Talal1

Name: Talal H
Instructors name: xxxxxxxxxxxx
Course: English 102-37
Essay: Research, problem/ solution. Final Draft.
Date: 04-18-2013

The unstable rate of Carbon Dioxide Emission and Cheap-Fossil-Fuel

The global CO2 emission is at an essential point in its existence. Carbon Dioxide
CO2emissions are at the highest levels that they have been in history and the amount of
CO2 in the atmosphere continues to increase (Web.ncf.ca, 1). Not only the growth of CO2 in
the atmosphere is a problem, but also the concern of how the United States is going to
continue obtaining resources such as oil and natural gas. For this reason, environmentalists
have claimed that CO2 emissions are a danger to the world, and severe consequences will
happen if we dont do something to lower CO2. It is important to say that the world is at an
important point in its existence because of how much oil and other natural resources are
being utilized in the United States. These resources will not last forever, and it is important to
beer in mind that if the United States continues to use energy resources like it has done for
the last century, it is likely that energy resources such as oil and natural gas will not be able to
fuel America in the next century. If the environment is not protected, future generations in
America will not have access to resources because the increasing in population and energy
consumption. On top of this, CO2 emissions have been proven that in urban areas, the annual
temperatures have increased and this is dangerous and will lead to more deaths in urban cities
on account of global warming. Environmentalists realize that rising temperatures will upset
the American way of life and could lead to death. In order for the United States to avoid an

Talal2

energy catastrophe, democratic government in the United States, starting in cities, need to
begin to prepare for the near future by cutting down CO2 emissions and finding better ways
to manage energy resources.
- Why it is a problem:
It is true that the United States has been producing at an accelerated rate over the last
century. Due to this increased production, CO2 emissions have reached an historical level.
According to the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change, consensus of scientific opinion
is that the Earths climate is being affected by human activities (Lpl.arizona.edu, 67). The
earths atmosphere is full of CO2 and this will lead to increased temperatures on the earth in
which many natural resources, human activities and ecosystem will be affected negatively
from the temperature increasing.
If the congress doesnt realize the seriousness of this problem, then the CO2 will
continue to increase. Furthermore, the global warming is not debatable. According to The U.S
Global Research Program, The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due
primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly
from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas) (Karl & Melillo $ Peterson, 24).
- Chicago experience in Global warming:
To better explain how urban areas can be contributed with the unstable CO2
emissions, a recent study was done in Chicago that examined the temperatures in the city. To
put the amount of CO2 in perspective, the state of Illinois ranks very high on a list of
countries that produce CO2. If Illinois was a country, it would be the fifth highest producer of
CO2 in the world (Web.internationalchicago.com, 1). In a study of Chicago, the result was
reached that The city of Chicago has already experienced a number of severe heat waves
(Hayhoe & Sheridan & Kalkstein & Greene, 65). Scientists made evaluations on the
temperature of the city and they concluded that in the future heat waves in Chicago would be

Talal3

significantly longer, warmer and would lead to more deaths do to heat stroke. The scientists
found that there would be a dramatic increase in the length of heat waves (Hayhoe &
Sheridan & Kalkstein & Greene, 70). Also, the scientists concluded, It is clear that extreme
heat represents a growing threat to the City of Chicago a threat shared by many other urban
centers around the country (Hayhoe & Sheridan & Kalkstein & Greene, 72).As a result of
that, the safety of Americas urban centers are at risk. The congress should recognize the
environmental and social concern of increasing temperatures in American cities. Also, cities
should take action to lower CO2 emissions to protect the people in the cities.
- Urbanization Vs. Global warming:
The question of how urban centers contribute to global warming is noticeable in the
amount of CO2 that urban centers create in comparison to rural communities. Because urban
areas are so used to live luxuriously and with technology, the reality of global warming
doesnt come to the minds of many Americans who live in suburbia America. Often, people
living in suburbia America have to drive their cars to work and this contributes significantly
to global warming in comparison to people who can take the bus or the train. People in
America are not educated about CO2 emissions. They dont know that when they drive to
work every day, CO2 enters the atmosphere. It should be a priority of cities to educate
American people how to be conservative with CO2 emissions. According to research done in
Environment and Urbanization, statements have been made suggesting that up to 80 per
cent of the worlds anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are attributable to cities
(Hoornweg & Sugar & Gomez, 208). Cities are the main places of industry, and city like
Chicago are some of the largest producers of CO2. The economic importance of cities is huge
and what happen in the cities is remarkable in the industry. For example, In terms of
economic significance, Tokyo and New York both have GDPs greater than Canadas
(Hoornweg & Sugar & Gomez, 209). Essentially, climate change and urbanization are two

Talal4

of the most important issues facing the world and the United States today (Hoornweg &
Sugar & Gomez, 207).
- Urbanization Market V.s The Environment:
The most interesting part about urbanization is its connection to The United States
economic optimization. In the books, The Bridge at the Edge of the World: Capitalism, the
Environment, and Crossing from Crisis to Sustainability, James G. Speth attempts to explain
how the market and the environment are connected. The one point that should be made
however is that when it comes to the poor, often the practices of global capitalism will have
devastating effects on the environment. For example, if the statistics, that 80 per cent of the
world CO2 is produced by cities, is taken seriously, then it makes sense that if the poorest
regions of the world are industrialized and urbanized, then more CO2 will go into the
atmosphere. Although urbanization likely presents the best chance for the worlds poorest
(Hoornweg & Sugar & Gomez, 207), it also will contribute significantly to CO2 in the
environment. Because of this, James G. Speth clarifies that the United States should
transform the market into a powerful instrument for environmental protection and restoration
(Speth, 90)
- Economic solution:
Speth argues that one of the solutions to the problem of global warming is to use
democratic government to attempt to lower the amount of CO2 produced in the United States.
Not only is this good for the environment, it is also good for society and the people who live
in the United States. Speth cites several examples of how the government has passed laws
that have had the goal of protecting the environment. The Clean Air Act was passed to
protect the environment and other laws have been passed to set environmental standards
(Speth, 95). Speth argues thatenvironmental economics can guide us to the least-cost,
most efficient way of achieving that goal (Speth, 91). Not only does Speth support this idea

Talal5

of cost-benefit analysis, but Amory B. Lovins also shows convincing evidence that money
can be saved when the government or the market tries to protect the environment. This is a
good reason why congress should invest in the future and start using conserving resources in
order for them to make money. For example, large American corporations have changed their
policies. In the article, Profitable Solutions to Climate, Oil, and Proliferation, Lovins shows
how large American corporations have saved a considerable amount of money when they
have cut their CO2 emissions. For example, DuPont said it would cut its 2010 global
greenhouse emissions to 60% below 1990's; by 2006, it had achieved an 80% reduction at a
$3,000-million profit. Dow's $1,000-million investment in energy efficiency has so far
returned $9,000 million in savings. BP met its operational carbon reduction goals 8 years
early at a $2,000-million profit (Lovins, 1).
- Wrong perspective:
The majority of people understand the bad and negative effects on the environment in
which the human being is the main reason in that negative impact. According to the New
York Times, Global emissions of carbon dioxide jumped by the largest amount on record in
2010 (Gills, 1). Furthermore, a recent study done by the EPA shows the relationship between
the spread of diseases and the climate change. In other words as the climate change moves to
the worst, we are expecting more diseases that are generated because of the poor quality of
air. Nowadays, the demand of energy has been increasing due to Overpopulation in the world.
Thus, we need to generate more energy, as we cant control the increasing in the population.
Current resources such as Burning fuel, obtaining coals by Mining Mountain can lead to
catastrophic implications on the human and the ecosystem. Many species have categorized
under endangered species and we are expecting more and more of them, also tremendous
numbers of natural disasters have been occurring because of climate change. As a result of
that, people and government sectors shall respond seriously and soberly to a problem like

