On Friday, The New York Times published an editorial that brought to light a change at the way scientists and politicians combat global warming. For the longest time, the largest scapegoat - justifiably so - has been Carbon Dioxide, or CO2. While it is the main greenhouse gas, CO2 is not the only one. The three other big contributors to raising global temperatures are soot, methane, and hydrofluorocarbons.
The Times editorial correctly identifies a problem that is happening with focusing our goal of stopping global warming by cutting CO2 emissions. With all the haggling and obstructions caused by the skeptics and denialists, it is hard to put into place meaningful reductions of this most odious of greenhouse gases. Also, CO2 stays in the atmosphere for a very long time. Between these two factors, we are seeing little effect on the atmospheric content of CO2 and so the globe continues to warm.
Now, scientists and politicians are banding together in a few nations to reduce their emissions of the three other greenhouse gases. While we can continue to work on reducing carbon dioxide emissions, we can also focus attention on reducing these other gases that warm the planet, but don't stay in the atmosphere for nearly as long as CO2. Not only can we combat all the major greenhouse gases, but we can actually have a chance at getting some of those gases out of the atmosphere sooner, giving us a chance to make the 2 degree Celsius cut that scientists say is the last acceptable temperature rise before disastrous climate change really sets in.
This solution fits into the regulatory category that many people despise. However, we must look at our approach to mitigating global warming - which is warming because of our energy activities - in a balanced way. We cannot just rely on technology, and we cannot just rely on regulations. We need both cleaner and more sustainable technologies to reduce our greenhouse gases, but we must also do all we can to make sure that our current practices of energy consumption do not continue to massively increase atmospheric greenhouse gases. I applaud the efforts of United States, Canada, Sweden, Mexico, Ghana and Bangladesh in creating a solution that is just another part of the grander solution in dealing with global warming. I encourage more of this brainstorming and implementation to take place, worldwide.
The Times editorial correctly identifies a problem that is happening with focusing our goal of stopping global warming by cutting CO2 emissions. With all the haggling and obstructions caused by the skeptics and denialists, it is hard to put into place meaningful reductions of this most odious of greenhouse gases. Also, CO2 stays in the atmosphere for a very long time. Between these two factors, we are seeing little effect on the atmospheric content of CO2 and so the globe continues to warm.
Now, scientists and politicians are banding together in a few nations to reduce their emissions of the three other greenhouse gases. While we can continue to work on reducing carbon dioxide emissions, we can also focus attention on reducing these other gases that warm the planet, but don't stay in the atmosphere for nearly as long as CO2. Not only can we combat all the major greenhouse gases, but we can actually have a chance at getting some of those gases out of the atmosphere sooner, giving us a chance to make the 2 degree Celsius cut that scientists say is the last acceptable temperature rise before disastrous climate change really sets in.
This solution fits into the regulatory category that many people despise. However, we must look at our approach to mitigating global warming - which is warming because of our energy activities - in a balanced way. We cannot just rely on technology, and we cannot just rely on regulations. We need both cleaner and more sustainable technologies to reduce our greenhouse gases, but we must also do all we can to make sure that our current practices of energy consumption do not continue to massively increase atmospheric greenhouse gases. I applaud the efforts of United States, Canada, Sweden, Mexico, Ghana and Bangladesh in creating a solution that is just another part of the grander solution in dealing with global warming. I encourage more of this brainstorming and implementation to take place, worldwide.
No comments:
Post a Comment