• yam天空
  • 天空部落
  • 新聞
  • 風林火山
  • 登入 註冊 網誌隨便逛
  • 加入天空部落
  • 和蕭敬騰合唱

網誌 相簿 影音 PK吧! Honda嬉遊趣
即時新聞 影音新聞 新聞專輯 政治新聞 財經新聞 娛樂新聞 運動新聞 兩岸新聞 科技新聞
進入官網 遊戲資料 奪寶好康
管理介面 發表網誌 發表日記 上傳相片 上傳影音 管理留言
推薦這個部落格: 215

西雅圖凹凸鏡

廖桂賢的地景及社會觀察

網誌 |留言板
中文退步了,英文也沒進步!(中時部落格嚴選好文) | 主頁 | 科技,讓我們離家越近或是越遠?(中時部落格嚴選好文)
February 4, 2007
不要以為全球暖化與你我無關(中時部落格嚴選好文)以文找文
kueihsienl 在天空部落發表於08:03:43 | 環境生態
鼓勵此網誌:0 

(本文亦刊登於Taiwan News財經文化週刊277期:標題「全球暖化 是大家的事」)

聯合國的「跨政府氣候變遷研究團」(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)昨天在巴黎發表最近的一份研究結果。這個由世界各地首屈一指的氣候科學家所組成的小組終於肯定的指出:人類活動是導致1950年來全球氣溫上升、暖化的主因。

image source: Dan Crosbie/Canadian Ice Servic from New York Times
Polar bears on chunks of glacial ice in the Bering Sea in 2004. Much higher temperatures are forecast for the Arctic, climate scientists say.

277這個結論當然不意外,許多關心環境議題的人也許早就這麼認定了。但這個新聞為什麼這麼引人注目?在全球暖化這個議題中,過去科學家大部分傾向抱持比較保守的態度,也就是說,即使許多統計資料和數據似乎顯示人類行為,尤其是溫室氣體的排放量,和地球平均溫度的節節高昇呈現正相關,但因為長期氣候變遷的因子複雜,存在許多不確定性,短期間所觀察到的氣候變異,不能代表長期趨勢。在氣候學中,時間的尺度極為重要,即使對人類而言漫長的五、六十年,甚至一個世紀,在氣候研究中相對上是短暫的時間向度,因此,即使過去一個世紀、甚至工業革命以來,氣象資料顯示全球氣溫有慢慢上升的趨勢,同時間大氣層中的溫室氣體激增,科學家仍是遲遲不願將人類活動與全球暖化直接劃上等號。直到昨天,科學家們終於有足夠的信心確認了這個等號。


image source: Dan Crosbie/Canadian Ice Servic from New York Times
困在孤島上可憐無助的北極熊
紐約時報以頭條來報導這個消息,所附的圖片令人怵目驚心。全球氣溫上升可以說對極圈產生最立即嚴重的影響,冰帽大面積的溶化,使得以此為棲息地的生物受到嚴重威脅,尤其是北極熊。北極熊利用覆冰在極圈裡遷徙移動找尋食物,然而極地的冰帽漸漸融化,許多北極熊被困在四周的冰都溶化的孤島上動彈不得,當腳下的冰孤島也慢慢融化,他們的命運就是活生生的溺死。有看過「令人不適的真相」(An Inconvenient Truth )這部片的人可能會記得,片中就有這樣一個動畫片段,動畫是動畫,一隻卡通北極熊死了就算了,現實情況卻是,無數的北極熊因為這樣活活溺死或餓死。

北極熊以及極圈的冰看起來也許跟我們的生活無關,尤其是遠是亞熱帶的台灣,但事實是,如果北極熊因為這樣滅絕了,人類大概也沒有多久好日子可以過。地球上各個環境元素環環相扣,北極熊賴以移動的極地冰帽溶化的結果就是直接造成海平面上升,海平面上升對沿海地區以及島國有直接的衝擊和最不利的影響,島國的台灣人能不關切這個議題嗎?

