Changing
for Climate Change
Written
by: ShaeLyn Heaps
Climate change may not come off as a huge
danger now,
but its effects impact the future
|
As the years move on, global warming and
climate change have become more popular topics. Every time a presidential
election rolls around, an organization called Science Debate asks twenty questions
about science, engineering, tech, health, and environmental issues to those who
are running to lead and represent the United States. The President of the
United States, one of the leading nations in the world, will lay down ideas and
policies that will affect research, progress, and funding in these fields.
Because the nominees have potential to increase or decrease discoveries and improve
or exacerbate change to the world, it is important to ask whether each
candidate actually knows what they are talking about. Published on September 13th
after the quadrennial debate held by
Science Debate, Jill Stein, Green Party representative in the 2016 United
States Presidential election claimed,
“Climate change is the greatest existential threat that humanity has ever
faced.” “The greatest ever,” she claims. That can make us wonder: “What about
war? What about disease? What about children without parents or whole countries
without clean water or enough food to fill their stomachs?” It’s appropriate to
ask whether climate change is as serious of a problem as Ms. Stein’s confidence
makes it sound. Do we have a potentially devastating problem on our hands, or
not? (Also referenced here.)
Everyone has heard the most
common results of climate change: rising oceans, atmospheric pressure
decreased, warmer temperatures, and many more, but it isn’t often that positive
outcomes are even brought to the surface. It appears that nobody wants to be
the opponent to a topic that is likely to be awful. It’s the goal of this
article to state both sides, and weigh out which is more accurate and correct
concerning the true nature of climate change.
Climate change threatens some people more than others. Economic status, age,
gender, and behavior all change whether or not climate change is more or less threatening
to you. The elderly, pregnant, and those with lower incomes seem to be more
negatively affected by climate change, compared to those who are young,
healthy, and well off financially. Environment and other factors of where one
lives can also determine the effects of climate change. The idea is that heat
waves become more dangerous with increased heat in the atmosphere and worse air
quality, which can cause more heat related deaths and make exercising less of a
benefit. For example, living in areas with worse air quality may increase
negative results of climate change. Although these things are possible,
preparation and adaptations can be made to live in better places for the needs
of you and your family, along with spreading awareness in hopes of preventing
what may cause the human population to be influenced one way or another.
Ah, but what about the
current war with armies in Iraq and Afghanistan, the problems we face with
Russia and Iran, Syria, and North Korea? Many argue that climate change may not
be good, just as Stein states, but compared to the current problems America is
facing, it is a small problem.
So much focus shouldn’t be spent on saving our future if we don’t live to see
it, they seem to say. I can see the truth in that
statement; if America and the world are destroyed through war, then maybe not
climate change, but the hate of pride and war is the world’s real greatest
threat. But, on the other hand, what’s the point in saving our current
situation if we don’t save our future? What is there to live for if we stop the
war, but don’t put any money or effort into preserving the land we live on and
the air we breathe? No hope for the future is the most pricey Christmas gift we
can give to the next generation, but they will wish we had left a receipt in
the bag.
Climate change effects our
physical health through the air and water, so I’m sure there’s a medication we
can create to fix the problems it brings, and all will be well, right? Wrong.
Climate change not only effects physical health, but also social and psychological health, plus many aspects of the environment including energy, water supply, ecosystems,
and outdoor recreational areas. To me, that doesn’t sound pleasant at all! But
what about those who argue for the benefits that climate change has agriculturally? The
amount of carbon emission in the air and the lengthening of the growing season
(caused by the changing climate) increases number of crops grown and allows for
more time to grow crops. Both of these things can combine to produce a positive
view of the subject, especially from farmers, but also from every American that
eats or uses anything made from agricultural crops. And who doesn’t eat
vegetables, meat, or drive cars powered by gas made with some percentage of
ethanol? It is always mentioned that we need more resources for the growing
populations. Maybe avoiding focus on climate change will bring these needed
resources and do more good than harm.
Nuclear Energy |
For many years, there has
been a push for green energy rather than that of fossil fuels, which proves that
making seemingly small changes a little at a time brings great results for
human health and environmental wellness. Many with roles who have their voices
heard have the reputation of making decisions using power, money, or fame as
motivation. If this is true, problems like climate control are constantly
placed on an ignored and forgotten backburner. If not prevented, the result is a
boiling overflow, with no way to clean it up. If we allow fallacy and procrastination
of what is happening continue, we will soon see an increase in the results of
climate change on society and the environment, but by then it will be too late
to do anything about it.
Although many see the
positive sides of climate change, it doesn’t change the fact that the negative
aspects still occur, and continue to affect the quality of living found all
around the world. Physical, social, and psychological health is affected, along
with huge environmental effects. There may be war and benefits to agriculture
that make climate change seem unimportant or not worth spending efforts on, but
that doesn’t destroy the fact that Jill Stein is correct when she says that
“Climate change is the greatest existential threat that humanity has ever
faced.” It may not seem like an urgent problem, but if we expect mankind to
survive and for the children and grandchildren of future generations to have
beautiful places to see and clean air to breathe, we must make efforts right now to be the change that can
save.
No comments:
Post a Comment