3 minute read

Policy

Next Article
New Trips

New Trips

Thinking Out of the Box Policies

The Earth is Ill

Advertisement

Imagine a sick person goes to visit the doctor. The patient has had a slight fever for days, but also smokes, is overweight, never exercises, drinks too much alcohol, and rarely eats fruits or vegetables. The doctor examines the patient, prescribes a popular antibiotic and tells the patient to come back in a few weeks. The doctor’s unwillingness to look at the root causes of the illness or to apply the best scientific evidence toward healing the patient is the type of behavior that many governments around the world are exhibiting toward climate change. As the world gathers in Durban, South Africa at the end of 2011 for the 17th conference of the parties to the Climate Change Convention, few are optimistic that transparent and binding commitments by nation-states to reduce greenhouse pollutants will occur. Further, the world’s nation-states seem incapable of even acknowledging how severe the problem is and what must be done to rectify it. The weight of scientific evidence now says that reducing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, from the current 390 parts per million (ppm) to William John350ppm or less, is the safest way to Snape, III avert severe human dislocation and is presently Senior suffering, as well as many species’ ex- Counsel at the tinction. While it might be fair (though Center for Biological ultimately wrong) to argue about Diversity, and a whether 350ppm is feasible, leading Legal Fellow and climate players such as the United Practitioner in States, China and India refuse to legally Residence at the acknowledge the existence of this sci- American University entific evidence. Apparently, we don’t Law School. want to ask the tough questions, and we don’t want the real answers. The irony is that many governments, including that of the United States, which is still the largest per-capita greenhouse polluter, already possess the legal authority and infrastructure to attack climate change. The Clean Air Act and several other well-established statutes clearly apply to climate pollutants such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. Unfortunately, the Obama administration has been very reticent to actually apply the Clean Air Act to old coal-burning power plants or other major industrial sources. Global greenhouse emissions, meanwhile, continue to rise. So while the mainstream media continues to give credence to the handful of hacks who still question climate change in general, the well-respected International Energy Agency bangs the ominous drum with its November 2011 report “on planned policies, rising fossil energy use will lead to irreversible and potentially catastrophic climate change” As the agency’s chief economist summarized, “we are going in the wrong direction.” The solution is a bunch of smaller strategies that all necessitate true leadership from our politicians: energy conservation, regulation of big polluters, carbon pollution fees, renewable energy incentives, and assistance to the disadvantaged (such as the precarious island states that very well might become submerged). However, these things will not happen by themselves. People will need to force this reality upon their governments, much like the protesters against the Canadian-U.S. KeystoneXL tar-sands oil pipeline accomplished when they at least temporarily halted the boondoggle, due to serious climate and environmental concerns. But no one should be naïve about the massive power of the oil, gas and coal industries. These interests continue to dominate the political process, with almost every developed country leader beholden to fossil fuel corporations. This is why, months after the worst environmental disaster (so far) in American history, BP and its brethren not only continue to collect record profits in the multiple billions of dollars, but also continue to get more massively subsidized permits to drill for more oil across the globe. Until there is outrage about this discordance, we are in big trouble. As our hypothetical doctor might have said to the patient, “ smoke.”• no worries. Go have another drink and

This article is from: