The Death of Your Planet

My family and I were at a dam in Sedona, Arizona and the water was probably only waist-high. There was a rope tied to a large tree and my brothers were using it to propel themselves into the deep end. My parents were being typical adults and were supervising everything, also known as sucking the fun out of everything. It was a perfect sunny day and within 30 seconds it all changed. The sky turned dark and the wind picked up and started agitating the water. My parents screamed to us, “GET OUT!” I heard the panic in their voices as I tried to double-time it out of the water, when something hit the back of my head. It felt like a small-sized rock was thrown at me by one of my older brothers, but when I investigated further, I realized it was a piece of ice: hail.

At the time I didn't realize this but my family and I were caught in a freak hail-storm. It was not very life-threatening, but at the age of eight, I was concerned and wanted to know what happened. Years later I was introduced to something called “global warming” and after the terrifying experience I had at the river and having just watched “The Day After Tomorrow”, I was convinced that this planet was trying to kill mankind. But why?

Mankind has been polluting the air, contaminating the oceans, and destroying ecosystems for several hundreds of years through a process called global warming or climate change. Climate change is mostly caused by the release of thousands of tons of carbon dioxide into the Earth’s atmosphere which acts as a sort of insulator, trapping the heat inside the planet. It is widely agreed upon in the scientific community that “the increase in CO2 levels will result in an estimated rise in temperature between 1.4 and 6.4 °C by 2100” (Weems, p.2). These rises in CO2 levels are directly related to anthropogenic actions. One of the biggest contributors of CO2 emissions is transportation, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), it accounted for “27 percent of 2015 greenhouse gas emissions.” Even though there are smart cars, hybrids, and even electrically powered

vehicles, the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere due to transportation is unacceptable. Other large contributors of climate change include electricity production, agricultural contributions, and deforestation. In the United States, we burn mostly coal and natural gas to produce energy, which releases tons of greenhouse gasses into our environment. There are greenhouse gasses produced from livestock and soils used for agriculture. And forests around the world act as sinks for CO2, as the trees absorb the gas from the atmosphere in its natural process and so destroying these forests is the same as destroying Earth’s natural solutions to a heating planet due to climate change.

As the planet’s surface begins to warm, more severe and more frequent weather patterns will appear resulting in widespread disease, famine, droughts and floods reaching the majority of the world. World Health Organization (WHO) reports that, due to a blistering heatwave in Europe in 2003, ”more than 70,000 excess deaths were recorded”. This heatwave is just one of many severe weather phenomena produced from climate change. A

well renowned water scientist and climatologist, Dr. O.H.R Awoye, believes that, “by 2050 reduced yields ranging on average between −10% and −40% are predicted for most food crops grown in West Africa”. This significant decrease in food production will spell widespread famine across countries in Africa.

There is a call for action that as a species, mankind must collectively collaborate to establish cleaner, renewable energy sources, put an end to deforestation and ultimately stop the destruction of our planet through the continued release of carbon dioxide.

One of the most common justifications for our continually rising global CO2 emissions is simply that the financial burden will be too much for the global economy to handle. Nicholas Stern, Head of the Government Economic Service from 2003-2007 states that, “the costs of stabilising the climate are significant but manageable; delay would be dangerous and much more costly” (Stern, 3). There are essentially two options in our current dilemma: we can continue our increase of carbon dioxide emissions which will lead to severe natural disasters which will not only kill hundreds of thousands of people but the costs of relocating the survivors, the devastating damage, and rebuilding would cost an immeasurable amount of money. Or we spend time and resources to research and develop new technologies and energy systems that reduce or stabilize our carbon footprint. The estimated cost of stabilizing CO2 emissions is one percent of the global GDP, or about 7.8 trillion dollars (Stern, 3). As you can see the overwhelming costs of “sweeping the problem under the rug” completely and utterly outweigh the costs of fixing our mistakes not only with monetary value but with the cost of lives as well. However, we cannot reduce our carbon emission without companies and governments coming together and collectively adopting policies and regulations for environmental sustainability.

No matter the costs of reducing our carbon emissions or the projected costs of natural disasters, the first and most basic problem we need to solve is ourselves, mainly greed and selfishness. It is imperative for companies and governments around the world to work together towards solutions of our planet’s impending demise. Tobias Finke, a graduate from University of St. Andrews in international business, conducted a research experiment that aimed shed light on why companies cannot collectively respond to climate change. From his experiment, Finke concluded that, “that the multiplicity of interests is the overarching reason why collective action is impeded”. In other words, the self-interests of company leaders is their number one priority which leads to many conflicting ideas and solutions in response to climate change. This massive array of thoughts ultimately results in the inaction throughout the companies and nothing is done and people will continue to suffer. This is one of the most threatening problems for introducing new technologies and energy systems because “most of the development and deployment of new technologies will be undertaken by the private sector; the role of governments is to provide a stable framework of incentives” (Stern, 405). The government should be responsible for making policies and regulations that limit the continuing burning of fossil fuels, but it is private companies that are now responsible to develop and integrate new technologies that will sever our continuing dependence on the actions which contribute to our changing climate.

To initiate the beginnings of possible solutions we first need to change from within and throughout. The solutions to these environmental dilemmas will not be easy and will force humans to change. Change our terrible habits of destroying environments. Change our continuing rape of our land. Change our lust for profits no matter the costs. Change ourselves completely. Change our ways of life.

There are several more specific ways we need to change society and ourselves. First we need to sever our dependence on burning fossil fuels for energy. There are plenty of new technologies that offer clean renewable energy that don't rely on fossil fuels such as wind turbines, solar panels, and nuclear energy. These energy sources have an extended pros-cons list, but the benefits outweigh the consequences in our specific circumstance. Remco Verzijlbergh, an author and professor at Delft University of Technology in Netherlands, has conducted an experiment that observed the effects of the integration of renewable energy sources in the European electric grid. His findings were that the wind and solar systems put in place are extremely effective in decreasing CO2 emissions but they present “variability and uncertainty” (Verzijlbergh, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews). Although these renewable energy sources offer a great solution to our continuing need to consume fuel resources, they are difficult to integrate into a society that has demands and expectations for their energy. While these sources produce substantial amounts of energy we could not solely depend on just one or two. The most effective and intelligent strategy for integrating these advanced renewable energy sources is to implement an array of different sources to combat inflexibility and societal demands.

Another controversial source for renewable energy is nuclear power systems. There are a number of growing concerns for these processes such as nuclear meltdowns and our given history with nuclear technologies (i.e. Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Chernobyl). However, the amount of energy produced from these power plants could easily support developing countries as well as highly modernized countries. If sufficiently maintained and monitored,

these power plants would not have a melt down. Another concern is that countries could use these nuclear technologies to manifest weapons of mass destruction just as the United States did in WWII. However, this problem has already been solved by the United Nations. They have developed and continue to develop a nuclear weapons ban for all countries and those countries that do not sign the ban will not be granted access to plutonium or uranium, the atoms necessary to create nuclear weapons or energy.

There is one last frustrating problem with nuclear energy: nuclear waste. The basic process in which energy is produced from nuclear energy systems is called fission or the splitting of the plutonium or uranium atom. This split releases an abundant amount of energy but the byproduct is extremely radioactive nuclear waste which can be life-threatening. However, physicists are extremely close to solving the problem concerned with nuclear power through a contrasting system called fusion. The process is essentially the opposite of fission, where two smaller lighter atoms (like helium and hydrogen) are combined to create heavier atoms. This process creates more energy than fission and does not have radioactive byproduct. It is of utmost importance that we continue developing this technology further as a clean energy system.

So, a combination of wind, solar and nuclear energy systems will cut CO2 emission by over 25%. However, at the rate we are headed we will likely need more cuts to effectively stop the climate from changing in irreversible ways.

Transportation is another big component of our air pollution. Elon Musk, founder of the Tesla cars, has already proven to society that we do not have to depend on petroleum as our only source of fuel for transportation. Creating the electric car was the first step into severing our dependency on oil but just like our energy systems, it is imperative that we do not just rely on one source. Another new source for fuel in road vehicles is hydrogen. The engine would essentially, “convert hydrogen and oxygen into water in a process that generates electricity”, and the process would only produce as little as “5% of the emissions of conventional fuel” (Stern, 402). Several countries have already begun adopting this new form of fuel such as Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Iceland, China, and even in the U.S. in California. Hydrogen may be the solution to many climate change associated problems, so don't be surprised if you start to see more hydrogen pumps and charging terminals at your local gas stations.

Another issue easily solved that leads to further climate change is deforestation. The main reasons for deforestation is typically for making more room for urban areas and

agricultural fields and the illegal logging in countries such as Brazil and Indonesia. As these forests are being permanently transformed, we are destroying several complex ecosystems and the Earth’s natural carbon dioxide recycling process. This is a straightforward issue that can be solved just by simply stopping the destruction of these forests and more intensely monitoring the countries where the illegal logging is most prevalent.

Look, the problem of climate change is a large, global issue and it is a pressing matter that must be addressed now. We must come together as a country and as species to combat our self-destructive behavior. This can only be achieved by first changing our policies and regulations and integrating all renewable energy sources and fueling options to put an end to the destruction of our forests and natural, limited resources. It is a lot to ask for and it will take several years for any progress to be achieved but these solutions will, in the end, prevent the death of our planet.

Sources

"Climate change and health." World Health Organization. World Health Organization, n.d. Web. 10 May 2017.

Finke, Tobias, et al. "Why Companies Fail to Respond to Climate Change: Collective Inaction as an Outcome of Barriers to Interaction." Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 58, 01 Oct. 2016, pp. 94-101. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.05.018.

Olson, Julia. "Youth and Climate Change: An Advocate's Argument for Holding the US Government's Feet to the Fire." Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 72, no. 2, Mar. 2016, pp. 79-84. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/00963402.2016.1145903.

Rose, David Exposed: How world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data. Daily Mail, April 13, 2017.

Verzijlbergh, R.A., et al. "Institutional Challenges Caused by the Integration of Renewable Energy Sources in the European Electricity Sector." Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 75, 01 Aug. 2017, pp. 660-667. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.039.