Introduction
Most Americans now admit that the future of our natural resources is at a risk. According to one analyst, (Lubber 316) America is at a critical moment and has to take urgent measures or the natural systems that it depends on for its collective health and security will collapse. Although there is much talk about action, it is sad to note that people are not yet acting in a manner that is anywhere near what is required to save the planet.
Many American’s erroneously thinking that being the ‘good guys’ does anything to help the environment but clearly, more needs to be done if a lasting solution to the problem is to be gotten. Indeed, Lubber warns that climate change poses the biggest financial risk that companies have ever-faced (317). However, many people think that climate change is an issue that does not affect them directly but this is far from the truth.
By looking closely, one will notice that disasters such as hurricane Katrina are linked to climate change and this should act as a wake-up call for all stakeholders to act on the issue with more urgency. Despite the American government knowing the financial risk associated with climate change, it has not taken any significant steps to look for a lasting solution to the issue.
To understand how the issue of global change is affecting each one of us, it is critical to look at where we are as American’s. According to Zukerman (323), a gallon of gasoline is currently retailing at $4 and what is even worse is that this wealth ends up in the pockets of people who do not support American policies such as Iran, Venezuela, and Russia. Zukerman notes that since the oil crisis of the 1970s, the American rate of oil consumption has been on the rise (324).
While the United States constitute only 4% of the world’s population, it accounts for around one-quarter of worldwide oil consumption, which is twice the combined rate of the Chinese and Indians. Even more shocking is Zukerman’s observation that nearly 70% of the 21 million barrels of oil consumed every day goes to transportation, most of which are utilized by individual drivers (324). This clearly shows that the prerogative of saving energy is not something that should be entirely left to the government since everyone is involved.
As the American people look for a lasting solution for the oil crisis, it is obvious that an alternative will have to be sought if we as a country are to attain our dream of energy independence since no combination of solar, wind, ethanol, biodiesel, or anything else will guarantee this independence shortly (Lubber 318). While the government has taken some steps toward the attainment of energy independence, most of these measures are driven by self-interest.
An example case is the bid to produce ethanol in the country. While the farm and ethanol lobbies have succeeded in getting Congress to pay huge subsidies to farmers to grow corn to be converted into ethanol, the same Congress has set high tariffs to discourage cheaper, imported ethanol. Instead of helping the situation, this has caused more problems since Americans believe that convincing farmer to grow corn for fuel instead of doing this for food consumption has led to high food prices (Lubber 319).
To look for solutions to the energy problem, it is prudent to first examine how we got to the current situation. According to Zukerman (323), the government has been trying to regulate the issue of oil consumption in the country. In 1975, the government passed the first fuel economy standard law, known as Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFÉ, which was a directive that doubled the fuel efficiency of the typical car marketed in the United States between 1974 and 1985 from 13.8 mpg to 27.5 mpg.
Although this was a welcome move, it did not help matters since the law has never been reviewed since that time. An attempt in 1990 to raise the fuel standard to 40 mpg for cars elicited strong criticism by Democrats from car manufacturing states. If this bill had been passed, America would now be using 3 million fewer barrels a day (Zukerman 324). In 2007, the soaring price of gasoline forced Congress to approve the first major increase in fuel efficiency in 32 years, requiring the fleet average to reach 35 mpg by 2020. Although this is a commendable move, it is sad to note that it will save only 1 million barrels a day then. On top of this, attempts to hike taxes on gasoline to reduce consumption have essentially failed, except for a small tax increase of 4.3 cents per gallon in 1993 (Zukerman 325).
Having established how the situation got into the current state, one thing that quickly comes to mind is the question of whether there available ways especially for ordinary citizens to save the earth. According to Friedman (290), a simple ‘Google Search’ will produce countless easy ways to save the planet. As it is, the problem here is ignorance on our part since we tend to think that saving the environment is something beyond us.
What is encouraging, however, is the fact that thinking about how to live and work in a greener fashion is being popularized and democratized. What this means is that everyone now has a chance of getting useful information on how to get involved in conserving the environment. The issue is even being accorded more importance in the media and currently, environmental reporters who were previously ignored are now being given prime time. The issue has received so much attention such that even al-Qaeda supporters are joining the green revolution (Friedman 291).
While this can be seen as a step in the right direction, it is sad to note that it is bearing little or no fruit. Although car manufacturers in America claim that they are conserving the environment, the truth of the matter is that they are creating more carbon emissions in the process. Friedman (291) quotes an example of General Motors, which has put yellow gas caps on its cars that are flex-fuel, meaning they can operate on a mixture of gas and ethanol.
Friedman notes that for many years, GM never bothered to point out that its cars were flex-fuel, or use this as a selling point with customers (292). This was because the only reason GM manufactured a certain number of flex-fuel cars was that, if it did so, the government would allow it to manufacture even more fuel-guzzling Hummers and pick-up trucks and remain under the CAFÉ fuel economy permitted by Congress (Friedman 292).
Apart from car manufacturers, even individuals are doing very little to deal with the issue of climate change. Apart from Goggle offering numerous “easy ways to go green,” the question of what going green means remains largely unanswered. As one environmentalist rightly puts it, obsessing over recycling and installing a few special light bulbs will not help the situation but will only slow the growth of environmental damage.
As a country, we need to be looking at fundamental changes in our energy, transportation, and agricultural systems rather than technological alteration on the margins, and this means costs and changes that our current and would-be leaders seem afraid to discuss (Friedman 294).
Friedman is not alone in observing that the government is to blame for the lack of effective ways to combat climate change. Zukerman (324) says that the time has come for the government to get past the lame repetition of the decades-old argument over the benefits of offshore drilling. What Zukerman and other environmental analysts are saying is that refusing to exploit the vast oil reserves in the American soil is insane. Of course, many people do not know that the United States is one of the few countries in the world that chose to lock up their natural resources by dramatically restricting production and exploration.
It is indeed amazing to note that America has vast reserves of oil that if exploited can save the country billions of dollars in oil exports. Indeed, estimates have shown that the outer continental shelf contains some 86 billion barrels of oil, plus 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas that is overwhelmingly off-limits and underdeveloped (Zukerman 325). Despite these statistics, American leaders continue to apply cosmetic measures to the issue of climate change and this will not bring the much-expected green revolution.
The Way Forward
According to one report of a task force set up to look at the issue of climate change, the lack of sustained attention to energy issues is undercutting U.S. foreign policy and U.S. national security (Task Force 312). The findings of the task force revealed that major energy suppliers have been increasingly able and willing to utilize their energy resources to pursue their strategic and political objectives.
According to the report, the U.S. is slowly realizing that its growing dependence on imported energy increases its strategic vulnerability and constrains its ability to pursue a wide range of foreign policy and national security objectives (Task Force 313). This calls for the U.S. to integrate energy issues with its foreign policy.
As Al Gore (301) once noted, America faces a dangerous strategic vulnerability if the world suddenly loses access to Middle Eastern Oil. This, according to Al Gore (302) should act as a wake-up call to those who are still tempted to dismiss the increasingly urgent alarms from scientists around the world. This message should also awaken those who ignore the melting of the north polar ice cap and all other apocalyptic warnings from the planet itself, and those who roll their eyes at the very mention of this existential threat to the future of the human species. In short, the message that environmental analysts are trying to pass across is that the very existence of America is at stake (Al Gore 302).
Over the next twenty years, it is infeasible to do away with the country’s dependence on foreign energy sources. According to the recommendations of the task force set up to look into this issue, the voices that advocate for energy independence are doing the country a disservice by focusing on a goal that is unachievable over the near future thus encouraging the adoption of inefficient and counterproductive policies. Indeed, over the next two decades, it is unlikely that the United States will succeed in making a sharp reduction in its reliance on imports, which currently stand at 60% of consumption.
The main task for the next two decades must be to manage the cost of dependence on oil, and not to pretend that the United States can eliminate it (Task Force 312). Instead of consumers using ineffective methods such as avoiding the use of candles to prevent carbon emission, the government needs to embark on nationwide efforts to retrofit buildings with better insulation and energy-efficient windows and lighting. This is because approximately 40 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States come from buildings and stopping that pollution will save money for homeowners and businesses (Al Gore 303).
Conclusion
The issue of climate change has elicited an animated debate in the recent past. Despite this interest, nothing much is being done about the issue. Although most people now have access to environmental literature that is supposed to provide easy information on how to go green, the issue is still far from being solved since there is no consensus on what it means by going green. What people are doing is employing ways that will slow down climate change but these ways are not bound to put an end to the problem. If the problem is to be solved permanently, then the American government will have to take far-reaching steps to deal with the situation. However, Americans will have to wait a little bit longer before the fruits of these efforts begin to take effect.
Works Cited
Al Gore. “The Climate for Change.” Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum. 11th Ed. Behrens, Lawrence, and Rosen Leonard. Longman Publishing Group, 2010. 301-304. Print.
Friedman, Thomas. “205 East Wat to Save the Earth.” Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum. 11th Ed. Behrens, Lawrence and Rosen Leonard. Longman Publishing Group, 2010. 290-296. Print.
Lubber, Mindy. “Balance Sheet the Climate Crisis: How America Businesses Can Help.” Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum. 11th Ed. Behrens, Lawrence and Rosen Leonard. Longman Publishing Group, 2010. 316-319. Print.
Task Force. “National Security Consequences of U.S. Oil Dependence.” Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum. 11th Ed. Behrens, Lawrence and Rosen Leonard. Longman Publishing Group, 2010. 312-314. Print.
Zuckerman, Morton. “Stop the Energy Insanity.” Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum. 11th Ed. Behrens, Lawrence and Rosen Leonard. Longman Publishing Group, 2010. 323-327. Print.