How can we reduce the risk?

    There are four general approaches to dealing with volcanic dangers. We can try to keep the danger from occurring - often an impossible task. We can try to change its path or reduce its impact on existing development. We can take steps to protect future development. We can also do our best to have disaster response plans in place before they are needed.

Removing the Threat

    Clearly, there is no way to stop an eruption. We can, however, attempt to reduce the eruption's effects by strengthening structures, for example, building protective works such as walls to make lava(熔岩) flow away from developed areas. Such efforts can be and have been successful, but are of limited use in a large-scale eruption.

Planning for the Future

    Protecting future development from volcanic dangers is a simple task. Before building houses, we should judge the risk. If the risk seems too great, a safer location should be found. This type of planning is very effective, but all too often, people are drawn to the lush(葱郁的)，rolling land of a quiet volcano.

Disaster Preparedness

    When a volcano comes to life, a few weeks may not be enough time to avoid a tragedy. Planning is the key to saving lives. Well before the warning signs occur, people must be educated about volcanic dangers. Escape plans must be in place. Communication between scientists, officials, the media, and the general public should be practiced. Emergency measures must be thought out and agreed upon.

    If you doubt the importance of these efforts, take another look at past volcanic tragedies, such as the eruption of Nevado del Ruiz. Communication failures left the town of Armero unprepared for escape. When a deadly mudflow came down the slope(斜坡), 21,000 people— 90 percent of the town's people--died.

    Can you imagine printing food? Some scientists are trying to revolutionize the dining experience by doing this. They hope that having a 3D printer in the kitchen will become as commonplace as the microwave. Scientists say that they are easy to use:you simply have to select a recipe and put the raw food "inks" into the printer. You can also change the instructions to make the food exactly how you want it. This means that it would be very quick and easy to create tasty and nutritious meals.

    They say that if people used 3D printers to create meals there would be less need for traditional growing, transporting and packaging processes as food production would be a lot easier. For example, alternative ingredients (原料) such as proteins from insects could be changed into tasty products. And as is known,those traditional activities are not beneficial to our surroundings.

    This technology could also help people who suffer from dysphagia (a swallowing disorder).The patients could program the printer and softer versions would be made so that they would not have trouble swallowing them.

    However,some people think that using 3D-printed foods would be a disaster. It could take away many jobs,including those for growing,transporting and packaging food. Imagine a world where there was no need for farming or growing crops and the same tastes could be printed from a raw "food ink". Likewise, traditional cafes and restaurants might lose business. Also, there are concerns about the nutritional value of printed food:is it really possible to get the nutrients we need from food-based inks?

    What's more, cooking and eating together with family and friends has long been a traditional and enjoyable activity. It is hard to imagine a world where the pastime of cooking is dead and meals can be created at the touch of a button.

    Back in 2009, China was wrongly accused by the West of "controlling" the Copenhagen talks on climate change. By then China had truly carried out strict policies to reduce the energy consumption of economic activities and at the international level, the top Chinese leaders participated in round-clock efforts to cooperate with the major players to build a united front for efforts to solve global warming. But China was finally misjudged.

    This misjudgment caused China's scholars to rethink China's climate change communicative ways. Among them was Zheng Baowei, journalism professor of Renmin University of China, who realized China had to better shape its communication on its environmental protection.

    Delightfully, the efforts have paid off. Zheng set up a top-level international group advising his research team. He is in charge of doctoral candidates on climate change communication. Climate awareness surveys have been conducted, and a package of communication tools has been designed. Many seminars have been arranged.

    Recently, he arranged a seminar on climate change and health communication on the changing situation both in China and the world. First of all, this stressed that China's policy has developed from reducing its energy consumption and pollution prevention to the important goals of achieving a "Beautiful China" and "'Healthy China, "while coming up with plans to realize an ecological civilization since late 2012. With such goals, China played a leading role in securing the Paris climate change deal in 2015 together with the United States and European Union. In Paris, China promised to let out its carbon to the maximum in 2030.

    It is a demanding job communicating climate change and other topics of lasting development well. Despite that, some foreign scholars have realized China's smart ways in presenting the green concepts. They appreciated China's idea of building a "Beautiful China" and "Healthy China" and said it can he expanded into an idea of a "Beautiful World" and "Healthy World".

    Looking back from how China had followed the steps of the industrialized countries in advocating climate fight, people find now its own green ideas are being recognized.

Show Biz Summer 2019

Location: Rosewood Center for Family arts

Important Information:

● Tuition paid on the first day of class. No tuition refunds(退款).

● DCT reserves the right to cancel any class; refunds made for cancellation(取消).

● Please accompany student to the first day of class.

● Registration begins one-half hour before class time.

How To Register:

● Mail: fill out the form in this brochure.

● Be sure to list the class and group that you want & the dates.

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?

In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census's measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic wellbeing, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.

While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.

The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.

In 2005, as the authors observe: real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France's consumption with the U.S.'s overstates the gap in economic welfare.

Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97 % of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy's performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.

Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.

I didn't go to Santiago, Chile to look for friendship. In fact, Chile was not even on my wish list.

A mid-life crisis woman, I got a chance to study abroad. I only wanted to learn about global business, taste South American cuisine, and check "study abroad" off my wish list.

On the fifth day, I joined a group for a neighborhood work project aided by the anti-poverty (扶贫) organization. Our tasks were to build a water tower and paint the community center. Upon arrival, I couldn't believe my eyes. It was like a scene out of a horrible film. That moment redefined poverty for me because I had never seen such terrible living conditions. As advised, I showed no signs of the motional battle going on inside me.

Just as I was about to start work on painting, a request came through for a few volunteers to help Nadia, a local resident who volunteered to cook for us. I raised my hand to help because I wanted spend time with the people of the neighborhood despite my shortage of Spanish speaking skills.

Nadia had a sincere smile but not overly friendly. Even without speaking each other's language we started to learn about one another. We chatted about our children, our upbringing, shared picture of our family, struggled to instruct each other to communicate in the other's language, and laugh many times.

After we fed everybody and the dishes were washed, my day was over. But I found myself hesitant to leave. It was as if I had known her my entire life. I had not predicted the unselfishness heart I would encounter, and it was moving.

As we were waiting for the car to pick us up, Nadia showed me her plants that are well-maintains. I could see that despite the hard conditions she was passionate about life. She made me long to be stronger person. She showed me that poverty was external, but happiness was internal. I was seeking to give 100 percent for a well-intentioned cause, but I left receiving 200 percent from her.