海平面如果就這樣慢慢上升,我們就慢慢的遷移到高處去也就算了,但事情沒有那麼容易,氣候變遷另外一個效應是造成全球降雨的異常,乾旱和暴雨這樣的極端現象會越來越頻繁,在大部分的區域,濕的地方越濕,乾的地方越乾,而且各種過去定義為「天然災害」的現象,例如颱風、颶風、以及其他氣候災害的威力會越來越強大。

聽起來人類好像無望、等著毀滅。不盡然如此,科學家還是認為,假如我們及早採取行動,還是有藥救。但是,正在寫這篇文章的我,與正在看這篇文章的你,很可能既不是具有呼風喚雨能力的政治領袖、又不是可以向各國提供解決方案的權威科學家,小小螺絲丁的我們能做什麼?我一直相信,全球暖化這件事,不是只是那些具有改變世界能力的人的事,而是大家的事,這就是為什麼我雖然作為一個小小的空間設計專業者,卻關心這個全球尺度的議題,因為,我相信,每一個人都可以在自己的專業和生活上盡一份力。對於空間專業者而言,我們可以思考自己所規劃設計的都市、地景、建築等環境,無論尺度大小,能夠為環境的改善進到什麼樣的力量?我們在形式材料等美學的選擇上,功能的提供上,對環境會產生什麼樣的效應?營造的過程的設計、完工後的空間使用模式又能不能產生最小的負面氣候效應?甚至產生正向的氣候和環境效果?同樣的,從事其他各行各業的人,即使和環境、生態、和氣候看起來毫無相關的領域:會計師、律師、業務員、計程車司機、油漆工人、電腦工程師、雜貨店老闆等等…..無論你從事哪一種行業,在工作上多多少少需要作許多決定,看似與環境不直接相關的決定,例如要開車還是走路去洽公?影印雙面還是單面、彩色或黑白?要買哪種材料進哪種貨?這些專業決定背後都有環境成本,都會影響環境及氣候。如果每一個人都能深刻的思考這些問題,大家的集體力量就會產生改變。

所以,不要以為全球暖化與你我無關,你我可以惡化這個現象,也絕對可以改善這個現象!

 
 

----------------------------------------------------------

想要多瞭解全球暖化,最快的方式是抽空去看「令人不適的真相」(An Inconvenient Truth )這部紀錄片,好看不沈悶。如果我記得沒錯的話,台灣仍有一些非營利組織提供觀賞的機會。

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change網站 :http://www.ipcc.ch/
可以下載最近的研究報告

----------------------------------------------------------

我將昨天紐約時報的報導轉載在這裡供參考:原文網址:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/03/science/earth/03climate.html?th&emc=th

 
February 3, 2007

Science Panel Calls Global Warming ‘Unequivocal’

By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL and ANDREW C. REVKIN

PARIS, Feb. 2 — In a grim and powerful assessment of the future of the planet, the leading international network of climate scientists has concluded for the first time that global warming is “unequivocal” and that human activity is the main driver, “very likely” causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950.

They said the world was in for centuries of climbing temperatures, rising seas and shifting weather patterns — unavoidable results of the buildup of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere.

But their report, released here on Friday by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said warming and its harmful consequences could be substantially blunted by prompt action.

While the report provided scant new evidence of a climate apocalypse now, and while it expressly avoided recommending courses of action, officials from the United Nations agencies that created the panel in 1988 said it spoke of the urgent need to limit looming and momentous risks.

“In our daily lives we all respond urgently to dangers that are much less likely than climate change to affect the future of our children,” said Achim Steiner, executive director of the United Nations Environment Program, which administers the panel along with the World Meteorological Organization.

“Feb. 2 will be remembered as the date when uncertainty was removed as to whether humans had anything to do with climate change on this planet,” he went on. “The evidence is on the table.”

The report is the panel’s fourth assessment since 1990 on the causes and consequences of climate change, but it is the first in which the group asserts with near certainty — more than 90 percent confidence — that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from human activities have been the main causes of warming in the past half century.

In its last report, in 2001, the panel, consisting of hundreds of scientists and reviewers, said the confidence level for its projections was “likely,” or 66 to 90 percent. That level has now been raised to “very likely,” better than 90 percent. Both reports are online at www.ipcc.ch.

