Talal1

Name: Talal H

Instructor’s name: xxxxxxxxxxxx

Course: English 102-37

Essay: Research, problem/ solution. Final Draft.

Date: 04-18-2013

The unstable rate of Carbon Dioxide Emission and Cheap-Fossil-Fuel

The global CO2 emission is at an essential point in its existence. Carbon Dioxide

“CO2”emissions are at the highest levels that they have been in history and the amount of

CO2 in the atmosphere continues to increase (Web.ncf.ca, 1). Not only the growth of CO2 in

the atmosphere is a problem, but also the concern of how the United States is going to

continue obtaining resources such as oil and natural gas. For this reason, environmentalists

have claimed that CO2 emissions are a danger to the world, and severe consequences will

happen if we don’t do something to lower CO2. It is important to say that the world is at an

important point in its existence because of how much oil and other natural resources are

being utilized in the United States. These resources will not last forever, and it is important to

beer in mind that if the United States continues to use energy resources like it has done for

the last century, it is likely that energy resources such as oil and natural gas will not be able to

fuel America in the next century. If the environment is not protected, future generations in

America will not have access to resources because the increasing in population and energy

consumption. On top of this, CO2 emissions have been proven that in urban areas, the annual

temperatures have increased and this is dangerous and will lead to more deaths in urban cities

on account of global warming. Environmentalists realize that rising temperatures will upset

the American way of life and could lead to death. In order for the United States to avoid an

Talal2

energy catastrophe, democratic government in the United States, starting in cities, need to

begin to prepare for the near future by cutting down CO2 emissions and finding better ways

to manage energy resources.

- Why it is a problem:

It is true that the United States has been producing at an accelerated rate over the last

century. Due to this increased production, CO2 emissions have reached an historical level.

According to the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change, “…consensus of scientific opinion

is that the Earth’s climate is being affected by human activities (Lpl.arizona.edu, 67).” The

earth’s atmosphere is full of CO2 and this will lead to increased temperatures on the earth in

which many natural resources, human activities and ecosystem will be affected negatively

from the temperature increasing.

If the congress doesn’t realize the seriousness of this problem, then the CO2 will

continue to increase. Furthermore, the global warming is not debatable. According to The

U.S Global Research Program, “The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due

primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly

from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas) (Karl & Melillo $ Peterson, 24).”

- Chicago experience in Global warming:

To better explain how urban areas can be contributed with the unstable CO2

emissions, a recent study was done in Chicago that examined the temperatures in the city. To

put the amount of CO2 in perspective, the state of Illinois ranks very high on a list of

countries that produce CO2. If Illinois was a country, it would be the fifth highest producer of

CO2 in the world (Web.internationalchicago.com, 1). In a study of Chicago, the result was

reached that “The city of Chicago has already experienced a number of severe heat waves

(Hayhoe & Sheridan & Kalkstein & Greene, 65).” Scientists made evaluations on the

temperature of the city and they concluded that in the future heat waves in Chicago would be

Talal3

significantly longer, warmer and would lead to more deaths do to heat stroke. The scientists

found that there would be a dramatic increase in the length of heat waves (Hayhoe &

Sheridan & Kalkstein & Greene, 70).” Also, the scientists concluded, “It is clear that extreme

heat represents a growing threat to the City of Chicago – a threat shared by many other urban

centers around the country (Hayhoe & Sheridan & Kalkstein & Greene, 72).”As a result of

that, the safety of America’s urban centers are at risk. The congress should recognize the

environmental and social concern of increasing temperatures in American cities. Also, cities

should take action to lower CO2 emissions to protect the people in the cities.

- Urbanization Vs. Global warming:

The question of how urban centers contribute to global warming is noticeable in the

amount of CO2 that urban centers create in comparison to rural communities. Because urban

areas are so used to live luxuriously and with technology, the reality of global warming

doesn’t come to the minds of many Americans who live in suburbia America. Often, people

living in suburbia America have to drive their cars to work and this contributes significantly

to global warming in comparison to people who can take the bus or the train. People in

America are not educated about CO2 emissions. They don’t know that when they drive to

work every day, CO2 enters the atmosphere. It should be a priority of cities to educate

American people how to be conservative with CO2 emissions. According to research done in

“Environment and Urbanization,” “…statements have been made suggesting that up to 80 per

cent of the world’s anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are attributable to cities

(Hoornweg & Sugar & Gomez, 208).” Cities are the main places of industry, and city like

Chicago are some of the largest producers of CO2. The economic importance of cities is huge

and what happen in the cities is remarkable in the industry. For example, “In terms of

economic significance, Tokyo and New York both have GDPs greater than Canada’s

(Hoornweg & Sugar & Gomez, 209).” Essentially, climate change and urbanization are two

Talal4

of the most important issues facing the world and the United States today (Hoornweg &

Sugar & Gomez, 207).

