Globalisation, which is partly synonymous with rising interna-
tional trade, has fostered the rapid production, trade and consump-
tion of material goods in unprecedented quantities. This has
weighted the ecological footprint of human activities around the
world. While it’s still difficult to assess the impact of globalisation
on the environment, it’s quite obvious in some areas. ...
Globalisation promotes CO2 emissions from transport. As critical
drivers of globalisation, transport systems have multiplied along-
side international trade. Emissions from road transport (mainly cars
and lorries) are of course very high, but more so within national borders. But the opening of some regional areas (such as the suppres-
sion of border controls among European Union countries) has given
a strong boost to road freight transport. Despite some encouraging
recent alternatives such as piggybacking (transporting lorries by
train for part of the journey), transnational road transport is an
important source of CO2 emissions.
Going from what Liam posted previously, I wanted to add to that point about the CO2 emissions that are given off by transport that are adding to global warming.
But the major mode of transport that has characterised globalisation
in the past decades is the aeroplane. Between 1990 and 2004, GHG
emissions from aviation increased 86%. Aviation is today responsible
for 4-9% of total GHG emissions released into the atmosphere. Meanwhile, sea transport swallows 2-4% of all the fossil fuels consumed
by the planet every year. Some 70% of international transport of
goods towards the EU and 95% of trade towards the United States is
by sea. Improved energy technologies aren’t enough to absorb the
environmental impact of the 3% annual increase in shipping.
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/0111111ec008.pdf?expires=1429263803&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=BA26726B2C92F6663331371FE181F6C8
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/0111111ec008.pdf?expires=1429263803&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=BA26726B2C92F6663331371FE181F6C8
Going from what Liam posted previously, I wanted to add to that point about the CO2 emissions that are given off by transport that are adding to global warming.
'Much urban research in the 1990s established that the globalisation of economic activity was felt in particular in a few very large cities with special roles in the world’s finance, banking and corporate activities. These places have been labelled “global cities”. Empirical results expressed initially by Keeling (1995) and subsequently by Smith and Timberlake (1998) confirm that the hierarchy of these global cities expressed in terms of their influence in global capitalism (Sassen, 2000) closely parallels the hierarchy of airports. Hence it would seem that the character of the global geography of airports is shaped by the forces associated with global city development. That means the continuation in the significance of the global cities will maintain the dominant role of a few very busy airports in the global network.'
ReplyDeleteKEVIN O'CONNER. (2003) Global air travel: toward concentration or dispersal? [Online] Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692303000024 [Accessed: 21st April 2015]
This is about global air travel and its rise since the 1990, i also touches upon global capitalism which i may go into later on, cities which have been given the title of 'global cities' are one main cause of the GHG emissions are these cities have become the most visited cities by tourism and trade.
Thats a good point, for example when we look at Bangkok in Thailand being one of the cities visited most by tourists which led to the rise of buses and motorcycles being used and causing more pollution and fumes given off in the city.
ReplyDeleteExactly just like the drastic measures that Beijing 2008 Olympics where only half the post code area in China was aloud to travel at one given time and this was for them to reduce there carbon emissions and bring down the smog which had developed over the populated and developed country.
DeleteIt can be argued that the measure they took to reduce the smog has not worked because today, the air quality of Beijing is 16 times worse than New York City.
DeleteThe BBC state that 'Pollution has soared to hazardous levels in Beijing, reaching 20 times the limit recommended by the World Health Organisation.
DeleteSince Saturday visibility has been low and many people were seen wearing masks. Experts say car emissions and construction in cities are to blame.'
Because of all of the developments in which 'global cities' do they are causing horrendous damage to their city and polluting the air around them, I believe that even though new developments generate new jobs rather than building up using the facilities available to them.