far behind. This is for the Caribbean as a whole, mind.
******************

2. Now for cruise ships, the fastest growing tourism segment. According to UNEP, the largest cruise ship travel region is the Caribbean, accounting for ~45% of the global market. Other sources list 50%. Nobody disputes that the Caribbean is King when it comes to cruise ships.

2b. A rather old (several years) figure but one that pops up in the literature over and over again is that of american passengers in the global cruise ship market. This figure is 80%. Sometimes the figure includes Canadians (as "america"), sometimes it specifically refers to U.S. citizens. Looking into this figure in further detail led me to 2C.

2c. The ICCL's 2003 figure for passengers worldwide. 9.8 million visitors total; 76% of which U.S. citizens constitute.
http://www.iccl.org/resources/2003_econstudy-analysis.pdf

More current statistics can be elicited from the Caribbean Tourism Organization, and the ICCL.

My region of expertise regarding environmental management & policy does not include the Pacific, unfortunately, so I cannot provide numbers. Maybe someone else can step up?

 

[RonDawg]

The small cars in Japan however are very well made. There is no evidence from crash studies that they fare worse than the larger cars. Of course if any car gets hit by a truck there won't be much left.

While I agree Japan makes excellent cars (I've owned almost nothing but), I have to disagree about a small car not faring worse than the large cars.

When establishing a car's crash worthiness, it's usually done against fixed barriers. It's less expensive than crashing two cars together, plus for comparison reasons you need to have the same point of comparison. When you start mixing and matching it becomes difficult to make comparisons.

What that means is that when you see crash test results, you can only compare them to results of similarly sized vehicles. In the US when car companies tout crash results, in the tiny print in the bottom you see something like "Crash test results only useful for comparison between vehicles within 500 lb of each other." Just because a Ford Focus has a 5 star crash rating doesn't mean it'll do well in a head-on collision with a large SUV, because it simply won't. You cannot override the laws of physics.

Tiny cars may be OK in countries where the majority of the cars are small, but in North America there are enough SUV's and pickup trucks out there to present a real hazard. Both the US Government and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety have done crash tests between small and large vehicles, and no matter what the results come out the same: the occupants of the larger vehicle tend to come out better than the occupants of the smaller one.

The following link comes from the IIHS, which discusses the concerns about small vs. large vehicle crashes:

http://www.iihs.org/srpdfs/sr3804.pdf

Actually I thought that America was quite strict about car design - wasn't that why VW had to make the Golf - because the US didn't consider the Beetle safe enough?

This is getting way off topic, but the reason VW discontinued selling the Beetle in the US in the late 1970s is simply because sales fell off. The Rabbit (Golf MkI) and the Dasher (Passat MkI) had been recently introduced and were taking sales away from the old Beetle. By that time the "Bug" was 40 years old and really showed it. Plus it wasn't that much cheaper than other VW offerings. While VW could have upgraded the car to the point where it could have met safety and smog regulations well into the 1980's, they felt it simply wasn't worth the money and effort.

Even the New Beetle doesn't sell as well here as the Passat or the Jetta. Except for its first year (basically due to exclusivity) people weren't willing to pay a premium over what's essentially a rebodied Golf with less interior room (esp. the back seat) and trunk space.

No Mark not a guilty conscious, just sick and tired having my country singled out as the only one responsible for the demise of our enviroment.

Exactly.

 

[fgray1]

Let me see if I remember how this Goes.

Humans blah,blah blah, and blah blah blah, blah blah. Cruise ships ba blah blah blah, blah blah. Cars blah bablah, blah blah, pollution ba blah blahbablah. United States BLAH BABLAH BABLAH.

The sky is falling!!!! the sky is falling!!!!
Give US a break.

 

[chrisch]

The sky is falling!!!! the sky is falling!!!!
Give US a break.

He he. Not yet.

Let's be honest here. Most of the World's population could not care less about the environment. I'm sure the percentage of US citizens who don't care is about the same as the percentage of Brits, Greeks, Philipinos or Japanese. Whatever.

With all those people doing their bit as well as the damage done by those that do care but can't see any way to not do damage the outcome is clear.

The important issue is therefore what to do about the future.

If you care......

Chris

 

[archman]

Let me see if I remember how this Goes.
Humans blah,blah blah, and blah blah blah, blah blah. Cruise ships ba blah blah blah, blah blah. Cars blah bablah, blah blah, pollution ba blah blahbablah. United States BLAH BABLAH BABLAH.

That was enlightening. Not behaviour that I expect from a scuba board moderator, however. Please be nice, and limit your comments to the useful... or at the very least whimsical.

Welcome to the Ecosystems & Preservation Forum! We discuss the environment here, and promote discussion on topics related to natural habitats and conservation. Environmental policy & management, marine science, and ecology are where the bulk of our postings root from. Hippies come here a lot, too!

 

[fgray1]

Wha I'm not ALLOWED to voice my opinion.
Gee, What does any of this have to do with me being a MOD.
But I see you got my point.
I guess I'm just one of those bad Humans you guys talk about.
At least no has asked anyone to help by signing a petition or join Green "Peeps"
Funny thing about a public forum anyone can respond (even mods) as long as they don't violate the TOS.

 

[WarmWaterDiver]

For those who think the fossil fuels will run out "soon" - I'm assuming you're using a geologic time scale. I remember the dire predictions of the 1970's on this - and we've found WAY more fossil fuel since then. Newer technologies like the Canadians producing "synthetic" crude oils from tar sands, gas-to-liquids research and development, new "molecular gate" separation stuff for natural gas fields high in CO2 and / or nitrogen, and innovations in exploration and production have shown quite a bit remains. And recall, these are all things produced by nature - that's why it's called "natural" gas. And note "natural" gas often contains significant CO2. And for those who think hydrogen is the answer - guess what the byproduct is of producing hydrogen from natural gas - its *gasp* CO2! The carbon atom in the methane moecule goes to CO and CO2 when you strip the hydrogen atoms away in synthesis gas reforming. So where is this CO2 rejected from the hydrogen production process - why, the atmosphere!

But compare "natural" volcanic events for atmospheric emissions while you're putting things in perspective, and then, compare the environmental regulations for the USA against the other regions of the world who are large fossil fuel producers - I think you'll find some differences. Then back out all the current "everyday" things that originate from "fossil' sources - like plastics & other polymers, halon and similar fire extinguishing media, Teflon, etc. and their uses in medical devices, food packaging, etc.

I think the US auto industry is getting more innovative too - the new V8 from Chrysler that selectively runs on 4, 6, or 8 cylinders depending on power demand is pretty slick, and not something I've seen in Japanese vehicles. The next few years should be interesting.

My final take-away - in a free market economy, when there's sufficient business incentive for change, mankind is able to innovate. And it is the Consumer who drives the free market.

 

[Otter]

Is there any concern with the earths diminishing inability to convert CO2 back to O2 due to diminishing flora?