Christina Brumbaugh

11/12/14

Earth Science IH / D Odd

Shogren, Elizabeth. "Ahead of UN Climate Summit, Global Treaty on Warming Looks Unlikely." News.nationalgeographic.com. National Geographic, 21 Sept. 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014.

One hundred and twenty heads of state held a meeting in New York City, supervised by President Obama,  to discuss ideas on how to handle the growing  potential dangers due to climate change. This meeting was not to put anything into action, whereas a meeting in December 2015 will be held by the United Nations. It is intended that all countries will have the ability to have a say in solving these crises. The choice of how each country will attack this problem depends on its financial circumstances and economic priorities. Despite the efforts of smaller countries to suggest a treaty, it seems unlikely that any treaty will be formed in this next meeting . The three largest pollution producers, China, India, and the United States. are unwilling to risk the stability of their economies. A legally binding treaty would cut down pollution emissions and take away from countries’ liberty. Instead of a treaty, the U.S would prefer to take voluntary action in reducing pollution. However, other countries worry that it will not be enough: “We refuse to accept that someone says it cannot be legally binding and everybody has to live with it because [larger countries] are so powerful,” says Jumeau, the ambassador for climate change for the island of Seychelles. As this issue continues to grow, it also becomes more financially complex as certain countries will be overshadowed by larger and more affluent nations.

Bringing awareness to the urgent need of altering the ways in which we function as a society is key to cultivating a cleaner planet, as no one country can do this on its own. These meetings allow the world to brainstorm their ideas and come together to fix the problem. Scientists warn that if the world’s pollution emission is not reduced by 40%-70%, there would be “catastrophic outcomes” by 2050. Many may immediately regard this plan as unrealistic; for most of the world’s products are made in factories. Examining this conflict causes people to question the balance between money and production versus the good of our planet. The possibility of small islands submerging under water may also be considered a catastrophic outcome. If we do not cut down production by at least 40% in 2050, serious thoughts of alternative ways of living must be considered. For instance, massive boats would be an option to keep people afloat and alive once their homes go underwater.

The article offered perspectives from several educated and passionate people, who held different viewpoints from each other and from the author, making it more interesting to read as it lets you form your own opinions. It seems as if the title was not representative of what was written in the article. The passage mostly consisted of hypothetical thoughts and opinions from different sources and named useful facts to help the reader further comprehend this subject. It focused on more than just treaties, so a title change would be appropriate. I also felt that the author’s voice was not impactful enough; she mostly stated facts and other people’s opinions, but none of her own to emphasize the significance of the issue.