Sarah Aezer 1

Gutaj
POLS 1100
12-1-17

Change Our Minds On Climate Change

Embarrassingly, the United States refrained from joining the Paris Climate

Accord. We are the only country out of 195 (every country in the world) that

decided not to do its part in stopping climate change. Most other world leaders

agreed that it was a critical step in mitigating the projected rise in heat, which has

been and would continue to cause problems across the globe. President Trump

stated that joining the Paris Climate Accord would put the U.S. economy at a

disadvantage and benefit other countries over our own. However, by not joining, we

are being reckless with our own economy and lives, and being a callous member of

the global community. Climate change, as evidenced by the rest of the entire worlds

participation in combating it, is an imminent threat to the human race and greatly

affects our State. Certain social groups feel the effects of climate change more than

others depending on class level, and location in the U.S. or its territories, but

everyone is affected in one way or another. Our economy is currently dependent

upon finite resources and if the entirety of the planet is switching to renewable

energy, it could leave Americas future economy behind. Though initially the

transition may be difficult, America needs to be conscious of climate change and do

our part to reduce our greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions because the climate is

ubiquitous in all policies (both domestic and foreign), interest groups, and political
Sarah Aezer 2
Gutaj
POLS 1100
12-1-17
parties. I believe that climate change is the most pressing issue in contemporary

American politics. What other legislation matters if human life cannot be sustained?

The United States makes up just one fourth of the worlds population, and yet

we contribute one third of green house gasses into the atmosphere. Next to China,

we are the largest emitter of carbon in the world. We are the country with the

worlds largest economy with a GDP of roughly 18 trillion dollars. Some might say

that as such an economic heavy hitter and with the damage that we are causing to

the atmosphere, we have a strong moral responsibility to do our part in lowering

GHG emissions. The atmosphere, after all, is whats referred to as a common good.

Nobody can be excluded from it and it is a finite resource. That means that when we

emit high amounts of green house gasses into the atmosphere, they are not only our

problem to deal with. Those green house gasses affect all other countries on earth

and they are not easily reversed, especially if the entire world (or at least the larger

contributors) doesnt cooperate. Since the industrial revolution, America has relied

heavily upon green house gas emitting fossil fuels. Today, our energy consumption

breaks down as such: 37% petroleum, 29% natural gas, 15% coal, 9% nuclear, and

10% renewable energy sources such as hydroelectric, geothermal, solar, or wind.

Per capita, the U.S. is 12th on the list of fossil fuel consumption per person; however,

our population surpasses the countries higher on the list, so we are currently using

higher amounts of fossil fuels than the rest of the globe per person. With population

increase, energy demand also increases, and our one-third contribution of global

GHG emissions is only projected to rise. GHGs trap heat in our atmosphere and
Sarah Aezer 3
Gutaj
POLS 1100
12-1-17
gradually warm the planet, melting sea and land ice, raising sea level and

temperature, causing droughts, strong hurricanes, heat waves, and a number of

other disastrous outcomes. Our nation state needs to recognize the peril we put less

advantageous countries in and do our part to maintain a safe, healthy, and lasting

environment by mitigating climate change.

Our culture is broken into a number of different demographic spheres or

identities. We may fall into any number of identities such as race, gender, political

party, social class, interest groups, etc. Climate change is one issue that should

interest every different identity, because it affects each and every one of us. No

matter our differences in background and opinion, we all have basic needs (food,

water, shelter, air, safety) that need to be met. A changing climate can make those

basic needs more difficult to come by or even impossible if the problem gets bad

enough. Although were all affected by the climate, some groups of people are

affected differently or more severely than others. As we recently saw this season,

those populations on our Atlantic coast or in the Gulf of Mexico are susceptible to

strong hurricanes caused by climate change. High sea surface temperatures cause

stronger and more destructive hurricanes that can endanger human lives and cause

irreversible damage to city infrastructures and economies. Peoples homes are lost,

livelihoods are lost, and many people lose their lives. Those in the southwest

contiguous Untied States experience deadly heat waves more and more frequently

as earths temperatures rise. Lower income households are subjected to more

danger in heat waves when air-conditioning is unaffordable. Hotter, dryer areas

Sarah Aezer 4
Gutaj
POLS 1100
12-1-17
experience higher rates of wildfires that engulf homes and livelihoods. Coastal cities

and especially our island states or territories are put at risk as sea levels rise at an

average rate of 1.8 mm per year. Those in the agriculture industry are affected by

climate change caused drought and progressively shorter pest controlling frosts.

Less snowpack means a diminished water supply for those populations who depend

on mountain runoff. No matter where you are located, or whichever group(s) you

are a part of, this shift in our climate creates issues for our health and safety as a

whole.

