Global Warming Prevention; A Real

Priority?
By: Margi Wiles

The Walker School

8th Grade Project/ Block A
Teacher: Mrs. Tulloch
March 5, 2010
Word Count: 1,201
 Wiles 2

Introduction
Global Warming is an ongoing theory that the earth‟s climate is changing in negative

ways. Many people believe that the United States should try to prevent this through ecologically

friendly policies. While others argue that it should not be made a priority. The question of

making Global Warming prevention a higher priority is a question that many politicians are

asking themselves right now. Agree or disagree with the idea of Global Warming prevention, one

thing is for certain, this issue is being brought to all U.S. citizens‟ attention right now and must

be resolved soon. One side of this argument is „Global Warming should be a number one

priority because it could have an effect on the future of our country‟ which is a reasonable

argument. While the other perspective is „Global Warming prevention should not be a priority

because of the lack of evidence there is to support the theory of Global Warming and the fact that

the U.S. has many other problems.‟ The U.S. should not make Global Warming prevention a

higher priority.

Body
Global Warming also known as climate change is a theory that Green house gasses

(which are pollutants that stop heat from escaping the atmosphere) made by mankind are causing

the earth to heat up. The Theory of Global Warming was introduced by Svante Arrhenius a

scientist in the early 1900‟s. This theory was dismissed and remained that way until a scientist

named C.D. Kelling discovered information that might possibly support Global Warming, but

this still did not catch on. Later, in the 1970‟s a group of scientists formulated a theory that the

earth‟s atmosphere was actually beginning to cool. This also did not catch much attention but it

did bring the theory of Global Warming back into the spotlight. In an effort to possibly slow the

8GPA_RPaper_V076 5/14/2010 12:57 PM

 Wiles 3

affects Global Warming, the U.N. formulated a national agreement called The Kyoto Protocol

which stated that all countries that sign the Kyoto Protocol must reduce the pollutants that are put

into the atmosphere through factories and other man made machines in the country. America did

not sign this because it would be too costly.

Global Warming prevention is very expensive. To make the U.S. completely green would

be very costly and hard on all U.S. citizens. For instance to go green or to become completely

environmentally friendly would mean that the U.S. would need to stop all use of Carbon

Intensive fuels. “The only way to cut carbon dioxide emissions (which is thought to be the main

cause of Global Warming) is to replace carbon intensive fuels, which rules out cheap fuels, like

coal… Kyoto (an international agreement made by the UN to support climate change prevention)

would boost electricity prices by 86.4% and other energy costs accordingly. (Haley)” This means

that to truly go green in the U.S. it would raise our energy costs by more than 85 percent. Also,

attempting to become environmentally friendly in the U.S. would have negative effects on many

jobs that have to do with carbon intensive fuels, which is a big part of the U.S. economy. “If the

Kyoto protocol goes into effect, West Virginia will lose 29,000 residents and 42,600 jobs by

2010, with per capita income falling $393 that year. (Vargo)” This quote is taken from a study

done by the West Virginia University bureau of Business and Economic Research which found

that if the government were to implement green policies on energy they would have negative

effects on jobs around the U.S.

The U.S. government has many priorities that must be attended to each year. For 2010

some of the top priorities of the government have been the economy, healthcare, terrorism, and

the public education system. President Obama has also listed cleaner energy as one of his top

priorities. But, when average U.S. citizens were poled climate change was listed as the last

8GPA_RPaper_V076 5/14/2010 12:57 PM

 Wiles 4

priority. With the current economy and other U.S. problems, spending lots of money on a

climate problem that is still a theory is not high on most average Americans list. Also, just

attempting to cut CO2 emissions is not going to magically solve the problem of Global Warming

What we must come to terms with is that even though CO2 causes Global Warming, cutting
carbon dioxide simply doesn’t matter much for most of the world’s important issues …This does
not mean doing nothing about Global Warming. It simply means realizing that early and massive
carbon reductions will prove costly, hard, and politically divisive and likely will end up making
fairly little difference for the climate and very little difference for society. (Lomborg)

Bjørn Lomborg was a strict believer in carbon reductions to stop Global Warming, but after

doing research for his book, his views actually changed to a now more realistic point of view. He

is now an acclaimed professor in Copenhagen. This quote was taken from his book called Cool

It. The U.S. has many more important and more easily solved problems than Climate Change

right now and there are better ways to approach this problem than implementing costly

unrealistic policies.

Synthesis
The topic of Global Warming Prevention in the U.S. government is a widely debated

topic with most people either for the first perspective „Global Warming prevention should be

made a priority in the U.S. government.‟ or for the second perspective „Global Warming

prevention should not be made a priority in the U.S. government.‟ Evidence that the earth is

heating up and the cause could be Global Warming does exist. But, should the U.S. really get

involved in something that is still a theory? Political figures such as Al Gore state that Global

Warming must be stopped otherwise, the U.S. could be ruining the future for all children. “The

United States is responsible for more greenhouse gas pollution than South America, Africa, The

Middle East Australia, Japan, and Asia all put together. (Gore 251).” So, how do we stop it?

8GPA_RPaper_V076 5/14/2010 12:57 PM

 Wiles 5

Through alternative resources CO2 emissions can be reduced dramatically. But, does reducing

carbon dioxide really stop Global Warming. Some people do not think so. “Green house gasses

are a fundamental part of the biosphere, necessary to all life, and that industrial activity generates

less than 5 percent of them, if that. (Haley 170)”. So the idea that we can solve Global Warming

by reducing CO2 is also still a theory, which many people do not agree with. The dominant

perspective in this argument is obviously “The U.S. should not make Global Warming

prevention a priority in the government.” This is so because although the first perspective has

fired people up, more and more people begin to disagree with the first perspective every day due

to the lack of facts in the Global Warming theory and the other ever pressing priorities of the

U.S.

Conclusion
Global Warming Prevention is considered a pressing priority by some; however when the

issue is examined in detail with all factors in place Global Warming Prevention fails to present

itself as a true priority. Global Warming is still a theory but, there is proof supporting it. To

prevent Global Warming would be very expensive and to what most people believe unsuccessful.

The United States has many problems on its plate right now such as the war on terror, the

economy, and Healthcare that are confirmed, unquestionable, and that can be solved through

inexpensive ways. Whereas, to solve Global Warming would be very expensive and from what

data shows have little effect on the actual issue at hand. Until more is understood about Global

Warming and how it works, The U.S. must attend to the pressing problems the U.S. currently

has.

8GPA_RPaper_V076 5/14/2010 12:57 PM

 Wiles 6

Works Cited
Gore, Al. An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We
Can Do About It. New York: Rodale, 2006. Print.

Haley, James. Global Warming; Opposing View Points. San Diego: Greenhavon Press Inc, 2002.
Print.

Hornnick, Ed. “Economy tops Obama‟s list of „09 priorities.” CNNPolitics.com 31 Oct, 2008.
Web. 9 Feb, 2010.
[http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/31/obama.blitzer/index.html.]

Lomborg, Bjørn. Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming. New
York: Random House Inc., 2007. Print.

Remez, Michael. “Public‟s Priorities for 2010; Economy, Jobs, Terrorism.” The Pew Research
Center for the People and the Press. January, 2010. Web. 9 Feb, 2010. [http://people-
press.org/report/584/policy-priorities-2010.]

Vargo, Same. “Study Finds Kyoto Protocol Would Cost West Virginia 42,600 Jobs.”
Encycolpedia.com 14 Feb, 2000. Web. 9 Feb, 2010.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P3-49732148.html6

8GPA_RPaper_V076 5/14/2010 12:57 PM