The Bush administration, which until recently avoided directly accepting that humans were warming the planet in potentially harmful ways, embraced the findings, which had been approved by representatives from the and 112 other countries on Thursday night.

Administration officials asserted Friday that the had played a leading role in studying and combating climate change, in part by an investment of an average of almost $5 billion a year for the past six years in research and tax incentives for new technologies.

At the same time, Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman rejected the idea of unilateral limits on emissions. “We are a small contributor to the overall, when you look at the rest of the world, so it’s really got to be a global solution,” he said.

The , with about 5 percent of the world’s population, contributes about a quarter of greenhouse gas emissions, more than any other country.

Democratic lawmakers quickly fired off a round of news releases using the report to bolster a fresh flock of proposed bills aimed at cutting emissions of greenhouse gases. Senator James M. Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican who has called the idea of dangerous human-driven warming a hoax, issued a news release headed “Corruption of Science” that rejected the report as “a political document.”

The new report says the global climate is likely to warm 3.5 to 8 degrees Fahrenheit if carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere reach twice the levels of 1750, before the Industrial Revolution.

Many energy and environment experts see such a doubling, or worse, as a foregone conclusion after 2050 unless there is a prompt and sustained shift away from the 20th-century pattern of unfettered burning of coal and oil, the main sources of carbon dioxide, and an aggressive expansion of nonpolluting sources of energy.

And the report says there is a more than a 1-in-10 chance of much greater warming, a risk that many experts say is far too high to ignore.

Even a level of warming that falls in the middle of the group’s range of projections would be likely to cause significant stress to ecosystems, according to many climate experts and biologists. And it would alter longstanding climate patterns that shape water supplies and agricultural production.

Moreover, the warming has set in motion a rise in global sea levels, the report says. It forecasts a rise of 7 to 23 inches by 2100 and concludes that seas will continue to rise for at least 1,000 years to come. By comparison, seas rose about 6 to 9 inches in the 20th century.

John P. Holdren, an energy and climate expert at Harvard, said the report “powerfully underscores the need for a massive effort to slow the pace of global climatic disruption before intolerable consequences become inevitable.”

“Since 2001, there has been a torrent of new scientific evidence on the magnitude, human origins and growing impacts of the climatic changes that are under way,” said Mr. Holdren, who is the president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. “In overwhelming proportions, this evidence has been in the direction of showing faster change, more danger and greater confidence about the dominant role of fossil-fuel burning and tropical deforestation in causing the changes that are being observed.”

The conclusions came after a three-year review of hundreds of studies of past climate shifts; observations of retreating ice, warming and rising seas, and other changes around the planet; and a greatly expanded suite of supercomputer simulations used to test how the earth will respond to a growing blanket of gases that hold heat in the atmosphere.

The section released Friday was a 20-page summary for policymakers, which was approved early in the morning by teams of officials from more than 100 countries after three days and nights of wrangling over wording with the lead authors, all of whom are scientists.

It described far-flung ramifications for both humans and nature.

“It is very likely that hot extremes, heat waves and heavy precipitation events will continue to become more frequent,” said the summary.

Generally, the scientists said, more precipitation will fall at higher latitudes, which are also likely to see lengthened growing seasons. Semi-arid subtropical regions, already chronically plagued by drought, could have a further 20 percent drop in rainfall under the panel’s midrange outlook for increases in the greenhouse gases.

The summary added a new chemical consequence of the buildup of carbon dioxide to the list of mainly climatic and biological effects foreseen in its previous reports: a drop in the pH of seawater as oceans absorb billions of tons of carbon dioxide, which forms carbonic acid when partly dissolved. The ocean would stay alkaline, but marine biologists have said that a change in the direction of acidity could imperil some kinds of corals and plankton.

The report essentially caps a half-century-long effort to discern whether humans, through the buildup of carbon dioxide and other gases released mainly by burning fuels and forests, could influence the earth’s climate system in potentially momentous ways.

