Health Care Spending Essay Example for Free

Health Care Spending Essay Healthcare is a very important sector in the countries around the world. The countries and the government always keep some money in their budget in relation to the health care activities in their countries. In the United States of America also, there are certain provisions in relation to the health care. The paper shall discuss about the health care spending in relation to United States of America. It shall discuss about the current level of health care expenditure in United States of America. There are shall be a lot of discussion in relation to the fact that whether the expenditure on health care in United States of America is appropriate or not. It shall also discuss about the manner in which the health care needs of the people in United States of America are paid by the government. In the end of the paper, there shall be a forecast in relation to the health care spending in United States of America. All the above said things shall be discussed in detail in the current paper. The government of United States of America has made a lot of provisions in relation to the expenditure of health care facilities in United States of America. In the United States of America, the health care spending has been increasing continuously (Hawe, 2008). There have been a lot of funds kept by the government of United States of America in its budget in relation to the health care services. In the year 1990, the expenditure made by the government of United States of America in relation to the health care spending was $714 million. Since then, the amount of expenditure on health care has increase to $2. 3 trillion. This is around 3 times of what it was in the year 1990. The government of United States of America is spending around 16% of its total gross domestic production on providing the health care facilities to the people. It is estimated that around $7600 are spent by the government of United States of America for each and every resident in the country. In this way, it can be said that the expenditure in relation to health care in United States of America is quite good and the country is taking adequate steps for making sure that adequate health care facilities are provided to the people in a proper and appropriate manner. The health care spending of the United States of America is the highest all around the world. There is no problem with the extent of money spend by the country towards the health care. Other countries around the world are also spending some money towards the health care but the expenditure made by the government of United States of America is the highest. Currently the expenditure incurred in United States of America towards is adequate and appropriate. It has to increase only with the increase in population. According to the per capita expenditure, the current expenditure in the country towards the healthcare is appropriate. When the country makes the budget in relation to the health care expenditure, then it has to take care that adequate expenditure is incurred on each and every activity related to health care. The government of United States of America should make sure that it spends appropriate expenditure on each and every area of the health care. The expenditure should be more on the critical areas and it should be reduced on the areas which are not very difficult to handle for the government. The government of United States of America should make sure that it increases the expenditure of the health insurance of those people which are not in a position to afford the costs for themselves (U. S. Health Care Costs, n. d. ). The government should also increase the expenditure in relation to the funds provided to the health care organizations for providing the benefits to the poor people in the United States of America. The government of United States of America should also increase the expenditure in relation to some specific and high risk diseases such as Cancer, Aids etc. If the expenditure shall be reduced in relation to the above said activities then, there is a possibility that the people in United States of America shall be benefitted to a very high extent. Other than the above areas, there are certain areas in which the government of United States of America should look to reduce the expenditure. The cost on some of the areas in the health care should not be reduced to the extent it hampers the health care services. If there is a requirement to reduce the health care costs then, these should be reduced only till the services are not affected in a negative manner. The areas in which unnecessary costs are incurred by the government should be recognized and the costs should be reduced in those areas. In the United States of America, there are adequate sources used for the purpose of financing the health care services in the country. In the country, the funding for the health care services is done together by the government and the non government agencies in the country. While preparing the budget, the government of United States of America keeps a percentage of funds in relation to providing the health care services to the people who are in need and also the people which are not able to have the health care insurance for themselves. Other than the government of United States of America, there are various other forms of associations which work for the purpose of providing the health care services to the people. They not only provide the health care services but also provide the financial for the insurance of the patients. There are few programs also in relation to the same. The programs include Healthcare Facilities Accreditation Program, Community Health Accreditation Program and various other programs. The health care finance in the United States of America are funded by the above said facilities and things. In the United States of America, the government and the non government associations share 50% of the expenditure each. In this way, there is a proper sharing the expenditure. For the last few years, the healthcare expenditure in United States of America has been increased considerably at an increasing rate. It is expected that the healthcare expenditure in United States of America shall increase in the same rate as it was increasing earlier (Scambler, 2008). In the year 2007, the health care expenditure in United States of America was $2. 2 trillion. This amount increased to $2. 3 trillion in the financial year 2008. In this way, there was a definite increase in the health care expenditure in the two years. It is expected that the health care expenditure will grow even more. In the year 2013, the healthcare expenditure is expected to reach the figure of $3 trillion and in the year 2017, it is expected that the health care expenditure shall reach the figure of $4. 3 trillion. In this way, it can be said that there is a forecast of increased expenditure on health care in the years to come. The chart below provides the forecast for health care in a proper manner. This chart is showing the healthcare expenditure in United States of America. The government of United States of America is spending a lot of money on the healthcare services in the country. With the kind of expenditure, the government of United States of America is spending on the health care facilities in the country, it can be said that the government is spending sufficient amount of money on the health care facilities.

