OneWorld.net (U.S.)

There are a number of different ways of approaching the topic of climate change. We can look at it from the scientific point of view, examining the relationship between increases in greenhouse gases and Earth’s rising average temperature—where two degrees make a critical difference. We can look at climate change from the social point of view, focusing on probable environmental and social impacts, particularly to the poor who will be hit hardest.

We can also examine climate change more from the political and policy perspective, assessing proposed policies and strategies for mitigating the level of greenhouse gas emissions. Although the Kyoto Protocol is considered just a beginning for the changes needed, the U.S. government’s “pro-growth, pro-development” approach, which stresses voluntary over regulatory change, puts the U.S. at odds with the rest of the world, especially the European Union. At bottom is the U.S. administration’s belief that the costs of reducing CO2 emissions are too high. We can expect to see this lack of agreement at the 2005 G8 meeting of the major industrialized countries (most of whom are the biggest producers of greenhouse gases).

Another way of looking at climate change is in relationship to the global production and consumption system. Clearly, the global production and consumption of fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) driven by increased electricity demand, the growing use of automobiles, SUVs, air travel, and global transport of goods, among other sources is the main source of the changes that concern us. Other consumption patterns contribute to the problem, such as the demand for wood, paper, and residential housing developments driving the destruction of forests (which turn CO2 to oxygen). Climate change is not an isolated problem; rather, it is one of the many impacts of the world’s unsustainable lifestyles—especially in industrialized countries. Air and water pollution, growth of waste and toxic chemicals, and dependence on pesticides are just some examples.

At the 1992 U.N. Conference on Environment and Development, unsustainable production and consumption patterns were identified as the major cause of environmental deterioration. In the program of action that emerged from this conference, Agenda 21, the industrialized countries agreed, among other steps, to “take the lead” in developing and implementing national policies and strategies to change these unsustainable patterns. The U.S. still lags behind on such leadership.

U.S. strategy for addressing climate change should be part of a larger national sustainability plan to change our overall unsustainable habits. Instead of subsidizing fossil fuels, our national energy strategy should emphasize sustainable energy solutions—such as wind power, solar power, and biomass, subsidy reform, public transportation improvements, vehicle fuel and engine standards, among others. We need to call on our leaders to give greater importance to the health and well-being of our communities and environment, noting that the current costs of our energy use include not only climate change, but the health risks from air and water pollution, and urban sprawl, not to mention war and other conflicts over competition for ever decreasing supplies of oil.

As citizens, there are many actions we can take at the individual and household level to assess and reduce our consumption of fossil fuel-based energy (e.g., window insulation, hybrid cars vs. SUVs, lowering household electricity waste). More importantly though, individuals must inform and educate themselves about the politics of energy.

Jeffrey Barber Executive Director, Integrative Strategies Forum