The group operates under the aegis of the United Nations and was chartered in 1988 — a year of record heat, burning forests and the first big headlines about global warming — to provide regular reviews of climate science to governments to inform policy choices.

Government officials are involved in shaping the summary of each report, but the scientist-authors, who are unpaid, have the final say over the thousands of pages in four underlying technical reports that will be completed and published later this year.

Big questions remain about the speed and extent of some impending changes, both because of uncertainty about future population and pollution trends and the complex interrelationships of the greenhouse emissions, clouds, dusty kinds of pollution, the oceans and earth’s veneer of life, which both emits and soaks up carbon dioxide and other such gases.

But a broad array of scientists, including authors of the report and independent experts, said the latest analysis was the most sobering view yet of a century of transition — after thousands of years of relatively stable climate conditions — to a new norm of continual change.

Should greenhouse gases continue to accumulate in the atmosphere at even a moderate pace, average temperatures by the end of the century could match those last seen 125,000 years ago, in the previous warm spell between ice ages, the report said.

At that time, the panel said, sea levels were 12 to 20 feet higher than they are now. Much of that extra water is now trapped in the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica, which are eroding in some places.

The panel said there was no solid scientific understanding of how rapidly the vast stores of ice in polar regions will melt, so their estimates on new sea levels were based mainly on how much the warmed oceans will expand, and not on contributions from the melting of ice now on land.

Other scientists have recently reported evidence that the glaciers and ice sheets in the Arctic and Antarctic could flow seaward far more quickly than estimated in the past, and they have proposed that the risks to coastal areas could be much more imminent. But the climate change panel is forbidden by its charter to enter into speculation, and so could not include such possible instabilities in its assessment.

Michel Jarraud, the secretary general of the United Nations World Meteorological Organization, said the lack of clarity should offer no one comfort. “The speed with which melting ice sheets are raising sea levels is uncertain, but the report makes clear that sea levels will rise inexorably over the coming centuries,” he said. “It is a question of when and how much, and not if.”

The warming and other climate changes will be highly variable around the world, with the Arctic in particular seeing much higher temperatures, said Susan Solomon, the co-leader of the team writing the summary and the section of the panel’s report on basic science. She is an atmospheric scientist for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The kinds of vulnerabilities are very much dependent on where you are, Dr. Solomon said in a telephone interview. “If you’re living in parts of the tropics and they’re getting drier and you’re a farmer, there are some very acute issues associated with even small changes in rainfall — changes we’re already seeing are significant,” she said. “If you are an Inuit and you’re seeing your sea ice retreating already, that’s affecting your life style and culture.”

The 20-page summary is a sketch of the findings that are most germane to the public and world leaders.

The full report, thousands of pages of technical background, will be released in four sections through the year — the first on basic science, then sections on impacts and options for limiting emissions and limiting inevitable harms, and finally a synthesis of all of the findings near year’s end.

In a news conference in Paris, Dr. Solomon declined to provide her own views on how society should respond to the momentous changes projected in the study.

“I honestly believe that it would be a much better service for me to keep my personal opinions separate than what I can actually offer the world as a scientist,” she said. “My stepson, who is 29, has an utterly different view of risks than I do. People are going to have to make their own judgments.”

Some authors of the report said that no one could honestly point to any remaining uncertainties as justification for further delay.

“Policy makers paid us to do good science, and now we have very high scientific confidence in this work — this is real, this is real, this is real,” said Richard B. Alley, one of the lead authors and a professor at Pennsylvania State University. “So now act, the ball’s back in your court.”

Elisabeth Rosenthal reported from Paris, and Andrew C. Revkin from New York. Felicity Barringer contributed reporting from Washington.

 

留言 (9) | 引用 (0) | 人氣 () | 轉寄
此分類上一篇:救救北極熊 | 主頁 | 此分類下一篇:[新聞轉載] 花東海岸線生態幾全遭破壞
引用 (你可以針對此文寫一篇屬於自己的blog/想法,並給作者一個通告)
引用
留言 (9筆)
9.
您好

11/25日在中和四號公園 有免費的「不願面對的真相」可以看
希望大家一起來關心暖化問題喔

http://blog.yam.com/qlife/article/12349260
板主回覆:
謝謝您提供的訊息
qlife 於 2007-11-05 14:37:29 留言 |

8.
HI~逛到你的部落格,我也一樣支持抗暖,想到未來地球變的不是地球了
就覺得很可怕>﹏<

我最近參與了一個抗暖活動,這是支持使用環保筷,介紹給你^^

邀請你一起貼部落格貼紙!
貼了貼紙之後
要記得在你的部落格貼紙送出一筆資料喔~(救地球標語跟看動畫填資料)
還可以參加抽獎XD

重點是,還可以看看目前我們的小小力量,共拯救了多少顆竹子
(看看能不能拯救一個足球場大的林地呀Q.Q)很有意義喔~

我很欣賞,也很支持,所以也推薦給你,邀請你一起響應抗暖^^
活動網站:http://www.animalplanet.com.tw/11/

P.S 有空也請到我部落格來坐坐ㄚXD
http://blog.yam.com/user/tako0904.html
板主回覆:
謝謝妳的留言!很高興你用實際的行動來對抗全球暖化,我在西雅圖也早不用免洗筷了。
只是,我是網頁白癡,不知道怎麼貼貼紙,看我陽春的網站就知道,不是不想貼,是不會貼~~
真汗顏!
tako0904 於 2007-10-04 16:51:04 留言 |

7.
蠻好奇 給高爾不少掌聲的 西雅圖市民, any thoughts on the following news,


高爾 豪宅 一年電費 3萬 美元! 別傻了.
"Al Gore's Inconvenient Electric Bill"

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257958,00.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/GlobalWarming/story?id=2906888&page=1
板主回覆:
記得前不久有聽人談起這件事,
我不知道大部分的西雅圖市民如何想
我當然是覺得頗為遺憾,
雖然對我而言這並不影響他對引起世人重視全球暖化議題的貢獻
倒不覺得他是故意的,
也許,揭發他的用電量龐大,也可以讓其他名人警覺一點吧!

ws 於 2007-03-19 08:25:57 留言 |

6.
謝謝您的文章,又看到令人震撼的北極熊畫面.
小麟 於 2007-02-19 00:47:33 留言 |

5.
澎湖有很多的水泥工程,小離島,觀光縣,競爭力,澎湖的發展,該如何定位呢?有必要大量建設嗎?http://www.wretch.cc/blog/a0033669&article_id=13038357
希望您提供看法!
板主回覆:
生態工法在台灣被亂用以及濫用是一件非常令人痛心的事,您部落格的照片正顯示了這個情況,不只澎湖,全台灣各地許多根本不該進行工程的地方,都因為生態工法之名而遭到了無法挽回的破壞。許多人認為一條所謂的「野溪」,看起來亂七八糟的會造成水患所以應當予以「整治」,又宣稱要用「生態」的方式整治,卻不知道,一個生態系統:一條野溪,本來就具備防洪的功能。
就先不要說生態保育了,大自然所設計的生態系統可以為人類提供許多不知道多少工程設計不出來的功能,例如淨化水質、保護土壤、涵養水源、防洪,這些功能人類用工程取代,卻更沒有效率又花費更多的費用。
說是經濟發展或是競爭力、觀光等,都是在沒有考量到這些看不到的「生態服務」所做出的膚淺假設,假如一個地方的生態系統崩潰了,整個人類的系統也會崩潰,歷史上提供了許多的教訓,例如復活島、中亞古文明、美國西南方的古印地安文明等等
(這些有空我會寫文章介紹)
澎湖在天然地理條件上,就和本島台灣有很大的不同,也因此造就澎湖所謂的「觀光」資源--美麗的海岸和景色,如果要學台灣本島朝向傳統的「發展」的方式來走,只會將原本的天然資源破壞殆盡,小小的島如果連天然的景致都沒有了,只剩下當初建造來服務觀光客的大馬路和水泥建設,誰還願意去澎湖?連澎湖人自己可能都沒辦法住下去。
我當然是反對大量建設的,尤其是台灣的離島,我並非反發展,而是發展必須是要根質於地方生態和資源條件,「建設」和「發展」並不能劃上等號,可惜的是許多人無知的所謂「地方人士」以及中央政府一直以來都盲目的以為建設就等於發展。
再者,「發展」的本質也是必須思考的,是什麼樣的發展?經濟的、文化的、工業的、還是人文的、精神的?是藥無止盡的賺錢的發展?還是生活達到滿足的水準即可?
政府總認為觀光是萬靈丹,卻沒有思考觀光的本質到底是什麼?或是觀光該如何才能永續?
寫的有一點沒有組織,談到這個我就很失望,這也不是短短幾句話就能夠討論的議題
以後有機會在與你討論交流
謝謝你的留言
澎湖主義時感噹部落格 於 2007-02-10 11:01:46 留言 |

