Did you know the Earth is hotter than it’s ever been? In Paris back in December, The United Nations convened and over 126 countries agreed that there is definitely a problem. Yet, back in the US, it doesn’t seem like it’s a big deal.
The common narrative, especially in the states, is that global warming is only a long term issue. Most people think the dangers associated with climate change are in the distant future. The latest climate change statistics are evidence of just the opposite. 2015 was the hottest year ever recorded only to be followed in 2016 by the hottest January ever. The following February, according to NASA, was the most unusually warm month in over a century. It is very clear within the scientific community that global warming is real and is having traverse effects right now. There are many potential dangers and risks associated if there is continued non action. The Environmental Protection Agency has continuously detailed the threats posed to agriculture, transportation, human health as well as other various sectors. In addition, on April 4th The Obama administration released a 332-page report that illuminates how global warming may sicken U.S. Citizens. The report warns of contaminated air, water, and food.
The EPA’s website says “The severity of these health risks will depend on the ability of public health and safety systems to address or prepare for these changing threats” (Impacts, EPA). This is important because it means that the longer we wait to address this issue the more dangerous it becomes. That is why it is so important that we change current blasé narrative. As we delay action we simultaneously debilitate ourselves. Every single day the corrective and protective potential of climate change policy decreases.
Economics is often used to argue against climate change policy. The case is made that renewable energy sources are still too expensive as opposed to coal technology. This is becoming increasingly false. Energy.gov provides comparative figures that show that cost of wind, solar, and electric technologies have decreased and their deployment has increased. Climate Change has the potential to devastate economy as well. A study published in the Nature science journal states that “unmitigated warming is expected to reshape the global economy by reducing average global incomes roughly 23% by 2100 and widening global income inequality” (Nature). The estimated costs of damage due to future droughts, floods, and heatwaves numbers 1.7 trillion U.S. dollars.
Hopefully by now you are on board with the informed, in thinking that this is huge deal. If you are like me then your first question is probably, “is anything being done about this”? That question brings us back to the U.N. meeting in Paris I mentioned earlier.
The Paris agreement has a very clear focus, stating in it’s opening
“Recognizing that climate change represents an urgent and potentially irreversible threat to human societies and the planet and thus requires the widest possible cooperation by all countries, and their participation in an effective and appropriate international response, with a view to accelerating the reduction of global greenhouse gas emissions” (1, UNFCCC)
Every signing country is required to make certain pledges or commitments in greenhouse gas reduction. Certain countries have also pledged to subsidize clean energy in other developing countries. The year 2020 has been set as a checkpoint and or deadline for progress. In addition to global emission, certain benchmarks were made for global rise in temperature. The convention aimed to keep it below 2 degrees Celsius with the goal being 1.5 degrees. The language of the document utilizes the word “ambitious” often to emphasize the belief that countries should be challenging themselves in efforts to shift to cleaner energy sources. The Paris agreement not only calls for quantitative progress but qualitative as well, referring to policy. “Recognizing the importance of the engagements of all levels of government and various actors, in accordance with respective national legislations of Parties, in addressing climate change” (21, UNFCCC).
In fact, the success of this agreement is solely dependent on resulting domestic policy, in the agreeing countries. All the agreement really is tangible commitment by the associated countries to do their best to convince their home governments that climate change initiatives are a priority. The Paris agreement has been lauded by some as historic. While in its existence it is somewhat unprecedented, many have criticized the acclaim it has received, arguing against its effectiveness. Some feel the national commitments are either unrealistic or too complacent. In the time following the agreement, preceding its signature, it has become apparent that the critics may have a point.
Globally, there has not been drastic successful legislation that aims to address climate change. The documented pledges of countries such as China and the European Union have been called into question not only externally, but internally as well. Developing countries such as India, one of the largest global contributors to greenhouse gas pollution, are apparently still anticipating international subsidiaries and therefore has been stalled in their energy efficiency efforts.
The United States hasn’t made much better progress towards their goals either. Although, aggressive legislation does exist, it just has yet to pass. Obama’s Clean Power Plan aims to reduce the carbon emissions specifically from power plants. It requires states to submit detailed plans in the near future, that are designed to achieve just that. However, on February 9th when brought to the Supreme Court the document was delayed. The court stayed the ruling on the plan, pushing back the decision. The delay of the decision in turn delays any resultant action, should it be passed. The court’s decision is representative of the strong dissent, within the government, to aggressive climate change policy. “By staying the rule, the court heeded the concerns of more than two dozen mostly red states and energy companies that oppose it” (M.S.L.J., TIME magazine).
Is this the first time your hearing of this decision? I wouldn’t be surprised; this news hasn’t received much mainstream circulation. Our own carbon emissions threaten to destroy the world and it’s not on the front page. That’s precisely the problem, and exactly why, as it stands, the Paris agreement is doomed to fail. The Paris agreement isn’t political action. The Paris agreement constitutes a tangible promise between world leaders to take political action. As far as the U.S. is concerned, it will be difficult to keep that promise. The Republican party doesn’t even acknowledge global warming as an issue. In an election year, the leading GOP candidates do not hold a stance on the climate change in their platforms. There was a whopping total of one question about climate change in all of the GOP debates thus far.
Bernie Sanders often criticizes the media for its lack of coverage on climate change. This criticism is crucial to ending the current narrative. If the public knew more about the recent drastic changes to global climate, they would be just as concerned as the U.N. Record breaking temperatures should become common knowledge. Issues such as gun violence, while an important national concern, are sensationalized and given mass coverage. Climate change cannot attract ratings because there currently appear to be no victims. What we as citizens must realize is that we all as humans will be the victims. The scary thing is, that if we wait until that is abundantly evident, we will have waited too long. It truly is on us. For global warming to be prioritized in American media and politics, it must first be a priority in the hearts and minds of American people. This article may serve as a conversation starter, but in order for this country to live up to its status as a global leader and for the future of human existence, it is up to you to keep the conversation going.
Works Cited
http://energy.gov/articles/clean-energy-economy-three-charts
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v527/n7577/full/nature15725.html
Climate Change Could Wreck the Global Economy
http://www.economist.com/node/21679865
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2016/02/americas-battle-over-climate-change
https://www.whitehouse.gov/energy/climate-change
https://www.whitehouse.gov/share/climate-action-plan
https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/
http://www.eenews.net/special_reports/global_climate_debate/stories/1060032233
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/how-world-has-changed-since-paris-climate-pact-20142
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf