Healing Liberty’s Scars
By: Aundre Hamilton
Tags: Carbon Emissions, Alternative Energy, Renewable Energy, Climate Change

For many residents of New Jersey, such as myself, the shore is a way of life. However, climate change is threatening to put an end to it. In New Jersey, climate change is posing as a major issue to health, property, liveability, and ecosystems. As the atmosphere warms, summers are too, bringing more extreme heat waves with them. These heat waves have already proved to be lethal to many New Jerseyans and with the temperatures increasing they’ll become even deadlier. Not only do they hit hard physically, but they do damage financially as well with steeper summertime electric bills due to cranking up the A/C in order to be safe, as well as comfortable. The warming atmosphere also brings with it a higher sea level that can be problematic for New Jersey residents for various reasons. A steadily increasing sea level will destroy homes, displacing thousands of people. The Union of Concerned Scientists states “that by 2045 more than 62,000 New Jersey homes… will be underwater, displacing nearly 80,000 people.” This destruction, “valued at $26.8 billion,” could occur with only a sea-level rise of two feet. However, this doesn’t compare to what a hurricane, such as Sandy, could do with its damage that was around seventy-billion dollars. What’s worse is that due to higher sea levels, warmer air, and a warmer ocean, storms such as Sandy will no longer be outliers. Since warmer oceans better fuel hurricanes and warmer air can hold more water for rainfall, climate change is a recipe for superstorm disasters. Climate change is also already affecting New Jersey’s unique ecosystem, the Pine Barrens. As temperatures rise the forest is being swarmed by an invasive species of tree-killing beetles, the Southern Pine Beetle. Normally cold winters kill off the insect but as winters continue to warm, the beetles’ threat increases. Although New Jersey is in grave danger due to climate change, all of the United States is in the same boat due to various factors that affect certain regions differently.

(“Here’s How Climate Change Will Make N.J. Deadlier in Your Lifetime.”)

As a whole, the average temperature in the United States has risen by 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit from 1901 to 2016, however, from 2021 to 2050 it’s estimated that it’ll increase by around 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit. Although this may seem insignificant, if temperatures continue to rise in small increments, the effects could prove to be irreversible. These effects “are expected to increase the intensity and frequency of extreme events.” These phenomena, which include coastal flooding, heavy precipitation events, forest fires, drought, and hurricanes, will put “human safety, infrastructure, agriculture, water quality and quantity, and natural ecosystems” at high risk. Coastal flooding is expected to get worse on the East and Gulf coasts, with the sea level being estimated to rise higher than the global average. This will be caused by things such as the gravitational field of the Earth changing due to melting ice. Heavy precipitation events are increasing in both intensity and frequency in the U.S. with the most extreme cases occurring in the Northeast and Midwest. Heat waves have been occurring more frequently since the 1960s in America, with extremely cold temperatures and cold waves occurring less frequently. Even record-setting high temperatures are expected to become increasingly common. Forest fires have been occurring more frequently in the West and Alaska, with no sign of stopping. This has been greatly affecteding the ecosystems in those regions. Droughts have been plaguing the west and if nothing is done to combat climate change, a long-lasting hydrological drought, an evident low water supply due to consistent dry weather patterns, could be possible before the end of the century. Hurricanes, as stated before, increase in intensity in a warmer climate. This would be disastrous for the east, as well as the west coast.

(Wuebbles)

These cases of extreme weather phenomena aren’t hypothetical and have already begun to take place in recent years. A prime example being the 2019–2020 Australian bushfires. Bushfires are a natural part of the Australian ecosystem, however, these most recent ones were fueled by climate change. From 1997 to 2009, Australia suffered through the Millennium drought, Australia’s driest, recorded 13 year period. However, in 2010 and 2011 they had their two wettest recorded periods. After that in 2017, they suffered through yet another drought leading into 2018 and 2019, their hottest and driest years on record. These extreme weather changes created more vegetation and also dried it out giving the natural bushfires more fuel to burn.

(Nuccitelli)

With these added factors due to climate change, the bushfires burnt over 18 million hectares of land, which 1,800,000,000 acres of land. Nearly 6,000 buildings were destroyed, with over 2,800 of them being houses. It’s estimated that a billion animals died, devastating ecosystems and endangering species. The polluted air is threatening the health of Australians, even those briefly exposed. Symptoms can vary from eye and respiratory irritation to even premature death. These fires have cost the country around $100 billion, as well. However, the fires didn’t only affect Australia as the smoke was pushed into the stratosphere to reach countries as far as New Zealand, Argentina, and Chile. To make matters worse, the fires have produced as much carbon dioxide as Australia produces annually in only three months, that being 400 megatonnes. This will only increase their emissions, thus increasing the likelihood of fires this intense occurring again. The United States is roughly 1.3 times larger than Australia, so if fires this severe occurred there, there’s no telling how bad they could have been had they happened here. Just like in Australia, the fires wouldn’t only affect Americans but Mexicans and Canadians, as well. Fires of that magnitude would cripple our nation.

