Barack Obama celebrated Earth Day by holding a huge event on the campus of the University of Iowa in Iowa City, Iowa (those Iowans like that word).
According to the campaign, Obama spent the day meeting with volunteer who were planting tree seedlings purchased by the campaign. He then delivered a speech in which he called for better environmental and energy policies and pushed for greater limits on carbon emissions. He called for national standards that would reduce the amount of carbon in fuel by 5% by 2015 and by 10% in 2020. He said that this would essentially be the equivalent of taking 32 million cars off of America's roads. (as a side note - I would like to actually see 32 million cars come off of our roads, considering the fact that 42,000 people die in car accidents every year.) Obama also pushed for greater fuel efficiency standards for America's cars, saying that by raising the standard to 43 miles per gallon, the US could effectively end its dependency on foreign oil.
Obama was one of a chorus of voices calling for greater environmental awareness in the past week. Fellow Democratic presidential candidates Sen. Hillary Clinton and former-VP nominee John Edwards both held events Saturday to promote similar values. Even Republican Senator John McCain got in the act, calling for the US to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to invest in alternate energy sources( here). Not to be left out of the fun, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) delivered a statement on Friday in which he called for "celebrity activists to take the 'Gore Pledge,'" which is a personal commitment to reduce one's energy usage and carbon emissions. He went on to say, "Activists in Hollywood who assert that mankind only has 10 years left to act in order to avoid a climate catastrophe...should make personal energy sacrifices themselves before demanding others do so." (courtesy of Inhofe's Senate page). Inhofe insists that Vice President Gore refused to take the "Gore Pledge" while testifying before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, of which Inhofe is ranking member and former chairman. (Yes, James Inhofe as the ranking member of this committee is like putting Tom Selleck in charge of ATF or making Sanjaya the conductor of the Cleveland Orchestra). What Inhofe does not mention and conveniently ignored in that hearing is that Gore purchased his house, not built it. And he spends extra money on green energy which is carbon-neutral so that he does not increase his carbon footprint. Gore pays for the equivalent of 5 kilowatt hours for every 1 hour of green energy he uses and has fought against his town to allow him to install solar panels on his home.
And just to remind everyone, this is the same Jim Inhofe who called global warming "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people" and compared global warming activists to the Third Reich in an interview with the Tulsa World newspaper.
Now, on to my thoughts on global warming. We all hear the ongoing debate as to whether or not all of the data is in on this issue and whether or not the scientific community has come to a consensus. Consensus or not, the data is there. Our carbon dioxide emissions have grown exponentially over the past 30 years and almost absurdly since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the US. The past five years have been the warmest on record (not just the summers, the whole year). The number of severe storms and hurricanes per year have been steadily increasing.
All over the country there have been records set not just for temperature highs, but for lows and snow fall. In Cleveland, 2005 was the snowiest year on record. And YES, this IS because of global warming. The continued melting of the polar ice caps puts more water into the Atlantic Ocean, which inhibits the function of the Gulf Stream. This is the major phenomenon that regulates weather across the eastern US and Europe; it essentially brings warm water up from the waters around the Equator and warms the northern regions. Because this has been hindered due to increased water quantities, winters have become longer, colder, and snowier.
It is time for the United States to stand up and take action on this issue. We have reneged on our world leadership here for too long. The Bush administration has pulled out of Kyoto and steadfastly refused to honestly acknowledge climate change. They claim that the data is still out (though they seem to be coming around) and that any real changes like those promoted in Kyoto will be catastrophic for the economy.
I have also heard arguments that global warming is a natural occurrence that we cannot affect, so why bother trying? Some have said that even if we curb our CO2 emissions, India and China will simply make up for it with rapid industrialization.
My question for all of those people who say these things is what can it hurt? So we curb our emissions, what's the big deal? What, will we become less dependent upon oil from the Middle East? OH NO! We will create new technological industries based on new energy sources, which will necessitate the creation of new American jobs. How awful!
And in terms of China & India, you're right, they are increasing emissions. But how will us sitting on our hands help the problem? By doubling it? If we want these nations to follow our lead, we have to lead. Perhaps if we actual stand up and accept responsibility they will feel the pressure of the international community with the US at its head to make good decisions and promote good policy.
For too long we have not stood up on the issue of global warming. The time to stand up is now. The US is supposed to stand for justice and change. Hopefully with Barack Obama in the Oval Office we can make that change. What have we got to lose?
No comments:
Post a Comment