- Urbanization Market V.s The Environment:

The most interesting part about urbanization is its connection to The United States’

economic optimization. In the books, The Bridge at the Edge of the World: Capitalism, the

Environment, and Crossing from Crisis to Sustainability, James G. Speth attempts to explain

how the market and the environment are connected. The one point that should be made

however is that when it comes to the poor, often the practices of global capitalism will have

devastating effects on the environment. For example, if the statistics, that 80 per cent of the

world CO2 is produced by cities, is taken seriously, then it makes sense that if the poorest

regions of the world are industrialized and urbanized, then more CO2 will go into the

atmosphere. Although urbanization likely presents the best chance for the world’s poorest

(Hoornweg & Sugar & Gomez, 207), it also will contribute significantly to CO2 in the

environment. Because of this, James G. Speth clarifies that the United States should “…

transform the market into a powerful instrument for environmental protection and restoration

(Speth, 90)…”

- Economic solution:

Speth argues that one of the solutions to the problem of global warming is to use

democratic government to attempt to lower the amount of CO2 produced in the United States.

Not only is this good for the environment, it is also good for society and the people who live

in the United States. Speth cites several examples of how the government has passed laws

that have had the goal of protecting the environment. The Clean Air Act was passed to

protect the environment and other laws have been passed to set environmental standards

(Speth, 95). Speth argues that“…environmental economics can guide us to the least-cost,

most efficient way of achieving that goal (Speth, 91).” Not only does Speth support this idea

Talal5

of cost-benefit analysis, but Amory B. Lovins also shows convincing evidence that money

can be saved when the government or the market tries to protect the environment. This is a

good reason why congress should invest in the future and start using conserving resources in

order for them to make money. For example, large American corporations have changed their

policies. In the article, “Profitable Solutions to Climate, Oil, and Proliferation,” Lovins shows

how large American corporations have saved a considerable amount of money when they

have cut their CO2 emissions. For example, “DuPont said it would cut its 2010 global

greenhouse emissions to 60% below 1990's; by 2006, it had achieved an 80% reduction at a

$3,000-million profit. Dow's $1,000-million investment in energy efficiency has so far

returned $9,000 million in savings. BP met its operational carbon reduction goals 8 years

early at a $2,000-million profit (Lovins, 1).”

- Wrong perspective:

The majority of people understand the bad and negative effects on the environment in

which the human being is the main reason in that negative impact. According to the New

York Times, “Global emissions of carbon dioxide jumped by the largest amount on record in

2010 (Gills, 1).” Furthermore, a recent study done by the EPA shows the relationship

between the spread of diseases and the climate change. In other words as the climate change

moves to the worst, we are expecting more diseases that are generated because of the poor

quality of air. Nowadays, the demand of energy has been increasing due to Overpopulation in

the world. Thus, we need to generate more energy, as we can’t control the increasing in the

population. Current resources such as Burning fuel, obtaining coals by Mining Mountain can

lead to catastrophic implications on the human and the ecosystem. Many species have

categorized under endangered species and we are expecting more and more of them, also

tremendous numbers of natural disasters have been occurring because of climate change. As a

result of that, people and government sectors shall respond seriously and soberly to a problem

Talal6

like that. Many major leading countries have addressed climate change as major and global

problem. According to Pew Research Center, “Concern about climate change is much less

pervasive in the United States than it’s in some of other countries (pewglobal.org, web 1).”

- The most convincing argument against CO2 emissions and global warming:

After reading this, it is easy to see that when companies try to protect the

environment, they can save money. That is important because of how quickly the United

States is using its energy resources. Perhaps James Howard Kunstler explains the most

convincing arguments. In the article, “The Long Emergency,” Kunstler recognizes that “…we

face the end of the cheap-fossil-fuel era (Rolling Stone, 1).” Kunstler also recognizes that “…

rescuing our way of life with “renewables” are also unrealistic (Rolling Stone, 3).” It is often

thought that renewable energy is the way of the future. However, Kunstler thinks differently

because he believes that the American way of life will soon come to an end. Essentially,

Kunstler sums up his argument by saying, “The circumstances of the Long Emergency will

require us to downscale and re-scale virtually everything we do and how we do it (Rolling

Stone, 4).” This means that the American way of life will change. People will not be able to

drive their cars because of the lack of oil, and many technologies that use cheap fossil fuels

will not be able to be replaced by renewable energy. Kunstler says, “We will not be able to

believe that this is happening to us, that 200 years of modernity can be brought to its knees by

a world-wide power shortage (Rolling Stone, 6).”

