A Global Effort

Contrary to what media and political agenda may advocate, the IPCC states that climate change is not only real but inevitable.  To stop climate change completely is currently impossible by the laws of physics and chemistry. The goal of the IPCC is to rather instead limit global warming at 1.5C instead of letting temperatures increase to 2C. This would require that human-caused CO2 emissions worldwide be reduced 45 percent by 2030 which would require much to change. However, limiting global warming to 1.5C would make drastic differences in the ecosystem of the planet including the survival of several species, the global sea level, and the diminishing Arctic sea ice (IPCC p. 1).  There exists technological fixes that can potentially remove CO2 from the air or capture carbon as it is released, however, there is little to guarantee that the CO2 will remain contained indefinitely at a large scale and may carry future risks for sustainable development (IPCC p. 2). Instead the IPCC cautions that the actions of human civilizations today may be the most important in determining the future of the world’s ecosystem (IPCC p. 2). The United Nations’ scientific panel currently suggests a carbon tax in order to mitigate CO2 use, however, the use of a carbon tax has been met with much opposition from political parties including the Trump party in the US (Davenport p. 1).

Climate science and the effects of climate change has been met with increasing skepticism and sets a good example of what becomes of science without political or monetary backing. It is important to note that the IPCC does not conduct its own research but instead compiles thousands of scientific papers in order to inform policymakers where agreement, differences of opinion, and where further research is needed in regards to climate change (IPCC p. 4).  Furthermore, the effects of CO2 emission on climate change has long been known by scientists such as John Tyndall who is credited for the first experimental confirmation of the greenhouse effect (Reidy p. 2).  However, the United States has continued to reject climate science, climate policy, and ultimately academic science in order to further political agenda and states intent to withdraw from the Paris agreement until “the identification of terms that are better for the American people”(p. 3). The actions of the Trump administration not only represent a denial of academic sciences, but more specifically a denial of sciences contrary to the political agenda of the Trump administration whose political agenda represents a careless and reckless abandon of future consequence and international relations for the sake of the American people. For some countries climate science may bring a unprecedented sense of unity and trust as countless people strive towards a shared global vision, for the US it may be what places us at odds with many nations and exemplifies the effect of our biases on our capacity to trust in academic sciences.