|
Lauren Farello
Period 2
27 January 2010
An International Agreement:
The Solution to Global Warming
With each passing day, humanity takes one more dangerous step towards a treacherous, unknown land, where global warming lurks in the abyss. Although previously debated, it is virtually accepted that it is very likely (90-99% probability) that the troposphere is getting warmer (Miller 466). According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), several findings support the scientific consensus on climate change (Miller 466). The two most significant reasons are that the 20th century was the hottest century in the past 1,000 years, and that Earth's average temperature has risen significantly since the commencement of 20th century (Miller 466). The causes of this temperature increase are various and widespread, but it is primarily "a result of emissions from unfettered burning of fossil fuels and the razing of tropical forests" (Revkin). Consequently, a number of steps have been taken to prevent the disastrous effects of global warming locally, nationally, and internationally. However, there is disagreement between economists, policymakers, scientists and government officials over how to respond to the potentially serious global threat (Miller 477). Although some steps are being taken to lessen the dangerous effects of global warming on society, and in order to ensure that humanity does not spiral into a perpetual declivity, all nations must unite to create, and strongly enforce, a powerful treaty that will require individuals to live in a more sustainable manner.
To accurately solve a problem that will affect the entire globe, it is necessary to define the predicament and explain its causes. Although it is virtually accepted that humans are expediting the path to a warmer planet, there is sufficient evidence that states the earth's predisposition towards fluctuating temperature. Over the past 4.7 billion years, Earth's climate has shifted due to volcanoes, changes in solar input, shifting of tectonic plates, strikes by large meteors and other factors (Miller 462). Therefore, the earth's rise in temperature may seem like a simple pattern. But the trouble lies in the fact that although earth's climate has always changed, it has rarely changed this fast ("Hot Planet"). In fact, according to Hot Planet, "At the current pace, most climatologists agree that we'll be about two degrees Celsius hotter in fifty years and three degrees hotter by the end of the century". In Naomi Oreskes' scientific journal, the IPCC states that most of the observed warming over the past 50 years is most likely due to the increase in greenhouse gas emissions (1686). This augmentation is due to the increased reliance on carbon emitting activities which include the burning of fossil fuels, clearing and burning of forests and grasslands, and the use of inorganic fertilizers (Miller 465). Although the burning of fossil fuels has made for easier transportation and an overall higher standard of living, it has caused the release of carbon dioxide and methane. Additionally, the burning of forests in order to build cities and make room for crops and livestock release enormous amounts of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide (Miller 465). Unfortunately, the rise in global temperature has caused many scientists to have fairly grim predictions in terms of the future. There are a number of disastrous effects that may occur if global warming is not slowed or halted in the near future. Fortunately, there are a number of steps being taken by various organizations and countries to do so. The Maldives (a series of over 1,000 small islands south of India) is taking various steps in order to become carbon neutral by 2020 by implementing wind turbines, giant solar panels, and biomass plant-burning projects (Jones). This nation is working towards a greener style of living through its actions and plans for the future. Despite the country's hard work, it may be one of the first to disappear due to the rising sea levels, which is a result of global warming (Jones). However, the countries emitting the most greenhouse gases are not as proactive as the Maldives in terms of working towards a strong plan to curb the effects of global warming. According to G. Tyler Miller, President of Earth Education and Research, America produces about 24 percent of the annual global emissions, despite the fact that only 4.6 percent of the world's populations resides in the United States (466). In order to effectively change the course of nature, America has to be the forerunner in trying to curb the release of carbon dioxide. Fortunately, the Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) is attempting to do just this. According to John Broder of the New York Times, the E.P.A. "proposed a stricter standard for smog-causing pollutants that would bring substantial health benefits to millions of Americans while imposing large costs on industry and local governments" (Broder). Although somewhat vague and ambiguous, the E.P.A.'s plan shows that the government is taking a step in the right direction. The new ruling will benefit both the environment and human health, as it will force smog filled cities to cut their emitted pollution (Broder). As more people become aware and educated about the causes of global warming and the detrimental effects it will have on all of humanity, the more they want to become part of the movement. The future of humanity depends on the ability of scientists and governmental officials from around the world to come together to compose a treaty that would force nations to practice environmentally sustainable principles. December proved to be a starting point when the United Nations met in Copenhagen, Denmark to work towards a universal environmental treaty. These meetings were not entirely successful because "other nations had rejected targets and a timetable for the rest of the world to sign on to binding emissions reductions" (Kanter). Additionally, the United States' participation was hindered due to the fact that the Senate did not pass comprehensive climate and energy legislation before the meetings (Meyer). Unfortunately, when the Copenhagen meetings ended, no actual treaty was created, as environmentalists would have hoped (Revkin). However, the only solution to global warming entails all nations uniting to strongly enforce a powerful treaty that will force individuals to live in a more sustainable manner. One nation can not do it alone; it will take the dedication of every country to stop nature's path. This treaty would serve multiple purposes, and would consist of a guide for both developed and developing countries as well as a set of rules and regulations. The United Nations would set up another climate summit, but this time it would be in an area where smog and pollution are clearly visible. Each country would have two parts to their treaties: an individual treaty with the guide to how to reduce the carbon and methane emissions in addition to the international treaty that all nations would decide on. For example, China's first part would consist of a list of steps to work with car companies, industrial farmers and factories to reduce the amount of fossil fuels released into the air. The second part would consist of the target numbers in which every country would be working towards. Additionally, all the developed countries would be obligated to set aside a certain amount of money that would go towards developing countries and the first part of their treaties. These treaties would allow nations to have their own plans to help fight global warming, but all of the countries would have the same target goals.