- Will renewable energies save our future?

James Howard Kunstler makes his argument bigger in his book The Long Emergency:

Surviving the Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Century. In the 21st century,

population growth is a consequence of the availability of cheap fossil fuels. This had led to

Suburbia in American life. This type of lifestyle is expensive and has only been possible due

to the availability of technology and cheap fossil fuels. However, Kunstler notices that

Talal7

“Islamist nations possess most of the remaining oil in the world (Kunstler, 61).” He says that

if there was no oil remaining in the Middle East, not only would it make life in America hard,

but it would also lead to regional conflicts in the Middle East. This is true because America

has not been able to occupy oil rich countries, such as Iraq.

However, Kunstler’s main argument is that renewable energies are not the solution to

America’s energy problems. Natural gas, although an important energy resource, will be

much like oil. Kunstler says, “…Indeed, North America, faces a chronic and accelerating

natural gas shortage that sooner or later will be described as a crisis (Kunstler, 107).” This is

for two reasons. The first reason is that pipelines are not a solution to distributing natural gas,

and the often talked about ANWR region in Alaska will also not provide the United States

with enough energy resources for the future (Kunstler, 107). The next renewable resource

Kunstler talks about is hydrogen. Again, with hydrogen, it will not be enough for America in

the future. This is because of Kunstler’s example of “A mid-size filling station on any

frequented freeway easily sells 25 tons of fuel each day. This fuel can be delivered by one 40-

ton gasoline truck. But it would need 21 hydrogen trucks to deliver the same amount of

energy to the station, i.e., to provide for the same number of cars per day (Kunstler, 114).” As

you can see, this would be too much in transportation costs and would cost as much or even

more than transporting oil.

- Contradiction in people’s opinion for the appropriate solution:

Although there is possibly lots of coal left in America, “Burning coal is still the

greatest source of overall toxic air pollution in the country and probably a significant

contributor to global warming (Kunstler, 118).” Many people think that wind and solar power

are the way of the future. However, Kunstler explains that, “Solar electric and wind power

therefore might be viewed as accessories of the fossil fuel economy (Kunstler, 127).”

Talal8

Kunstler says this because it takes lots of fossil fuel to build solar and wind energy resources

and without cheap fossil fuel it is unlikely that America could produce solar and wind energy.

- Kunstler’s alternative energy:

The alternative energy solution that Kunstler examines is nuclear energy. Nuclear

energy is possibly a good solution to the energy problem in America because it is much like

oil and can provide lots of energy. For example, countries like France have almost 70 per cent

of their power from nuclear energy (Kunstler, 140). What Kunstler says is, “What the nuclear

option comes down to is this: Unless we want living standards in the United States to slide far

beyond pre-modern levels in the absence of cheap oil and natural gas, we will have to use

nuclear fission as our principal method for generating electricity for some time into the

twenty-first century while we scramble to make other arrangements (Kunstler, 140).”

- Realistic solution:

One of the ways that America can begin to cut down on CO2 emissions is to begin to

manage energy resources in a more responsible way. For example, globalization has made

cities major players in politics and in the global economy. The research in “Environment and

Urbanization” shows that, “By their nature, as national governments deal with more

intractable geo-political issues, cities are often able to better cooperate with each other than

their host countries. Cities often express the desires of their citizens more succinctly and

more quickly than higher levels of government, and when these rising voices are credibly

articulated, their global impact is considerable. The global response to climate change is

illustrative. In the US, for example, 1,017 cities have signed up to meet or exceed Kyoto

Protocol targets to reduce GHG emissions… even though the national government refused to

sign the protocol (Hoornweg & Sugar & Gomez, 217).” This shows that cities are often able

to be more effective in promoting environmental standards than the national government.

Because cities are the main producers of CO2 emissions, cities should take the lead in

Talal9

beginning to manage energy resources in a way that will benefit the environment. Also, my

research has shown that when cities begin to protect the environment, they can also begin to

save money. The government should support this alternative.

Another solution to the problem of global warming is to think harder about the future.

If the United States continues to use Cheap-Fossil-Fuels and to produce CO2 emissions, the

future is at risk. This is partly due to the political difficulties that are in the United States

when discussing global warming. There is no common consensus about the issue, and it is

unlikely that politicians will begin acting on global warming when it is too late. James G.

Speth makes a good statement when he says, “…regulation expresses what we believe, what

we are, what we stand for as a nation (Speth, 105)…” It is important to say that America is

the leader in CO2 emissions alongside of China (Davis & Caldeira, 5688), and America

should take the lead in beginning to protect the environment and cut down CO2 emissions.

