Global Warming And Global Climate Change Essay

It is well known that politics and religion are two topics to never to be discussed with someone one does not know well. In today’s society, it feels as if this list of topics that are socially deemed inappropriate to discuss seems to be growing, with climate change now being a conservation to avoid. This aversion to discussing climate change appears to stem from the fact that the issue tends to polarize opinions, in which people fall into one of two groups: climate change skeptics and climate change believers. This paper seeks to address and analyze the ways in which climate skeptics speak about and understand climate change as well as how climate scientists understand climate change phenomena. More specifically, this paper focuses on how climate skeptics comprehend the relationships between grasslands, livestock, methane and nutrient cycling and how these interconnected concepts do not lead to the type of climate change that “green urbanities /green politicians/green activists/green elite” predict. The paper will conclude with an evaluation of the two differing positions between climate skeptics and climate scientists, in which I will determine which argument I find to be the most accurate.

The Earth has always been undergoing climate change. Extreme weather, natural disasters, and global warming are a few examples of current climate changes. To help prevent this, the Climate Change Education act was introduced by Ed Markey, a democrat from Massachusetts. The main goal of this act was to educate the citizens about the causes of climate change, solutions to it, and small adjustments in their own lives to help prevent it. While there are people who totally support this, there are others who do not. The Climate Change Education act can be seen as helpful because it can protect the Earth and its inhabitants, yet it can be unnecessary because it will not contribute to our society.

A business plays a heavy and critical role in the contribution to global climate change. Suzanne Goldberg (2013) reports that only 90 companies worldwide caused two-thirds of the man-made global warming emissions. Oil, coal and gas companies are the major players in the global climate change crisis of the 21st century (Goldberg 2013). Companies such as Chevron, Exxon and BP are three of the highest contributors of greenhouse gas emissions. A staggering statistic from Suzanne Goldberg (2013) states that half of the total global emissions were produced in the past twenty-five years; which is a long time before governments and corporations became aware that the burning of coal and oil were causing dangerous green house gas emissions. Businesses can now choose to run their companies sustainably and this in turn, will help reduce the effects of climate change.

Amazon is the big online shopping conglomerate we know today, which is known for their presence in the online shopping scene. They started with Jeff Bezos’ leadership, growing to where they are today. Amazon is a powerful company, however it is not without its problems. The company’s problems regard its strategies with growth, compared to Patagonia, leading them towards unsustainable results (LMPGS). To bring forth my proposal, I will talk about the narrative of Amazon’s start. Also, the definition of sustainability and why it’s relevant to the proposal at hand. Thirdly, a counter-argument will be brought forth on a practice used by companies that counteract sustainability. The proposal to change practices, such as the waste of packages, and the communication with suppliers. Amazon could be made more sustainable by studying other, less growth-oriented companies.

Climatic changes have been a major concern in the recent researches. The changes have negatively affected the production across the world and also the human lives are at stake. There are so many occurrences of unpredicted climatic effects such as the drought occurrences and the tides which affects the people. The unpredicted climatic changes have been as a result of the many factors. One of the most controversial things is that climatic changes have been caused by the social factors, which government takes number one responsible for it pros and cons. Climatic changes is therefore attributable to certain sociological perspectives. The question is, are human activities causing climate change? Should government promote different social contexts of what actions should be made?

It is no secret that the magnificent glaciers that cover this earth are facing negative repercussions due to climate change. Pratima Pandey verifies this statement in her article by stating that “it is the climate that is the driving force controlling the mass balance of a glacier in space and time, resulting in the recession and advancement of a glacier,” (Pandey, par. 1). The earth is getting warmer, and this means that soon, glaciers will start to disappear. While the earth naturally produces its own heat, the contribution from humans is also making the earth warmer than usual. James Balog and Extreme Ice Survey team explain that “since the Industrial Revolution, burning of fossil fuels has ratcheted up the burning of greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide, which traps heat in the atmosphere (Global Warming). Greenhouse gases then go to raise the already increasing temperatures, which are causing glaciers to melt. This is a sad reality for the glaciers of the earth. The melting of glaciers can cause ocean and sea levels to rise, which in turn can flood different animal habitats and displace millions of people. Also, the melting can lead to the loss of freshwater sources to those who use reservoirs as a source of drinking water, such as those around Asia near the Himalayan glaciers. Lastly, if the climate continues to melt the glaciers, various different tourist attractions, such as Glacier National Park will no longer draw in visitors to view the magnificent beauty.