4.
我是澎湖人,
謝謝你同意轉載,
澎湖主義時感噹部落格 於 2007-02-08 09:57:19 留言 |

3.
我常看你的部落格,這篇文章我逕自轉載,
我的部落格是:澎湖主義時感噹
http://www.wretch.cc/blog/a0033669,若不同意我當立即刪除.
板主回覆:
歡迎轉載!沒問題。
您是澎湖人嗎?我好喜歡澎湖,大學十代去了好多次,以前也曾經去澎湖採訪過...
澎湖主義時感噹部落格 於 2007-02-08 06:50:58 留言 |

2.
我相信我今天所做的資源回收, 搭乘大眾交通工具, 少買過度包裝物品, 是為了我的世世代代後代
玉珊 於 2007-02-06 10:46:10 留言 |

1.
與其說很受感動,不如說有種置之死地而後生的感覺
我覺得這篇文章寫的很棒。我們早知道環保問題,人人有責,但也
時常需要這類文章來真切的提醒怠惰的我們,令外有個錯字,我龜毛的
在這邊指出
"這不紀錄片" 應該是這部吧


板主回覆:
非常謝謝你的留言與指正,真是不好意思,我的錯字一堆....
林四九 於 2007-02-05 18:58:44 留言 |

發表你的留言 (字數限制 最多 2000 個中文字)
私密留言: 是 否
Name:





是 否
內容:
系統公告
桂賢的新書,請多多指教!
好城市
聲援農村 | 反對毀滅環境的開發案
反中科熱血青年聯盟
搶救徐州路老樹
連署搶救老樹
個人檔案
個人圖檔
ID:kueihsienl
暱稱:廖桂賢
地區:北美洲
  • 訂閱 |
    • 我要訂閱此部落格的
    • 日記
    • 網誌
    • 相簿
  • 好友 |
    • 好友功能
    • 觀看好友列表
    • 觀看人緣列表
  • 人氣 |
  • 簡介 

人氣指數
當日人次:
累積人次:
文章分類
  • 目錄 (13)
  • 凹凸鏡佈告欄 (20)
  • 空間設計與城鄉規劃 (86)
  • 環境生態 (41)
  • 永續家園行動 (52)
  • 西雅圖的故事 (49)
  • 社會文化觀察 (65)
  • 異國旅人手札 (65)
  • 美加探索札記 (20)
  • 水患課題 (19)
  • 美濃 (6)
  • 求學工作與生活雜記 (36)
  • 從世界看台灣 (5)
  • 私房推薦 (32)
kueihsienl的最新的回應
  • 健常:
    容我大膽地預測,這個盲...
  • elinernurse:
    環境的永續是人們永遠的...
  • donuthing:
    我的意見是,永續(su...
  • ws:
    除了開心之外,...
  • 交大傳科 林忻:
    不好意思, ...
讀者從哪裡來?
Locations of visitors to this page
黑米
非常用心的好站

