Download File

Why Not Then Reduce Production?
lomente
I.
Introduction
Climate change is the leading environmental problem that the human
race is facing today. It is a great threat not only to the human race but also to all
forms of habitants living inside earth. In order to prevent its destructive effects, this
paper intended to evaluate its causes and also its best possible solution.
The terms climate change, global warming and greenhouse effect are defined
in the first section of this paper to give the reader a clear view because these terms
are often misjudge when mentioned by most of the people.
The second section consists of the different causes of global warming and
some contradicting ideas regarding population’s growth and urbanization’s link to
global warming.
The last section then discusses the best possible solution to the causes of
global warming laid down in the second section.
Definitions
Climate Change, global warming and greenhouse effect when mentioned,
immediately imposes a negative impression. This is because most of the time, they
are viewed and defined as a threat both to humanity and the planet, which is not
always the case. Climate change and greenhouse effect are not problems that
recently popped up on earth as what most of the people of today perceived them. On
he contrary, they are natural phenomena happening on earth that already exist even
before humans do. Their sole purpose is to maintain life in the planet. Unlike climate
change and greenhouse effect, global warming is not natural but a result of the
excess greenhouse gases present in the atmosphere.
Climate change is depicted as the Earth’s gradual self-modification due to the
time to time alteration of its features such as “temperature, precipitation and wind as
well as the associated changes in the Earth’s atmosphere, oceans and natural water
supplies, snow and ice, land surface, ecosystems and living organisms”
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2007b as cited in Swim et al.,
2009, Executive Summary, p. 6). However, the climate change of today and of
yesterday differ a lot in the amount of time these changes occur. While yesterday’s
changes was gradual, today’s is on an immediate motion according to the World
Nuclear Association (2013).
On the other hand, greenhouse effect is defined by the World-Nuclear
Association (2013) as the absorption of radiation by the earth’s surface and the
trapping of some amount of heat in the atmosphere. The trapping of heat causes it to
bounce back to the earth’s surface, warming the earth. This is the reason why
earth’s temperature is always above moon’s temperature (para. 6). Thus, the
habitable property of earth is the most beneficial result of this process. However, due
to the high level of carbon dioxide and other radiative gases in the atmosphere,
increases the level of heat that is trapped causing the temperature to rise (para. 3).
In addition, according to
United States Environmental Protection Agency
(2014) global warming, which is just but one characteristic of climate change and the
cause of the irregularity in both climate and weather, refers to the dramatic increase
in the earth’s surface temperature due to the high concentration of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere.
II.
Causes
Global warming is not just some random thing that popped up from nowhere.
It is a result of actions done, being done and never done and things that happened
and things that are still happening. Its causes are being discussed and argued every
now and then in the hope of finding better solution for it.
The most common cause of global warming is the dramatic increase in the
level of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere (Waymouth, 2014, para.1; Atkin,
2014, para. 1; World-Nuclear Association para.5; and United States Environmental
Protection Agency (2014), para. 1). In 2013-2014, a great increase in the CO2 level
was recorded than any other year after industrial revolution. This leads humanity to
the level of which Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as cited by
Waymouth (2014) perceived as a very dire situation (para. 1).
The increase in CO2 level is also due to the human deeds that secrete a lot of
not just carbon dioxide but also greenhouse gases like methane (CH 4), nitrogen
oxide (N2O) and ozone (O3) into the air. Some of these activities that are pointed out
are the production of biofuels, population growth, and consumption urbanization.
Production of biofuel like palm oil was first thought to be helpful in lessening
the carbon emission due to energy use because it produce less carbon. However it
was discovered that the process of its production produce a whole lot more
greenhouse gases than it reduces. Though they produce less carbon, the burning of
peat lands to grow them produce a lot more carbon than burning a forest, making it
contribute more to the problem than being a solution.
Aside from the increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, population
growth and urbanization are also one of the most talked about and debate prone
causes of global warming. Swim and et al. (Psychology and Global Climate
Change...) claim in their research that reduction of the population size will not
significantly reduce the production of carbon dioxide. However it is still of great
importance because the reduction of consumer means the reduction of the
consumption level. A simple mathematics. Thus, they propose the assistance of the
psychologists to understand the human psychological aspect that influences the
growth of population such as the social environment, cultural diversity, and the mindset of every people towards the policies imposed in reducing the population (p. 33).
