Exist many ways to contribute to reducing the contamination of waste in the world. In my opinion, the first thing we have to do is change our habits and start with some actions from home, and if this is successful we can share that with others and increase the number of people helping the environment with little actions. The actions from our house could contribute efficiently to generating good disposal of waste helping the environment in the process.

In our house, we can improve the way to dispose of our wastes, and dividend the different types of waste. Our government rules with different types of color bags to make effective disposal of our wastes in houses, hospitals, enterprises, and more. In our house, we would use three colors (White, Green, and Black) for the correct disposal of waste. 

Green color: we use this color for using organic waste like food scraps and agricultural waste.

White color: we use this color for usable waste like plastic, cardboard, glass, paper, and metals. 

Black color: we use this color for unusable waste like toilet paper, napkins, paper, and cardboard contaminated whit food and metallic paper.

At the same time, we can do it at home when making our purchases and look for products that have reusable packaging, or those that decompose quickly, reducing the amount of waste that would be generated at home. Some packaging can be given another life, a glass bottle can be used again, or given a new use, such as turning into a vase or some decorative element. Even so, one of the most important things to do is to buy only what is really necessary, and buy fewer items according to the amount of waste we generate at home.

In conclusion, if we are aware of the things we buy and the waste we generate with these purchases, we can become more efficient when making purchases to reduce waste and thus contribute to the environment. Using the 4 R's of recycling: Reduce, Recycle, Reuse and Recover, will generate a great change in our lives and in the work of the people in charge of collecting this garbage in our community.

In Colombia since 1986 the State has used Glyphosate as a herbicide for cocaine and marijuana’s crops. The main idea of Law 30 was eradicating drugs and its exploitation, all of these, in the Plan Colombia framework. Nevertheless, that practice has meant aggression for health and attacks to the environment for communities. Until now, there is still a debate around if Colombia should continue with it, although there exists a lot of studies and research with evidence about human health and environmental damages. For this reason, this essay has a purpose to promote that Colombian people must demand the aspersion with Glyphosate be eliminated soon. 

In the present text, firstly it is going to present the history about Glyphosate in Colombia. Secondly, it will show what are the damages in human health, in animals, and the environment. Finally,  it will propose a way to demand the use of Glyphosate. 

In Colombia the “War on drugs” began in 1975. It was presided over by the United States, when President Richard Nixon announced drugs as a main public enemy. The influence of the USA over Colombia has always been around different topics, for example: commercial exchanges, justice, multilateral helping and fight against drug trafficking. One of these requirements was to eradicate cocaine crops, and they suggested Glyphosate as one of the mechanisms. Colombia adopted with Law 30 of 1986 the practice and also mixed with other strategies, however, during all of these years the plan has not been effective. All day, the drug crop is increasing, and the most important states in the USA have made decisions of legalization. The conclusion is: “Wars on drugs” are lost.  

During Juan Manuel Santos’ Government signed a peace process in Colombia, and with this the communities and FARC asked to eliminate Glyphosate. Additionally, the Constitutional Court failed and prohibited the use of Glyphosate, because it argumented the herbicide causes a lot of consequences over environmental and human health. The Following paragraphs show the principal effects. 

For some studies Glyphosate gets diseases in humans. For example: toxicological problems on skin, genetic and chronic toxicity. There are even studies that suggest Glyphosate is a carcinogenic element. Particularly, in the Congress of Colombia the alternative caucus of Senators presented a project in which one of the arguments was the high impact in farmers with more than 120 cancer cases. 

In animals Glyphosate causes surfactn in mammals and toxicological problems. Besides, there is evidence showing neurotoxic effects over flying animals. For example, the European Food Safety (2018) reported that only in 2013 in Belgium where they probed Glyphosate, 360 residius were found in the skin, brain and feets in different species of animals. 

Finally, the majority of research shows hard consequences on the environment and in the last years scientists and researchers have been concentrating on mapping of remains in food crops, and water for consumption. Initially, those studies had suggested that the aspersion with glyphosate could be removed from water. Notwithstanding, later researchers stood up against it, and they compared the volume biodegradation vs volumen non-degradation, and they found that there were more particulars non-degrade. Some equal was with food, which researchers declared not possible eating food from crops aspersied with Glyphosate.