There would be numerous benefits to implementing this treaty around the world. However, one of the most difficult pieces of this plan would be making sure every country follows through with its plan. Penalties given to a country that fails to comply with its own treaty could include a large fine given to the nation and/or a mandatory meeting between the country's leaders and United Nations officials to figure out how to get the country back on its feet. Fortunately, the benefits of this treaty would outweigh the potential setbacks. The treaties of each nation would include plans that would cut the use of fossil fuels, improve energy efficiency, reduce deforestation, shift to renewable energy resources and even reduce poverty (Miller 466). Countries could also choose to be proactive by planting more trees and forestry, as plants absorb carbon dioxide. "Increasing forest lands and making changes to the way we farm could increase the amount of carbon we're storing" ("Global Warming"). These techniques alone will prove beneficial towards all of humanity. The reduction in the use of fossil fuels will also decrease health problems caused by indoor and outdoor pollution (Miller 475). The treaty would also reduce the risk of the rising sea levels, which threaten to take away coastal cities and low lying islands (Miller 475). Additionally, the weather extremes brought about by global warming would be subdued due to the treaty. Developing countries would also benefit because they would be given financial assistance from the developed countries . They would also benefit because "the largest burden of all the harmful effects of moderate global warming will fall on people and economies in poorer tropical and subtropical nations without the economic and technological resources needed to adapt to its harmful impacts" (Miller 475). Therefore, each nation and its residents would benefit with their new environmentally sustainable lifestyles and plans.
It is essential for every nation to take immediate action in terms of greener living to save humanity and reduce the effects of global warming. The consequences of waiting while countries debate about what to do are too dangerous. According to Miller, "it will very likely cost less to help slow and adapt to global warming now than to deal with its harmful effects later" (481). If every nation pledges to work towards cutting the use of fossil fuels and switching to renewable energy, the world could be saved from a challenging and expensive problem. Although it may seem difficult to have all of the world leaders come together to try to fix global warming, it is the only way humanity can be saved. Each nation needs to become a leader in the fight against global warming. However, it is not an impossible goal. It will just take determined individuals and unwavering nations to do so. Carol Browner, former administrator of the E.P.A., has high hopes for the future as she states "In fifty years. . . [America] will finally join an international agreement on climate change" (204-205). Hopefully in fifty years, each nation will not only be a part of an international agreement, but will also have implemented numerous sustainable practices to mitigate the warming planet. If everyone works together to make a change, the world could be saved from the dangerous effects of climate change.
Works Cited
Broder, John M. "E.P.A. Seeks Stricter Rules to Curb Smog." New York Times 7 Jan. 2010. 11 Jan. 2010 <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/08/science/earth/ 08smog.html?ref=earth>. Browner, Carol. "We Will Have Learned Our Lesson." In 50 Years From Today: 60 of the World's Greatest Minds Share Their Vision of the Next Half Century. Ed. Mike Wallace. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2008. 204-205. "Global Warming Solutions: What Can We Do?" National Geographic. 12 Jan. 2010 <http://environment.nationalgeographic.com /environment/global-warming/gw-solutions/>. Hot Planet. Dir. Steve Crabtree and Victoria Bell. 2009. Television Movie. BBC Productions, 2010. Jones, Amanda. "Maldives: Getting Their Green On." Los Angeles Times 10 Jan. 2010: L1-L8. Kanter, James. "E.U. Blames Others for 'Great Failure' on Climate." New York Times 22 Dec. 2009. 12 Jan. 2010 <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/08/science/ earth/08smog.html?ref=earth>. Meyer, Alden. "The Copenhagen Accord: Not Everything We Wanted, But Something to Build On." Union of Concerned Scientists 23 Dec. 2009. 12 Jan. 2010 <http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/ big_picture_solutions/the-copenhagen-accord.html>. Miller, G. Tyler Jr. Living in the Environment: Principles, Connections, and Solutions, 14 ed. California: Brooks/Cole- Thomson Learning, 2005. Oreskes, Naomi. "Beyond The Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change." Science 304 (2004): 1686. 11 Jan. 2010 <http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/ content/full/306/5702/1686>. Revkin, Andrew C. "Global Warming: Overview." New York Times 8 Dec 2009. 11 Jan. 2010 <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/ topics/globalwarming/index.html>. |