New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

ENEC 201 Notes: Week 2 (8/29/16-9/2/16)

by: Hadley Ashford

ENEC 201 Notes: Week 2 (8/29/16-9/2/16) ENEC 201

Hadley Ashford
GPA 3.776

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

These notes cover Maladaptation and tools for promoting environmentally friendly practices on a national and global scale
Class Notes
25 ?





Popular in Environment and Ecology

This 4 page Class Notes was uploaded by Hadley Ashford on Friday September 2, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to ENEC 201 at University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill taught by GANGI,GREGORY J in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 47 views. For similar materials see ENVIRONMENT AND SOCIETY in Environment and Ecology at University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill.


Reviews for ENEC 201 Notes: Week 2 (8/29/16-9/2/16)


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 09/02/16
ENEC 201 Notes 8/29/16-9/2/16 8/29/16 - Greenland (cont. from Friday): o Depended on small forest for charcoal for metalsmithing o Power concentrated with church/rulers  Common people had few rights o Trading with Europe very important o Conflict with Inuit because different cultural values o Factors leading to downfall of Norse settlement:  Refusal to adopt Inuit model for survival  Superiority complex of Norse  Religious beliefs- “God will save us”  Make-up of feudal society- land=power so don’t want to become nomadic  Discouraged from interacting with Inuit (considered heathens)  Deforestation  less charcoal less ability to trade and defend themselves  Decreased trade with Europe because introduction of new elephant ivory from Africa (instead of walrus tusk ivory from Greenland) - Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: o People are not interested in environmental protection until after at least physiological and safety needs are met o Shrinking middle class  less collective concern about environment - Diamandis and Kotler’s Hierarchy of Needs: o Fixing problems on bottom level (food, water, shelter) has domino effect o Effects of clean water on greater issues:  Less disease  lower birthrate because don’t feel need to have children to compensate for those that may die  Less need to walk 10 miles for water  more education for women/girls  lower birthrates due to knowledge of family planning and option for career  Less need to boil water to kill bacteria  reduced strain on forests o Dominos can fall in negative ways:  Ex. climate change hypothesized to cause bad droughts in Syria  Farmers unable to harvest crops so moved to cities  Government unable to provide assistance to these farmers  Discontent  protests  undermining of Assad regime  civil wars  Syrian refugees tried to escape unrest and fled to other countries o Caused strain on those other countries’ economies and domestic policy - Extreme pollution as result of Industrial Revolution o Most pollution=short lived and localized  Ex. pollution in Manchester doesn’t affect Amazon - Negative externalities (in economics specifically): third parties that are affected by two-way transactions o Difficult to account for in economic or environmental policies o Ex. Nuisance laws (ability to take legal action against party hurting ability to use land to its fullest capacity): difficult to apply to pollution  Ex. copper factory introduced to farming community causes lower crop yields  Difficult to prove cause/effect relationship to court 8/31/16 - Hierarchy of law in US o Constitution o Statutory Law (Legislature): Congress o Common Law  Includes nuisance law - No right to clean/healthy environment in constitution o Wasn’t an issue at time constitution was written - Congress uses Interstate Commerce Clause to justify environmental legislation o Environment classified as public good (that goes between different states) so Congress has jurisdiction over them - “race to the bottom”: actors that have lax environmental regulations/standards are more competitive because can keep price down o Encourages other actors to loosen environmental regulations  race to have the most lax standards o Usually happens when states given power to make own environmental regulations  Better for environment when there is universal set of rules (made by federal government) - Pollution can bioaccumulate (ex. pesticides) - Pollution can be long-lasting o Plastics o Nuclear waste - Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring” o Spring would eventually be silent because animals would die from bioaccumulation of pesticides o Also stab at other scientists who were being silent about same issues - Most environmental laws passed in 1970’s o Ex. Obama’s Clean Power Plan based on Congress’ concession for presidential power in Clean Air Act from 1970’s - Most environmental legislation is very vague so there is room for interpretation o EPA usually interprets these first o Eventually ends up in federal appeals court  Usually ends up being judges with limited knowledge of environmental issues making legislation - Problem with being first to make environmental legislation: o Make many mistakes: only have limited knowledge of that time  Ex. government requiring companies to use scrubbers with blanket legislation  Creates prisoner’s dilemma because companies have economic incentive to not comply with regulations  Government should have provided market incentive to encourage companies to comply with end goal o Ex. should have made “x” goal required and give scrubbers as an option to reach that goal, but companies would innovate to create a win-win solution to save money - Difficult to amend environmental legislation because environmentally-conscious politicians afraid entire legislation will be scrapped completely if put back on the table - Cost-benefit analysis: o Best method to get environmental legislation passed= make it affordable and use it to create more jobs o Difficult to do because difficult to put dollar value on non-material benefits- very subjective o People against environmental protection use this argument against it o John Graham found that benefits greatly outweighed cost of environmental protection - Global community limits good countries can do environmentally o Weak international institutions  International community can’t force countries to do things they don’t want to do o Unequal power balance only serves interests of larger powers (like US)  US considered veto power or dragger state o Legislation with dragger states taken into account  Either lower standards to appease large power  Or go forward without them, but legislation usually very weak 9/2/16 - International order has to work through consensus o Very difficult o Talked about one outcome last time (dragger state)  Often been US recently (ex. Kyoto Protocol)  China has also been dragger state o Other barrier to international consensus: North-South divide  Represents division between rich and poor countries  Many “southern” nations see North as most responsible for pollution, idea that “pollution=development”  Northern/wealthy countries try to prevent southern countries from using pollution to develop  Southern countries think that makes it almost impossible for them to ever be on par with North - Group discussion about possibilities to reduce carbon footprint in US: o Carbon tax: difficult to pass an increase in taxes, especially with Republican lawmakers o Cap and trade: also difficult to pass o Congestion taxes to encourage public transportation: no one wants higher taxes o Tax on waste pick-up (recycling= free) o Tax breaks for renewable energy in homes/businesses o Raise emissions standards o Food transportation: tax breaks for local food production  Farmers markets around local businesses and public transportation  Closer connection with farmers builds relationships and encourages future use/business o Stop subsidizing Big 5 (soy, wheat, corn, etc.) because artificially lowers price for meat production and causes increased demand  Taxes go to subsidies so consumers only take into account sale price when purchasing meat (which would be cheap because most in the form of taxes)  Meat production uses a lot of energy  Subsidies  seemingly lower price  increased meat demand  harmful to environment o Reduce subsidies for oil: should instead increase subsidies for renewable energy o Re-education/retraining of coal and oil workers so they can be successful in other renewable industries o Further education on environmental issues: begin at younger age and more in depth at all levels  Difficult to get passed because global warming considered pseudo-science by many politicians o Feed-in tariff: idea that people should be paid for producing energy o Increased investment in public transportation  Difficult to pass because us vs. them mentality between urban and rural areas- rural legislature thinks urban areas get too much government help when they don’t need it  Ex. light rail between Durham and Chapel Hill proposal blocked o Stop auctioning off federal land for oil/gas production o Reduce blocks on renewable energy in local communities rd  Ex. monopoly by Duke Energy- taxes for using 3 party energy provider o Tax tree removal and incentivize reforestation o City planning that prioritizes pedestrians


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

25 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Allison Fischer University of Alabama

"I signed up to be an Elite Notetaker with 2 of my sorority sisters this semester. We just posted our notes weekly and were each making over $600 per month. I LOVE StudySoup!"

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."

Parker Thompson 500 Startups

"It's a great way for students to improve their educational experience and it seemed like a product that everybody wants, so all the people participating are winning."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.