Global Warming
The issue of Global Warming has been circulating around the United Nations for some time now and there still is not a clear response to what is going to be done. Many people are scared that the Earth is going to continue to heat up which will cause the melting of glaciers and higher sea levels. The UN is concerned that if fossil fuel emissions are not regulated then they will simply continue to increase over the next century. “In recent months, business groups have banded together to make unprecedented calls for federal regulation of greenhouse gases” (Global Warming). My biggest concern is that, if Global Warming is such a big issue, why has nothing been done? There has been a lot of talk but no action has been taken. Personally, I think that Global Warming is a natural occurring process because the planet naturally heats and cools. It is important to understand that since we are in postglacial cycles, the planet’s orbit and tilt gives us more and longer summer days, which adds to the heating. More and longer summer days means more heat that is shined on the planet causing it to be slightly warmer which is exactly what is happening now. Also, Earth is still thawing out from our most recent ice age and the planet will continue to heat because of that, eventually we will begin to cool again. Although it is an issue that is planet is warming, it is not actually a big deal because it is a natural process. Even if humans had such a large impact on the heating of the Earth, the UN has done nothing to help the situation. Everybody is so concerned but nobody takes action to aid the problem. If the heating of Earth is such a problem, then the UN should do something, such as actually enforcing the reduction of the burning of fossil fuels and our green house gases. If nothing is going to be done what so ever, then we must simply accept the fact that it is a natural process and that it will eventually subside.
climatehotmap.org. 1999. UCS. Feb 10 2008.
“Global Warming.” New York Times. Feb 10 2008. Feb 10 2008.
ncdc.noaa.gov. 2007. NCDC. Feb 10 2008.
Global warming is a controversial issue about the increase in the temperature of the world. Global warming threatens many of the earth’s creatures, especially those that live on or near polar ice caps and depend on the ecosystem that exists there today. There are different degrees of concern that people hold today regarding global warming, and the cause of this scientific phenomenon is not yet agreed upon. Three main stances exist today; global warming is a natural cycle and the solution currently in place is not a solution at all, there is no real proof of global warming and nothing is getting done, and lastly, global warming needs to be addressed, but by everyone and through the right methods. Global warming is a significant concern today, as Dan says, but it is the fault of the people and the global community does need to focus on it in order to tackle and restrain the cause.
Carbon credits are the post-Kyoto worlds guilt free card. Our current solution to global warming is to give a certain amount of credit to nations that translates into the amount of carbon emissions that the nation is permitted to produce. Any excess credits can be sold to nations who have gone over their limit, or who plan to produce more. Although this system is only partially effective because not all nations partake in this trading game, carbon emissions really don’t make a difference. According to Alexander Cockburn, author of “From Papal Indulgences to Carbon Credits”, “…a whopping 30 per cent cut in man-made CO2 emissions didn’t even cause a 1 ppm [parts per million] drop in the atmosphere’s CO2”. He acknowledges that CO2 in the atmosphere increased about 21 per cent in the last century, and that the temperature in the world is increasing, but not for the reasons we have all heard before. Cockburn credits these changes in heat to the natural cycle of Ice Ages and warming periods caused by increased amounts of solar heat, and the changes in CO2 to the oceans. He states that the 71 per cent of water that covers the earth has “at least a hundred times more [dissolved] CO2” than the atmosphere. When the ocean warms, the dissolved carbon goes into the atmosphere, explaining the increase in carbon. Cockburn believes that this cycle of warming and cooling is natural, and we should let it run its course, but how would one then explain the gaping hole in the ozone layer that is just recently growing to such huge proportions? That has never happened before in this phase of warming.
In the article, “Climate of Uncertainty”, the confusion is absolutely clear. The sole thing that scientists agree on is that “the planet has warmed by about 1 degree over the last century” and that we need to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from fossil fuels. It is also thought that the figures projected for future greenhouse gas emissions were grossly overestimated, causing the results of these emissions to be unrealistic. As of now, Kyoto is not doing much for the environment, Hayward believes, and in the future when we have a more efficient method of control we will look back on what the current system lacks and see what needed to be done.