(UN Environment Programme)

While the United States is greatly affected by climate change currently, it could clearly become worse. This is why we must begin attempting to vastly lower our emissions as the U.S. is one of the largest producers of carbon dioxide, being the 2nd largest. In 2018 the world produced 33.1 gigatons of carbon dioxide, with the United States making up 5.41 Gt of the total. That’s nearly ⅙ of all carbon emissions coming from one country (“Each Country’s Share of CO2 Emissions”). A majority of the emissions come from transportation, electricity, industry, and commercial/residential (US EPA, OAR). However, this can all change. The United States can reduce its carbon footprint in order to combat climate change through my proposal, the End Climate Change Policy. This proposal would be on a national scale where the United States would be investing in renewable energy, enacting climate policies, and strengthening regulations on the fossil fuel industry.

The United States needs to start transitioning towards renewable energy as fossil fuels aren’t a long term option. We began to become more dependent on gas because it was a cleaner alternative to oil, but now it’s time to make a transition once again to an even cleaner option. Fossil fuel generation has become more expensive in most of the U.S. than renewable energy and with its generation come many cons. Its production, transportation, and combustion cause issues for “clean air, clean water, wildlife, landscapes and ecosystems, human health, [and] local communities” (Carter, McEnaney). Gas leaks are also an issue that is adding to our emissions and it’s another cause of poor health. Fossil fuels are also an issue in power generation as power plants aren’t equipped with carbon capture and storage technology so their emissions go unchecked. The drilling of natural gas also adds to health risks as well as climate issues. It’s clear that fossil fuels cause more harm than good which is why there are numerous forms of alternative energy that can replace it.

Investing money into these industries will put us on the right track towards net zero carbon emissions. Not only will this transition be better for the environment, but it will be better for the economy, as well. This is because renewable energy is becoming cheaper than fossil fuels year by year. So much to the fact that “By 2025, almost every existing coal plant in the United States will cost more to operate than building replacement wind and solar [facilities] within 35 miles of each plant” (Maracci). Renewable energy doesn’t just stop at solar and wind either, it also encompasses other sources such as hydroelectric, geothermal, biomass, and fusion. These alternatives also just make more sense to utilize. If the United States were to completely rely on solar power to meet its electricity demand, around 10,000 sq. miles of panels would be sufficient (Maracci). Although this total appears to be astonishing, since it’s larger than Vermont, it could be done without taking up any extra land due to solar panels ability to be installed on rooftops. The country also has a lot of potential for wind energy, especially in the central most states in the country that are the windiest. Many U.S. states also have the ability to utilize hydroelectric power, with over 20 states touching a large body of water. Also while we lead the world in geothermal energy, the western states have the ability to generate even more electricity.

With the transition away from fossil fuels will come an increase of jobless Americans. However, the investments into these renewable energy industries will supply these newly unemployed Americans with jobs but many other Americans, as well. Fossil fuel workers were already outnumbered 3-to-1 by clean energy workers, with them consisting of around 3.3 million Americans (Marcacci). This gap will only become greater as employment in the field keeps growing. In 2018, employment in clean energy grew 3.6% and had an expected growth of 6% in 2019 (Marcacci). Another ginormous job spike will come from construction, as well. To get to net zero emissions, the electric sector will have to create a large capital expenditure plan to create these new green facilities and equipment, thus needing thousands of new laborers to construct them. The workers in clean energy will also earn wages higher than the national average.

Next on the agenda would be enacting new and reenacting old climate policies. A substantial one of which being the Paris Agreement. On November 4, 2020, President Trump withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement claiming it would “kill jobs and impose onerous regulations on the U.S. economy” (McBride). However, the true purpose of the Agreement is to reduce carbon emissions with the goal of keeping worldwide temperature increases under 2 degrees Celsius. That specific temperature was chosen because if global temperatures become higher than that threshold, its effects could potentially be irreversible. Nearly every country in the world is in on the Agreement, even the highest producer of carbon emissions, China. With the U.S.’ leave, this global effort might not be attainable, as the U.S. is the second-largest producer of carbon emissions in the world. Along with leaving, the President has rejected Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which would’ve set emissions-reduction requirements for each state while giving them the freedom of how to achieve them. While those are the main two, the Trump Administration has also rolled back 27 policies regarding air pollution and emissions and 12 policies regarding drilling and extraction, with multiple still in the works. We need to put an end to these reversals, reenact these policies and even strengthen them in order to put the country back on track to lowering emissions. Re-joining the Paris Agreement will also be a huge step forward, as well.

Finally, regulations regarding fossil fuel industries must be strengthened. Under Trump’s “America First Energy Plan,” he’s decreased regulation of fossil fuels in order to create new jobs and reach “energy independence” (McBride). However, this is only hurting our country and economy. The fossil fuel industry is on a decline in the U.S. and renewable energy is already taking its place. It’s also more of a strain on our economy to invest in fossil fuels as they’re more expensive and these investments will prove to be unfruitful in the near future. Economists claim that protecting these jobs in the oil, coal, and gas industries will hurt the U.S. financially since renewable energy will offer more long-term employment and benefits (McBride). This is why regulations such as the following will be beneficial. Since the U.S. has a surplus of gas pipelines, causing many leaks which add to our emissions, and more are being constructed yearly, a rigorous pipeline review process should be put into place. This review will actually look into not only the need for new pipelines but its effects on the climate, as well. Carbon capture should be put into place at facilities where a lot of methane is emitted so these facilities emissions can reach net zero. This would combat the rollbacks of federal rules requiring “substantial quantities of methane” be captured (Carter, McEnaney). Also, acts like drilling on federal land should be prohibited and emissions restrictions should be placed on oil and gas wells.

This is the only possible solution to reach net zero emissions. Even if carbon capture was used at all facilities that produce methane or other emissions, it would only reduce emissions, not nullify them. Transitioning to renewable energy will nullify and not only reduce emissions. Becoming completely reliant on renewable energy is also the only way to eliminate transportation emissions. By eventually transitioning to electric vehicles, there would also be no more carbon dioxide from vehicles contributing to climate change.

Through the End Climate Change Policy, carbon emissions in the U.S. can reach net zero which will stop a disastrous future from occurring. A future where 55% of the Earth’s population “lives in areas subject to more than 20 days of lethal heat a year.” A future where one billion people will be displaced as a result of rising sea levels making “some of the world’s most populous cities uninhabitable.” A future where “Food production falls by one-fifth as droughts, heat waves, flooding and storms affect crops.” A future where Earth is no longer a comfortable place for humans to live. This future could be as soon as 2050, if nothing is done. By acting today, it could mean saving the world for future Americans and humans.

Works Cited

Carter, Sharyl, and Bobby McEnaney. “The Climate Crisis Requires That We Move Away from Gas.” NRDC, 11 July 2019, www.nrdc.org/experts/sheryl-carter/climate-crisis-requires-we-move-away-gas. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.

Energy Innovation: Policy and Technology. “Renewable Energy Job Boom Creates Economic Opportunity As Coal Industry Slumps.” Forbes, 22 Apr. 2019, www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2019/04/22/renewable-energy-job-boom-creating-economic-opportunity-as-coal-industry-slumps/?sh=3471eba33665. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.

“Here’s How Climate Change Will Make N.J. Deadlier in Your Lifetime.” Nj, 19 Oct. 2018, www.nj.com/news/2018/10/climate_change_will_make_nj_deadlier_and_it_will_p.html. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.

McBride, James. “The Consequences of Leaving the Paris Agreement.” Council on Foreign Relations, 2017, www.cfr.org/backgrounder/consequences-leaving-paris-agreement. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.

Nuccitelli, Dana. “How Climate Change Influenced Australia’s Unprecedented Fires » Yale Climate Connections.” Yale Climate Connections, 17 Jan. 2020, yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/01/how-climate-change-influenced-australias-unprecedented-fires/. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.

Parfit, Michael. “Energy Sources, Renewable Energy, Oil, Coal — National Geographic.” Nationalgeographic.com, 5 Oct. 2009, www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/powering-the-future/. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.

UN Environmental Programme. “Ten Impacts of the Australian Bushfires.” UN Environment, 22 Jan. 2020, www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/ten-impacts-australian-bushfires. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.

Union of Concerned Scientists. “Each Country’s Share of CO2 Emissions.” Union of Concerned Scientists, 2020, www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emissions. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.

US EPA,OAR. “Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks | US EPA.” US EPA, 8 Feb. 2017, www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.

Wallach, Philip A. “Where Does US Climate Policy Stand in 2019?” Brookings, Brookings, 22 Mar. 2019, www.brookings.edu/2019/03/22/where-does-u-s-climate-policy-stand-in-2019/. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.

Weise, Elizabeth. “End of Civilization: Climate Change Apocalypse Could Start by 2050 If We Don’t Act, Report Warns.” USA TODAY, USA TODAY, 5 June 2019, www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/06/05/climate-change-apocalypse-could-start-2050-if-we-do-noting/1356865001/. Accessed 2 Dec. 2020.

Wuebbles, Donald. “How Will Climate Change Affect the United States in Decades to Come? — Eos.” Eos, 3 Nov. 2017, eos.org/features/how-will-climate-change-affect-the-united-states-in-decades-to-come. Accessed 24 Nov. 2020.