Building A Sustainable Campus For Higher Education

Dr James Hansen’s argumentative essay, “A Solution to the Climate Problem,” discusses his premise that it is imperative for humankind to deal with carbon dioxide emissions, which he believes needs to be phased out by the mid-21st century. He begins with the current paradigm in government efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and claims that so far it has been a lot of talk and action in the other direction. Dr Hansen argues that while governments pay lip service to agreements such as the Kyoto Accord, they are going full steam ahead with projects that will result in increased carbon dioxide emissions, such as going forth with coal-fired power plants, coal-to-liquids, hydraulic fracturing, and tar sands oil extraction. Dr Hansen believes

The world economy is a very complex system; in the system harmful externalities disrupt capital flows and determine economic productivity. Most notable of these externalities is inadvertent global warming. Spending towards research and regulation of climate change at both the national and international level are very important in determining current and future business trends. Economists and scientists worldwide continuously debate the pros and cons of emissions reduction and what consequences can quickly follow. Though many have different views on the issue, all can agree that the immediate and long term effects of climate change have become an economic matter of paramount importance. The sweeping impact from climate change will have important fiscal, financial, and macroeconomic ramifications that influence global commerce standards.

The argument about man’s role in climate change and the role of government, the role of industry and the role of citizens is a significant challenge that crosses all levels of government, crosses all geopolitical boundaries and crosses all sectors of business. National governments across the globe are dealing with the issue in different ways, but one overarching aspect of control and mitigation can be seen in the oversight and regulation of the electric energy industry. One significant challenge facing each nation is the cost to lower carbon emissions and the question of who will pay the additional cost for compliance. Though the cost issue is significant, a much more difficult question is whether any decision on lowering emissions can make

The election of 2000 took place during a time that was mostly peaceful, unemployment rates were historically low, but however, there were a record number of terrorist threats (Muhlhausen). Despite all of these headlining topics presidential candidate Al Gore and Vice President Joe Lieberman were far more concerned about global climate change (“Al”). Gore was, and still, is very passionate about this topic (“Al”, 9). He has challenged the two biggest polluters in the world, China and The United States to, “Make the boldest move in climate change.” Figure 5

Studies show that education, training, and incentives are causing university students to become more concerned with their environment and the environment of the next generation (Levy and Dilwali, 2000). Providing the opportunity to live in a sustainably built environment has become an important differentiating factor among universities around the world and is becoming increasingly important to students in terms of both how they adopt sustainable practices and their choice of a university. The majority of students and their parents are making acceptance decisions based on a university’s environmental commitment (Princeton Review, 2012). If the University of Central Arkansas would raise the facility fee, then the higher percentage rates

Indeed, if we are to combat global warming, of course we need to stop the rampant use of fossil fuels. In its place, the grand vision and hope is to transition our economy from relying on fossil fuels to using renewable energy sources. (This becomes an additionally pressing issue for those who are concerned with the U.S.’s “soft power” as China vies to become the world leader in clean energy.)

“Scientists have been warning about global warming for decades. It's too late to stop it now, but we can lessen its severity and impacts” - David Suzuki. Global warming, a primary topic of debate in various conversations throughout all levels of government, has been an issue for countless years. In fact, of the 134 years recorded, the 10 warmest years have all occurred “since 2000, with the exception of 1998 “(NASA). Solving a global issue such as this is not as easy as it may seem; however ,The Paris Agreement vows to do just that by setting a plan to limit global warming to well below 2°C in “the first-ever universal, legally binding global climate deal” (Europa). Before signing off on such an agreement one must analyze the many negatives

Penn State University offers various ways for members of its community to live environmentally consciously and sustainably. The Sustainability Institute at Penn State boasts a gold rating from the Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System (STARS), a green rating from The Princeton Review, and a ranking of 48 out of 173 on Sierra Club’s list of the most sustainable colleges (“Track our Progress”). Despite these awards and recognitions demonstrating Penn State’s commitment to the environment, the university still produced and directed 14,950 tons of solid waste to landfill sites in 2015 (“Recycling and Waste Management”). Penn State Food services can reduce the amount of waste the university produces by expanding the existing

I am choosing to apply to Dickinson College because it stands out against all others. Dickinson’s commitment to sustainability is incredibly important to me. I believe that in my lifetime, the energy industry will switch from a fossil fuel majority to a sustainable energy majority. I want to attend a college that has the capability to prepare me for a future of sustainable energy practices and I believe Dickinson has the educational capability to do exactly that.

There are 7.3 billion people on Earth (United States Census Bureau, 2016). More specifically, there are 7.3 billion people who depend on Earth for food, water, and shelter. If there is one thing that every living organism has in common, it’s our dependence on the planet to survive. Unfortunately, since the Industrial Revolution, humans have been systematically degrading the Earth and its resources. President Obama’s final State of the Union address was structured around four main points, one of which was centered around innovation (2016). His points focused on the impending reality of climate change and America’s potential to lead the world down a path of sustainability and green innovation. His hour long speech devoted a mere five minutes to climate issues, further suggesting that climate change remains a less pressing issue than the economy, for example, and I felt that he oversimplified an incredibly complex issue. President Obama’s economic appeals paint a hopeful picture without acknowledging the potential pitfalls associated with climate capitalism. However, President Obama’s strong stance claiming that climate change is in fact happening is an incredibly positive step in the fight against climate change.

Gary Stix calls to Americans to halt global warming. The world is changing and not for the better, he writes “The Debate on Global Warming is Over” (Stix 46). CO2 levels are higher than they have been in 650,000 years and are projected to only increase at an exponential rate. No one knows exactly when and what will happen, but all scientist can agree that it won’t be good. Making a difference in the fight against global warming will require a massive alteration in the entire world’s energy economy. Fossil Fuels account for 80% of the world’s energy and if a “carbon budget” is put into place then they will be ineffective (Stix 47). We need to begin to make a shift towards more renewable sources of energy, and adopt a system to help regulate the total amount of emissions. These programs will give us a head start on lessening the effects of global warming, but the

It is becoming increasingly certain that climate change will have severe adverse effects on the environment in years to come. Addressing this issue poses a serious challenge for policy makers. How we choose to respond to the threat of global warming is not simply a political issue. It is also an economic issue and an ethical one. Responsible, effective climate change policy requires consideration of a number of complex factors, including weighing the costs of implementing climate change policies against the benefits of more environmentally sustainable practices. Furthermore, this analysis must take place amidst serious gaps in the existing research and technology concerning the developing climatic condition.

Climate change is one of the most concerning issue in the history foriegn policy. It encompuses not only the United states but the entire world. Which is why it is hard to create procedures and establish alliances concerning global climate change because greenhouse admission are not created by the actions of one nation. Addressing climate change is going to be a massive task. Every nations who emitts green house gasses must become part of some sort of a global agreement. This agreement will require new thinking when it comes to foriegn policy. The United States has recently created a Task force to deal with climate change. The task force recomends creating a treaty between the world's biggest emitters including China

The climate change impacts of greenhouse gases threaten the economic development and environmental quality. These threats indicate that all nations regardless their economic growth should work collaboratively to reduce the emission to a certain level. Hare et al. (2011) argued that “climate change is a collective action problem” thus requires a global coordination from all countries. This indicates that actions from several countries would never be sufficient to address the climate change problem. If a global target to limit warming to 2°C or below is about to achieve (UNFCCC 2010, p.4) a broad range of participation is required (Hare et al., 2011). However, the increasing complexity of negotiation processes is inevitable. Each country will pursue its own interests during the

They looked at two scenarios, inaction, where business’ continue finding and using carbon as they see fit, and action, where business’ use a low-carbon energy mix. They found that not only would the investment cost of the action scenario be no more than inaction, but it would even cost a bit less- 190.2 trillion dollars for action and 192 trillion dollars for inaction. This is before even considering the amount of money saved by the effects of the action scenario itself. The report found that, “the difference in climate damage costs between low (1.5°C) warming and high (4.5°C) warming scenarios could be as high as $50 trillion” (Business Insider). The effect of such a large economic company reporting this data is the perfect example of how using economics for the sake of reversing global warming can be really beneficial. The argument often used by economists is that becoming more sustainable would hurt the economy, but the data in this report proves just the opposite, and how terrible it would be if we did nothing. For the sake of investment in industry’s like coal and gas, this information is often denied. But this is not anywhere near the first time industry’s have had to adapt due to uncontrollable events. This report emphasizes the importance of recognizing