Charles Carroll

Composition 1
Dr. Tidwell
December 15, 2015
Global Inaction
Never before have the effects of global climate change reached such dramatic levels.
Polar ice caps are melting, summers are hotter, winters are colder and weather is more insane
than ever. Thankfully, however, countries have the capabilities to counteract these issues.
Unfortunately due to the skepticism and lack of action that surrounds global climate change, few
programs exist that are at all effective in counteracting the continuing effects. If nothing more is
done in response to these issues, there are multiple dire ramifications. The most commonly
proposed solution in response to this fact is carbon emission cuts. Carbon emissions are
attributed to the global rise in temperatures, and many possible programs exist that could be
enacted to help solve the worlds complications with climate change. Therefore, emissions
should be cut around the world in order to lessen the effects of global climate change.
Currently there are initiatives all around the world that have been attempting to act
against climate change, and one could say that current efforts are enough. One of these many
initiatives is an international initiative called the Kyoto Protocol, named after the first city to
adopt it. The Kyoto Protocol is a UN treaty made to commit to minimizing the amount of
greenhouse gases being released by industrial countries. The provisions of the agreement require
the agreeing countries to monitor and report their emissions and trades to ensure that emissions
arent increasing within the international community. At the national level, there is different
kinds of work being done all across the board. In the US, the Obama Administration recently

pushed for more solar power. As quoted from The Columbus Dispatch, With the nations new
electrical needs growing only modestly, renewable power executives are depending on electric
utilities finally retiring their aging coal-fired power plants and replacing them with renewable
power sources (Harris). As companies start realizing the potential of renewable energy sources
like wind power and biofuel, the US hopes to speed up the switch. In the UK, there is a similar
program that is currently running. The Climate Change Act of 2008 was made in response to the
Kyoto Protocol to push the idea further with a goal of reducing emissions by 80% by 2050. The
program works by inching closer to the goal through carbon budgets which are designed to
reflect cost effective path to achieving the long terms objectives (United Kingdom). Over the
course of the next three and a half decades, this initiative is expected to counteract the trends of
climate change, and the same is expected of many other initiatives.
Sadly, the current initiatives that have been enacted globally arent enough to counteract
the current trends in climate. According to the EPA, the United States alone hasnt seen such
extreme temperatures since the 1930s. In fact, since the year 2000, the world has set record high
and low temperatures every few years. However, even though global temperatures have risen
upwards astronomically, they have plummeted as well. Because of these record low drops in
temperature, the idea that global warming is non-existent has misled many, including those in the
US Senate. As quoted from earlier this year on the Senate floor by Republican James Inhofe,
You know what this is? It's a snowball, from outside here. So it's very, very cold out. Very
unseasonable (Bump). Senator Inhofe said this in response to reports of 2014 being the warmest
year on record during a debate about climate change initiatives. The issue with this assertion is
the fact that the drop is easily explained scientifically: All weather events are affected by
climate change because the environment in which they occur is warmer and moister than it used

to be (Atkin). The fact that Inhofe also happened to work in the eastern part of the US, of which
had the coldest year, didnt help much with his false assertion. Because there are multiple people
in power promoting such claims, there is a legitimate fear of delayed action when regarding
climate change.
Delayed action, and in some cases, inaction are terribly common when considering
countries and their climate change initiatives. Whats worse about this is the fact that since the
current initiatives havent been enough, the predicted effects of their continued ineffectiveness
pose a large global threat. With the Climate Change Act of 2008 in the UK, the goal is criticized
for being set too far into the future. Essentially, it perpetuates delayed action rather than
immediate action. In the case of the UN agreement, there is no enforcement body to enforce the
agreement, so countries have the freedom to refuse to commit. In fact, one such case of this
happened in 2011. According to The Guardian, Canada pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol because
To meet the targets would be the equivalent [to] the transfer of CAN$14bn from Canadian
taxpayers to other countries the equivalent of $1,600 from every Canadian family with no
impact on emissions or the environment (Carrington). Canadas environment minister Peter
Kent on record said this because he believed the money spent on carrying this out would
fundamentally do nothing towards the issue. Unfortunately, the calculated risk in this kind of
inaction is severe. As reported by a study done by Google.Org, Our modeling indicates that,
when compared to BAU in 2030, aggressive energy innovation alone could have enormous
potential to simultaneously Grow the US economy by over $155 billion in GDP/year.
(Google.Org). Essentially countries gain more from carbon cuts, and refusal to do so not only
hurts their economy, it does so much more. As mentioned by LiveScience, Global warming may
also lead to extreme weather other than cold or heat extremes. For example, hurricane formations

