CO2 Emission

Relevance

The optimist vs. pessimist debate for CO2 emissions centers around the effect that it has on the planet’s temperature and the future production of the green house gas. Essentially this is a global warming debate as well. This debate seems to be dominated by the pessimists, who believe that the Earth’s temperature could rise as much as 4.5 degrees Celsius and the ocean’s level could rise as much 43 cm, both of which would have devastating effects on Earth’s life and human society. In addition, they believe the world is not doing enough to limit CO2 production, with the US being the biggest offender.

Optimist

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), co-winners of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice-President Al Gore, predicts that if green house gas emissions could be kept at current levels than 2 degrees Celsius. In addition, the oceans may only rise 14 cm. Still, no one really knows what the impact of what just 14 cm could mean for the world. Nearly 50% of Americans live within 50 miles of the ocean.

There is however, also the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change that argues the sun has a greater effect on climate. The Heartland Institute recently drafted a report for the NIPCC called “Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate.” In this report the authors attack the idea that ice cap melting and warming oceans mean that humans must be causing the warming. According to the report, ice cap melting is a consequence of warming and does not indicate whether it is anthropogenic or natural. There are also many other factors that affect them, and they are not accurate measure of warming. The NIPCC also argues that there is no conclusive evidence to support the connection between temperature and CO2 levels. Though global warming is widely accepted as being caused by humans, there are some who still argue otherwise and would likely consider themselves to be optimists.

The optimists can also look at the changes that are being made to curb CO2 emissions. Hybrid car sales are soaring, it seems that oil reserves are running out, and many countries have ratified the Kyoto Protocol.

Pessimist

Much of this debate seems to be dominated by a pessimistic view point. First it is reported that of the many US governmental departments that were set to be cut back in 2006, the majority of the departments were researching climate change. In 2000, US President candidate George Bush promised to be very proactive in reducing carbon dioxide emissions. However, once he took office in 2001 he pulled his support for the Kyoto Protocol.

His new plan was to reduce carbon emissions in his own way. He proposed to offer incentives for business to voluntarily reduce green house gases. The goal was to reduce emissions by 4.5%, which would allegedly be equal to taking 70 million cars of the road. This plan was clearly not equivalent to ratifying the Kyoto Protocol because the US Department of Energy reported that this new level would be 30% increase over the 1990 levels, when the Protocol requires 7% decreases over these levels. It wasn't just the President who was against ratifying the Protocol, the Senate had passed a resolution saying that America would not sign any protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing nations as well, because it might harm the US economy.

The pessimists believe that action must be taken now to reduce carbon emissions, and that it is possible to stop or prevent global climate change. While 178 other countries have accepted the Protocol, President Bush believe it would cost the economy $400 billion dollars and 4.6 millions jobs. Without signing the Kyoto Protocol, pessimists fear the US and the world will not be able to stop global warming that could lead to catastrophe.

References

Optimist Pessimist Debate | Population | CO2 Emission | Fossil Fuel Reserves | Renewable Energy | Free Trade | Agriculture