Download rogerian-open-letter-on-climate

Rogerian Letter on Climate Change and Adoption of
Renewable Energy Technologies
Jaron John
ERH 221W-01
Many conflicts and social problems plague the world today. From terrorism to child birth
rights. Many of these issues however, can be handled at a country or even state level but one
problem stands out as one that must be solved as a united world, and that is global warming.
Since 1988 the media has spread the issue of global warming. Before James E. Hansesn’s
testimony to the senate in 1988, climate change was strictly a scientific fact of an evolving
planet.1 Now, it is a major concern from capital hill to the average home owner. It has gotten to
the point where anyone running for a national office whether it be for congress or president, will
be asked their stance on global warming. But why are there sides to this argument? Can’t scientist
prove or disprove that the earth’s temperature is rising and if it is, are humans causing it? Both
of these questions are what have many American citizens on the fence about the issue. Most
people can agree that the earth’s temperature is rising but what separates the two sides is; will
the temperature peak soon and fall back down as it has in the past and are humans the real cause
of the current temperature rise?
1
Aaron M. McCright. “Challenging Global Warming as a Social Problem: An Analysis of
Conservative Movement’s Counter Claims”. Social Problems, vol. 47, no. 4, 2000, pp. 500
One of the leading climate change skeptics is Myron Ebell. Myron is the Director of Energy
and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), the chair of Cooler Heads Coalition
think tank as well as the nominee to lead the EPA transition team for President elect Donald
Trump. Myron’s latest stance on climate change is that he believes that man-made climate
change exists yet does not believe that it is a serious problem and that policies that are trying to
be passed are going to be ineffective and will cost much more than people anticipate. In his
speech at the Heartland Institute’s 7th International Conference on Climate Change, Myron
focuses on remaining to use energy producing technologies that currently exist and combating
the regulations that the Obama administration has set on the oil and gas fields. He says that the
democrats that are supporting the push for clean energy are ignorant and gives an example of
how one leading congressman said that the atmosphere consisted of 40% CO2 when in fact CO2
is only .04%. Myron points that the Obama administration is placing the regulations to hurt the
big names in the oil and gas field and therefore hurting the economy and creating
unemployment. He also suggests that the “left” is in a fantasy world thinking that by preventing
global warming they are saving the planet. Later in his speech he compares renewable energy
technologies like solar panels and wind power to a hamster running in a wheel. I personally can
see where Mr. Ebell is coming from on these points. No one wants to cut jobs in this economy,
and no one wants unintelligent people making decisions in Washington on their behalf.
Those who believe that human acts are causing the sudden rise in global temperatures
contribute this to the rise in CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. However, the
opposing side will argue that there is not enough historical data to truly track the rise and fall of
the average global temperature. Climate models are also believed to be unreliable and even if
they are, how can scientist know for sure that the current increase in temperatures are due to
the CO2 emissions by humans? In fact, more than 1,000 scientist disagree that human activity is
the primary reason for the increase temperatures. Scientist also believe that CO2 emissions do
not necessarily cause global warming.
CO2 levels are believed to precede rising
temperatures, not cause them. In 2003
an ice core study was conducted that
covered the last four climatic cycles
(past 240,00 years), during which
scientist concluded that CO2 levels only
rose because the temperature of the
earth was rising.2 Dr. William Happer at
Princeton University also found that even the amount of CO2 admitted will have little impact due
to the already high level of CO2 that occur naturally in the atmosphere. He concluded that the
CO2 level has reached a plateau of holding in greenhouse gasses and that the increase emission
of CO2 will have a miniscule effect on Earth’s average temperature.3 In 1997 over 150 nations
attended a conference in Kyoto Japan to compose a framework that would set guidelines to hold
countries accountable for their greenhouse gas emissions. The goal of the treaty is to cut the
greenhouse gas emissions of country by 5% by 2012. In 2001, under the Bush administration, the
2
3
Climate Change ProCon.org. Section 3.
Climate Change. Section 5
US dropped out of the treaty. This was believed to have been done by lobbyist and conservative
think tanks.
I can see why there is skepticism for the current cause of climate change. With political
bias taking place during research and lobbyist and conservative movements changing the view of
the U.S. on climate change it is easy to find fault with the issue. I agree with the view point that
climate change occurs naturally and that it will peak and then fall again. During my research I also
found evidence that backed what I originally thought which was that CO2 levels are rising and
temperatures are rising but, the immediate effects of the Earth are miniscule. I also agree that
the media has caused this issue to became a social issue and is now another divide between
liberals and conservatives.
Where my view differs form the general consensus, is when we add in the human
element. It is my belief that humans are directly responsible
for the unnatural, exponential rise in temperatures. The data,
no matter how conservative think tanks, like Mr. Ebell’s, twist
it, it’s overwhelming that the increase emissions of CO2 in the
atmosphere is directly correlated to the rise in the average
surface temperature on earth. Mr. Ebell jokes at how low of a percentage CO2 is in the
atmosphere but he doesn’t mention at how fast that percent is rising and how much of an effect
that has on our ecosystem. I can also agree with the view that climate change models may be
faulty. We don’t have records of the climate past 1659, anything before that is a guess. So it only
seems right to question how can we assume that the climate of the earth is changing faster than
usual. I also find great fault in Mr. Ebell’s opinion because he is being directly funded by big oil
and gas companies. Of course he’s going to push for more mining and drilling and of course he’s
going to do everything he can to degrade the effort to produce clean renewable energy. If he
doesn’t the companies that pay his salary will go bankrupt. Mr. Ebell is a short term thinker. He
seems to only care about what will put money in his pocket right away. If he was smart he would
be lobbying for the renewable energy technology companies. It is almost inevitable that the
technology and scientist behind solar panels will become so efficient in converting sunlight to
electric energy that drilling for coal will be like throwing your money down a well.
It is my wish that we start fighting the rise in temperatures now by investing in renewable
energy technologies. We can no longer rely on the government to make up it’s mind on whether
global warming is real or not. We must take a personal investment into saving the environment
and saving our own money at the same time. With government tax breaks and rebate on
installing green energy generating devices in your home or business people will be more eager
to install these devices and save money on their electric bill. With people doing this, the demand
for electricity, that is mostly produced by coal, will decline significantly. I believe that power
companies should divert their money to building clean energy developments instead of research
on where to dig the next coal mine. People fear what will happen to the thousands of jobs that
rely on the coal industry but I don’t see why we can’t invest in clean energy technologies in those
areas and put those people to work building and maintaining these. No matter which side you
are on and even if human aided global warming turns out to be entirely false, there is little to no
downside in investing in clean energy technologies.
Bibliography
"Climate Change ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2016.
McCright, Aaron M., and Riley E. Dunlap. “Challenging Global Warming as a Social Problem: An
Analysis of the Conservative Movement's Counter-Claims.” Social Problems, vol. 47, no.
4, 2000, pp. 499–522. www.jstor.org/stable/3097132.
"Myron Ebell, ICCC7 - Climate Conferences." Climate Conferences. N.p., 05 Dec. 2012. Web. 29
Nov. 2016.
<https://web.archive.org/web/20160530171251/http://climateconferences.heartland.o
rg/myron-ebell-iccc7/>.