The level of emissions rose up from several

The line graph presents data showing annual emissions of sulfur dioxide in the period from 1850 to 2010 around the world. As it is evident from the chart, the level of emissions rose up from several tonnes at the beginning of the observations and reached its peak in 1980 with 140 tonnes of sulfur dioxide contaminations.

After 1980 the line chart illustrates, in general, a downward trend of emissions: from more than 140 tonnes to approximately 95 tonnes by the 2010 year. As it is evident from the graph Africa produced the less part of total emissions beginning from the 1950th years. By the 2010 year ejections from the African side made up less than 10 tones from the total number.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

South America also had low indicators of pollutions compared to Asia, Europe and Noth America. It did have a short-term upward trend until 1990 years, but after 1990 it began to reduce slightly and inconsiderably climbed again after the 2000 year. In Asia, the level of emissions was relatively stable and low till the 1930 year and had several jumps two times after this – in 1960 with approximately 18 tonnes of sulfur dioxide and 2000 with 45 tonnes.

Europe and North America showed the upward trends in emissions until the 1980 year, but after this, the level of ejections went down and decreased by the 2000 year to 25 and 20 tonnes respectively. After that North America continued to maintain a downward trend in emissions, but Europe showed a rising line in contaminations already in the 2010 year.  All in all, the data provide sufficient evidence that the emissions of the sulfur dioxide around the world reached its peak in 1980 and by reducing the ejections in Europe and North America, the current emissions went down by almost 40 tonnes for 30 years.   Question 1.2.

 The line graph delineates mortality rate from air contaminations in the world per 100 thousand people. As the chart illustrates, the death rate steady went down from 1990 to the 2015 year and showed 100 fatal cases in 2015 instead of nearly 130 deaths in the 1990 year.  According to the line graph, there are several essential points with fatal cases in the result of ozone impact, inhalation of ambient particulate matter and indoor solid fuels and poisoning by it. It is precisely seen from the graph that in the observed period the most significant part of deaths happened because of intoxication by ambient particulate matter. It had approximately the same level of fatal cases per 100 thousand people during the all observed period – about 65 persons in the 1990 year vs 60 persons in 2015.

The same level of mortality saved ozone poisoning – steady about 3-4 fatal cases for 25 years.  The most significant changes happened with a blue field (indoor solid fuels); it shrank by more than one third by the 2015 year from the beginning and became less than 40 cases of death. Due to this fact of the reducing in the blue field, overall figures of the death rate from the air pollutions declined to 100 deaths per 100 000 individuals in the world.  Question 2  The growth of the fast food industry has, without doubt, impacted on the eating habits and the health of many societies around the world. Diabetes, high cholesterol, heart and respiratory problems are all on the rise due to fatty and sugar-rich food. However, the question is whether the higher tax would improve this situation or not.

 Some experts emphasize that tax might seem sensible. For example, in countries such as the USA, Australia and Britain, the healthcare system spends a large part of its budget on people with diet-related health problems. The most common argument against this is that these people have caused their illnesses – their choice of food. Thus, why should they expect the state to pay for their treatment? However, one must admit that the tax could help fund the healthcare system. On the other hand, we need to consider which socio-economic group consumes fast food as the main part of their diet. Indeed, statistics indicate that lower income groups eat more of this food than wealthier people.

One reason for it is that fast food is far cheaper than fresh produce. It happens because of many governments offer large subsidies to farmers who provide products for the fast food industry, i.e. corn, wheat and beef, but fruit and vegetables are not subsidised. We cannot ignore the fact that some researchers suggest that many families simply cannot afford to buy healthy food or pay higher taxes on fast food. For them, fast food is not a choice but a necessity.

 From these arguments, one could conclude that higher tax can advance the situation with the distribution and popularity of fast food among people with a low level of income. Subsidizing farms can find an optimal solution for society and its healthy lifestyle in the future.  P.S. It seems that someone did have one topic, but wrote about another thing.

I wrote the conclusion based on what was in the prepared text, but not in the topic. I suppose that this conclusion is far away from the topic.   Question 3 Based on data from the Pew Research Center, it can be said that contemporary youth is more likely to live with parents in their households, than it was earlier – in 1990th and 2000th years – with the representatives of previous years. As the polls show 15% of Millenials from 25 to 35 years-old in the USA lived under the parents’ roof yester-year; the minimum level of such people was recorded in 1964 (8%) and 1981 years (8%).

It is not always related to the lack of job places, which forces to stay Millenials at parental home: just 5.1% from this category were without a job during the collection of data for the research at the beginning of the 2016 year.Millenials notably much less moving from and to parental home than the representatives of 18-24 years. In the poll, conducted by the analytic centre in 2016, 91% of 25-35 years-old people said that they lived in the same place one year before. If we are comparing with Gen Xers in 2000th years, then 86% reported that they did have the same address a year earlier; as for Silent Generation in 1964, even fewer people – 83% – noted, that they lived with parents one year ago.

The most of people living with parents had just a high school background. For example, 20% of polled Millenials had high school diploma and continued to live with a father and mother, in 2000 this figure was 12% of Gen Xers. People, who did have at least a bachelor degree, less depended from their parents: just 10% stayed at home with the relatives in 2016 and only 7% of Gen Xers 16 years earlier. There are a lot of obstructions for living separately: unemployment or expensiveness of living apart, etc. But in general, the level of education reflects the dependence between young adults with high wage rate, who prefer to move away from parents and the other group with the less-educated background and low salary subsequently.

 Question 4 A problem of self-determination among nations in the modern world exists in consequence of different reasons and levels of the reality perception. It seems that all more or less important actions led by the globalisation process. Nowadays, there are a lot of examples of economic and politic unions in Europe and Asia, where both the most powerful states and even not so powerful countries try to decide paramount and sufficient questions. At the same time, a lot of nations attempt to refuse any cooperation and go alone. To begin with, there are at least two points of view about a country in a world, what kind of strategy – globalisation or regionalisation – it should choose for further prosperity. The public, in general, tends to believe that for a state is more safety to be in a union with other countries, which have powerfulness in among partners in a political game.

The European Union, NATO, the United Nations provide in a globalised world some preferences for participants, in turn, demand the execution of rules and submission. For example, NATO provides defence and security to counties, which take part in this union. However, the other part of experts believes that the process of regionalisation determinates the further fate of some countries because of these states too small for enough political influence or too weak for economic control and leadership. Other words, for such countries the development of nationalism is a way out from this situation.

However, according to some political researchers, countries and citizens develop nationalism regardless the fact that a state has a success in some directions. One must admit that it has a sense because, despite the fact that a country has a powerful, it tries to protect people by using of facts of national history, customs and traditions in order to recover the level of national identity as it happens in Ukraine. In conclusion, I would like to add that every country decides what way it will choose; there is no “absolutely positive” or “absolutely negative” way of development. Moreover, a lot of countries successful combine regionalisation and globalisation, although at first sight, it seems uncombined.


I'm Gerard!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out