Insight into Climate Change - Essay Example

The Insight into Climate Change The climate of Earth has undergone several cycles of changes. The last ice age ended about 7,000 years ago and the human civilization appeared. Its appearance and human activity has had a huge impact on climate change routine. For eons the climate changes of our planet have been mostly attributable to natural factors, such as slight variations in Earth’s orbit. This influenced the amount of energy our planet received from the Sun. However, today’s shifts in the temperature are basically caused by anthropological factors. Human activity has severely aggravated the situation with climate change, the most evident consequence of which is global warming. After a considerable study the scientists have outlined the primary sources of global warming. Its main engine is increasing of the carbon dioxide level in our atmosphere. This gas has a heat-trapping nature and its heightened concentration leads to greenhouse effect. The NASA’s statistics shows that atmospheric carbon dioxide level has increased extremely since the industrial revolution. Moreover, for last 650,000 years its concentration has never been so high. The consequences of current climate change are already frightening and may become even more dangerous in future. Glaciers melt, global sea level rises and coastal areas end up being submerged every year. The average temperature rises too which leads to desertification, global forest fires and exhaustion of rivers and lakes. The lack of fresh water and resources forces different species to abandon their natural habitats and migrate in the search for better conditions. To crown it all, higher temperatures result in increasing numbers of extreme events and may cause outbreaks of diseases. So, it is clear that climate change brings about irrevocable ecological problems and the duty of all humanity is to take immediate actions in order to prevent the looming danger. Climate change is real and its consequences are no longer a mystery for us. However, there are still not enough actions taken in response. This unwillingness of people to act is one of the main problems that contribute to ongoing global warming. Business and money are the main barriers on our way to reaching ecological balance. Bill McKibben suggests that it would be possible to eschew potential carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere, if major fossil fuel companies, such as Lukoil or ExxonMobil, reduce pumping out their reserves. But it is obvious that no company will agree to do that because it will mean huge losses, trillions of dollars. And why should developed countries limit their companies’ emissions, whereas developing countries would not face such restrictions? So it is evident that the policy of global limitations should be introduced to reduce greenhouse gases emission. However, it is worth mentioning, that several countries and prominent companies have voluntarily made a few steps towards mitigating our dire ecological condition. But those voluntarily actions are not enough to make a considerable change. Only decisive national and international actions, such as governmental laws, regulations and restrictions can prevent frightening consequences of climate change and global warming. One of the first urgent actions which should be taken is increasing conservation and fuel efficiency (“Facing the Challenges…”). To achieve that the government should introduce higher taxes on “gas-guzzler” cars, encourage car companies to design fuel efficient cars and increase funding of energy- and fuel-saving public transport. Next, it would be reasonable to invest into scientific researches of new sources of energy that would be ecologically friendly and renewable. Some of those are already known, such as solar and wind energy, hydropower and some forms of nuclear energy. It would be also efficient to increase federal funding for the research of new technologies that would store greenhouse gases in harmless way. On the international level strict limits should be provided on the amount of greenhouse gases that each country can release. In the case of breaking those limits high taxation and fines should be assigned. The majority of scientists, that would be 97%, agree that current climate change is real and that it is human-caused (Fitzpatrick). However, the surveys made in 2013 in the US showed that only less than half the population believed that. Long story short, 55% thought that the climate science was unsettled and people were not to blame for the global warming. As a result, there are now global warming skeptics who do not believe in its devastating consequences. These individuals are mostly not climate scientists and they eagerly focus their attention on media and general public rather than enter direct discussions on scientific conferences. It is interesting that climate change deniers receive huge funding from fossil fuel companies. Today there is an ongoing battle where both skeptics and scientists have their own arguments (Skeptical Science). The most popular and widespread delusion of deniers is that climate change is not occurring at all, or that it is a natural process. Climate is always changing, just like it has changed before. This is really so, but scientists say that climate reacts on any factors which force it to change. And right now the predominant factor influencing the climate is human activity. The next argument of skeptics is that it has not warmed since 1998 and the climate is even cooling. These are also false statements as scientists claim that the previous decade was the hottest on record. Deniers also believe that extreme weather conditions are not attributable to global warming. The experts, however, respond saying that climate change does not always cause extreme weather events, but makes them more frequent and serious. Some skeptics even admit that the climate is getting warmer indeed, partially due to different human activities, but they believe that people will only benefit from the global warming. This is also a severe delusion. Scientists can already provide the evidence of global warming’s negative impact on agriculture, health and environment on the whole. To conclude, there will always be different points of view and the opponents of global restrictions, such as gas and oil companies, will always try to downplay the importance of climate change. But the environmental scientists and experts can provide undeniable evidence of global warming. Climate change has been examined as an ecological and partly as an economic crisis of our planet. But if it is caused by humans, then we should think of it as of a moral crisis. Most people are aware of ongoing climate change and its reasons, however, it still does not spark moral outrage in them. People tend to care about things endangering their lives and the lives of their families, but for some reasons they are not excessively concerned about such a serious problem as global warming. In his article David Roberts gives a few psychological factors that may explain why people are morally inert against climate change. He claims that it is hard to understand climate change as such because of its abstract nature. Furthermore, global warming is unintentional, so it is harder to cause outrage if there isn’t any specific villain who does that on purpose. As people are responsible for global warming they subconsciously do not take it so seriously to avoid the feelings of guilt, shame or regret over their actions. At last, the predictions of climate change are a bit blurred and this uncertainty leads to unreasonable optimistic thinking. All these and several other factors acting in concert may explain why people are not so much concerned about global climate change. Roberts suggests also several psychological strategies that would help people understand the importance of climate change and breed proper moral attitude towards it. Among those are using existing moral values, motivating people with the help of positive rather than negative emotions and highlighting positive social norms. The most effective solutions are, to my mind, focusing on the damage that we may cause to further generations in combination with increasing empathy towards them. If today’s society leaves the dangers and possible dreadful outcomes of global warming unheeded, our descendants will have to pay high price for that. Despite high pace of climate change, we may not witness all its consequences, but if we do nothing, we will certainly leave our further generations with burdens they will not handle. If global warming is not stopped, rising temperatures, melting ice caps and rising sea level will flood coastal areas devastating island and coastal nations. The rise of sea temperatures will lead to mass deaths of marine species which are already at the brink of extinction. Moreover, continued erosion of the ozone layer will result in rise of skin cancer cases among people and demolition of crops and farmlands. The most terrifying of potential consequences of global warming is devastating wars between nations for scarce resources. If that happens, most countries are likely to use weapons of mass destruction. It is certainly not the type of destiny we would wish for our great-grandchildren. In this context we can think of the Native American seven generations concept. This philosophy implied that chief decision makers in Amerindian tribes took into account the consequences of their decisions on their descendants’ lives. They calculated for seven generation into the future, how their actions would affect people. Native Americans realized that everything has its consequences for others. I believe, this is what we all should learn to do in terms of our ecology. It is so unwise to sacrifice our children’s healthy future for our own economic welfare and benefit. All in all, it is high time for us to act. Until there are no global regulations introduced to preserve our ecology and minimize global warming, we can make our own contribution as individuals. Apart from sustainable and wise consumption we need to stay informed about our ecological situation. If you are not indifferent towards climate change, monitor any media resources in your area and, in case you have noticed misleading information from global warming deniers, inform the Union of Concerned Scientists about that. Send your alerts at sciencenetwork@ucsusa.org. It is also helpful to visit NASA’s site on climate change that will keep you up with the latest facts and data on this issue http://climate.nasa.gov. In case you want to make more considerable contribution, you may visit a web-site where all latest and most important petitions on climate change are available http://www.thepetitionsite.com/environment-and-wildlife. The future of our planet is in our hands. So let us act now and do whatever it takes to save it. Works Cited “Climate change: How do we know?” NASA GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE. http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ “Facing the Challenges of Climate Change. A guide for citizen thought and action.” Public Agenda. http://www.publicagenda.org/files/globalwarming_guide.pdf Fitzpatrick, Melanie. “Scientists Agree Human0Caused Climate Change is Real: But Wait, We’ve Known That for Decades!” Union of Concerned Scientists. 16 May 2013. http://blog.ucsusa.org/scientists-agree-anthropogenic-climate-change-is-real-but-wait-didnt-we-know-this-already-128?_ga=1.222394011.1877967516.1434364569 Gibson, Kelly. “Sustainability, a Seventh Generation Philosophy.” National Relief Charities Blog. 11 Apr. 2011. http://blog.nrcprograms.org/sustainability/ “Global Warming & Climate Change Myths.” Skeptical Science. https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php McKibben, Bill. “Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math.” RollingStone. 19 Jul. 2012. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719 Roberts, David. “Why climate change doesn’t spark moral outrage, and how it could.” Grist. 27 Jul. 2012. http://grist.org/article/why-climate-change-doesnt-spark-moral-outrage-and-how-it-could/ Read More