-->
Sloan
Davis
We
find ourselves in the midst of an election year while studying
environmental science. As time goes on, these two topics find
themselves evermore connected and dependent on one another. I am
passionate about politics because of my love of the planet and the
natural world. To understand the current state of environmental
science is also to have knowledge about the political climate we live
in and how a desire to act against the climate crisis can become a
reality for the United States and the world. That deeper
understanding starts with comprehension of the factual issue facing
the biosphere today, and it works its way up the political web and
into what actions can drive policy and what policy can drive
progress.
Climate
justice is not only a scientific issue, but it is also an economic
issue, a race issue, a political issue, and a moral issue. The water
in Flint Michigan is poisoned because of poor infrastructure.
Billions of animals are displaced because of wildfires around the
world. When sea levels rise and the weather becomes extreme,
the most vulnerable among us will be the most affected. At this
pivotal point in human and geological history, it is imperative that
the appropriate action is taken to usurp disaster. In goal 13 of the
sustainable development goals, the UN claims that between 1880 and
2012, the global average temperature rose 0.85°C, and in all
likelihood that number will reach 1.5°C which will be a tipping
point for many of the world’s ecosystems. Likewise, sea-levels have
already risen 19 centimeters since 1901 and further, accelerated rise
is predicted (UN Environment). On this front, private industry has
failed the world. Back in the summer of 1977, Exxon first learned of
the dangers of climate change; that is 11 years before NASA presented
similar findings to Congress (Hall). Democracy is the only thing
protecting the planet’s biomes from vast alterations.
Change
will not start from the top down, it must come from the bottom up and
challenge the status quo of institutions that are indifferent to the
climate crisis. Activism is this change in its infancy; it is a
rudimentary stepping stone that informs the masses and generates a
conversation. Every great progression in society since the dawn of
civilization has started from the roots and worked its way into the
political system. In the same way, the findings from environmental
science in the past 40 years have to be translated to the public for
the arduous process of political change to take place. Unlike the
current climate, politics is not fast-changing nor unpredictable. At
the forefront of climate activism is are the younger generations who
understand that the impacts of this environmental crisis will ripple
into their adult lives and the lives of their children. One such
person, Greta Thunberg, has made waves in the political discourse of
the globe by protesting political inaction on climate change and
bringing 13 million strikers with her in 228 countries across the
globe through her organization Fridays For Future (Fridays For
Future). This movement of all peoples from across the globe pivoted
the international discourse towards climate action.
Picking
up on the groundwork that activists lay, democracy must choose the
sweep ambitious candidates with climate action on their agendas into
office. Activism is great but if people vote for the same old corrupt
and intellectually bankrupt politicians, coastal cities will be
consumed by the oceans and the global ecosystem will be thrown into
the sixth mass extinction. Already 200 species go extinct every day
(Vidal). To combat this, ambitious legislation must be put forward to
meet the demands of science as outlined by the UN, IPCC and other
international, non-partisan organizations. One such plan, the Green
New Deal co-authored by representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, aims
to meet all of these needs in a ten-year time frame. The Green New
Deal includes plans to reduce carbon emissions to zero by 2030,
reduce U.S. reliance on air travel, and invest in sustainable
agriculture. Soon after its introduction, several U.S. presidential
candidates adopted versions of the plan and some even present climate
action as one of their top priorities (Roberts). Proposed policies
also include plans to clean up the polluted oceans while restoring
them to a natural balance of pH. Now, legislation waits in the halls
of Congress and the legislative chambers of countries worldwide that
aims to tackle the climate crisis
head-on.
Because
of the failures of private industry to act on the issue of climate
change, political action, starting from the bottom, is needed to
quell the existential threat that is climate change on the natural
world. Activists must protest, citizens must vote, and politicians
need to bring fresh ideas to the table if humanity is to survive this
challenge. The environment can, and will, survive without us, but we
cannot survive without it. To protect the most vulnerable, the poor,
the disenfranchised by society, environmental science and politics
have to be one and the same. People cannot sit idly while the Earth’s
oceans acidify, the great rain forests are burned, and species pass
to extinction.
Questions:
What
should governments do to combat climate change?
In
what ways should private corporations evolve to be environmentally
friendly?
Should
the United States engage the governments of other countries to help
tackle this issue? If so how?
Do
you feel the general public has an adequate enough knowledge of
climate change to be able to make an educated voting decision?
Works
Cited
Hall,
Shannon. “Exxon Knew about Climate Change Almost 40 Years Ago.”
Scientific
American,
Scientific American, 26 Oct. 2015,
www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/.
Roberts,
David. “The Green New Deal, Explained.” Vox,
Vox, 30 Mar. 2019,
www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez.
“Statistics
/ Graph.” FridaysForFuture,
www.fridaysforfuture.org/statistics/graph.
Un.
“GOAL 13: Climate Action.” UNEP
- UN Environment Programme,
www.unenvironment.org/explore-topics/sustainable-development-goals/why-do-sustainable-development-goals-matter/goal-13.
Vidal,
John. “Scientist: Mass Extinction Happening Unlike Anything The
World Has Seen Since Dinosaurs Disappeared.” HuffPost,
HuffPost, 25 May 2011,
www.huffpost.com/entry/un-environment-programme-_n_684562.
-->
24 comments:
The government can take many different forms of action to combat climate change. Government research and development programs can help create clean energy technologies for use in large companies. Additionally, they could implement a carbon dioxide emissions tax, especially on large corporations. An emissions tax would encourage alternative energy sources and help lower greenhouse gas emissions, combating climate change. While these are feasible ideas, they would take pretty long to implement due to slow policymaking speeds and bureaucratic red tape.
I believe that the government could enact more green initiatives to create more action within people. And I think a lot of large corporations need to be fought back, in a sense, by the common man to make them realize that this is something the public wants and needs. It’s bold to say that corporations would want to start, and I think you make an excellent point in that change needs to start from the bottom down. It is impactful to see consumers use more environmentally friendly options, so that as it moves us the chain of power everyone realizes that it could be a feasible change, but not as immediate as we want it to be.
I think that this is an interesting take on the environmental problems of the world. I agree that we need to change from the bottom to the top, not vice versa. A way that the government could help is when officials that are environmentally conscious. I believe that the U.S. should get involved with other countries since we are a global superpower and can spark change.
I think that the government can help the environment the most. They need to create more pro-environment initiatives and laws. I do think that people know the environment is in danger, but not the extent of it. I also do not think that they will take action without it affecting politics and economics. This election is the perfect opportunity to bring it up and have the candidates talk about it.
Politicians do hold a great weight to finding solutions for the environmental crisis. Without them, major changes can’t be established. People on their own can make active choices to improve their lifestyle with the Earth's interest in mind, but without the government on the same page, the Earth will continue to be on the breaking point. I get the perspective of people mostly taking the environment’s situation as a joke. They are aware of the dangerous signs and catastrophic events that happen around the globe, but they don’t have the knowledge to understand the pressing matter and severity of the situation. People have lost the motivation to actively take care of the Earth and feel the need to have the environments stability as a main issue to resolve. With more advertising and push towards going green and the need for it through the internet, companies, and passionate people around the world, more people would begin to see the pressing matter.
I found it incredibly interesting how you tied politics into environmental issues. I believe governments should play an active role in reducing these issues, especially politicians with great influence. If the general population witnesses figures of authority working towards reducing environmental issues, people will be more encouraged to attempt to make a difference. By implementing pro-environmental laws and policies, the government could help establish change.
I completely agree with you that it is time we move from corrupt politicians to candidates that will really take initiative. Today, Antarctica hit a record high temperature of 65 degrees Fahrenheit near the East Coast! Furthermore, I appreciate your mention of Greta Thunberg because she is a good example of how the student body can also contribute to forcing political action through awareness. It's time we found leaders leading by example so that the people may follow suit, avoiding the sixth global extinction you mentioned. Amazing job tying politics into environmental science!
I found it surprising that the Green New Deal plants to reduce carbon emissions to zero by 2030. The plan would have to take into account the massive impact this would have in eliminating the key source of energy for the U.S. Many people working in the oil and natural gas business would undoubtedly be negatively impacted by this change, so a new sustainable energy business would have to fill this job vacuum. Despite these setbacks, I think it’s important that an actual plan is being devised to build up to a sustainable future. The Green New Deal is only the first step, but it is important in that it promises efforts toward sustainable development through legislation.
I am impressed with people like Greta Thunberg and their determination to make change within society, and even her reach through foreign countries and her raising of awareness. I feel like the government should make laws limiting fuel usage and even plastic wastage or even production, I would also suggest trying to fund operations to help clean up the wastage polluting the environment. Corporations should also try to be safer with the environment by transferring to more Eco-friendly products, or regulating their wastage. Lastly, I believe that the US can help foreign countries through investments and that I honestly do not yet believe that the public would have enough knowledge for an educated voting decision.
It’s always intriguing to see and understand the political reasons behind humans not doing something that seems intuitive and right. Though the green new deal never went through, it really was a big step in opening the conversation of government regulation in industry and our country’s goals towards doing our part in the climate crisis. It’s certainly a scary world where people don’t agree on the facts of a subject, especially climate change. This is something that effects every person and we all need to do our part.
I think it is important for politics to be intertwined with environmental protection because it is ultimately the government’s authority and power to make major changes to conserve resources and biodiversity, and the government should take measures to set aside land that contains some of the country’s most important habitats and ecosystems so that a good measure of biodiversity is preserved. I think private corporations also have a responsibility to help the environment due to their wealth and influence, and they should do this by producing products and other things that they produce in a more environmentally sustainable way.
