Sdi 2010 Midterms Impacts Updates



Download 0.56 Mb.
Page27/34
Date10.08.2017
Size0.56 Mb.
#30755
1   ...   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   ...   34

Warming Legislation Good


New carbon legislation solves runaway warming

Pooley, 9

Eric, Kalb Fellow, Shorenstein Center, Harvard U, ‘How Much Would You Pay to Save the Planet? ,’ January, http://www.hks.harvard.edu/presspol/publications/papers/discussion_papers/d49_pooley.pdf

When it comes to global climate change, it is sometimes said that we are the meteor.The analogy is imperfect, of course. Cli-mate change is slow and gradual, at least for now, unfolding on a time scale that confounds the capacities of our politics, our economics, and our journalism. Abrupt, rapid disruptions are likely, but no one can say when they may come. De-spite the uncertainties, climate scientists have no doubt that the impact is already being felt and little doubt that future con-sequences will be severe to catastrophic. It is too late to “prevent” global warming, but it may yet be possible to avoid cata-clysm. Doing so, environmental experts overwhelmingly agree, requires decarbon-izing our economy—not with a meteor-smashing space shot but with a broad, urgent World War II–style mobilization. Intense opposition to that sort of action remains, in part due to fears of rising en-ergy costs in a carbon-constrained world. Well-designed policies are the key to re-ducing emissions while avoiding price spikes, and public support is the key to passing those policies into law. A vigorous press ought to be central to both climate policy and climate politics, but this is not a time of media vigor. The American press has been hit by a meteor of its own, a secular revenue decline that is driving huge reductions in newsroom staff and making disciplined climate coverage less likely just as it becomes most crucial. So it is well worth asking: How is the press do-ing on the climate solutions story? This paper attempts to answer that ques-tion by examining coverage of the eco-nomic debate over Senate Bill 2191, the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2008. The economics of climate pol-icy—not the science of climate change—is at the heart of our story because the most important step toward national mo-bilization is putting a price on carbon emissions, either through a carbon tax or, in Lieberman-Warner’s case, a mandatory declining cap. This is the great political test, and the great story, of our time. But news organizations have not been treating it that way.


Warming Legislation Good


Key to global action

Bales 9

Carter, managing partner emeritus of the Wicks Group, a private equity firm, ‘Avoiding climate disaster,’ Feb 22, http://whatmatters.mckinseydigital.com/climate_change/avoiding-climate-disaster



The primary benefit of imposing a carbon cap in the United States is the prospect of containing the adverse impact of global warming. Assessments by prominent researchers such as Lord Nicholas Stern, former chief economist of the World Bank, suggest that the quantifiable negative GDP impact would range anywhere from 5 percent or less up to 20 percent from unchecked climate change. Moreover, while the basic physics of global warming are well established, profound uncertainties remain regarding the potentially catastrophic effects of climate change. If the United States decides to cap domestic emissions, the hope is that this action would provide the credibility needed to negotiate an international accord, which would help address the problem on a global scale. Even if such an accord proves elusive, by moving early the United States would still reduce the risk of extreme global-warming outcomes while developing the technological edge to roll out solutions quickly to global markets once a serious global emissions containment regime is negotiated.


Warming Leads to War – Nuclear


Global warming leads to nuclear war

Dyer 9

Gwynne, MA in Military History and PhD in Middle Eastern History former @ Senior Lecturer in War Studies at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, Climate Wars

THIS BOOK IS AN ATTEMPT, peering through a glass darkly, to understand the politics and the strategies of the potentially apocalyptic crisis that looks set to occupy most of the twentyfirst century. There are now many books available that deal with the science of climate change and some that suggest possible approaches to getting the problem under control, but there are few that venture very far into the grim detail of how real countries experiencing very different and, in some cases, overwhelming pressures as global warming proceeds, are likely to respond to the changes. Yet we all know that it's mostly politics, national and international, that will decide the outcomes. Two things in particular persuaded me that it was time to write this book. One was the realization that the first and most important impact of climate change on human civilization will bean acute and permanent crisis of food supply. Eating regularly is a non-negotiable activity, and countries that cannot feed their people are unlikely to be "reasonable" about it. Not all of them will be in what we used to call the "Third World" -the developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The other thing that finally got the donkey's attention was a dawning awareness that, in a number of the great powers, climate change scenarios are already playing a large and increasing role in the military planning process. Rationally, you would expect this to be the case, because each country pays its professional military establishment to identify and counter "threats" to its security, but the implications of their scenarios are still alarming. There is a probability of wars, including even nuclear wars, if temperatures rise two to three degrees Celsius. Once that happens, all hope of international cooperation to curb emissions and stop the warming goes out the window.



Download 0.56 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   ...   34




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page