Thus, in this essay was exposed why the Colombian People must decline the aspersion with Glyphosate. The reasons are around bad effects over human health with diseases like toxicological problems until cancer. Also, problems in the environment with damages in food crops, water for consumption and collateral effects in mammals and flying animals. This is a huge threat for a country with a big biodiversity and with the importancia of stopping climate change. The “War on drugs” is lost, life still has hope. 

Pollution is one of the most important environmental problems that we have in Bogotá and the transportation means has the biggest impact on this issue. For this reason, I would like to expose and describe in these lines the main problems related to these and how they have a negative impact on the environment and human's health. Finally, I will present a possible and real contribution that we can implement in our life habits to decrease this environmental problem and maybe improve our health conditions. I can apport to figure it out. Because I believe that WE CAN IMPROVE OUR HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL CARBON FOOTPRINT BY CHANGING OUR MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION.

I would like to describe some problems that I consider are the most important. Bogota has the 6th position in LATAM related to air pollution. This is confirmed by recent studies realized by Greenpeace org. These studies confirm the high level of air pollution in Bogotá and affirm that more than 60% of the emissions of pollutants (carbon dioxide, nitrous oxides, and sulfur dioxide) are related to means of transportation like buses, cargo vehicles, and private cars. These private cars contribute between 40% to 70% to these pollutant emissions although they only represent 11% of trips in Bogota. However, Bogota has the most important bike trails in South America, so maybe it is a change beginning.

Other problems caused by transportations means are for instance first, the noise that has a terrible effect on animal and human life and constant exposure can affect hearing. And second, human diseases. Pollutants are related to cancer, cardiovascular, and respiratory illness. In fact, I think that all these relations could have had devastating consequences with the current Covid 19 pandemic. So, I could list a lot of issues related to our transportation means. But this isn't the Idea. in the final paragraph I will write about some easy solutions that we can implement in our life behaviors to decrease the air pollution in Bogotá.

In conclusion, Like I mentioned in the last paragraph, air pollution is a huge problem in Bogotá, and I exposed several consequences related to this. But what can we do to improve air conditions? Now I will expose what I think could help us in this goal. First is a change in the transportation means that we usually use, because this is an important step to transform the environment positively. For instance, when we go to work, we have to use public transportation, bicycle, or electric scooters or we could run or walk. We must avoid transportation by private car. So, if we use bicycles, running or walking we can improve our health too and the achievements will be very rewarding for you. Finally, I know this change is not easy and requires a big effort. But this change is related to conscience changes that the environment and you need. These changes are for now and for the future.

Nowadays we have heard a lot of factors that affect the world we live in. One of the most important and relevant is climatic change.

Based on the last research of the Zurich University, published in April 2019. The pole melting rate has increased 18% more than expected 6 years ago. This is causing climate affectation, wildlife crisis, and natural disasters all around the world.

A crucial example of these changes would be the recent forest fires in Australia during the pandemic, and the extreme cold temperatures registered in U.S cities such as New York.

In a deeper look at the causes of these disasters, we can easily determine that strong greenhouse gases are playing an important role in the recent history of climate change. Only the last year it was the determine an increase of over 50% of the number of gases since the industrial revolution in the XVIII century.

This contrasts even more when we analyze the political aspect of it, some governments decided to remove restrictions or minimize the problem, only based on their conclusions and not over years and years of investigation and research. This has left the planet on a countdown for the end if we do not take action to stop the unreasonable pollution crisis, we are rushing the destruction of our ecosystems and our imminent extinction.

Due to these facts, our commitment now should be to impulse the renewable energy sources, rearrange the regulations and permissions the industries have and establish a more sustainable execution of their merchant activities. Reduce the extractive industry and focus more on eco-friendly and sustainable industries such as wind farms, or the research of new energy obtention methods.

Also, on the personal aspect, we can start by reducing the amount of plastic we generate every year and comply with all the recommendations provided by the regulation organisms, as separate rubbish, and reduce the consumption of nonessential products.

Remember that the change can be little initially, but together it can generate a huge impact and save our beautiful world.

You wake up in the morning, go to the kitchen for a cup of coffee and after that, you look at your email where you find an energy bill for more than 500 Euros! Well, that's exactly what has happened to the EU in the last year.  This is the result of a lot of bad international political decisions, poor energy planning, a complex geopolitical chess game, and dark myths about alternative sources of energy. Since this situation is unsustainable, nuclear power is the only solution Europe has to its current energy crisis. 

The EU was born in the context of the new millennium, the new century with new promises about climate change, new energies, and sustainable development. But 20 years later the continent is in the worst crisis since the end of the cold war. The EU is facing a war between Ukraine and Russia that began this year.  In 2016 Ukraine said no to the political Influence from Moscow and started a dialogue with Brussels to be a new member of the EU and NATO.  But this year the war began and the government of Ukraine asked for military aid from the EU and NATO. First, they accepted. They sent military equipment and supplies for the Ukrainian army but some weeks later this aid just stopped. Germany ordered the other EU members to stop the aid to Ukraine because Gazprom ( the Russian statal gas and oil company) started blackmailing the German government because they have control of the Nord Stream Pipe, a large pipe that sends gas to Europe. Since 10 years ago Europe used gas, solar, and wind power, except for some countries like France and Poland that used nuclear energy,  the problem with this energy is that it can't supply all the energy demand of the EU, so they need Russian gas, making them dependent on Russia.

 

But some countries prefer nuclear power that wind, solar power or gas, those countries like Poland and France don´t need Russian gas, the nuclear power is a simple steam generator, the heat of the plutonium combined with water creates a lot of steam that moves a turbine, creating energy for us. Nuclear power is cheaper than Russian gas, more efficient, and greener than gas, but nuclear energy has a few problems and is a bad image that has in the common people. The memory of Chornobyl and Fukushima created fear of nuclear energy cause for example 0 nuclear energy from the german government since 2010. But countries like France, Spain, and Poland still use nuclear power for no dependence on Russian gas. The principal disadvantage is that nuclear power creates also nuclear waste, a poisonous chemical waste, that the only solution is to bury 10 km under the ground. 

Nuclear power is the solution, the EU is going through an energy crisis and an imminent war with the principal production of gas in the world. this is like a shot in the feet, the nuclear power is less contaminant than solar or wind power, nuclear waste is indeed a dangerous part of this but actually, countries like the US, Japan even Russia use correct and safe nuclear waste protocols. Nuclear power also can generate more energy with less inversion than the other” green” powers. This is the way that the EU must follow to erase the dependence on Russian gas and continue with the sustainable development

Conclusion 

In the end, the Russian blackmail through Gazprom and the inefficient production of wind and solar power, the only solution to solve this crisis in the EU is the adoption of nuclear power like other countries in Europe, Asia and America do it. if they don´t do that the high prices of energy  and the new foreign policy of Russia could destroy the EU as we know 

Air pollution in Bogotá is a big problem for the present and the future of its citizens because it can cause many diseases such as asthma, lung cancer, and other breathing issues. Moreover, the air pollution also causes acid rain which damages things like the paint of cars and affects the animals that live with the human beings in the city. For that reason, the use of devices that run with fossil fuels must be restricted in the city.

Air pollution in Bogotá comes largely from transportation powered by fossil fuels such as diesel and natural gas, followed by construction industries, gasoline-powered cars, gas-fired boilers, and domestic heaters. So, to achieve a reduction in air pollution or pollution, the use of the devices achieved must be rethought or, as a result, their use in the city must be prohibited.

However, as we all know, most of these devices cannot be aggressively banned or restricted in the city because they are vital to the operation of the city. For example, in the case of diesel and natural gas devices used for mass transportation of people, it would be very difficult or costly (in the short term) for the city to change its energy source to gasoline or electricity. Another example occurs with domestic gas heaters, which until now are the most economically accessible option for users.

Finally, for the reasons given, it is concluded that although a restriction on the use of the devices could improve the air quality of Bogotá, it should also be considered that many of these devices are not replaceable in the short term. And for that reason, it is necessary to start to think about the use of devices that are more efficient and that can work with other types of fuels that do not generate pollution.

