THE MELTING of the polar ice caps, the rise of sea levels and massive flooding covering nations across the globe? It may sounds like a scene from an apocalyptic movie, but, if trends continue, this scenario is moving closer and closer to reality. Global warming studies show the Earth is heating up and humans are to blame. Nevertheless, the Bush administration has prevented the severity of global warming from becoming a widely known public issue, allowing officials to continue to ignore the problem.
The year 2005 was the warmest year on record, according to NASA climatologist James E. Hansen. Fifty three cubic miles of the Greenland ice sheets melted away, as compared to just 23 cubic miles in 1996. The problem has accelerated faster than expected, posing the possibility of passing a "tipping point," when merely reducing emissions would not prevent the warming of the Earth.
Yet the United States, the largest contributor of greenhouse gas emissions in the world, has not stepped into any sort of leadership role. Worse even, we have lagged behind our duty to reduce greenhouse gases. The United States has not ratified the Kyoto Protocol, the United Nations initiative that commits nations to reduce their emissions of six greenhouse gases. A total of 162 nations have signed the agreement, yet the agreement will lack the desired effect if the largest contributor of gas emissions remains conspicuously absent.
The current administration has faulted the Kyoto Protocol for its inconsistent goals for developing versus industrialized nations. They also point to the potential for economic downturn. At the G-8 meeting last year, an annual political and economic summit between eight industrialized democracies, the administration decided to make a"practical commitment industrialized nations can meet without damaging their economies," reducing already questionable commitments. Instead of overall carbon emissions, the officials focused on "carbon intensity," a deceiving sounding figure which is the ratio of carbon emissions to economic activity. In the United States's goal of decreasing carbon intensity by 18 percent by 2012, The New York Times notes that this figure actually represents an increase in overall emissions.
Even if the administration disagreed with the details of the Kyoto Protocol, initiatives could have been taken without its ratification. Most notably, the administration could have set the same or similar standards for the nation through Congress. Initiatives for the planting of forests, which serve as carbon sinks, could have been planned. Carbon taxes or emission trading -- essentially the creation of a global greenhouse gas "market" for businesses -- could have been explored as economically efficient alternatives. Instead, misleading goals are hand fed to the public with the appearance, but without the substance, of change.
The administration has tried to cover up the problem by censoring the world's most prominent scientists. Recently on 60 Minutes, Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, detailed the efforts of NASA and the Bush administration to censor the gravity of his research. "In my more than three decades in the government I've never witnessed such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the public," Hansen told 60 Minutes.
For example, the White House now reviews all climate related press releases and forces a press official to be present for all interviews. Hansen believes the federal government is trying to suppress his research which, if current trends continue, supports the "tipping point" of global warming to be in approximately 10 years.
The government feels it can change the science to its liking. Rick Piltz of the federal Climate Change Science Program said his work has been edited to make global warming seem less threatening. Despite the fact he is a lawyer and former lobbyist of the American Petroleum Institute, Phil Cooney edited works of science before leaving his position last June. In his revision, Cooney added several words and phrases of uncertainty such as "may be" and "potentially," despite the fact that study after study shows strong evidence of global warming. A lawyer has absolutely no right to edit a scientific work, just as a former oil lobbyist had absolutely no right to hold a federal environmental position. Besides the fact that it limits the First Amendment's right to free speech, such censorship filters important scientific information that must be present in policy making.
Instead of action, the federal government has chosen to conduct further research. Despite the repeated conclusive findings that global warming is indeed attributable to humans and is accelerating, President Bush and his science advisor John Marbuger continue to stress the "lack of information" and the "uncertainty" of global warming. While ongoing research should be applauded, it becomes irrelevant when emissions continue to increase.
President Bush has shown his trademark state throughout the global warming debate -- being unprepared. If the United States continues to do nothing to slow global warming, the polar ice caps will continue to melt and massive flooding will occur. We will once again wonder how a disaster occurred right under our noses. For once, no Congressional committee or investigation will be necessary -- simple ignorance from the leader of our nation is all it takes.
Rajesh Jain is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at rjain@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 4 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
