As Romm writes, the wealthy countries (USA, EU member nations) have a duty to cut more greenhouse gasses than the developing nations (China and India, both big polluters, are getting wealthier, but they're still developing nations). Donald Trump, a climate denier, has argued that controls on emissions is bad for business. He is in the process of defunding the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and many worry that he will remove the US from the Paris Climate Agreement. Here is a graph showing that the US has been the heaviest polluter throughout most of the 20th century:
http://www.pbl.nl/en/infographic/total-global-cumulative-greenhouse-gas-emissions
What is your feeling about this? Which should take precedence? Business/jobs or protection of the climate? Is it fair that we should have to cut more pollutants than a huge polluter like India?
Since about 97% of climate change scientists argue that our climate is dangerously warming and that humans have caused the vast majority of the warming, why do some (businesses, a few scientists, and many US politicians) argue the opposite? What are their motivations for arguing against the science? What do they know that the scientists don't know?
Welcome to the blog for Prof. John Talbird's English 101 class. The purpose of this site is two-fold: 1) to continue the conversations we start in class (or to start conversations before we get to class) and 2) to practice our writing/reading on a weekly basis in an informal forum.
As an american citizen, giving an opinion about the presidents and US politicians decision could create a serene/tense attitude among the audience. however, if the place i live in is getting deteriorated, action should be taken. The first steps should be taken by countries such as US, China, Europe, India between others. These countries are in the top 10 of the list that create more pollution, as well as greenhouse gases, therefore an increase in global warming. I believe that from the moment president Trump started his presidential period, he must have stopped thinking as a business man, and think of what is more beneficial for society. As that the percentage of greenhouses gases created in The United States is higher compared to third world countries; the numbers of cautions actions should not be limited. At the same time the among of gases that need to be controlled in developing countries (in some aspects) such as China India and brazil should not be lower either, regardless the budget and economic conditions of each country to fight the issue. in conclusion I think that the amount of gases emitted should be directly proportional to the percentage of pollution and damage created by such countries.
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts on this is that instead of Trump removing the EPA he should doing something to protect the environment. Protecting the environment will help all of us in the future and now. Also we can help the animals from extinction.
ReplyDeleteI think protection of the climate should be the first priority because our future depends on it. Current greenhouse gas emissions have already done a lot of damage, and predictions have been made for the further damage that they can further make global warming worse which will eventually cause more damage to the environment. I think the wealthier countries should cut more greenhouse gases than the developing countries, because they are the most heaviest pollutants, and secondly there isn't much that the wealthiest countries are doing regarding the emission of greenhouse gases. As for our president, seems like he cares more about doing business to raise his wealth, as well as some of the politicians, scientist, and businesses than to compromise it for the benefit of the society.
ReplyDeleteSince about 97% of climate change scientists argue that our climate is dangerously warming and that humans have caused the vast majority of the warming, still the businesses, a few politicians, and scientists argue the opposite probably because they are following the orders of our president, or maybe they have the same motives as him. As we already know that the fossil fuel trading/dealing brings raise in the economy, but along with releases greenhouse gases, which our government seem to neglect; preferably for their own interest to raise their wealth. I don't think they know anything more than what the scientists already know about the global climate change, because the facts are clear that they have merely became greedy, so avoiding anything that could eliminate the use of fossil fuel.
ReplyDeleteI also think that the importance of climate in the world especially in the U.S. is important rather than business being done because India and China can be made as an example through these issues, China produces so much green house gases through their production from factories involving business creating a problem with their air eventually creating a problem for their people and as far as India, their country consists of numerous amounts of waist being thrown in poor communities creating a pollution in their air, soil, and water and developing diseases towards all this junk giving it a real problem for their peoples health and well being. We have to focus in working on our environment and world in order to have a better future rather than focusing about money, but coming from people like Donald Trump who only focuses in their wealth tend to ignore this issue and focus more in an economic stand point rather than a wider thought of the Earths future.
ReplyDelete