Air pollution is a health and environmental hazard. We know what we’re looking at when brown or gray haze settles over a city, exhaust bellows across a busy highway, or a plume rises from a smokestack. Some air pollution is not seen, but its pungent smell alerts us.

Thesis Statement: It’s necessary to use green means of transport as an alternative to reduce air pollution and improve quality of life and health.

Air pollution is a mix of hazardous substances produced from people and natural sources.

Produced from people: The primary sources are landfills that do not comply with regulations, the means of transport emissions as CO2, fuel oils and natural gas to keep heat homes, by-products of manufacturing and power generation, particularly power plants that use combustion of coat, and fumes from chemical production.

Air pollution from Natural Sources: Nature releases hazardous substances into the air, such as smoke from wildfires (which are often caused by people); ash and gasses from volcanic eruptions; and gasses, like methane, which are emitted from decomposing organic matter in soils.

Air pollution affects everyone’s health, but certain groups may be harmed more. Almost 9 out of 10 people who live in urban areas worldwide are affected by air pollution.

Means of transport sustainable refers to producing low or zero emission, including electric vehicles.

Let’s talk about the benefits of sustainable transportation, for example:

The bicycle is 7 times more efficient than a car, talking about space between 4 or 3.5 meters per lane, another aspect is the most cost effective transportation on the planet. In fact cycling is more efficient than any other method of travel, including walking.

By the way, electric skateboards, electric scooters or electric unicycles are another important options to move into the city, for the big availability to recharge and above all to store.

   

Another alternative is the efficient use of cars, for instance, it’s not necessary for only one person, you should be use your vehicle with other people or neighborhoods. 

It’s necessary to change the mindset to change the world. The young people are the most powerful example in the use of alternative means of transport. Awareness for a better world motivates them to make decisions without prejudice or accusations. The 76% of them show concern, which produces coherent actions in favor of not continuing to be part of the problem.

A banker got economists thinking when he said:

"A cyclist is a disaster for the country's economy: he does not buy cars and does not take out loans to buy. He does not pay insurance policies. He does not buy fuel, does not pay for car maintenance and does not need repairs. He does not use paid parking. He does not provoke serious accidents. You don't need multi-lane highways.

You don't get obese.

Healthy people are neither necessary nor useful for the economy. They don't buy the drugs. They don't go to hospitals or doctors.

They add nothing to the country's BIP.

"In contrast, every new McDonald's store creates at least 30 jobs, actually 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 dieticians and nutritionists -- in addition to the people who work in the store itself."

PS: going on foot is even worse. Pedestrians don't even buy a bike!^[a][b][c]

        

According to Esther Miguel Trula's article in 2019, "consumption per American was 65 pieces of clothing per year. It is a considerable increase if we take into account that in the 90s they were buying 40 pieces of clothing. We are not far behind them: we consume 34 pieces of clothing and throw away 14 kilos of clothing. Per person. Every year."  According to this information, the term "fast fashion" appears, referring to those clothing purchases that are made according to a fad and that generally imply that the production materials are not the best. This clearly has a direct impact on the environment. 

It all starts in the garment manufacturing process in which 3,000 to 10,000 liters of water are used. In addition to that, the materials used as microplastics in the production process cause carbon dioxide emissions that go directly to the ozone layer, and the remains of the production reach the oceans.

Chile and Ghana are examples of places invaded by clothes that are thrown away every year. Since these clothes are part of "fast fashion", they are not sold. Tons of clothes arrive daily directly from Europe, the United States and China to Accra, the capital of Ghana, being articles that are used for new businesses or that are left out in the open covering streets and creating mountains of waste. Moreover, Atacama in Chile, is the desert called the immense "garbage dump of the world" for the same reason. This place is  evidence of the excessive consumption of the planet.

In conclusion, it is necessary to be aware of the purchase of articles and do this in a responsible manner by acquiring good quality products that allow a long life and several uses. As well as to throw the garments that are no longer used in the spaces designated for this purpose, since in this way they can be given a new opportunity and we can take care of the environment.