Employment During The Era Of Climate Change

Since the mining of Natural gases and energy, Emissions of greenhouse gasses have been slowly releasing into the atmosphere. This happens by burning the natural gases to create energy for our vehicles or even lawnmowers. On Earth we utilize a lot of energy to maintain a lifestyle we know and love today. But most forms of energy, cars and Farming produce large amounts of green-house gases that can heat and change the earth's atmosphere permanently and cause the ice caps to slowly melt because of constant heating.

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

Ross McKitrick is a Professor of Economics at the University of Guelph specializing in environment, energy and climate policy. This piece was written for the Journal Academic Matters in 2008. This article was written at a time when climate change and environmental issues were at the forefront of people's minds. Policies were being developed and laws were implemented to reduce greenhouse emissions and control climate change. Ross Mckitrick encourages us to view the environment in terms of specifics rather than on the whole. Using a scientific approach with the support of data may support a very different view of the actual state of specific aspects of the environment. The writer uses logos, pathos and ethos in this article. He uses logos by

Fossil fuels have been used in the United States of America for hundreds of years as a source of energy to power machinery and to do a lot of work more efficiently. If they had not been easily monetized, they would not be so important to the United States’ economy as they are now, but does their effectiveness as an energy source outweigh the damaging effects that burning fossil fuels has on the world? Texas alone emits 641 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, which is not only a massive amount, but also doubles the amount produced by California, the second largest carbon producer in the country (Magill, “Texas, California Lead Nation in Carbon Emissions”). Carbon dioxide is the emission of humans breathing as well, so this may not seem so important at first, but the production of it not only by people, but by industrial factories, transportation, and electricity production, which all can use the combustion of fossil fuels, is poisonous to life on Earth and is slowly heating up the planet. The rising levels of heat due to fossil fuel emissions can have devastating effects on the environment and often leads to the kinds of extreme weather situations that were previously mentioned.

the Climate,” where she addresses the relationship between human activities and the climate change. Throughout the article Klein argues that people and carbon fuels do not cause climate problems. In her opinion, the issue is due to an arrangement between the people and the materials that pollute the earth. Klein argues that capitalism leads to finding resources and exploit them, which lead to climate change. Klein believes that this capitalist agenda is a habit that now we are used to, but she thinks that we can change if we decide to take the following steps: 1- reviving and reinventing the public sphere, 2- Remembering how to plan, 3- Reigning in corporations, 4- relocalizing production, 5- Ending the cult of shopping, and 6- Taxing the rich and Filthy. In the end, Klein claim that responding to climate change would necessitate us from to break a number of capitalist rules, which need to be done urgently (Klein, para

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

Temperatures are reaching a new high, snow and rainfall patterns are shifting, and more extreme climate events, such as drought, flooding, are taking place. It is not a forecast anymore; greenhouse gases are intensifying the global warming. In 2013, 81.2% of the energy consumption in the world are produced by fossil fuel (International Energy Agency). Could you imagine how much greenhouse gases are produced? Ever since 1980s, scientist has found that the emission of the greenhouse gases is the major factor contributes to the global warming, which intensify the climate change that the human civilization may collapse one day. In the book This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate, the author Naomi Klein describes that we are headed toward a catastrophic levels of warming. She suggests that the solution to climate change, in short, is to fight for a change in the economic model of capitalism and move towards a low-carbon economy. Making this adjustments will affect every aspects of our life--from how the energy generate, what we consume, and the technologies we use. “Change of this magnitude creates risks but also opportunities. There will be both winners and losers as the world moves towards a low-carbon economy (**).” One of the important aspects which many people care about is the impact of climate change policy on employment. Does the movement improve the employment? Klein suggests that climate change policy has a huge

On the surface big business and climate change seem like fundamentally different issues, but upon deeper investigation, we can see that these issues have an underlying direct correlation. How can two ideas that are fundamentally different interact so thoroughly on one topic? Naomi Klein dedicates her work to investigate how these two issues interact, and what microcosms of our society encourage this interaction. Klein has a revelation about the issues with big businesses dominance over our society. She also suggests ways for us to change our lifestyle to be more environmentally friendly and prevent massive damages to the environment. Klein’s works have the power to change how we think about these big businesses’ presence in our society

