Climate Change

When Donald Trump was elected as our 45th president, there were a lot of conflicting opinions flying about.  More people attended the Women’s March than the inauguration, and the phrase “This is Not Normal” was gained popularity.  

Women’s March in NYC

At the same time, many Americans were celebrating what they saw as a shake-up in the administration, and an opportunity for change.  Today, we are nearly a year into his administration, and I think it’s important to look at one aspect of American life which has been significantly affected, but infrequently discussed: science.  From climate change to pipelines to opportunities for future scientists, I want this blog to explore the ways in which science and its impacts have been altered during the Trump administration.

“The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive”- Donald Trump

Climate change is one of the biggest issues our world needs to tackle in order to become more responsible citizens of this planet.  For a while, it seemed like progress was being made.  The Paris Agreement seeks to bring together every country, all agreeing to significantly reduce carbon emissions within the century.  These changes hoped to limit the global increase in temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius this century.  Sounds great, right?  Until Donald Trump decided to take the United States out of the equation.

“The Paris Climate Accord is simply the latest example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the United States to the exclusive benefit of other countries…so we’re getting out…I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris ”- Donald Trump

Trump speaks about the Paris Accords

With the United States leaving the deal, other major players, such as China, also expressed interest in leaving the negotiations.  Just because the Paris Accords won’t factor into the policy of our nation as a whole doesn’t mean that no changes will be made.  After Trump referenced Pittsburgh as a reason for leaving the deal, mayor Bill Peduto asserted that the city would be keeping up with goals set by the Paris Accords to reduce their carbon emissions.

“Pittsburgh stands with the world and will follow (the) Paris agreement, … I can assure you that we will follow the guidelines of the Paris agreement for our people, our economy and future”- Bill Peduto

Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto

After intense backlash from within the US and globally, Trump posited that there was a possibility of the US rejoining the Paris Accords, but he clarified that this would only happen if it allowed US businesses to remain competitive.

I certainly don’t agree with this withdrawal, but there are pros and cons of both sides.  One thing that has no foreseeable benefit is the removal of information about climate change from government websites.  After Trump’s inauguration, government agencies like the EPA removed pages about climate change, or even the phrase “climate change” was replaced with words like “sustainability” or “resiliency”.  In other cases, websites concerning the subject were taken down entirely.

This is a completely unsustainable way to confront a real, environmental problem.  If there is no information about a topic, especially one which sparks so much discussion, people cannot be expected to make educated decisions or opinions.  Taking away good information from reliable sources like government agencies only fuels the propagation of fake news and rumors, not to mention the fundamental wrongness of this withdrawal of information.

None of these issues are completely clear cut, and they have sparked a lot of debate.  Whether you’re on the side of Trump, or agree more with Peduto, there are pros and cons of each side, but also a lot of aspects to consider.  How has the environment changed so far in this era of populism?  How much more do you think it will change before the end of Trump’s administration? Do you think the Paris Accords will work out?  Will we be a part of that movement?  Will other superpowers, like China, participate?  Will good information on climate change become available as time goes on?  Which should take priority: business or the environment?

For me, I think that the first priority should be taking care of the planet on which we live.  We’re not ready to colonize other planets, so we need to respect our Earth, and protect the environment for future generations.  Big negotiations like the Paris Accords can be stepping stones for global change, and I believe that it is important for the US to set an example in these types of things, rather than dropping out and reneging on our commitments.  In addition, I think it’s almost impossible to improve our nation’s position on and knowledge about climate change and other environmental issues if reliable information from credible sources is not available; the removal from government agencies is disheartening.  It’s crazy to think how much the environment could have changed in less than a year, and due to the contributions of (mostly) one person.

As always, remember, This is Not Normal.

Best,

Natalie

1 thought on “Climate Change”

  1. Natalie, great first entry. Good thoughts, and way to acknowledge both sides of the argument. For me, the question of “business vs. the environment” will always be the one that defines this issue. Perhaps this issue, at least more than most, gives us insight as to where we are as a species.

    For instance, let’s begin with the subject of scientifically proving that “climate change” is real. As we’ve seen, studies arguing both “yes” and “no” have come from very reputable sources on both sides of the aisle. With data, maps, opinions, and research that so convincingly proves one side or the other, it is up to us as a citizenry to stop, and think, “if numbers and data can tell both sides of the story equally as compellingly, there has to be something more.”

    Many would argue that a good first step in finding out the “something more” would be to examine the funding that those performing the aforementioned studies receive. If we’re familiar with one thing, it should definitely be the fact that big money is certainly capable of manipulating the data, opinions, and sound bytes that we as the public receive at the hands of scientists, doctors, and the media.

    Or, perhaps one would take it in the more philosophical direction: who says we know anything about the earth we live on and how it changes? Certainly, there have been noticeable alterations — for as long as we can remember. Maybe the surest thing in this raging debate is not whether “climate change” exists; maybe it is the fact that we as a species certainly retain the ability to change the globe as we know it.

    Now, one may argue for these two as one-in-the-same. However, this is only contingent upon the fact that we know what’s best for our globe. While we’ve made incredible advances, to say that we’re certain about anything is a gross misrepresentation of our abilities as human beings. And, so long as numbers can point both ways, I’m afraid the only way to enact change is through disaster.

    I would agree that the world we live in should certainly take precedence over business in most cases. In other words, we should never reach the point where death of our fellow humans is a side-effect of pollution. If this is the case, rampant production at the cost of human lives is no better than sweatshop labor, slavery, or death for profit. While these are extreme examples, they damn near prove that anyone unable to control the instinct to make money at the cost of a human life isn’t nearly as “smart” or “advanced” as we make them out to be.

    For the sake of your blog, I love the topic. I do believe with my whole heart that the preservation of the planet is certainly an issue to be addressed. However, I do believe that because we feel the need to turn to our politicians for a fix, we’re falling dangerously behind. Way to take a shot at Washington though, respect for that now and always. This is not normal, nor should it be. But it definitely makes you think about how smart we really are, doesn’t it?

    http://bigthink.com/Mind-Matters/why-smart-people-deny-climate-change
    https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *