User Forum

(1) The tourism industry is undoubtedly in a state of flux. Countries are competing for tourists by investing in their holiday destinations and thus making them more attractive and diverse. Whilst others are trying to block tourism because they feel that over tourism has had a negative impact on their society. Tourism needs to be carefully managed to prevent harm to the environment and disruption to local communities and their economy. The possible disadvantages of tourism on the one hand and new types of sustainable tourism on the other are discussed and contextualised in the two extracts.
(2) There are several potential issues to understand. First, important projects for local communities might be sidelined as councils focus on infrastructure developments for tourists. Second, the situation in environmental problem zones may be exacerbated by, for example, water cycle damage. Third is more pervasive because the profits of tourism often are not for the benefit of the local population. Instead global players such as hotels or airlines alongside others gain the vast majority of the income.
(3) The flaws of tourism are contrasted by trends such as eco-tourism which aims at reducing the impact tourism has on naturally fecund environments. Eco-tourism is based upon the idea that the natural environment and local communities are not exploited by tourism. All tourism projects are designed in cooperation with local communities. Infrastructure improvements have to benefit local inhabitants and not just tourists and there has to be evidence that the whole region is benefiting from visitors.
(4) Tourism nowadays has to be seen in the context of climate change and declining natural resources. Some remote islands or regions located on the shore may disappear in the foreseeable future due to rising sea levels. The erosion caused by too many visitors will literally melt sights in front of our eyes so we should do our utmost to put off such an austere scenario by travelling responsibly, avoiding long-distance flights as much as we can. On the upside by travelling responsibly we can make positive changes to less well-off and environmentally sensitive areas.

(1) Global warming is all over the news from morning to evening and most of it is about how little is actually being done. The most frequently blamed and maligned source is carbon fuels. In light of the fact that the majority of the world is almost entirely dependent on fossil fuels for their electricity has made the scientific community uncomfortable and with little coming back from them on how to solve the apparent crisis we may need to go back to the ideas of the 1970s or just keep ourselves calm with recent fake news about the Earth's actual rate of temperature change.
(2) Some researchers have proposed global-scale geoengineering projects to cool the planet and, by extension, preserve or restore ice. Others argue that it might be possible to chill just the north, for instance by artificially whitening the Arctic Ocean with light-coloured floating particles to reflect sunlight. A study recently suggested installing wind-powered pumps to bring water to the surface in winter, where it would freeze, forming thicker ice. But many researchers hesitate to embrace geoengineering. And most agree that regional efforts would take tremendous effort and have limited benefits, given that Earth's circulation systems could just bring more heat to north to compensate.
(3) Alternatively and in spite of multiple lines of converging scientific evidence show conclusively that our climate is warming, stories sometimes appear in the media calling that into question. New studies are interpreted as contradicting previous research, or data are viewed to be in conflict with established scientific thinking. The article discussed a short-term cooling period that showed up in the data in 2017 and 2018 and correctly stated that short-term cooling cycles are statistical noise compared to the long-term trend.
(4) In short, it is clear that try as they may, the scientific community are not in complete agreement about the earth warming or about how to stop it or even possibly reduce it. Cooling the earth is a real yet exorbitant issue that most countries are unable to afford and without whole world involvement it will never work. The need of attacking the problem at both ends is then an absolute and yet it will be some time until we can all agree to do the right things.

(1) Global warming is all over the news from morning to evening and most of it is about how little is actually being done. The most frequently blamed and maligned source is carbon fuels. In light of the fact that the majority of the world is almost entirely dependent on fossil fuels for their electricity has made the scientific community uncomfortable and with little coming back from them on how to solve the apparent crisis we may need to go back to the ideas of the 1970s or just keep ourselves calm with recent fake news about the Earth's actual rate of temperature change.
(2) Some researchers have proposed global-scale geoengineering projects to cool the planet and, by extension, preserve or restore ice. Others argue that it might be possible to chill just the north, for instance by artificially whitening the Arctic Ocean with light-coloured floating particles to reflect sunlight. A study recently suggested installing wind-powered pumps to bring water to the surface in winter, where it would freeze, forming thicker ice. But many researchers hesitate to embrace geoengineering. And most agree that regional efforts would take tremendous effort and have limited benefits, given that Earth's circulation systems could just bring more heat to north to compensate.
(3) Alternatively and in spite of multiple lines of converging scientific evidence show conclusively that our climate is warming, stories sometimes appear in the media calling that into question. New studies are interpreted as contradicting previous research, or data are viewed to be in conflict with established scientific thinking. The article discussed a short-term cooling period that showed up in the data in 2017 and 2018 and correctly stated that short-term cooling cycles are statistical noise compared to the long-term trend.
(4) In short, it is clear that try as they may, the scientific community are not in complete agreement about the earth warming or about how to stop it or even possibly reduce it. Cooling the earth is a real yet exorbitant issue that most countries are unable to afford and without whole world involvement it will never work. The need of attacking the problem at both ends is then an absolute and yet it will be some time until we can all agree to do the right things.