will change current computer models of the atmosphere indicate that hurricanes are more
likely to become less frequent on a global basis, though the hurricanes that do form may be more
intense (Bradford). Along with this, more lightning is predicted, extreme weather events like
droughts and blizzards will be more common, and these will be worldwide. Inaction is a
dangerous idea. Without action, the world will be devastated by unusual weather patterns within
the next couple of decades.
Although inaction has become prominent, developments on replacements for fossil fuels
havent been totally overshadowed. Countries have the capabilities to work against the rising
effects of climate change, and the current efforts are thankfully proving to be a small but decent
step towards this. One of the many ideas in this vein is biofuel. Biofuel is an energy source made
with renewable organic materials from the Earth, unlike gasoline and petroleum. Although
biofuels were initially developed to counter the dependence on the decreasing amounts of fossil
fuels, they present many possibilities in cutting emissions. Due to their more clean nature, they
release less CO2 than the current alternatives, and can act as a step against climate change.
According to US Department of Energy, Life cycle analysis completed by the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, and later by Argonne National Laboratory, found that greenhouse
gas emissions for 100% biodiesel (B100) could be more than 52% lower than those from
petroleum diesel. These analyses also showed that biodiesel may reduce petroleum use by more
than 88% throughout its life cycle (United States). This is significant because of the possibilities
it presents for the industrial world, and addresses a huge cause regarding climate change. In
reducing the amount of fossil fuels we use, we not only help the environment; countries also end
up saving money. These same practices with biofuels could be applied in many forms to

accommodate any energy situation whether for cars, homes, factories or more. On a national
scale, all it would require is some negotiation on collaboration.
Solar power is a natural energy conversion initiative that shows a lot of potential. In
terms of environment friendliness, there are no emissions to worry about. Emissions regarding
solar power are only actually present when secondary sources are called upon when there are
fluctuations while drawing in solar energy. Otherwise, solar energy can harvest multiple
terawatts every hour per location (Frankel). Despite its promise, there are a few issues with solar
power. The most prevalent issues being solar power will only be able to draw in energy during
the day, will become less effective during certain seasons of the year, and will take up large
amounts of space. However, there are ways to address these issues. According to Think Progress
in their article National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Solar Has The Most Potential Of Any
Renewable Energy Source, Due to their high populations, large land areas, and ample sunlight,
California and Texas are the states best suited to harvest the most solar power, especially from
utility-scale projects. In fact, in California, the National Park Service and NREL, which is a
division of the Department of Energy, have outfitted one of Americas most noteworthy locations
with 1,300 solar panels as part of an on going effort (Frankel). There are thousands of areas
similar to this in not only the US, but all over globe. Once governments internationally manage
to utilize initiatives on a broader scale, the possibilities for reducing carbon emissions are
tremendous.
Another front on the battle against climate change is wind power. As one can guess from
the name, wind power only really works in windier regions. However, when this is taken into
account, the possibilities presented by wind power open up. Much like its sunny counterpart,
wind power is totally green due to the way it generates energy. When it comes to cost, there is no

longer a challenge in using this versus other forms of energy. As reported by the New York
Times, The cost of providing electricity from wind and solar plants has plummeted over the last
five years, so much that in some markets, renewable generation is now cheaper than coal or
natural gas (Cardwell). With the costs of these types of systems coming down, there is more
incentive for the world to focus more on newer renewable energy sources. In Germany, there is a
national initiative based on moving away from fossil fuels and nuclear energy by 2020 and
reducing emissions by 80% by 2050. According to The Local.de, The report [compiled] by
the European Wind Energy [Association] (EWEA) shows that Germany added 1,706 Megawatts
(MW) of capacity to the grid from January to July, easily outstripping the highest annual record
for the whole of Europe, 1,483 MW added to the grid in 2013 (Luyken). This initiative has set
multiple records in both Germany and the world with its quick progress every year. If nations
across the globe could be as determined, the world would never have to face the consequences it
slowly faces every year.
In the efforts to reduce the worlds amount of carbon emissions, the work at the national
level has been the best. Since more still needs to be done to achieve better reductions
internationally, nations need to push their companies more to move away from fossil fuels. There
currently isnt enough being done to address the issues of climate change, and this wont change
until countries negotiate terms on carbon cuts and replacement initiatives. Unfortunately,
countries dont realize the cost doesnt matter since the end is all that really does matter. Global
disaster inches closer with every year the world doesnt work to fix climate change, and it can be
remedied with simple initiatives. Biofuel and wind and solar power are exactly what the world
needs to cut emissions, so the world needs to take the extra step to make the dreams part of a
disaster-free reality.