Economically, this call for lowering greenhouse gasses is controversial. As I

stated before, the United States energy consumption is 85% fossil fuel based, and in

addition to our high consumption of fossil fuels, the U.S. is one of the top 5

producers of fossil fuels, supplying about 11% of the worlds crude oil. One of the

Trump administrations election platforms was reviving and strengthening the fossil

fuel industry in America. His claim, and that of fossil fuel companies, was that this

would make our country energy independent, that it would fight terrorism (cut

ties with oil rich countries in the middle east), and stimulate our economy. In my

opinion, to minimize damage on the economy, we can continue to produce and

export fossil fuels for intermittent use, but we should join the rest of the globe in

renewable energy consumption. To justify this, we must first look at the path of

destruction that fossil fuels leave in their wake. What is the economic cost of oil

spills, fracking, of destroying our agriculture industry, our national parks, our

infrastructure, ecosystems, our health and safety? What is the economic cost of
Sarah Aezer 5
Gutaj
POLS 1100
12-1-17
falling behind on technologies and innovations of the future? What is the economic

cost of defiantly and immorally continuing to harm other countries environments,

health, and safety? In my opinion, we need to stay on the forefront of innovation.

America cannot afford to let the rest of the world surpass us in production of

renewable energy. Whether we are dependent on them or not, fossil fuels are a

finite resource and we will eventually run out. When we do, we will be the least

energy independent country in the world. Instead of America first, well be

America last. Our economic status in the world is on an actual, measurable clock

unless we invest in a renewable energy future. One way that I could envision this

being economically possible is through taxing. Perhaps a high carbon tax could be

implemented for companies emitting high amounts of GHGs into the atmosphere

(not for production, just emissions). The numbers could be correlated, meaning the

higher your emissions, the higher your taxes. There could also be tax incentives for

citizens or companies who are investing in renewable energy. The tax incentives

and carbon tax could balance each other out until we had made a notable switch to

renewable energy sources. These new incentives could create job growth as

companies moved to build solar panels, wind and water turbines, etc. America

would be moving in the direction of the rest of the world and would remain a global

competitor. We could supply supplemental fossil fuels to growing and developing

nations, which would benefit our economy and our philanthropic status. Switching

to renewable energy would only increase our power as a nation and give us more

economic and environmental longevity.

Sarah Aezer 6
Gutaj
POLS 1100
12-1-17
In conclusion, it would be wise for America to rethink our current stance on

climate change and renewable energy. This issue is the umbrella under which all

other issues sit, and the United States needs to make a concerted effort to reduce

our greenhouse gas emissions. We are a large contributor of the GHGs harming the

planet and have a moral obligation to do our part in solving this issue. Also, its

citizens health and safety are dependent upon lowered green house gas emissions.

In addition to our very lives, our economy could be improved by switching to

renewable energy. It may take some sacrifices and some tough choices to shift our

energy consumption sources. However, it is time that we stop looking at the present

and begin looking to the future, and it is time that we stop valuing fossil fuel

corporations campaign contributions more than the quality of life of our children. I

believe with government leaders who prioritize our environment and with carbon

tax or clean energy tax incentives, we could join the rest of the world in the

investment of our planets future. Jane Goodall once said, You cannot get through a

single day without having an impact on the world around you. What you do makes a

difference, and you have to decide what kind of difference you want to make. I

personally, would like to be on the right side of history. Id like to make an effort to

change the world for the better. Id like to help change Americas mind about climate

change.
Sarah Aezer 7
Gutaj
POLS 1100
12-1-17
Sources

Id like to note that this semester I took ATMO 1020, a climate change class at SLCC
taught by Dr. Maura Hahnenberger. I also took POLS 1100, a political science class at
SLCC taught by Professor Perparim Gutaj. For this paper I drew information from
lectures and assignments in these courses.

Aton, ClimateWire Adam. Most Americans Want Climate Change Policies. 3 Oct. 2017,
www.scientificamerican.com/article/most-americans-want-climate-change-
policies/. Accessed 6 Dec. 2017.

Ellis, Jonathan. The Paris Climate Deal: What You Need to Know. The New York
Times, The New York Times, 1 June 2017,
www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/climate/paris-climate-change-guide.html.

Where Our Oil Comes From. Where Our Oil Comes From - Energy Explained, Your
Guide To Understanding Energy - Energy Information Administration,
www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_where.

Clark, Duncan. Why can't we quit fossil fuels? The Guardian, Guardian News and
Media, 17 Apr. 2013, www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/apr/17/why-cant-
we-give-up-fossil-fuels.

Parker, Ashley, and Coral Davenport. Donald Trumps Energy Plan: More Fossil
Fuels and Fewer Rules. The New York Times, The New York Times, 26 May 2016,
www.nytimes.com/2016/05/27/us/politics/donald-trump-global-warming-
energy-policy.html.