The United States is crucial to the success of any industrial world movement. Although we are only a small percent of the world’s population, industrially and politically we are a huge power. Vedantam, the author of Impact on Global Warming May be Largely Symbolic points this out, saying that “[w]ith the United States on the sidelines, the Kyoto treaty could end up as ineffectual as that post-World War I League of Nations”, which we also failed to take part in. Not only does the treaty lack a huge force, but it also focuses on a not so effective way to reduce global warming. The treaty, “ratified by 141 nations, limits emissions from 35 industrialized countries” and is “aimed at controlling global warming linked to carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases”. If the United States had agreed to Kyoto our economy would be at a huge risk, “it would have cost 5 million jobs and $400 billion annually”, so we need to find a way to continue producing what we currently do, but to do it in a more emission reducing way. The right method to control global warming is to “develop and spread clean technology… [through a proposal designed] to set efficiency standards”. In America we already have standards set for electrical appliances, those with the highest efficiency have the ‘energy star’ logo on them, encouraging people to be more environmentally friendly. In order for Kyoto to be successful, the US needed to be a part of the ratification of the treaty, but there are still ways to reduce global warming without trading carbon credits.
Global warming is a issue today, as a result of human behavior, and although Kyoto might not be working at its best now, we will come up with another system that works even better and is not as threatening to the economy’s of the nation that take part in it.
Cockburn, Stephen. “From Papal Indulgences to Carbon Credits”. 28 April 2007. 13 Feb. 2008. .
Hayward, Stephen F. “Climate of Uncertainty”. The Weakly Standard. 27 Feb. 2006. 13 Feb. 2008. .
Vedantam, Shankar. “Kyoto Treaty Takes Effect Today”. The Washington Post. 16 Feb. 2005. 13 Feb. 2008. .
In Response to the viewpoints conveyed by Dan Gil about the world’s recent concern with global warming, I agree that action must be taken. Although it is a natural process, as he has stated, the world is becoming dependent upon fossil fuels and harmful greenhouse gases. The rise and fall of temperature is a natural thing over the timeline of the world, however humans are greatly contributing to the recent rise in temperature. According to Perkins (Access Science) there is “strong evidence that people are to blame”.
The reality of it all is that global warming is not the only downside to the superfluous production of harmful gases. Oil is not a renewable source, and accordingly we must begin to convert to using other sources of energy. Changes are slowly occurring, however, nothing drastic is being accomplished. People are heavily dependent upon driving everywhere, despite the immensely high gas prices. Power plants are still being used, burning coal at a constant rapid rate, persistently filling the air with harmful gases. Airplanes are flying in and out of airports all around the world every minute of every day, and the human race is destroying forests with cutting and burning in several areas. Additionally, “Coal and petroleum combustion each account for about 40 % of global carbon dioxide emissions,” (Perkins). All of these aspects contribute to global warming, and with such advanced technology in the modern world, reducing the use of these sources will be a difficult task. The world’s economy and life in general is based upon the use of these harmful sources, hence making change a harder mission to accomplish.
Dan brought up an interesting question in his post, asking “Why has nothing been done?” regarding global warming. I personally feel that a lot of small changes are being made, but the UN needs to take action. I am therefore in agreement with some of his statements; however I feel that it is easier said than done. Nonetheless, the UN is appointing new leaders on the issue, as they have realized how progress is not very imminent (The Associated Press). This change in leaders hopefully will bring more success on the whole issue. Hope is portrayed through Michael Bloomberg’s statement that “‘this is just as important as stopping terrorism,’” (The Associated Press). Our nation has gotten so consumed in the issue of fighting terrorism (which isn’t a bad thing). Even so, it is not the only issue that needs to be addressed sooner rather than later. Bloomberg also had a smart approach to the situation in proposing a carbon emissions tax which will contrast to the “current U.S. strategy that largely relies on voluntary approaches and spending for research and technology.” I agree that the United States is one of the most industrial countries and therefore we must be the ones to compensate for our excessive use of harmful energy sources. General Ban Ki-moon showed a similar viewpoint; though he does mention that all the countries must be a part of the change- the U.S. being the one to lead the transformation.