Life in the 1960s was Better than Life Today Essay examples -- essays

Life in the 1960s was both better for the people and significantly different to life today. When comparing the 1960s and today, there are many significant differences. The 1960s held events that were unique to that era, such as the Vietnam War and the landing on the moon, and today we are trying to find ways to advance technology further. The two eras also had different lifestyles, clothing, technology and pass-times. Life in the 1960s was better than the life today because the world hadn?t yet advanced too far, and life was revolved more around friends and family then other things. Events in the 1960s changed the people of that era. People who did adventurous things such as Neil Armstrong walking on the moon and those men who returned home from the Vietnam War inspired them, feminism bettered the life for women, teens began to enjoy life more as the counter culture began, the cold war made people aware of the danger of nuclear technology and the JFK assassination gave people a topic of conversation. Important events today include the discovery of cloning, which is a way of c...

Bottled Water and Its Industry

Bottled Water and Its Industry Bottled water is a big business. Since the 1970s the market for bottled water has boomed around the world. Even soft-drink companies like Pepsi and Coca-Cola have dipped their hands into this successful product. According to Beverage Marketing Corp, New York City, Americans now consume more bottled water than milk, coffee, beer, or any other drink (Fishman) Consumers’ thirst for the beverage is fueled by many factors, one of the largest reasons being an increased interest in a healthy lifestyle.As a result, the bottled water market increased by an average of 9% annually between 1999 and 2004 (Spinner, 2006) The global rate of consumption more than quadrupled between 1990 and 2005 (Li, 2007) People in the United States buy more than half a billion bottles of water a week; that is enough to circle the earth more than 5 times (Leonard). How can we explain this trend and what are the consequences for producers, consumers, and the environment? Bottled water consumption reflects a certain way of life. In many cases, bottled water is an alternative to tap water.Consumers think it tastes better than tap water and they perceive it as being safer and of better quality. Bottled water is perceived as pure and harmless, although it is not necessarily the case. Consumers care for their health and their well-being and bottled water happens to be a quick, easy, and healthy alternative to other bottled beverages. The history of bottled water comes back to how the economy works. If companies want to keep growing they have to keep selling more and more stuff. In the 1970s giant soft drink companies got worried when they saw their growth projections starting to level off (Leonard).This was most likely because one person can only drink so much soda and sooner or later people were going to realized that soda is not healthy and they will convert back to drinking tap water. So at the end of the 1970s companies found their next big thing in a Frenc h product, Perrier. This was water sold in glass bottles and became the newest fad. It wasn’t until 1989 when they started manufacturing bottled water in plastic containers (Tapped, 2009). But how do you get people to keep spending two-thousand times more on a product that they can get out of their kitchen sink?Companies needed to find an effective way to keep people interested in their product, so they start using manufactured demand, or advertising. They started scaring people away from drinking tap water, telling them it was no good. Susan Wellington, president of the Quaker Oats Company’s United States beverage division said, â€Å"When we’re done, tap water will be relegated to showers and washing dishes† (Gleick, 2010) Their next technique was to hide the reality of bottled water behind pure fantasy. They market it as being convenient and personal, which caters to our desires as a human.Producers know that we love having something that is all ours a nd in close reach whenever we want it. They seduced us with images of mountains, streams, and pristine nature, but in reality one-third of bottled water in the United States comes from the tap. Pepsi and Coca-Cola are just two of many brands that are merely tap water. There is much debate on whether bottled water is better or worse than tap water. Obviously there are places around the world, and even the United States that do not have access to clean drinking water, so yes, in these places bottled water is the better choice.But in the places where most bottled water is purchased, tap water is equally comparable, if not better, than bottled water. In 2006 Fiji built an ad campaign around not drinking city tap water. They chose the city of Cleveland, Ohio and printed full page ads in magazines that read â€Å"The label says Fiji because it’s not bottled in Cleveland†(Gleick, 2010) Obviously the city of Cleveland was not pleased and conducted a blind test comparing Fiji w ater to their city’s tap water. The test showed that a glass of Fiji water is lower quality and loses the taste test against Cleveland’s tap water.Five percent of the bottled water purchased in Cleveland fell within the required fluoride range recommended by the state, compared with 100% of the tap water samples (Duncan, 2010) Also, a bottle of Fiji costs thousands of times more than the same about of tap