Conclusively, the consideration of the growth in population in the future determines
the probability of the increase in the number of consumers as well, which is
according to Satterthwaite (2009) is the true main driver of climate change.
Yet, Satterthwaite (2009) argued that population has nothing to do with
climate change but “the growth in consumers and in their levels of consumption” (p.
545 para. 1). He has taken into account the great difference in greenhouse gases
(GHG) production between low-income countries with high increase in population
growth, and high-income and upper-middle income countries with low population
increase from the timeline of 1980 to 2005 (p. 554). His findings shows that the latter
has a lot greater GHG production that the first. This proves his claim that population
has no string attached to climate change. The countries without significant increase
or decrease in their population within this timeline like Germany and Denmark exhibit
a great decrease in their GHG production level (p. 555), which further proves his
claim. Through this findings he then pointed out that low-income countries will never
be able to surpass the production level of GHG of high-income and upper-middle
income countries because “for a household to contribute to global warming, they
have to consume goods and services that generate GHG emissions”(Satterthwaite,
2009, Sec. II, para. 5).
Despite of the contradicting views on population regarding climate change
between Satterthwaite ss(2009) and Swim et al., (n. d) they somehow agreed in one
thing. Both of them pointed out consumption as a great contributor to climate
change. Consumption of products that cause creation of GHG is what makes it a
great contributor. As mentioned above countries with great GHG production are the
high-income countries and the upper-middle income countries. These are the
countries that have great economic progress during the time mentioned above
(Satterthwaite, 2009). It is due to economic development that the financial capability
of every individual in high-income and upper-middle income countries also increase,
resulting in the high probability of consuming. While in low income countries,
consumption is fed up by the country’s culture, perception on consumerism and
psychological state (Swim et al., n. d).
Lastly, one other thing that is focused by the blame regarding global warming
is urbanization. Satterthwaite (2009) corrected this by using his production
perspective. Through the production perspective which evaluates how much of the
GHG was produced in a specific area (p. 546), the high GHG production in lowincome and lower-middle income countries is linked to urbanization because the
factories and the production industries were located and concentrated inside the
cities. However, this is not the case of the high-income and upper-middle income
countries. The citizen in these countries who have high GHG production per person
tend to live in rural area for comfort and retirement. Not just the location of settlement
is located in the rural, production industry also, for example power plants were
located mostly in these areas for easy access of the raw materials, thus making the
GHG production level of that rural place higher (p. 562-563) than the urban cities.
To sum it all up, it is undisputable that “… human behavior are the primary
drivers of climate change” (Swim et al., n. d., para 3) not humans themselves. Only
that they contribute a lot to the worsening situation because of certain activities that
produces high concentration of GHG into the atmosphere keeping nature’s balance
off the track.
III.
Solution
The products that release large amount of GHG during their manufacture,
usage and disposal is the root cause of the great concentration of GHG in the
atmosphere causing global warming. And to add insult to the injury, instead of
banning and reducing the creation of these products due to the harm that they
impose, creation and availability rocketed to the highest level because of the
increasing demand of growing consumers.
Here then comes the idea of reducing the consumption of the populace to
reduce the GHG amount of these products.
It is an inferred solution since
Satterthwaite (2009), Swim et al. (Psychology and Global Climate Change…) and
many more researchers and scientists consider consumption as the chief cause of
global warming. However, large consumption of these products are inevitable for a
lot of reasons.
First, culture and social environment dictates the definition of the needs and
wants of an individual (Swim et al., n. d.). That is why, products were already
considered as a necessity though they are not really vital in supporting life itself. In
the cultural aspect, necessity is defined as a vital element in supporting the lifestyles
of the consumers using the products (Swim et al, n. d). For example, the use of
internet is not considered as one of the basics needs of a being, however most of the
people nowadays perceived it as a vital element of their everyday life and routines
for the internet offers a lot of convenience in managing and updating huge size of
information that was impossible before. While social environment pushes an
individual to consume for him/her to fit in the society through social status and trend
(Swim et al., n. d, p. 38).
Second, economy also affect consumption (Swim et al., n. d). In a national
scale, manufacturers of products are essential to support every country’s economy.
Thus, it is difficult for the policy making body of a country to stop them producing and
advertising their goods to the public. These advertisements encourage more people
to be a consumer and also encourage more consumer to indulge more in
consumption (Swim et al., n. d, p.37-38).