Despite no severe changes in the general use of fossil fuels, there are some ideas on fixing this whole issue, however according to Schrag, “It’s clear that none of these is a silver bullet,” (Perkins). Some options are capturing carbon dioxide and confiscating it, or expanding the use of more efficient energy. One more fascinating and complex idea is to “lock away” the gas into seafloor sediments (Perkins) or into oil and gas fields. All of these are very innovative and clever, yet it is unclear as to whether scientists will really follow through. Regardless, adjustments need to be made before we let mankind destroy the earth to a point where transformation is not a possibility.
Gil, Daniel. “Global Warming” Learnerblogs. 10 Feb 2008. Wordpress MU. 12 Feb 2008. www.dannyg.learnerblogs.org/2008/02/10/global-warming/
Perkins, Sid. “From Bad to Worse: Earth’s Warming to Accelerate.” Access Science. 11 Feb 2008. McGraw-Hill. 12 Feb 2008. www.accesscience.com/content.aspx?id=SN12813
The Associated Press. “UN Seek New Leaders on Global Warming.” New York Times. 11 Feb 2008. NYtimes.com. 12 Feb 2008. www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-UN-Climate-Change.html?_r=1&sq=global warming&st=nyt&oref=slogin&scp=2&pagewanted=print
The issue of Global Warming has become increasingly more and more debatable. One side will argue that we, as common citizens of Earth, are destroying the environment and, eventually, our planet, by emitting hazardous gasses. Others may argue that the calculated rise in temperatures is simply due to the Earth’s natural pattern of heating and cooling. Although pollution is certainly a major and important problem that should be dealt with nonetheless, I do not believe that we are currently in an unnatural state of global warming. For example, one scientist measured that the southern coast of Greenland was receding, and therefore proclaimed that Global Warming was melting the country. However, he failed to notice that not only had the northern coast extended more than the southern coast had receded, but also that the thickness of the ice sheet had also increased. By misinterpreting and misrepresenting certain data, scientists may be led to believe that the Earth is in danger. However, I agree with Dan that we are simply caught in the natural cycle of a billion-year-old planet.
Sorry I didn’t realize I wasn’t logged out. I post above that starts “The issue of Global Warming has become increasingly more and more debatable” is from me (Sophie)
And here is my works consulted:
Starobin, Michael. “Greenland’s Receding Ice.” Scientific Visualation Studio. .
and Mr. Taylor’s lectures on Global Warming
In reply to Dan Gil’s post concerning global warming, the United Nation’s actions concerning it, and its significance in the world today, I have to say that I agree and disagree with many statements he made. It is true that numerous people are afraid of global warming and the negative effect it could have, such as melting glaciers and causing the sea levels to rise. However, Dan explains that he personally believes that global warming is essentially a natural process in which we really shouldn’t worry about. At one point he states “Although it is an issue that is planet is warming, it is not actually a big deal because it is a natural process.” Even though Dan makes an excellent point in that global warming is due in part to Earth’s ordinary orbit, tilt, and other natural factors, I don’t think that it is an issue to be taken lightly. Yes, some of global warming process is something humans are incapable of controlling, however much of it is due to our own actions as a race. The facts are here to show that what the United States and other countries are doing is definitely detrimental to the climate and has put a huge dent in the progression of global warming. The Associated Press reports that “the U.S. emits about 7 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases a year. China, with 1.3 billion people, has pulled roughly even with that amount…”(The Associated Press). It is a known fact that people all over the world and especially in this country are extremely dependent upon driving, despite the high gas prices. The emissions of burning coal from power plants continue to fill the atmosphere with harmful gases. The things people simply do everyday without thinking are truly taking a toll on the environment, and I disagree with Dan when he says “If nothing is going to be done about it whatsoever, we must simply accept that fact that it is a natural process and that it will eventually subside.”