The climate on the Earth is changing. Currently, the temperature of the earth’s climate system continues to rapidly increase which leads to global warming. Global warming, by definition is the “gradual increase in the overall temperature of the earth’s atmosphere generally attributed to the greenhouse effect caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, and other pollutants”(Webster’s). There are many reasons why global warming occurs, such as human activities and the increasing of gases; for instance carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. To reduce the issue, about 200 countries have signed Kyoto Protocol that states that they must lower four greenhouse gases. The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations Convention on climate change and it commits the Parties to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Global warming and climate change will trigger major change in diversity and abundance of arthropods, geographical distribution of insect- pests, insect population dynamics, insect biotypes, and herbivore- plant interaction, activity and abundance of natural enemies and efficacy of crop protection technologies changes in geographical range and insect abundance will increase the extent of crop losses and thus, will have a major bearing on crop production and food security. Distribution of insect- pest will also be influenced by the change in cropping pattern triggered by climate change. Major insect pests such as cereal stem borers (chillo, sesamia and scirpophaga), pod borer (Helicoverpa, Marucaand Spodoptera), aphid and white fly, may more to temperate regions, leading to greater damage in cereals, legumes, vegetables and fruits crops. Host plant resistance, biopesticides, natural enemies and synthetic chemicals are some of the potential options for integrated pest management. However, the relative efficacy of many of these pest control measures is likely to change as a result of global warming. Climate change will also result in increased problems with insect- transmitted diseases. These changes will have major implications for crop protection and food security particularly in developing countries where the need to increase and sustain food production is most urgent. Long term monitoring of population level and insect behavior, particularly in identifiably sensitive

The constant exponential increase of atmospheric greenhouse gases emitted by humans from 1750 until now is currently changing planet earth 's climate. These emissions are mainly the cause of fossil fuel use. Because the amount greenhouse gas on a planet determines the amount of infrared radiation being absorbed, the increase of emissions corresponds to rising atmospheric temperatures (Bintanja, Van de Wal, & Oerlemans, 2005). The rate at which these greenhouse gases are being released does not mimic any past natural environmental changes and as ice core drillings suggest there is more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere now that there has been over the last 650,000 years stats (Lüthi, 2008).This dramatic altering of the composition of gases in earth 's atmosphere has adverse effects on all weather systems. This change is called global warming or climate change. The purpose of this paper is to describe the potential outcomes of change in global climate. This paper will first focuses on the impacts of emissions of atmospheric greenhouse and also how an overall warming of the atmosphere will and is changing weather patterns as well as associated ecological factors. It will then describe the effects of sea level rise due to polar ice cap melting and how this will affect human activity and migration. Finally it will look into the ecological effects climate change is and will have on New Zealand.

The main reason why I chose to research this topic and why it fascinates me, is mainly based on the fact that our society has convinced us that animal agriculture, which fuels meat consumption, is not responsible for most of our greenhouse gases. When in fact, numerous studies has proven that livestock, and the byproducts that come along with it are responsible for approximately 51% of all worldwide GHG emissions3. Along with that, I find it interesting that livestock is blameworthy “for 65% of all human-related emissions of nitrous oxide– a greenhouse gas with 296 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide.”3 I found all of the information very interesting, but I had to see the application and actual data.

In a survey that was performed by Greg Holland and Peter Webster in the National Center for Atmospheric Research that found that an increase in the number of observed hurricanes, stating that “increasing cyclone numbers has lead to a distinct trend in the number of major hurricanes and one that is clearly associated with greenhouse warming” (Holland 1). Another source concluded that global warming has absolutely no correlation with hurricane frequencies, rather the fact that access to improved monitoring is the reason for frequent hurricanes. “Increasing temperature leads to an increase in vertical wind shear which may inhibit the formation of hurricanes” (Vecchi). This is the reason why the impact of global warming on hurricane frequency

Transitioning to clean energy sources will involve a policy that involves an extensive amount of research in the fields of science, economics, and politics. It is crucial that the United States conceives energy resources that decrease both environmental and health impacts. However, environment and health impacts are not the only aspects that must be considered as the United States moves to cleaner energy resources. The competitiveness of the United States’ economy as a whole and job security must be taken in account. ("Facing Our Energy Realities” 4) Therefore, the transition must be controlled.

The issue is extremely interesting, scary and a bit of a shock as to how much we have abused and taken advantage of this Earth. First of all, it is important to know that the "greenhouse effect" is not a bad thing in itself. In fact, this planet would be a life-less waste land without its natural greenhousing.

When one starts a car or burns wood, the last thought on their mind is the

     In the February 1st edition of the New York Times, journalist Andrew C. Revkin discusses the rising threat of global warming, and more importantly, the disagreement between various nations and institutions upon the definition of “dangerously high global warming.” Revkin’s article, titled “Deciding How Much Global Warming Is Too Much,” brings to light the various failed attempts at creating a barrier at which industrialized countries (the main producers of the greenhouse gasses which result in global warming) will cut the release of harmful gasses into the atmosphere. Revkin also discusses how upcoming events, conferences; reports will hopefully solve this problem.