Lastly, emotional needs makes it more unavoidable for the populace to
consume. According to Swim et al in most instances self-identity and social status is
defined by consumption. It is already a norm to judge an individual in the way he/she
dress and the things that he/she owns. As a result, acquiring things that raises up
one’s social status satisfies ones sense of belongingness, power and supremacy
over others in the society, thus promoting ones self-worth (Swim et al., n. d., p. 38).
Therefore, if the key solution for the reduction of GHG emission is the
reduction of consumption, then it is right to infer that the control of production will
reduce the amount of GHG emitted. Because of the short time left which is only from
2050 to 2100 (Swim et al., n. d) for action to be taken in order to prevent hazardous
effects of global warming, control over production is more feasible than reducing the
consumption level since its reduction carries a lot of baggage. Reducing
consumption means changing the perspective and habitual actions of the majority of
the people in the world (Swim et al., n. d) which is difficult to achieve in a short
period of time according to the hindrances mention above, but proved to be possible
in the long run. Instead of changing the perspectives of all the consumers on
consumption, only the policy making body is needed to be convinced. This will prove
to be more effective because all the efforts would only be directed to the few that is
influential in their societies than dividing the efforts among all the citizen of the word.
When these people are convinced the rest will have no choice but to follow.
Therefore, upon knowing that the availability of resources is limited, they will lessen
also their consumption in order to save for their future use.
A great example of this is the reduction of GHG production of California
because of the effort done by their former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
empowering California’s policies of limiting the production of GHG in every industrial
and business companies that is operating inside their country (Waymouth, 2014).
Because of the tight implementation of these policies to reduce the creation of
products, therefore reducing consumption, they pretty succeed in their pursuit of
reducing their emission down to 450 parts per million of CO2, the IPCC’s standard of
mitigation.
This shows the important role of the policy body (government) upon saving
the humanity from the dire situation that the effects of global warming brings. World
Meteorological Organization (WMO) as cited by Atkin (2014) emphasizes the
significance of a “cooperative international policymaking” (para. 11) to control the
CO2 production worldwide. Since economy plays a great role in the level of
consumption (Swim et al., Psychology and Climate Change), reduction of GHG
emission will only be possible if every government each country would do the effort
upon limiting the creation of products to reduce excessive consumption, putting into
mind that money still comes from resources that is produce by the nature. Thus
economic achievement which solely depends on the availability of these resources in
the environment is not out of reach upon reduction of production. And since it was
already proven effective in California then nations can no longer have an excuse not
to reduce their own GHG production level through the decrease of their production.
REFERENCES
Atkin, Emily (2014). UN Scientists See Largest CO2 Increase in 30 Years.
Development & Science: Climate Change, Ecosystems, Environment,
Governance, Risk. Web. UNU Office of Communication. 12 June 2014.
Corner, Adam (2009). Psychology is the Missing Link in the Climate Change Debate.
Web. The Guardians News and Media. 26 Oct. 2009. United States
Environmental Protection Agency. (2014, March 19) Climate Change: Basic
Information.
epa.gov.
Retrived
Oct.
28,
2014,
from
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/
Satterwaite, David (2009). Implications of Population Growth and Urbanization
for
Climate Change. Environment and Urbanization Vol. 21, No. 2, Sep., p 5454566.
Swim, J., Clayton, S., Doherty, T., Gifford R., Howard, G., Reser, J., Stern, P. and
Weber, E. n.d. Psychology & Global Climate Change Addressing a
Multifaceted
Phenomenon
and
Set
of
Challenges
at
http//www.apa.org/science/about/publications/climate-change.aspx
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2014, July 2) Climate
Change Indicators in the United States. epa.gov. Retrieved Oct. 28, 2014,
from
http://www.epa.gov/climate/climatechange/science/indicators/ghg/index.html
Waymouth, Belinda (2014). Emissions without Borders: The Problematic Geography
of Mitigation. Development & Science: Climate Change, Ecosystems,
Environment, Governance, Risk. Web. UNU Office of Communication. 12
Sept. 2014.
World Nuclear Association. (2013, October 28) Climate Change – The Science.
World-nuclear.org.
Retrieved
Oct.
28,
2014
from
http://www.world-
nuclear.org/info/Energy-and-Environment/Climate-Change---The-Science/