A menace is on the horizon, threatening to radically alter the world we live in. Caused in part by carbon dioxide emissions that trap heat, the phenomenon known as “global warming” is projected to melt ice caps, raise ocean levels and pretty much make life exceedingly uncomfortable for the future residents of earth.
This isn’t a new menace, though. We’ve been hearing about global warming since we were attending single-digit grades, but maybe we’ve become desensitized because we’ve been so overloaded with images of catastrophic climate change (Waterworld and The Day After Tomorrow to name a couple of poorly executed examples).
The U.S. has been the fat kid at the global table for quite some time now, using the most resources and passing more than our share of greenhouse gas, but with China and India’s economies booming, there is an increased urgency to address this problem, which first gained international attention in the 1980s.
According to the International Energy Agency, China is expected to overtake the U.S. as the world’s leader in carbon dioxide emissions by 2010. China and India have a combined population of approximately 2.5 billion people – more than eight times the population of the U.S. – and if these countries continue developing at the rate they have been, worldwide carbon dioxide levels will skyrocket to unimaginable levels.
In 1997, the Kyoto Protocol was finalized to set standards for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Despite the fact that the U.S. Senate passed it unanimously and Al Gore signed the treaty, the U.S. failed to ratify it.
President Bush said that he has no plans to submit the treaty for ratification, claiming that it is not because he is against the principles of the Kyoto Protocol, but because China, currently the second largest producer of carbon dioxide, is exempt from the emissions standards – even though China has ratified the treaty.
To further complicate the situation, analysis of the economic impact of the treaty by the Congressional Budget Office and the Energy Information Administration has shown a potentially large decline in the Gross Domestic Product from implementation.
In 2005, the U.S. signed the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, an agreement similar to the Kyoto Protocol, except that it allows individual countries to set their own goals. Critics argue that this agreement is an empty gesture, however, because unlike the Kyoto Protocol, no enforcement measures are in place to ensure these goals are met.
If the U.S. is to continue being the world leader it proclaims itself to be, it should not let China’s and India’s exemptions keep us from working toward reducing our own greenhouse gas emissions. Bush’s claim is analogous to a child arguing to his or her parents, “Billy’s mom lets him stay up as late as he wants.” By setting an example, we can potentially lead other countries to do the same.
As for the possible negative economic impact, what ever happened to that American ingenuity we’re always told about? Similar claims have been made for nearly every other proposed environmental policy, and industry seems to be able to find a way to continue turning profits. Further, the long-term economic impact of abstaining from reducing greenhouse gas emissions is far more dire. With drastic climate change comes natural disasters that will wreak havoc with insurance claims and lost resources.
Unfortunately, this kind of foresight is lacking in those in power, and quick action is unlikely until dramatic changes begin to occur. So until large-scale change is implemented, do what you can to reduce your own “carbon footprint.” Turn off electronic devices when they’re not in use; walk, bike or take public transportation instead of driving, and reuse as much as you can because although recycling is definitely a good thing, the energy and resources used in the process are substantial, and that second page of a Web site you printed that only has the url at the top of the page would be more efficiently used as scratch paper than in the recycling bin.