Modernism represents an optimistic view of human impact on the environment that has been the dominant viewpoint for the last 200 years. The knowledge that mankind holds the ability to control the environment heavily stresses why climate change is not such a problem to worry about. One of the core beliefs of the modernistic perspective is that people have no need to fear future environmental disaster because the next technological advancement that will prevent it is right around the corner. Furthermore, those who share this view do not include themselves in their image of the ecosystem, believing they are detached from it. Lastly, a laissez-faire approach is taken to environmental problems, focusing on progression through technology, stressing that as long as progress is made in this area all problems will be fixed. For a modernist, climate change is nothing to worry about. This may be a real situation, but it will be solved with advancements in technology before one’s way of life is changed. What people should be worrying about is ensuring a laissez faire approach to the market with sponsorship to new technologies. As a result of reusable energy technology already existing, modernists believe that the problem of climate change has been solved and without disrupting free market system these technologies will be further implemented. As long as there are people given the opportunity to innovate, some will focus on and ultimately solve the concern of climate change. The issue of

Climate change, specifically in reference to C02 Emissions released by human use of fossil fuels and their consequential effects on the environment, is perhaps one of the most pressing issues we, not just as Americans, but as human beings face in our lifetimes. Though it may sound like a sensationalist statement the facts are hard to deny. In May of 2013, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

One of the greatest emitters of carbon dioxide is the oil industry. It accounts for over thirty percent of all carbon dioxide emissions in the United States. (Environmental Protection Agency 2016) However, the oil industry is an important source of jobs in this country. Employing almost nine million eight hundred thousand people, and the average hourly wages of over forty dollars an hour. (Bureau of Labor 2016) Over four times the California minimum wage. It is a major concern of many that new regulations to the industry could harm these jobs. However, new jobs in the field of clean emissions free energy are on the rise and projected to grow in great numbers over time, as many as six million three hundred thousand new jobs by 2030. (World Watch Institute 2016) This is bolstered by the three million four hundred thousand new job that were created by the end of 2013. (Small 2015) With well-paying jobs in emissions free energy sources like solar, wind and geothermal we could, in all probability, make up any lost

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

Intro: This report will aim to define responsible business, in relation to the vast range of topics such as Corporate social Responsibility/Corporate Citizenship, sustainability, whilst comparing these through academia and their different meanings relating to Responsible Business. Furthermore, this report will also aim to critically analyse climate change and its effect in relation to making Business more responsible as well as the drawbacks/opportunities this holds for business. Finally, this report will exploit the relation between government and Business; identify possible barriers for businesses through government via academic views and evidential impacts on businesses and how government supports business to create a more sustainable world, through incentives such as the climate change Act 2008.

Greenhouse gases come from such mainstays of modern life as electrical power plants, automobiles, and heavy industry. Growing consumption of fuel by less efficient cars and light trucks suggests that motor vehicles may soon overtake industry as the largest source of gases suspected of causing global warming by effectively creating a greenhouse around the Earth. Many people do not want to decrease their standard of living by reducing their consumption of fossil fuels. These people do not realize that if they reduce their consumption, there will be a reduction in the amount of greenhouse gases. If this does not happen and global warming continues, the long-term effects may be catastrophic.

CO2 is one the gases in the greenhouse gas family and with “a stronger greenhouse effect [it] will warm the oceans and partially melt glacier and other ice, increasing sea level” (Climate Change). As humans continue to emit greenhouse gases into the air it is inevitable that sea levels will raise, temperatures will increase throughout the globe, and ultimately change the climate drastically damaging many ecosystems and impacting the way in which humans live on Earth. Many make the argument that the reason fossil fuels are the primary source of energy is due to their density amount of energy, but there is another source of energy that has energy even more dense than fossil fuels.