Unfortunately, today’s environmental issues seem to be (I believe wrongly) linked with politics. For some reason, the common perception is that most of the people who “care” about the environment are from one political party, while those who “don’t care” about the environment are from the other political party. I’m not sure that landfills or smog care what political party we belong to, we just know that landfills are growing in record numbers and pollution is so rampant in some parts of the world that people walk around with masks to prevent breathing in hazardous fumes. We shouldn’t need to have political debates on issues that we can see with our very own eyes.
Take the Great Pacific Garbage Patch for example; this is an area of floating garbage located in the central North Pacific ocean which is made up of marine litter and estimated to be a region of garbage twice the size of the State of Texas (If that isn’t staggering, I’m not sure what qualifies). The patch contains high concentrations of plastic and other debris that have been trapped by the currents of the North Pacific. It is estimated that the area contains over 100 Million tons of debris that range in size from small pellets used in abrasive cleaners, to abandoned fishing nets. I think both political parties can agree this is not necessarily a good thing.
As recently reported in the media, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wants the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to hold a public hearing on the scientific evidence for man-made climate change in an attempt to stop potentially sweeping federal emissions regulations. In essence, they want to put the science of Global Warming on trial. If the EPA denies the request (which is expected), the Chamber plans to take the fight to federal court.
This has all come about as the result of the EPA’s plan to formally declare in the coming weeks that the heat-trapping gases which scientists blame for climate change will have the following devastating results; Endangerment to human health, increased likelihood of more frequent and intense heat waves, increased wildfires, degradation of air quality, increased rain and flooding in some areas and increased drought in others, greater sea level rise, severe storms, harm to water resources, harm to agriculture and finally harm to wildlife and ecosystems. The net result is that the EPA will make CO2 subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act which is a cornerstone of the current administration’s plan to set strict new emissions standards on cars and trucks.
But, even if you only believe ¼ of what the EPA says is correct in reference to the findings, isn’t it still worth it to ensure that future generations have the opportunity for cleaner air, less garbage in landfills and cleaner drinking water? Legislation is just the first step. The real power lies in encouraging entrepreneurial businesses across the country to seize this opportunity to transform our wasteful society into a more productive resource conscious economy. By letting businesses take the lead, we should be able to invent technology to help move us from a 20mpg vehicle into a 200mpg vehicle which will be better for everyone in spite of political affiliation. Regardless of whether you believe in climate change or not, we should all believe that less pollution and less waste is a good thing for business as well as the planet. If we can’t all agree on that, the only party we end up belonging to, is the losing party.
