Global Weird-ing

There are those who choose to believe...

The warming signs, the documentaries, the overwhelming scientific support.  The concept of "global warming" became part of the American consciousness after the success of Al Gore's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth.  The environmental movement in America is centuries old, but in the 21st century, it has become a mainstream issue/concern/debate.

But the term "global warming" has seemed to have subsided.  Since the "great depression", the momentum behind the green movement has been stalled.  With harsh criticism, an incident of research scandal, and a political wing that politicized the issue, many Americans are thinking twice about this "threat".

Both liberals and conservatives can agree that the Earth is getting warmer.

But they disagree as to why.

Liberals contend that our planet is warming due to the influx of CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels.  Some scientists have traced this incline in temperatures back to the industrial revolution of the 19th century.  With evermore machines, consumption, and production by the human race, comes the expansion of our carbon footprint.



Conservatives have increasingly become skeptical of "global warming".  Their doubts and criticisms, many of them being personal attacks against Al Gore (former Democratic presidential candidate), have fostered doubt and disagreement over the "threat" of climate change.

Some of the pundits have flat out disputed the scientific research.  They claim that there is no empirical evidence that links rising temperatures with the industrialization of man.  They question the cause.

And with this doubt, they scoff at the idea that our society has to slow production.  If we slow production (to meet Cap and Trade standards, or to lower our Co2 output), we will slow the economy.  Why should we forfeit progress?  Again, they see climate change as a naturally occurring phenomena.  Even for those conservatives who believe that humans have damaged the environment, they claim that the economic cost is too much.  Close the factory?  Pay to go green?  All of these modifications are costly.  Why invest in a weaker power solution, like wind or solar, when the U.S. is full of coal and natural gas?

Then there is the geopolitical issue.  Can the U.S. afford to limit its production, while newly emerging economies such as China and India up their production?  If they do not agree to lower carbon emissions, will the U.S. bow to its competitors?





Ah, that's right... the gas!  

So, we have an "addiction" to foreign oil.  A fairly new solution has come about with the extraction of shale gas.  There is a large supply of natural gas within the Marchellus Shale, located in the North East of the United States.

 

This gas-filled area could be the solution to some of the nation's energy dependence issues.  In order to extract the gas from miles under the earth's surface, energy companies have to drill.

"Fracking" is currently the most commonly-used technique for natural gas extraction within the Marcellus Shale.  By forcing water and other chemicals (like formaldehyde) down the shafts, to break up rock and extract the gas, these companies doing some potential harm to the local water sources.  There are several studies, videos, and documentaries coming out that show the devastating effects that fracking can have on the local environment.  The most threating occurance has been the tainting of wells and water supplies.

America is, again, stuck in a position.  Environmentalists have come out blasting the gas mining companies for piping toxins into the water table.  But at the same time, there is an energy solution at the bottom of those shafts.  With the economy in decline and jobs in high demand, this new energy project has some potential.

Doesn't America have to take advantage of this natural resource in its own back yard?

Think about the politics behind this issue.

Think about the pro's and cons.  See what adds up.

What will save the day here?

Is global warming too far off to interest Americans?

Can the U.S. afford to go green?