全國環境行事曆

[連結] 台灣的民間力量
  • 公共電視「我們的島」
  • 環境資訊中心
  • 台灣綠黨
  • 台灣環境行動網
  • 美濃愛鄉協進會
  • 搶救福隆沙灘
  • 南方電子報
  • 台灣綠色公民行動聯盟
  • 淡水河守護聯盟
  • 治水監督聯盟
  • 我的一畝田
  • 小地方新聞網
  • 苦勞網
  • 美濃農村田野學會
  • 野上野下
  • 台灣農村陣線
  • 公民行動影音紀錄資料庫
  • 為地球嗆聲
  • 莫拉克獨立新聞網
[連結] 國外的民間力量
  • People's Waterfront Coalition
  • Center for Law in the Public Interest
[連結] 永續課題
  • Environment for Europeans
  • Word Changing
  • Fragile Earth
  • People and Place: Ideas that Connect Us
  • Resilience Science
  • Open the Future
[連結] 永續設計
  • Low Impact Development Center
  • Ecocity Builders
  • US Green Building Council
  • Green Infrastructure
  • SOLTAG energy housing
  • Better Bricks
[連結] 水患管理
  • Polders - The Scene of Land and Water
  • EU Flood Risk Management
[連結] 地景 / 建築
  • European Prize for Uban Public Space
  • European Archive of Urban Public Space
[連結] 規劃設計組織
  • The Buckminster Fuller Institute
  • Participatory Community Design in the Pacific Rim
  • National Association for Olmsted Parks
  • Holcim Foundation for Sustainable Construction
  • The Cultural Landscape Foundation
  • Urban Land Institute
[連結] 規劃設計雜誌
  • Harvard Design Magazine
  • TOPOS
  • Inhabitat
  • Tree Hugger
  • Land+Living
  • Daylight & Architecture magazine by VELUX
[連結] 電影 / 紀錄片
  • An Inconvenient Truth
  • Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room
  • Oil on Ice
  • Fear and Trembling
  • The March of the Penguins
  • Supersize me
  • Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price
  • The Corporation
  • Grizzly Man
  • Emmanuel's Gift
  • Next Industrial Revolution
  • Ecological Design: Inventing the Future
  • 榖子‧榖子
  • 南方澳海洋紀事
  • Who Killed the Electric Car
  • Street Fight
  • 練習曲 Island Etude
  • Drowned Out 滅頂家園
  • Darwin's Nightmare
  • 河口人
  • The 11th Hour
  • Guns, Germs & Steel
  • Planet Earth
  • When the Levees Broke
  • What would Jesus Buy?
  • The Kite Runner
  • Sicko
  • Arctic Tale
  • Oil + Water
  • RiverWebs
  • River Ways
  • The Carbon Connection
  • Fast Food Nation
  • T-Shirt Travels
  • Up the YangTze
  • FLOW
  • Darbareye Elly
  • Food, Inc.
  • 囧男孩
  • 平成狸合戦
  • Home
  • Capitalism: A Love Story
  • Everything's Cool
  • 我家門前有大河
  • Amal
[連結] 綠色生活
  • The Green Guide
  • Green Roofs for Healthy Cities
  • 主婦聯盟生活消費合作社
  • EarthSave
  • Seattle EcoMetro
[連結] 朋友的部落格
  • 鐵蛋魚酥雜貨舖
  • 瑞典小丸子
  • 江彥生的學術網站
  • 爬天梯
  • 游離在海洋與城市之間
  • 蔚藍手札
  • 北歐四季透明筆記
  • 美濃菸酒會
  • Orange Town
  • 台灣雜燴: Tawain COMBO
  • Jellyfishing State
  • 老得太快,聰明得太遲
  • et dansk eventyr…
  • Clio & Sonya 的異想世界
  • 邱銘源的自然野簿
  • 林祖媽哇欸天空
  • 印地安娜旅外生活
  • 環境的自辯
  • Explore Drawing & Painting
  • 誰來趕走雨季?
  • We've Been There
誰推薦我
我的讀書筆記
  • 生態城市‧都市水文
誰來我家
拿來增加效果的東西
搜尋此頻道內容
搜尋:
RSS 訂閱
RSS2
ATOM
贊助商
其它資訊
本部落所刊登之內容,皆由作者個人所提供,不代表 yam 天空 本身立場。
POWERED BY
POWERED BY 天空部落
會員登入│免費註冊