water. Tap water being chosen blindly over bottled water seems to be the common trend (Wilk, 2006) Bottled water is actually less regulated than tap water. City municipals must perform multiple tests a day on the city’s water source, whereas bottled water industries are not bound under these same laws.Clearly taste is not the central motivation behind the continuing increase in the bottled water trade (Li, 2007) In March 1999, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) released a report called â€Å"Bottled Water, Pure Drink or Pure Hype? † NRDC's repo rt points out that as much as 40% of all bottled water comes from a city water system, just like tap water. The report also focuses on the fact that 60% to 70% of all bottled water sold in the United States is exempt from the FDA's bottled water standards, because the federal standards do not apply to water bottled and sold within the same state.Unless the water is transported across state lines, there are no federal regulations that govern its quality. According to the NRDC, â€Å"Bottled water companies have used this loophole to avoid complying with basic health standards, such as those that apply to municipally treated tap water. † Also, all carbonated or sparkling waters are completely exempt from FDA guidelines that set specific contamination limits. According to the NRDC study, â€Å"Even when bottled waters are covered by the FDA's specific bottled water standards, those rules are weaker in many ways than EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] rules that apply to big- city tap water. For instance, if we compare EPA regulations for tap water to the FDA's bottled water rules (these examples are quotes from the NRDC report): †¢City tap water can have no confirmed E. coli or fecal coliform bacteria. FDA bottled water rules include no such prohibition (a certain amount of any type of coliform bacteria is allowed in bottled water). †¢City tap water, from surface water, must be filtered and disinfected. In contrast, there are no federal filtration or disinfection requirements for bottled water. Most cities using surface water have had to test for Cryptosporidium or Giardia, two common water pathogens that can cause diarrhea and other intestinal problems, yet bottled water companies do not have to do this. †¢City tap water must meet standards for certain important toxic or cancer-causing chemicals, such as phthalate (a chemical that can leach from plastic, including plastic bottles); some in the industry persuaded the FDA to exempt bottled water from the regulations regarding these chemicals. City water systems must issue annual â€Å"right to know† reports, telling consumers what is in their water. Bottlers successfully killed a â€Å"right to know† requirement for bottled water †¢The Natural Resources Defense Council report concluded: â€Å"Therefore, while much tap water is indeed risky, having compared available data, we conclude that there is no assurance that bottled water is any safer than tap water. † Often, enforcement and monitoring of water quality is uneven and irregular for both tap water and bottled water.While tap water contamination incidents must be reported promptly to the public, the same is not true for bottled water. While contamination of bottled water does occur, many instances have never received public notice until recently (Gleick, 2010). Aside from the excessive spending of consumers on bottled water, there are also many health effects inadvertently caused by the b ottled water industry, one of these problems being tooth decay. Since the 1950s, the United States has been involved in a public health program called ‘community water fluoridation’(1800 Dentist).Many communities throughout the nation added fluoride to their water supply, and the result was a significant decrease in the number of childhood cavities (Xiang, 2010) Bottling companies use processes such as reverse osmosis or distillation to remove impurities from the water, which also removes the fluoride (Lalumandier,2009). Fluoride, or lack thereof, in your water may not seem like much of a reason to worry about whether or not you should drink tap water versus bottled water, but this is not the only risk for consumers.According to a 1999 NRDC study in which approximately 22% of brands were tested, at least one sample of bottled drinking water contained chemical contaminants at levels above state health limits. Some of the contaminants found in the study could pose health risks, such as cancer, if consumed over a long period of time (NRDC) Polyethylene terephthalate (PET, or PETE) is a chemical found in the plastic used to make water bottles. A 2009 study by reasearchers form Goethe University in Germany suggest that PET bottles may contain hormone-disrupting chemicals that are detrimental to human health.Some compounds in PET may seep out from these bottles and can possibly cause cancer. This typically occurs when the water is exposed to either cold or hot temperatures (Ferrier, 2001) Another chemical found in the plastic used to make water bottles is bisphenol-a (BPA). This has multiple health effects, including cancer and reproduction problems in women of child bearing age, as well as in babies (Ferrier, 2001, and Tapped). Producers and consumers are not the only components affected by the bottled water industry. Probably the most effected element is our environment.From diminishing fresh water sources, to wildlife, to pollution, our environment i s suffering immensely from production and disposal of bottled water. In a recent full page ad, Nestle said, â€Å"Bottled water is the most environmentally responsible consumer product in the world. † (Nestle Waters). How can this be true when these industries are trashing the environment all along the products life cycle. This is not environmentally responsible. The problems start with extraction and production where oil is used to make water bottles. PET is derived from crude oil.One kilogram of PET requires two kilograms of oil and produces three kilograms of CO2. Making bottles to meet consumer demands for bottled water requires more than 1. 5 million barrels of oil a year (Arnold, 2006 and Ferrier, 2001). That is enough oil to fuel 100,000 cars each year. With all that energy used to make the bottle, even more energy is used to ship it around the planet and once it reaches us we drink it in about two minutes. That brings us to the problem at the other end of the life cyc le. What happens to all the bottles when we are done with them?Eighty percent of empty bottles end up in landfills where they will sit for thousands of years before decomposing. Many end up in incinerators where they are burned releasing toxic pollution into the atmosphere. The rest is recycled. But what happens to the recycled bottles? In a perfect world each bottle would be recycled and remade into another water bottle. Instead the plastic goes through a downcycling process, which turns the material into lower grade plastics which is used to produce tons of other products, wasting much of the scrap and discarding it in another country’s backyard and/or into the ocean (Tapped, 2009).There is a garbage patch twice the size of Texas in the North Pacific Ocean. The garbage patch occupies a relatively stationary region of the North Pacific. The rotational pattern of the current draws in waste material from across the North Pacific, including costal waters off North America and J apan. As material is captured in the currents it remains trapped inside this region of ocean. One hundred million marine mammals and turtles in the North Pacific are killed every year by plastic in the ocean. 70-100% of North Pacific sea birds are affected by eating plastic. Plastic is killing the ocean and it is poisoning the fish we eat.Because the fish we eat have likely ingested contaminated plastic, it is virtually impossible for nature to produce organic fish in the ocean. Pepsi’s vice chairman publicly said, â€Å"The biggest enemy is tap water. † They want us to think it is dirty and that bottled water is the best alternative. In many places public water is polluted. Thanks to polluting industries, one of the major contributors being the bottled water industry. Drinking bottled water has become a trivial habit in many people’s everyday lives. Bad tap water taste or quality, fitness goals, and other numerous reasons lead consumer to buy bottled water.Bott led water may even be necessary, for instance in case of temporary tap water contamination. This flourishing market is profitable for many companies and provides a great number of jobs to people around the world. Bottled water quality is generally good, although it can suffer from the same contamination hazards as tap water and also contains hazardous compounds in the bottle itself. Some solutions to make sure bottled water quality is as good as it claims could include things like, companies releasing their quality tests on a day-to-day basis and make them available to the community.It should also be required by all companies to include information about where the water came from, or how it was filtered, on the label. The International Bottled Water Association (IBWA) is beginning to â€Å"go green†. Nestle, for instance, will use 30% lighter plastic bottles and 30% smaller labels, as well as eco-shaped bottles. Their bottles will be 100% recyclable, and when building product ion plants they will make sure the building is green-building certified.Another step they are taking is looking into hybrid vehicles for distribution of their product (Nestle Waters, 2011). This seems like Nestle is taking the right steps to improve production and use resources in a manner that will help improve, or at least maintain, our environment, but I cannot help but wonder if this is one of their marketing tools. Sure, they are producing in a more environmentally friendly way, but is this one of their ways of â€Å"tricking† us into buying their product and steering us away from their non-green competitors?When buying their product we are still contributing to this market. Bottled water is not all bad. It has many positive uses. Bottled water is an absolute critical lifesaver in many natural disasters. Bottled water has a substantial shelf life. This is especially valuable for emergency preparation, but also for many other purposes. Also, bottled water is a nearly idea l consumer product: it is healthy, non-addictive, hypoallergenic, caffeine-free, calorie free, and contains no artificial colors, flavors, trans fats, etc. Fager, 2009) Some things we could do to reduce the environmental impact of bottled water are to re-use bottles of water rather than recycling them to be re-manufactured, or buy a reusable, BPA free, water bottle. A more aggressive approach would be to lobby with city and state officials for more drinking fountains around your city, or towards the boycott of bottled water in your public schools and work places. These are just a few steps to start protecting our wallets, our health, and our planet.

