Global Warning Masked By Denial

Original Post: Us Government hates the Earth (sadface) by Yada Garcia

In this original editorial concerning climate change, Yada presents some very compelling points to her readers, all of which I couldn't agree with more. Climate change and global warming are real and an ongoing issue. We human beings, as capable inhabitants of planet Earth, need to acknowledge this as a fact and take action. We are destroying our own future.

Climate change is a controversial issue, though it shouldn't be. There a multitude of reasonings behind the denial of this issue. Large-scale companies and corporations like Exxonmobil and the Koch brothers have a firm financial incentive to ignore the facts. However, Michael Ranney, a professor of law at UC Berkley believes the denial of global warming is due to a "wisdom deficit," meaning there is a lack of comprehension in the mechanism of global warming. People genuinely do not understand what is happening when scientists say the Earth is warming. It is actually a misconception that light energy is trapped in the atmosphere because it bounces between greenhouse gases and the Earth's surface. What is actually happening is that Earth transforms visible light to IR light energy, which happens to leave the Earth slower because it is being absorbed by the greenhouse gases. We increase the amount of greenhouses gases in the atmosphere by doing the most simple things, such as driving to school, heating our homes, etc.

Polls, specifically the Gallup poll (as of March 2016) approximates that 65-70% of people believe and show a fair amount of apprehension about global warming. This percentage is greater than it has ever been in the past, still however, it is not 100%. Some of the [approximate] 30% that deny the occurrence of this issue include those who help regulate and create legislation for our country. Like Yada stated in her post, even government officials (including president-elect Donald Trump) refuse to accept climate change as a truth, even though there is clear evidence as provided by scientists and those who study climate. This problem draws a thick line dividing the two parties. The majority of those who believe in climate change are liberals, whereas conservatives lie on the opposite side of the spectrum. Again, similarly to what Yada asserted, participation in elections other than presidential elections is crucial. By electing officials who will vote to implement or create regulations on decreasing toxic emissions and by even cutting back on our own emissions, we have the ability to fix the problem surrounding global warming.

Pipe Dreams vs. Sustainable Future

In 2014, Dakota Access, LLC, announced plans to build a $3.7 billion pipeline that would stretch from North Dakota to Illinois, about 1,170 miles across four states. The pipeline while being built is to create 8,000 to 12,000 jobs and once completed, predicted to haul approximately 470,000 barrels of crude oil per day. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration advocate pipelines to be the safest option for transporting oil and natural gases because unlike rail cars and trucks, there is not a possibility of wreckage, therefore no chance of large spread fires. 

However this has brought light to another frequent issue, that of leakage and ruptures. For example, in 2013, an Enbridge Energy pipeline broke open and spilled 843,000 gallons of oil into the Kalamazoo river in Michigan, which resulted in a cleanup that cost millions and took years.

Over the past several months, the DAPL has received national attention and attracted thousands of protesters. Worried of the potential health hazards the pipeline could bring to the surrounding inhabitants, environmentalists and tribe members (primarily from Standing Rock Sioux Tribe) from all around have begun peaceful protests. The Sioux object because part of the pipeline is to be built on sacred burial lands, but the overwhelming majority of the pipeline is built on private property. Only a small portion of the pipeline is slated to be built on federal land. Therefore the Federal Government has very limited options on what it can do to help the Sioux Nation oppose the construction of the DAPL. 

I believe fossil fuel is the fuel of the past and the United States government should not support a private industry major investment in the infrastructure of the fossil fuel economy. Furthermore, as a government and a nation, we should not jeopardize the environment or waste money and effort to maintain a diminishing and inefficient fuel source. I believe the U.S. government should respect the wishes of the Sioux Nation and support them in their opposition to the construction of the DAPL. I would rather see private industry, with government support, use the $3.7 billion to build an energy infrastructure that furthered the production, delivery, and use of alternative and sustainable energy sources. The way of the future.