Issue 9: Should the U.S. Be Doing More to Combat Global Warming?

Should the U.S. Be Doing More to Combat Global Warming?

Authors: Jerald L. Schnoor and the Bush Administration

1. (2pts) Definitions. List the important new terms and concepts used by the author. Define terms with which you were not familiar. Circle those that you think need clarification and discussion. Minimum 4.

a. animal husbandry - the agricultural practice of breeding and raising livestock

b. biogeothermal cycle – refers to the symbiotic relationship between the Earth and humans. Human activity can alter the Earth, and the Earth, in this case, the atmosphere will change. This resulting change impacts on humans and other life forms.

c. albedo – “(Latin for white) commonly used to apply to the overall average reflection coefficient of an object. The greenhouse effect, by trapping infrared radiation, can lower the albedo of the earth and cause global warming.” (Source: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/albedo.html)

d. arrears - a legal term for the type of debt which is overdue after missing a payment.

2. (4pts) Summary. In your own words, summarize the themes and key points developed in this chapter, article, or section of an assigned book. Write as if you were the author telling another educated person what you were trying to say in the assigned piece. In this section, do not give your opinion. Present the arguments and themes of the assigned author.

The positive argument argues that global warming does exist and that human activity is to blame. Consequently, we must take drastic measures to reduce carbon dioxide levels within our atmosphere to curb the climate change. This relates to Issue One: The Precautionary Principle. As the data is, some scientists say it indicates a climate change whereas politicians and other scientists can take that same data and say it indicates a biogeothermal cycle occurring.

The major points the positive argument’s author Jerald L. Schnoor makes are:

We know that the increase in greenhouse gases are being caused by humans because (1) the increase began in the end of the 18^th century with the start of the Industrial Revolution, (2) our global emissions match the rate of CO₂ increase in our atmosphere, (3) “the temporal and spatial dynamics of CO₂ in the atmosphere, mixing from north to south, and fluctuating annually with an increase in the baseline each year, can only be explained by human emissions.” (p. 155)

Global warming is occurring. The Earth is 1.1ºF or 0.6ºC warmer on average than it has been in the past 1,000 years. General Circulation Models predicted twenty years ago that the Arctic would have a more obvious reaction to the warming trend because the ice would melt first, which increases the albedo of the earth surface and causing more increase in temperatures. The sea is also warmer, which worries climatologists because there will be more evaporation, which could potentially cause more extreme events such as tornadoes, hurricanes, and floods.

Humans and the environment are affected by global warming. The summers are hotter than before. Professor Tony McMichael of the Australian National University estimated ~160,000 people died in 2003 from heat stroke resulting from the climate change. Pollutants in the air pose great risks to the elderly and asthmatic. Also, there has been an overall pole ward or elevation increase movement in plant and animal populations worldwide, though other populations just have decreasing numbers.

The United States needs to ratify the Kyoto Treaty. It was signed, but never ratified. He believes that the U.S.’s objection to developing countries being allowed to emit greenhouse gases is wrong. The U.S. currently emits approximately 25% of all global greenhouse gas emissions. He believes that “developing countries also must reduce emissions if we are to be successful in preventing global warming, but only after they have reached a certain level of income and development. … [T]he developing world must be allowed to reach some level of prosperity before being obliged to reduce emissions.”

We can reduce greenhouse gas emissions while securing our energy needs. By using our energy efficiently and relying on wind power, we can reduce our use of fossil fuels by 50%. Wind power is growing 30% per year since 1995.

The negative argument believes that global warming is real, but that it’s blown out of proportion. There will be no climate change, it’s just a warming trend that happens every hundred years or so. Also, the Bush Administration and other detractors feel as though the trade-off of protecting our environment at the expense of our economic growth is ill-advised. They offer a solution of reducing greenhouse gas emissions so that the economy may still grow. However, Schnoor does not accept this, as a growth in an economy coupled with reduced emissions still results in the same emissions as we now have or more, both of which are at a dangerous level for our planet.

The changes implemented by the President are outlined thus:

Reduce the greenhouse gas intensity of the U.S. by 18% over the course of ten years

o Economic growth is the solution, not the problem. It will fund research and technology needed to combat a climate change. We need to implement emissions reductions, regardless of incomplete scientific data.

o Reducing 183 metric tons of emissions per million dollars GDP to 151 metric tons by 2012. This is comparable to the requirements that the nations who have signed the Kyoto Protocol.

Substantially improve the emission reduction registry

o Participation has been limited with the 1995 Energy Policy Act and the Secretary of Energy has been directed to make improvements that would compel businesses to comply for incentives.

Protect and provide transferable credits for emissions reductions

o Businesses and individuals can register the reductions they make and ensure no penalty under any future climate policy. Those who implement real reductions in emissions will be given transferable tax credits.

Review progress toward goal and take additional action if necessary

o Allows for a revision in 2012 that may include more incentives and voluntary measures to accelerate technological advances.

Increase funding for America’s commitment to climate change

o America is spending $4.5 billion total in climate regulation – a figure unmatched in the world.

Take action on the Science and Technology Review

o The President has devoted $1.7 billion to fund research on both climate change and new energy technologies.

Implement a comprehensive range of new and expanded domestic policies

o Tax incentives for businesses, investors, and individuals for use of solar, wind, and biomass power, and for use of hybrid and fuel cell vehicles.

Promote new and expanded international policies to complement our domestic program

o The President is investing $25 million in climate observation stations in developing countries, and has challenged other developed nations to match it.

o The President has tripled funding for his Debt-For-Nature program, which releases developing countries from their debt to the U.S. by promising not to release their rainforests to logging use.

o The President has provided a way for joint research to be conducted with Central America, Italy, and Japan concerning the climate change.

3. (3pts) Creative Reaction and Integration. Record some of your own ideas that came to you as you were reading and thinking about the issue or issues the author is discussing. Formulate these in well-written sentences, develop them as best you can, and relate them to the author’s discussion and possibly to other readings and course themes.

If developing countries have no limit on their emissions, and their economy is growing, wouldn’t their emissions increase? So if developed countries reduce their emissions and another country is increasing theirs, isn’t it the same as if the developed country remained the same with their emissions and the developed country stayed low? What good is this? The source of emissions does not matter as much as the total amount of emissions, because it is the overload of emissions that our planet cannot handle. Not the origin of emissions.

However, the Administration is not taking global warming as a real threat. When the EPA put out its report in 2002, that admitted that global warming was indeed real and that human activities were to blame for it, President Bush reacted with a retort that seemed to dismiss the report in its entirety.

4. (2pts) Opinion – Not graded, 2 points awarded if completed.

I do not know if President Bush believes in global warming or not. I don’t think he does, as his actions do seem to be strong and decisive to combat it, I wonder if he actually believed in it, would he not do more? We certainly need to do more. I do not agree with the Kyoto Protocol because I feel it is unrealistic and would harm our country more than it would help our environment. But, as the producer of nearing 25% of global emissions, we are responsible to do our part to help our world. I believe our vast resources could be used to research and implement innovative technologies that would curb our overuse of energy. Also, we could follow Australia’s path and make incandescent light bulbs illegal for use because it pulls too much energy that is not used for light, but rather, heat. Any method that us to promote the welfare of our environment should be taken seriously, considered, researched, and funded. The environment has too long be taken for granted.