I truly believe that action needs to be taken now, and so do many other people. So why, as Dan said, has the issue of global warming continually been brought in front of the United Nations, and there continues to be no clear plan of action? A couple days ago, 21 countries met to discuss how to battle the global warming epidemic and looked to find a compromise in order to reduce carbon emissions. Yvo de Boer, head of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was quoted saying “Climate change needs an economic solution and the negotiations are an opportunity to find solutions that are economically viable worldwide” (AFP). I full-heartedly agree with this statement, and believe that hopefully more conferences such as these can be held to get to the root of the problem. At this conference as well as many others, the focus has been put on developed nations, specifically the United States, and what they can do to help reduce carbon emissions. This is because it is shown not only that developing countries such as ourselves are releasing more gas into the atmosphere, but also that we are doing the least to prevent it from happening. Although I quoted the Associated Press article earlier saying that China and the US exerted about the same amount of greenhouse gases a year, this statistic actually goes to show how irresponsible the US is being individually. Our country, with far less people living in it releases the same amount of harmful gases as China, who has about four times the population we do. The article quotes Yvo de Boer saying “The United States has been walking away from the Kyoto Protocol on one side, and on the other side you know that major developing countries are not making any moves forward in order to see how the climate change can be tackled” (AFP). We don’t need to make a global effort to reduce these harmful greenhouse gases, but instead we need to start by simply making a national effort.
Gil, Daniel. “Global Warming” Edublogs. 10 Feb 2008. Wordpress MU. 12 Feb 2008. dannyg.learnerblogs.org/2008/02/10/global-warming/>.
The Associated Press. “UN Seek New Leaders on Global Warming.” New York Times. 11 Feb 2008. NYtimes.com. 12 Feb 2008. www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-UN-Climate-Change.html?_r=1&sq=global warming&st=nyt&oref=slogin&scp=2&pagewanted=print
Nations Seek Compromise in Climate Change Talks.” AFP. 14 Feb. 2008. 14 Feb. 2008 afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5ghkvHOZ4P0IuiB0OAG5V83p–kdw
Adam I.
Response to Dan’s Blog on Global Warming
In Response to Dan’s entry on global warming, the United Nations is in a very tough spot on the subject of global warming due to the fact that there is no clear way to solve it. In the case that they were to apply a carbon emissions restriction it would cause massive concern because every country has its different needs, for example, the carbon emissions of China differ significantly from a country like Canada. Hence, it would have to be different for every country. In addition we rely so much on the gases causing it that if we were to one day just fully stop it, the world would come to a halt, therefore the way we are going with it now seems to be the best route. By easing into alternative fuel resources will we stop the fear of our world collapsing due to global warming. However, a new idea has been brought to the table in which we do almost the opposite of what we’ve been doing. Two scientists by the names of F. Jeffrey Martin and William L. Kubic Jr. are proposing that we keep using gasoline fueled cars. They are testing a new idea in which we would remove the carbon dioxide from the air and turn it back into gasoline. “The idea is simple. Air would be blown over a liquid solution of potassium carbonate, which would absorb the carbon dioxide. The carbon dioxide would then be extracted and subjected to chemical reactions that would turn into fuel: methanol, gasoline or jet fuel.” When Dan mentioned a quick effective action, this is the best route to go, with enough testing this could be into affect within the next couple of years, and global warming would be a thing of the past. In addition this route would be best because it would require the least change. In December the Bush administration denied California permission to regulate and reduce global warming emissions from cars and trucks, this is viewed as a “political payoff to the automobile industry.” “The decision, announced Wednesday by Stephen Johnson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, overrode the advice of his legal and technical staffs, misconstrued the law and defied both Congress and the federal courts.” The E.P.A has been receiving much criticism for not regulating carbon emission and it frequently hid behind the argument that carbon dioxide was not apart of the Clean Air Act, this act should be changed because obviously one of the most significant gases affecting our world is carbon dioxide. It seems the Bush administration is keen on keeping the motor industry at its current state, and is not willing on doing the people of the United States a favor, by keeping our air clean.
Gil, Daniel. “Global Warming” Edublogs. 10 Feb 2008. Wordpress MU. 12 Feb 2008. dannyg.learnerblogs.org/2008/02/10/global-warming/>.
Chang, Kenneth. “Scientists Would Turn Greenhouse Gas Into Gasoline.” New York Times 19 Feb. 2008.24 Feb. 2008 .
“Arrogance and Warming.” New York Times 21 Dec. 2007. 24 Feb. 2008 .