We’d like to believe climate change won’t affect us.
But according to a new report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, by 2040 the global population could see global temperatures rise to dangerous levels of 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels. This could create serious harm for coastlines, coral reefs and populations that already have severe droughts.
So why doesn’t there seem to be any sort of concern regarding such a catastrophic issue? Inaction is traced to the idea that climate change is buck-passed on a small and large scale.
At a more local level, we’d like to think someone else will be the one to live more sustainably by driving an electric car, recycling, picking up trash or other environmentally-friendly endeavors. In addition, we feel less proactive because climate change is not something we are able to fix individually. It takes a collective effort and because it’s an irreversible issue, we approach it as a daunting task.
But as the report points out, if we don’t make a collective change, our planet will deteriorate quickly starting with coral reef destruction, wildfires and food shortages.
No matter how segregated environmental problems may appear to the average person, the complexity of the earth means a small change will likely yield a massive effect. Unfortunately, people can’t see the urgency if the numbers are not shocking enough.
It seems like there will need to be scarier and more drastic statistics in evidence for climate change, in order for people to believe the urgency. But until then, people are quick to shrug it off.
As citizens of a wealthy country with plenty of resources not just to combat climate change, but also spread awareness and education about the matter, Americans should take it upon themselves to be ambassadors for change.
Natural disasters and other possible effects of climate change don’t always phase our country. Though there are many people in the United States that reside under the poverty line, overall we are capable of maintaining our infrastructure.
For less wealthy and developed countries, this is more of an issue, which is why our government should take it upon themselves to be more committed to the international fight against climate change — for those nations that can’t.
Pulling out of long-term international conservation policies like the Paris Agreement are steps in the wrong direction, and the next administration to take the reigns will need to have a more dedicated approach.
These long-term treaties among the members of the international community are important because if we don’t have those, then what do we have as a means to make a statement that we’re all fighting together? They’re the last thing we have to prove were committed to climate change in the long run.
At the same time, we need to improve education on the subject.
At a young age, children across the world need to be introduced to this topic. Why are we waiting? Moreso, college-aged students need to plan and collaborate to be more sustainable when they graduate and have the responsibility of making independent life choices.
In other countries such as China and many in the European Union, lawmakers have started to enact carbon pricing programs to help. The United States is the second-largest greenhouse-gas emitter behind China, yet for some reason, lawmakers have been slow to even consider such taxation or a price on carbon dioxide emissions.
If lawmakers are unwilling to take the next step toward combating climate change as a collective international community, the best thing we can do is become more educated and proactive as individuals. We share this space together and we can’t let our laziness trump our generational legacy.
The year 2040 is just 22 years away.
Comment policy
Comments posted to The Brown and White website are reviewed by a moderator before being approved. Incendiary speech or harassing language, including comments targeted at individuals, may be deemed unacceptable and not published. Spam and other soliciting will also be declined.
The Brown and White also reserves the right to not publish entirely anonymous comments.
9 Comments
Climate change has always occurred throughout the ages and at one time the ice age ended long before the industriall era without its greenhouse gases. Then the world cooled again & now it is warming again. How much of this is related to greenhouse gas emissions since the industrial era & how much is related to the cycles of the Sun is debatable.
The fact of the matter is that rather than focus on perhaps false preventative measures, we best simply prepare for the changes anticipated such as preparing to relocate communities subject to flooding. Warmer temperatures does not necessarily result in food shortages as the growing seasons & crop regions will increase further north & levies & fertilization efforts can increase food supplies for the world.
You need to change the focus of your climate change efforts & recognize that the US cannot afford to support the world poverty situation & the Paris accord was flawed.
Astonishing. I guess your clientele must be 50+, because those are exactly the kinds of paragraphs that lead people under 50 to say “You do not get my money.”
Anyway. Bruce is, of course, stuffed full of deliberate ignorance. Fifteen years ago he’d have been full of bluster about how there was no such thing as global warming, nothing was warming, scientists are morons and thieves in cahoots with environmentalists, etc. Now, rather than admit that he’s been wrong and that human activities have an ongoing effect on the climate, he’s kept what’s left of his brains switched off and followed his party, away from “this isn’t happening and will never happen” to “this has always happened” — perfect Orwell — and is now 100% selfish in his thinking about who deserves help now that the predicted coastal inundations are real. (He’s left out all the other, equally real effects of climate change: droughts and their famines, droughts alternating with crop-destroying monsoon-like rainfalls, more violent tornadoes, widespread forest and grassfires, not to mention the uninhabitability of some places simply because they’ve grown too hot, the ongoing decimation of species that can’t move fast enough to evade climate change, and the release of more powerful GHGs from melting permafrost.) The communities that already need relocation (and indeed are relocating) the most are exactly the ones Bruce despises, because they are poor and generally not American, and their members have a different skin tone than his does. I mean they will *never* book a room at his hotel, so what good are they, anyway? So figures Bruce.
I appreciate that it takes a certain kind of weirdness for alumni to post here, but I really do wonder sometimes how representative the Bruces are among Lehigh alumni. Because if he’s pretty representative — you know, I went there, I recognize it’s not a hotbed of geniuses. It’s people born on third, maybe second-and-a-half, who’ll do a good job of staying on third. But if Bruce is representative, how is it that Lehigh has any reputation at all? Maybe I’m brainwashed into believing it gets some respect, but people actually don’t think it’s much. Certainly out here they’ve never heard of it.
I note that Amy continues to exhibit of a complete liberal brainwashing syndrome from her undergraduate years at Lehigh.
I note she rants about people older than 50. Basic math tells me that is probably her age. One would have hoped by now she would have would have wised up and started doing some critical thinking of her own.
Last Sunday there was an excellent program on Fox News about climate change and global warming.
It featured a discussion by Patrick Michaels who is a bona fide expert on the subject.
See: https://cdn.cato.org/archive-2018/michaels-fox-10-21-18.mp4
Michaels was a contributor and reviewer of the IPCC report.
Michaels pointed out that virtually all of the computer models championed by the report are wrong and fail to agree with the historical empirical data of what has actually been happening.
He points out that there is only one model out there that agrees with the empirical data.
It is one devised by the Russians.
Take your meds Amy & calm down. Lehigh’s reputation was based on success of its graduates which in our era was among the best in the country creating captains of industry.
Your tolerance of alternative thinking is so typical of the left wing arm of the New Democratic Party labeling others as uneducated. Stay out in California & tax yourself into oblivion in your pursuit of your agenda of government control.
We are doing just fine here without your help. Hope you don’t live on the shoreline but then again our climate could very well change back to a cooling cycle in 2020 so don’t throw in the towel just yet!!
Say, Bruce, what’s your view of IPCC?
Based on IPCC report it appears that they are recommending the elimination of all cows around the world to reduce the largest source of methane gas. What a shame as I love animals & ice cream!!!
Should I take this to mean that until I asked you, you were unaware of IPCC’s existence?
Amy, I am always so dumbfounded by your hatred and anger of people.
I didn’t realize you had such strong feelings about being asked about IPCC, CS.