There is a clear consensus in the scientific community that international climate modify or worldwide warming is caused primarily by human activity. This conclusion has been endorsed by no less than 30 scientific societies and academies of science. This includes each single national academy of science of all the key industrialized nations. With such a robust consensus, why do we locate the president Bush providing environmental double-speak and thwarting any affordable environmental legislation?
Actual Cause for Concern
Is worldwide warming a true danger? Yes – a catastrophic a single. According to Don Fitz of Zmag Ecology states “in order to avoid catastrophic effects … greenhouse gas emissions (largely CO2) need to be cut by 60-80% by 2050 (even though the figure may possibly want to be a 95% reduce in the US).” What are these so called catastrophic effects? According to Wikipedia, “the predicted effects of global warming on the atmosphere and for human life are quite a few and varied.” It continues with specifics such as “raising sea levels, glacier retreat, Arctic shrinkage, and altered patterns of agriculture are cited as direct consequences, but predictions for secondary and regional effects include extreme climate events, an expansion of tropical ailments, adjustments in the timing of seasonal patterns in ecosystems, and drastic economic impact.”
We have a serious emissions problem in the United States. According to National Geographics, “The U.S. is accountable for much more green property gas pollution than South America, Africa, the Middle East, Japan and Asia – all put collectively.” Unless our government acts swiftly and decisively, we may possibly soon find ourselves at the begin on a really slippery slope.
Even believed president Bush is conscious of worldwide warming and the function humans are playing. “In July 2005, he provided his very first explicit acknowledgment that humans have been contributing to the difficulty of global warming” states Sheryl Gay Stolberg of the New York Occasions. He has extended ignored his duty to act.
Final Wednesday President Bush supplied his plan “to halt the development of U.S. emissions by 2025, toughening a prior aim of braking the development of emissions by 2012.”
Is This Proposal A Step Backward?
According to Eileen Claussen, President of the Pew Center on Worldwide Climate Adjust, “The proposal announced by President Bush … is a step backwards for U.S. climate policy. In 2002 the administration laid out a strategy that allowed U.S. emissions to grow until 2012 – the present proposal will enable our emissions to grow till 2025.” She continues with the powerful statement “the only great news is that this is irrelevant – both in the U.S. and globally.”
Senator John Kerry, D-Massachussettes states, “If this is President Bush’s concept of 20/20 vision he wants to get his eyes checked.” According to environmentalists and Senate Democrats alike this most current plan from Bush would permit for the continued growth of greenhouse gases like CO2 for almost two decades. Senator Barbara Boxer, D-California, chairwoman of the Senate Power and Environment Committee, considers this new plan “worse than performing absolutely nothing” and that it would “have America stand by whilst greenhouse gases reach unsafe levels.”
While the Senate hopes to pass a climate bill in June which calls for 19% reduction in greenhouse gases by 2025, Bush considers such a requirement “unrealistic.” If that is not disconcerting enough, a recent Linked Press write-up by H. Josef Herbert states Bush considers the Clean Air Act and Endangered Species Act a “train wreak.”
A Genuine Solution
Worldwide climate modify is a serious concern, and we need to have to leverage actual professionals. Professionals like Lester Brown, director of the Earth Policy Institute. In Brown’s new book, Strategy B 3., a pass., he provides an agressive and ambitious program to reestablish the balance of our planet. TIME Magazine says it is a plan ” that is significantly less concerned with political feasibility than the survivability of the planet.” In this strategy Brown calls for reducing “global carbon dioxide emissions 80% by 2020.” According to Brown, “This is not Strategy A, enterprise as usual. This is Plan B – a wartime mobilization, an all-out response proportionate to the threat that global warming presents to our future.”
You can chose to ignore the existing environmental situation, you can chose to deny it, but that will not adjust something. In order to deal with the current scenario we want genuine action, and we require it right now. Don’t let Bush lead our nation down the incorrect path, contact your Congressperson these days and let them know you won’t fall for Mr. Bush’s attempts at greenwashing.