To add to this, “The further and faster market transformation is pursued, the better off our

children and grandchildren will be (Speth, 106).” If America doesn’t start looking to the

future now, it is probable that future generations in America will have the consequences of

the poor decisions that the politicians make today. The American people and the American

government today are sacrificing the future for the present. They want to use all of the cheap-

fossil-fuels and live a lavish life, but this will greatly disrupt the future by leaving nothing to

the future generations. It is a selfish policy, and if the United States doesn’t realize this, there

will be severe consequences as James Howard Kunstler explains.

- Sum up all suggested solutions:

Kunstler is a very good source when we want to find out what are the best solutions to

the energy problem in the United States. It looks as if America has put itself in a bad

situation. Because of the large amounts of cheap fossil fuel, America has been able to

produce and to grow at a very fast rate. However, the consequences of this growth are very

Talal10

noticeable. Global warming is beginning to warm the earth and to disrupt the natural

landscape of the planet. For example, the icecaps are beginning to melt at a rapid rate. In a

study done by the “Bulletin of Atomic Scientists,” it was concluded that “. Over the past 15

years, the ice sheets of both Greenland and Antarctica have changed from a nearly balanced

mass flux (in other words, snowfall kept pace with glacial outflow and melting) to losing 100

to 200 gigatons per year from each ice sheet to the oceans… The rate of mass loss appears to

be increasing yearly (Scambos, 29)…” Also, CO2 emissions are at a historical high and there

doesn’t seem to be any decline in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. This rapid growth

has changed people’s outlooks and has made them unwillingly to change their lifestyles in

any way that will stop the growth of CO2 in the atmosphere. What people don’t understand is

that their way of life will have to change if cheap fossil fuels are used up and America is left

with a power outage. Suburbia America would come to an end and people would have to

change their lives and not live so lavishly. This is why America should look to solutions to

cut down the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and to prepare for the future

- Conclusion:

In conclusion, CO2 emissions are one of the most important issues facing the United

States and the world today. However, people are still not recognizing this, and the American

government is not doing enough to cut down CO2 emissions. Is it like people don’t even

realize that it is not only CO2 emissions that are a danger to the future, but also running out

of resources like Cheap-Fossil-Fuels. If America does run out of fossil fuels, the results could

be devastating. Suburbia America would come to an end and people would have to change

their way of life. The evidence is clear, and if America wants to continue to lead the world it

should act on global warming. For this reason, the democratic government of America should

face reality and realize that sacrificing the future for the present is not only unhealthy for the

environment, but it also not good for future generations. The government in America is the

Talal11

leader in American society and they should listen to the environmentalists and start lowering

CO2 emissions.

Talal12

Work Cited

- Charts and Figures from “An Inconvenient Truth”. Web.ncf.ca. Dec. 2006. Web: 21 March

2013.

- The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change: How Do We Know We’re Not Wrong?.

Lpl.arizona.edu. Web: 22 March 22 2013.

- “Global Warming Seen as a Major Problem Around the World Less Concern in the U.S.,

China and Russia”. Web pewglobal.org. Dec.2009

- “Who is responsible for Chicago’s crazy weather?” Web internationalchicago.com.

Feb.2013

- JUSTIN, GILLIS. "Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded." New York

Times 4 Dec 2011, Web. 1 Apr. 2013.

- Thomas R. Karl, Jerry M. Melillo, and Thomas C. Peterson, “Global Climate Change

Impacts in the United States” Cambridge University Press, 2009

- Lovins, Amory B. "Profitable Solutions to Climate, Oil, and Proliferation." Ambio. 39.3

(2010): 236-248. Print.

- Speth, James G. The Bridge at the Edge of the World: Capitalism, the Environment, and

Crossing from Crisis to Sustainability. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008.

- Davis, SJ, and K Caldeira. "Consumption-based Accounting of Co2 Emissions."

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 107.12

(2010): 5687- 92.

- Hoornweg, Daniel, Lorraine Sugar, and Gomez C. Trejos. "Cities and Greenhouse Gas

Emissions: Moving Forward." Environment and Urbanization. 23.1 (2011): 207-227.

Talal13

- Hayhoe, Katharine, Scott Sheridan, Laurence Kalkstein, and Scott Greene. "Climate

Change, Heat Waves, and Mortality Projections for Chicago." Journal of Great Lakes

Research. 36 (2010): 65-73

- The Long Emergency. Rolling Stone. Web: 19 March 2013.

- Scambos, Ted. "Earth's Ice: Sea Level, Climate, and Our Future Commitment." Bulletin of

the Atomic Scientists. 67.1 (2011): 28-40. Print.