Netflix Leading with Data:What advice would you give to the CEO of Netflix Essay

Case: Netflix Leading with Data: The Emergence of Data-Driven Video Question: What advice would you give to the CEO of Netflix? Digital distribution market is undoubtedly the future of the video rental industry. Netflix has already taken a good lead in it but must have fresh ideas to keep its advantage in the industry. Beating its competitors in the domestic market is important, however, Netflix should jump out of its own circle into a new market to gain the first mover advantage. Looking at the global market, China is a good choice for Netflix’s next station. Using the Porter’s Five Forces model, Netflix can examine its advantages and disadvantages see whether entering China is good choice: * Bargaining power of customers China has a growing economy with a large group of new middle-class, who are able and willing to consume on entertainment. Nowadays, Chinese usually watch films on free websites with a low picture quality and slow Internet speed. While the number of people watching films are increasing, the picture quality is becoming more important for the viewing experience. Providing a fast, flexible and high-quality service, Netflix can persuade many customers into its subscription model. * Bargaining power of suppliers: China’s film and TV show makers have been facing a major problem: plagiarizing (including unpaid online watching), which substantially decreases their profits. They are finding a pathway to introduce their product to the customers. The advantages of plagiarizing products are the cheap prices and convenience, which Netflix can also provide. Netflix should cooperate with Chinese filmmakers to gain sources of authorized edition film databases and get a lower price since the Chinese filmmakers are eager to run out of the bad situation. * Competitive rivalry: Under the same business model, Netflix would be the first mover in the industry. Although China has few subscription service websites, this is only a minor part of the industry. * Threat of new entrants: The potential competitors have not released any big signals showing that they will enter this industry. Apple’s iTunes, as well as Amazon did poorly in China and have decided not to continue expanding. Netflix should cease this opportunity to enter and take China’s market. * Threat of substitute products: China’s online distribution market is dominated by â€Å"Youku†,  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Tudou† such online video provider; however, their profit model is advertising fees, focusing on the quantity of visitors. With distinct service, it’s not hard for Netflix to occupy the market share. How to focus on the targeted group and how to persuade their potential customers, who used to enjoy cheap, even free resources online, to pay for a m onthly membership, is a big concern to the corporation. To emphasize Netflix’s higher quality service is of great importance. First, Netflix’s technology can help its members build up personal own style’s videos at high efficiency. Besides that, compared with the existing Chinese video websites, like Youku and Toudu, Netflix does not contain any advertisement before or after a movie. Those movies and TV shows posted on Netflix are mostly high definition displays, and customers would like to pay for the HD movies, rather than trying to understand a blurry image on other websites. Furthermore, Netflix’s new component called Friends allows movie buffs to share reviews and recommendations. In China, the website could cooperate with Douban, which is the largest and most influential film review website, and Renren, which is regularly called Chinese Facebook, so that Netflix could not only act as a video online leasing website, but also a social network website in China’s market. Beside the high-level quality, Netflix should offer a large quantity of movies, especially the movies from Hollywood. With the Chinese movie import policy, China only imported 55 movies in 2012. The number is comparatively small compared with the amount of movies that the Chinese audience demands. Netflix could take the advantage to offer more American movies online, which is under laxer regulation both on amount and the content examination, to gain the customers who are interested to watch more foreign movies. ——————————————– [ 1 ]. Walker, Russell, and Mark Jeffery. â€Å"Netflix Leading with Data: The emergence of Data-Driven Video.† Kellogg (2010): 6. [ 2 ]. www.douban.com [ 3 ]. www.renren.com [ 4 ]. China Communication research center, SARFT. Website: http://www.sarftrc.cn/cn/ [ 5 ]. è µ µÃ¨â€œâ€°Ã¥ © §,Ã¥ · ¨Ã¦â‚¬ Ã¥Ëœâ€°. â€Å"ç ¾Å½Ã¥â€º ½Ã§â€ µÃ¥ ½ ±Ã§Å¡â€žÃ¥ ¼â€¢Ã¨ ¿â€ºÃ¥ ¯ ¹Ã¤ ¸ ­Ã¥â€º ½Ã§â€ µÃ¥ ½ ±Ã¥ ¸â€šÃ¥Å" ºÃ¥ ½ ±Ã¥â€œ Ã§Å¡â€žÃ§  â€Ã§ © ¶Ã¢â‚¬ 

