Bush Administration Ignores Efforts to Tackle Climate Change
Autor: Paul • October 23, 2011 • Essay • 593 Words (3 Pages) • 349 Views
Bush Administration ignores efforts to tackle climate change
In an article that was written in the newly updated website, http://www.greenpeace.org, the author expresses great concern with the Bush Administration. There is one major protocol that the Bush Administration has withdrawn from taking any action upon, called the Kyoto Protocol. It seems that the Administration is more interested in giving millions of dollars to in subsidies to coal industries, oil and gas. They do not seem to have any interest, or appear to be making any credible efforts to support renewable energy. The have also recently opened the Artic Wildlife refuge for oil drilling.
Although the Bush Administration has showed a lack of support for the wind and solar technology development, the US has made significant contributions to its progress. According to the article, "US scientists have played an important role in climate change research." They are calling it the "smoking gun" of global warming. Over a decade of research "has confirmed that our planet is absorbing more energy from the sun that is emitted back into space - indicating an "energy imbalance" which is causing global warming.
I consider this to be a moral matter because our planet is our lives. I believe that our government should be doing anything possible to help save our planet. Our climate has changed so much in the past century that is noticeable worldwide. Hotter climates mean plant life will begin to diminish, which will eventually kill off much of the local wildlife. There are many ways that taking leadership in climate change would benefit the US. For example, "it would create more skilled jobs, because renewable energy creates more jobs per kilowatt than fossil fuels or nuclear." It would also help the US depend solely on ourselves rather than on foreign oil. I think that global warming is a major issue that should be tackled with all we have got. The US could set a great example for the rest of the world, since "it is the largest producer of greenhouse gases and is responsible for nearly 25 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions."
I would say there are several dilemmas that stand in the way of changing our country to straight energy. The first and most important problem is the price of conversion. It would cost entirely too much money to change everything to energy power, even though in the long run it is cheaper. Another problem I see in the line of work that my good friend does is the environmentalists. It seems impossible to please some of them because they are always trying to save something. That "something" could be the biggest barrier for many people. How do you put up wind generators if they will not let you build because of a "rock" that they have never seen before. I am sure there are many more problems that would present themselves. The only