Urbanization or habitat destruction?

Do you know where most of the people live? Nowadays, the answer seems to be obvious: we live in cities. It is estimated that half of the world’s population live in cities (click here); however, the physical space we name “city” has not always been like we know it today. As population grown, it was necessary to find new spaces not only for people to live, but also for them to have a secure and comfortable space where settling down. As a consequence, the process of urbanization started, and the zones that in the past were part of the countryside or forest, today are considered as part of urban zones.

Urbanization is the growth of urban areas as a result of rural migration. This process has lots of benefits; for example, cities are more efficient in supplying basic needs than rural areas; the access to education, health, and social and cultural services is more available to people; and social integration is better than in villages. 

Although all these benefits, urbanization has a negative impact in our environment. This process can increase atmospherically temperature; produce pollution due to factories and automobiles; change the natural water circle; and destroy natural habitants of flora and fauna.

Population will go on growing; therefore, urbanization is something we cannot stop. Do you think that it is fair to use the place of animals and plants to create cities? Is human developing more important than animals and plants’ security? Can we do something to preserve natural areas free of urbanization?

Click here to watch a video about the struggle burrowing owls have to face because of urbanization.

Click here for further information.

Nuclear Power in Chile: Good or Bad idea?

In the present time, electricity has become more than a first necessity. Given that the demand of electricity has grown alarmingly these past 50 years, the search for new sources have not stopped.   This search led to the use of nuclear fission to produce energy.  

The construction of a Nuclear Power Plant in Chile has been kicking around during the past three or four years; in fact, in 2011 the Chilean Government signed an agreement of collaboration for the investigation of nuclear energy with the US. There are different opinions about this matter.

On one hand, nuclear energy is said to be clean because of the lower emission of toxic gasses in comparison with oil or coat plants. Furthermore, considering nuclear reactors, the amount of energy produced is much larger; just one plant is needed to produce a vast quantity of energy.

On the other hand, the risks of a nuclear accident for Chile are much more than for other countries because it is located in the most seismic area of the world. Another problem is the generation of nuclear waste, which is potentially dangerous for people and the environment.

Even though this way of generating energy is said to be pretty secure, accidents such as the Chernobyl disaster in Russia (1986) and the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan (2011), make us think about the possible risks attached to nuclear power.

In my opinion, Chile is not prepared yet considering that the costs are quite high; there’s an absence of an energetic policy; furthermore, there are not specialists enough as to deal with such a large-scale project.

Do you think that in the future,  Nuclear Energy would be a possibility?