Why social recruiting is the next big thing for recruiters

Why social recruiting is the next big thing for recruiters When you think about what’s changed the job search more than anything else over the past 10 years or so, it’s probably the exponentially growing influence of social media. Job seekers have learned to be more cautious about what they post online (at least they should be), and it’s opened up a whole new pool of recruitment potential for employers. To a certain extent, companies still follow the old recruitment model- put out a job opportunity and the response will include a number of qualified candidates. But more and more, organizations are looking to take advantage of the organic networking of social media to boost their recruiting.This focus on outreach to potential candidates via social platforms like LinkedIn, Facebook, or Twitter is known as â€Å"social recruiting.† This isn’t just posting job ads on sites and hoping for the best- social recruiting is a proactive method for reaching new candidates by searching for profiles with specific qualiti es, interacting with potential candidates on the platform, and letting people know about specific job opportunities. This is a huge growth area for hiring companies and recruiters- in fact, nearly 60% of recruiters rated candidates that came in through social recruiting as â€Å"highest quality,† according to a JobVite survey.So why should companies consider embracing this trend more fully?It’s cost-effectiveJob advertisements are getting more expensive all the time, and the results can be†¦mixed. Social recruiting gives recruiters more control over the talent pool and more visibility into the talent available. Unlike advertising, associated costs (if there are any) are minimal.The right platform can yield great resultsThere are obvious places to start (like  LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook), but more specialized platforms can really step up your recruiting game. For example, if you’re looking for a designer, you might want to try Instagram or other visua lly-oriented social media platforms.hbspt.cta.load(2785852, '9e52c197-5b5b-45e6-af34-d56403f973c5', {});It’s an update on word-of-mouth hiringReferrals are a time-honored way to bring in good candidates for a particular job- someone who knows what’s required of the job (an employee or colleague) refers someone he or she knows who might be a good fit. The â€Å"insider track† helps narrow the field, but it also yields high-quality results. Plus, the eventual turnover rate is lower, as referred employees have a turnover rate of about 13%, versus 19% for employees hired through more traditional recruitment channels. The difference here is that the â€Å"referrer† is the candidate’s publicly searchable information.It reflects the changing workforceThe early adopters of social media, Millennials, are now the largest segment of the American workforce. Social recruiting signals a willingness to meet these potential employees on their own terms in an incre asingly digital landscape. Facebook is currently the most popular platform among this group, but developing a strong social recruiting platform now means being able to adjust to whatever social networks come next.It makes recruiting more active, less passiveBeing able to reach out directly to potential candidates is an advantage. Job seekers spend a lot of time and energy building and refining their online presence in the hopes of getting that next big opportunity. Companies who go looking for candidates are able to find these savvier, well-prepared candidates faster and more efficiently, rather than waiting for them to come through a traditional pipeline.Social recruiting is the wave of the future because it makes sense for recruiters who want to find the best candidates while making the most of their recruitment resources. It’s an opportunity for people on both sides (job seekers and job fillers) to work together to make the hiring process a better, more informed propositio n for everyone involved.

