As global warming is detrimental to all human life, it is up to the individual to take action against it. It is also imperative that corporations take action in their factories and transportation methods to combat global warming. I will support my argument by demonstrating the inability of politicians to pass adequate legislation to mandate the reduction of emissions, such as the Kyoto Protocol. I will explore the reasons behind this lack of political action. I will also show how even the smallest actions, such as using public transportation, buying local goods, and using energy-saving appliances, can impact climate while minimizing inconvenience. I will finish my argument by looking at environmentally responsible companies- their motives for “going green” and the effects (both financially and economically.)
Reason: The political arena has been unable to pass proper legislation that would limit greenhouse gas emissions.
Evidence: The Kyoto Protocol, which would only cut emissions by 5.2% of the necessary 94% for the U.S, was not ratified by the Senate (George Monbiot's Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning.)
Reason: Small actions on the part of the individual can drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Evidence: One liter of gasoline will fuel a car for 4 to 5.5 miles. The same amount of gasoline can power a bus full of 40 people for 31 miles and a train of 300 passengers for 34 miles. A five minute shower, as opposed to a bath, can save 400 liters of water (and the energy needed to heat the water) per week. If your car tired are properly inflated, your gas mileage will improve by at least 3%. This is important, considering every gallon of gasoline burned releases 20 pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere.
Reason: Being environmentally-friendly has many benefits for a company.
Evidence: Becoming more fuel-efficient has benefits for the company and the environment. Continental Airlines has invested billions of dollars into more fuel-efficient aircraft and aircraft accessories. For example, a winglet on Continental's Boeing 737 and 757 airplanes reduce emissions by 5%, while saving the company on fuel (Fortune magazine's website.)
5 comments:
I wish there was a bit more information. This sounds like a more concise version of your first post. Just remember the more information you present, the better off the negotiation and mediation will turn out.
few people and companies have shown the willingness to change their ways of life. Without having a certain regulations and authorities, we as a community will not be able to make a difference. If the government imposes stricter laws and regulations on emissions and pollution, the amount of crude oil will go down, and therefore reducing the necessity for the war in iraq.
Also, how many American's are actually willing to drive a hybrid car or move into a new green building, or home powered by renewable energy. As a society we haven't shown the initiative to change or better our planet.
You have two 'reasons' that you are disagreeing with but isn't there more. Think about the role of government. Big government? Reserved government? Which approach to combating global warming would be more efficient, yield better results, become habit forming? You can mention the Iraq war but think beyond it. What would be your argument without the war?
The issue with both big government, small government, and public authorities being responsible for taking action towards global warming, is that it would create either in increase in taxes or a cut back in funding other areas or institutes. The amount of money required to create and maintain such programs to reduce global warming is substantial. Big government would have to create a certain organization or institutions that will oversee all local government operations toward global warming. Local government global warming organizations would have to be required to hire employees to impose regulations and research new concepts and ideas for global warming. This would require a significant amount of funding by the government, which would most likely result in an increase in taxes. If raising taxes is not an option, then either the United States will go farther into debt, or will the closure of other organizations which then will take away the jobs of many people.
Also, even though not all people change their efforts toward global warming, there are many people and companies that do. Being able to change our ways, improving our environment, and reducing the amount of greenhouse gases, is not a quick fix. As more companies "go green" and as people continue to recycle and become environment friendly, the closer we come to reducing global warming.
Post a Comment