Although Clare mostly defines the war’s legacy as the explanation for the current climate change challenges, the ideas by Bauer and Nielsen prove that the progress of the oil industry contributes to the climate crisis. I believe it is wrong to choose a single reason for today’s environmental problems, addressing either political or industrial aspects, but consider these impacts equally important.
There are many ideas about who should be blamed for the climate crisis and the impossibility of protecting the environment when the first concerns emerged. Some people prefer to underline the role of the government, while others reveal the responsibility of each individual in this situation. Profit and non-profit organizations are involved in regular discussions about how to stabilize the climate, prevent global warming, and postpone the distinction of the human race as far as possible. According to Clare, war is one of the causes of human failure in addressing climate change problems (para. 2). The author believes that such powerful countries like the United States should pay attention to the solution to global problems instead of embroiling in unnecessary and debilitating conflicts (Clare para. 3). However, these wrong decisions are not the only mistakes that some nations continue supporting. Bauer and Nielsen offer to check how the rapid development of fossil-fuelled plastics might affect the climate. They introduce the conception that “as the climate crisis worsens, plastics production at plants… is ballooning” (Bauer and Nielsen para. 4). Thus, both approaches to climate change deserve recognition and analysis.
In the modern world, people are obsessed with technological achievement, industrial benefits, and financial prosperity. Still, they continuously neglect the direct and indirect impacts of their activities on the environment, neighbors, and future generations. In their article, Bauer and Nielsen admire “enormous compressors… distillation columns…large tankers… and tall chimneys” (para. 1-2). They do not hide the truth about the desire of people to use plastic products every day to facilitate their lives, achieve high quality, and integrate available opportunities. At the same time, oil demand continues to grow because of increased plastic output. However, business owners do not believe in the harm they cause to the environment because they consider using renewable resources (like plastics) as a way to mitigate the climate crisis. Their financial gains blind them and weaken the possibility of predicting the release of greenhouse gases – about 13 million tons annually – or carbon emissions that increase the temperature by 1-2 degrees and provoke global warming (Bauer and Nielsen para. 37). All these threats may be invisible at first sight, but such rapid oil industry growth damage the climate in multiple ways.
The relationship between the success of oil companies and climate change can be proved in different ways. For example, Clare discusses this topic through the prism of the war in Iraq. The line of events is not hard to recognize and comprehend. The war is caused by the desire to gain control over oil resources and makes people increase the production of carbon dioxide and other harmful greenhouse gases, which affects climate (Clare para. 7). Thus, not everyone is able to understand the worth of the indirect impact of the oil industry and climate change addressing the issue of war, and Clare’s article is a unique attempt to establish the connection. As well as Bauer and Nielsen, Clare does not reject the human impact on the environment. Still, their approaches vary to demonstrate the unpredictability of the situation.
Works Cited
Bauer, Fredric, and Tobias Dan Nielsen. “Oil Companies Are Ploughing Money into Fossil-Fuelled Plastics Production at the Record Rate – New Research.” The Conversation, Web.
Clare, Michael T. “Iraq and Climate Change.” Climate & Capitalism, Web.