Global Warming, El Nino, and other Climate Phenomena

Global Warming, El Nino, and other Climate Phenomena The weather we experience is a manifestation of the climate we live in. Our climate is affected by global warming, which has led to many observed changes, including warmer sea temperatures, warmer air temperatures, and changes in the hydrological cycle. In addition, our weather is also affected by natural climate phenomena that operate over hundreds or thousands of miles. These events are often cyclic, as they reoccur at time intervals of various lengths. Global warming can affect the intensity and return intervals of these events. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued its 5th Assessment Report in 2014, with a chapter devoted to the effects of climate change on these large scale climate phenomena. Here are some important findings: Monsoons are seasonal wind reversal patterns accompanied by significant rainfall. They are responsible, for example, for the summer thunderstorm periods in Arizona and New Mexico, and the torrential downpours in India’s rainy season. Overall, monsoon patterns will increase in area and intensity with continued climate change. They will start earlier in the year and end later than what had been the average.In North America, where monsoons are limited to the U.S. Southwest region, no change in precipitation due to global warming has been clearly observed. A decrease in the length of the season has been observed, though, and monsoons are expected to be delayed during the year. So there appears to be no relief in sight for the observed (and predicted) increase in frequency of extreme summer temperatures in the U.S. Southwest, contributing to drought.The amount of precipitation from monsoon rains is forecasted to be higher in the more pessimistic scenarios considered by the IPCC. In a scenario of continued reliance on fossil fuel and the absence of carbon capture and storage, total precipitation from monsoons, globally, is estimated to increase by 16% by the end of the 21st century. The El Nià ±o Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a large area of unusually warm water that develops in the Pacific Ocean off South America, affecting weather over a large portion of the globe. Our ability to model future climates while taking into account El Nià ±o has improved, and it appears that variability in precipitation will increase. In other words, some El Nià ±o events will produce more rainfall and snowfall than expected in some areas of the globe, while others will produce less precipitation than expected.The frequency of tropical cyclones (tropical storms, hurricanes, and typhoons) is likely to stay the same or decrease, globally. The intensity of these storms, both in wind speed and precipitation, is likely to increase. There are no clear changes predicted for the track and intensity of North American extra-tropical storms (Hurricane Sandy became one of those cyclonic storms outside of the tropics).  Ã‚   Predictive models have improved significantly in the last few years, and they are currently being refined to resolve remaining uncertainties. For example, scientists have little confidence when trying to predict changes in monsoons in North America. Pinpointing the effects of the El Nià ±o cycles or the intensity of tropical cyclones in specific areas has also been difficult. Finally, the phenomena described above are largely know by the public, but there are many other cycles: examples include the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Madden-Julian Oscillation, and the North Atlantic Oscillation. The interactions between these phenomena, regional climates, and global warming make the business of scaling down global change predictions to specific locations bewilderingly complex. Source IPCC, Fifth Assessment Report. 2013. Climate Phenomena and their Relevance for Future Regional Climate Change.

Examining My Community's Source of Energy Essay

Examining My Community's Source of Energy - Essay Example This paper seeks to establish the sources of energy in Hillsborough County, Florida both at the basic home level and the community level. It will look into the type of energy in use and the approximate cost of energy from the household to the community. This will also include the impacts of the energy source to the community over the time it has been in use and seek to establish new alternative sources that can effectively replace the existing sources with consideration to the effects both to the household and the environment. Sources of energy for the community Hillsborough County in Florida is a community that has several choices on the sources of energy to use. This comes as a result of the availability of several companies that specialize in provision of the different types of energy. Currently, there are around sixteen energy production companies in the area. The common types of energy source in use are coal, electricity, solar energy and wood. However, is worth noting that thes e sources of energy are mostly generated locally which leads to the centralized pollution system to the environment by the well over sixteen companies in the area. ... The coal is also used for the same reason of heat and energy production by the companies though there are a small number of households that make home use of it. Impacts of available energy sources on home and community The discussion about use of coal, wood and the production of electricity are all embroiled in the fact that to some extent, they all pollute the environment. The United States of America is one of the countries with the highest use of coal. In the locality, the disaster caused by the use of coal cannot be undermined. One effect of coal use is the radiation exposure. Coal is known to contain traces of Uranium and Thorium which are radioactive materials that occur naturally occur naturally. The coal wastes from the plants are known to be highly disastrous than the direct emissions from a nuclear plant. The other long term effects of the gases released from the use of coal are those associated with the greenhouse gas release to the environment. These greenhouse gases are of great hazard especially to the ozone layer depletion. The third negated effect of coal use is that it causes so many annual deaths. In the United States at large, the deaths resulting from the coal particulate pollution and ground level ozone without effective pollution control measures is on the increase. The deaths are caused by probable development of lung cancer, heart attacks and the acute bronchitis to the victims. Coal also when used even in traces release methyl mercury to the environment. This is a mercury emission that is very fatal to the plant and animal life. The air emissions related to use of coal in this environment is of absolute interest. There are a