I agree with your take on this issue. People should vote for good politicians that will actually help the environment. I think that the government can help this issue by passing more laws to regulate how people treat the environment. I also think that more people should care and speak out against this issue, like Greta Thunberg. Only then can change start to happen.
It's so strange to think a 1.5C change in temperature can have such a dire impact on ecosystems. As sea-levels rise, a positive feedback occurs and more and more glaciers melt. It is extremely important to sustain the environment. Many of the times, it is the government spreading awareness, but it is time to take initiative. The majority of the populations are usually the working class, so we need to start an environmental revolution to sustain the planet and its resources.
It is true that the oceans have been steadily increasing in temperature due to the increase in carbon emissions being put into the atmosphere. I also didn’t think about how politics in today’s society could affect the environment around us. So, If we are to fix the issues that are currently popping up on our environment, we would need to get big corporations to lower their carbon emissions. One way that would help is by either making production a little slower or find better ways into making the same amount of products, but with a healthier alternative such as more energy efficient processes. However, not only do big corporations need to change, but the people themselves have to as well. We should focus on being more educated about our surroundings, whether it be at school or at home. That way we can not only have more people help on the issues at hand, but possibly create more influential people as time continues to move forward.
I agree to an extent that change will not start from top down but bottom up. However, I believe that the government should start something so that the people could follow along. The first step would be to make the problems known to the people and educate them. I also agree that climate change and climate justice is not only a scientific issue, but also political, economic and other issues. If everyone does a little, like voting, protesting, and proving ideas, I believe that the world could change positively.
I agree with your take on this issue. If more people express their feelings towards climate change and their desire to take a step in the right direction, I think more politicians and big corporations will start to change for the better, even if it is just for public image. I think governments and corporations can start off with little changes such as banning/taxing plastic bags at grocery stores and then working their way up to large scale environmental clean up operations in the ocean.
I think the government should tackle climate change by taking large steps and passing legislation to fund efforts to stop climate change. For example, carbon emissions must be reduced to zero and more waste should be reused and reduced. However, even in this rush for combating climate change, it is important not to take any shortcuts. If we do, we can cause potential problems that can negatively impact the future generations, which is what we are aiming to prevent. Corporations should definitely reuse as much bulk waste as possible and they should fully transition to cleaner sources of energy. The United States alone cannot solve this problem, so it is important to rely on other countries through conventions and treaties. I know younger generations are definitely knowledgeable due to social media, but older generations or people without social media may not be as aware of these issues.
I think that even though the government plays a massive role in creating regulations to help stop the impact of climate change, there are still more steps to be taken. The impact of pollution and carbon emissions needs to be reduced and the disposal of waste needs to be more efficient. If more people show a concern for climate change and more involvement in these issues the government will have to take more of a stand to stop this from happening. Not only in the USA, but worldwide people need to look into the devastation climate change causes.
Governments have many courses they could take to combat global warming including, more laws, better enforcement of current laws, international treaties with other countries, and the preservation of many other ecosystems around the world. Private corporations should take into account the many ways their production hurts the environment and regulate it indefinitely. Yes the government should work with countries around the world to help preserve the earth because we all live on it and I'm sure all want it to stay healthy and habitable for as many years as possible.
We could do a lot to protect our environment through government regulation. In fact, our government is currently pressing charges for a chemical spill against a company here in Texas. We should petition our government to make a greater commitment to internationalizing care for the environment, by entering the Paris Climate Accord once more and to pressure countries such as Brazil to halt unsustainable slash and burn agriculture.
The government needs to regulate corporations’ emissions and waste in order to preserve the planet and make it last. Strict rules that are enforced could help turn the tide against climate change and save Earth for future generations. However, participation from nations around the world other than the United States are necessary to stop climate change before ecosystems are irreversibly damaged. Global cooperation to regulate and reduce emissions could help save the environment.
As the country enters an election year, a major issue that should be addressed is climate change. I can't believe the amount of people won't accept the science and understand that the overall temperature of the Earth is increasing and it's not just a cycle of warming of the Earth. I think that we shouldn't agree with political party alignment but instead what's in the best interest of the Earth which is to take drastic measures such as those proposed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Whether it be fines or rewards I think the most effective was to cause change to prevent climate change is through the government. Nothing incentivizes people like money does, so the government should provide rewards to people who find solutions to climate change like Greta and fine those who damage the environment.
Those who hold the most control over climate change are the ones running our government, and the subject has become of political issue solely for the purpose of power and not actually for the environment. We need to become less reliant on the government as long as they refuse to support the environment if we want to make a change.
Post a Comment