By Corinne Speckert
Special to the Spartan Daily
By 2050, our over-populated planet is expected to continue this trend by reaching nine billion people, according to a recent New York Times article. This predicted increase is the equivalent of adding two populations the size of China's to our planet.
With an ever-increasing population soaking up our scarce natural resources, one may think, '”What's another 2.23 billion people?”
I'll tell you what a couple billion more people means. Not only does it ensure a constant depletion of natural resources, but it also guarantees more carbon footprints. That's right, the same footprints environmentalists have been working to decrease ever since the realization of global warming.
With numerous environmental protection laws such as the Clean Air Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, both implemented in the 1970s, you'd think we'd be on our way to a cleaner America – but that's not the case.
A recent New York Times article stated, “Since 1970, temperatures have gone up at nearly three times the average for the 20th century.” With overpopulation and glutenous consumerism, our country is a far cry from recovery.
A report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated that the global climate is likely to rise between 3.5 and eight degrees Fahrenheit if atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations reach twice the level of 1750, according to the New York Times Web site. The site further stated that the climate panel predicts a seven to 23 inch rise in our planet's sea levels by 2100, and that these changes will continue for centuries to come.
Fortunately for us, the White House was recently presented with the Montreal Protocol, a 21-year-old treaty developed to regulate ozone-depleting substances. The only problem is the Obama Administration declined to sign it, reasoning that immediate action could decrease their amount of negotiating room in future climate and environmental talks, according to the New York Times article.
These ozone-depleting chemicals – that could account for as much as 30 percent of all atmospheric warming by 2040 – have been renamed as super-greenhouse gases because they can be thousands of times more lethal than carbon dioxide in heating the atmosphere, the article stated.
Don't worry about Obama's refusal to sign this protocol, because there is now more room for negotiating down the line. Despite the 195 nations that did sign the treaty, our government is confident that securing negotiating room is what's going to restore our planet for future generations, not actual action through the regulation of harmful gases.
That's right everyone, Barack Obama pulled a George Bush, Jr. He refused to sign a treaty designed to phase-out hydrofluorocarbons – a potent group of climate-warming gases – just as Bush refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol – an international treaty developed to bring greenhouse gas emissions down to 1990 levels, in 2005.
With the hype of a new president, expectations of actual “change”and “hope” were on the horizon and now it appears global warming may be the only thing we see.
With the expected nine billion mouths to feed and bodies to clothe, our government needs to think beyond the “negotiating” powers of today by taking measures to ensure a habitable world for future populations.
We need to take a step away from abundant trade and industrialization and prioritize the conservation of resources while reducing harmful gases if we want our planet to heal. Environmental protection is not only a matter of implementing bills designed to regulate environmental hazards, but it's also a matter of enforcing them.
If Obama's idea of “change” continues down this path, not only will our country's money trees fail to replenish, but we'll have a greater environmental debt that may never be balanced.
Source:
The New York Times, "Obama Not Seeking Quick Climate Action Under Ozone Treaty," by John Broder on May 4, 2009.
No comments:
Post a Comment