Talal6

that. Many major leading countries have addressed climate change as major and global
problem. According to Pew Research Center, Concern about climate change is much less
pervasive in the United States than its in some of other countries (pewglobal.org, web 1).
- The most convincing argument against CO2 emissions and global warming:
After reading this, it is easy to see that when companies try to protect the
environment, they can save money. That is important because of how quickly the United
States is using its energy resources. Perhaps James Howard Kunstler explains the most
convincing arguments. In the article, The Long Emergency, Kunstler recognizes that we
face the end of the cheap-fossil-fuel era (Rolling Stone, 1). Kunstler also recognizes that
rescuing our way of life with renewables are also unrealistic (Rolling Stone, 3). It is often
thought that renewable energy is the way of the future. However, Kunstler thinks differently
because he believes that the American way of life will soon come to an end. Essentially,
Kunstler sums up his argument by saying, The circumstances of the Long Emergency will
require us to downscale and re-scale virtually everything we do and how we do it (Rolling
Stone, 4). This means that the American way of life will change. People will not be able to
drive their cars because of the lack of oil, and many technologies that use cheap fossil fuels
will not be able to be replaced by renewable energy. Kunstler says, We will not be able to
believe that this is happening to us, that 200 years of modernity can be brought to its knees by
a world-wide power shortage (Rolling Stone, 6).
- Will renewable energies save our future?
James Howard Kunstler makes his argument bigger in his book The Long Emergency:
Surviving the Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Century. In the 21st century,
population growth is a consequence of the availability of cheap fossil fuels. This had led to
Suburbia in American life. This type of lifestyle is expensive and has only been possible due
to the availability of technology and cheap fossil fuels. However, Kunstler notices that

Talal7

Islamist nations possess most of the remaining oil in the world (Kunstler, 61). He says that
if there was no oil remaining in the Middle East, not only would it make life in America hard,
but it would also lead to regional conflicts in the Middle East. This is true because America
has not been able to occupy oil rich countries, such as Iraq.
However, Kunstlers main argument is that renewable energies are not the solution to
Americas energy problems. Natural gas, although an important energy resource, will be
much like oil. Kunstler says, Indeed, North America, faces a chronic and accelerating
natural gas shortage that sooner or later will be described as a crisis (Kunstler, 107). This is
for two reasons. The first reason is that pipelines are not a solution to distributing natural gas,
and the often talked about ANWR region in Alaska will also not provide the United States
with enough energy resources for the future (Kunstler, 107). The next renewable resource
Kunstler talks about is hydrogen. Again, with hydrogen, it will not be enough for America in
the future. This is because of Kunstlers example of A mid-size filling station on any
frequented freeway easily sells 25 tons of fuel each day. This fuel can be delivered by one 40ton gasoline truck. But it would need 21 hydrogen trucks to deliver the same amount of
energy to the station, i.e., to provide for the same number of cars per day (Kunstler, 114). As
you can see, this would be too much in transportation costs and would cost as much or even
more than transporting oil.
- Contradiction in peoples opinion for the appropriate solution:
Although there is possibly lots of coal left in America, Burning coal is still the
greatest source of overall toxic air pollution in the country and probably a significant
contributor to global warming (Kunstler, 118). Many people think that wind and solar power
are the way of the future. However, Kunstler explains that, Solar electric and wind power
therefore might be viewed as accessories of the fossil fuel economy (Kunstler, 127).

Talal8

Kunstler says this because it takes lots of fossil fuel to build solar and wind energy resources
and without cheap fossil fuel it is unlikely that America could produce solar and wind energy.
- Kunstlers alternative energy:
The alternative energy solution that Kunstler examines is nuclear energy. Nuclear
energy is possibly a good solution to the energy problem in America because it is much like
oil and can provide lots of energy. For example, countries like France have almost 70 per cent
of their power from nuclear energy (Kunstler, 140). What Kunstler says is, What the nuclear
option comes down to is this: Unless we want living standards in the United States to slide far
beyond pre-modern levels in the absence of cheap oil and natural gas, we will have to use
nuclear fission as our principal method for generating electricity for some time into the
twenty-first century while we scramble to make other arrangements (Kunstler, 140).
- Realistic solution:
One of the ways that America can begin to cut down on CO2 emissions is to begin to
manage energy resources in a more responsible way. For example, globalization has made
cities major players in politics and in the global economy. The research in Environment and
Urbanization shows that, By their nature, as national governments deal with more
intractable geo-political issues, cities are often able to better cooperate with each other than
their host countries. Cities often express the desires of their citizens more succinctly and
more quickly than higher levels of government, and when these rising voices are credibly
articulated, their global impact is considerable. The global response to climate change is
illustrative. In the US, for example, 1,017 cities have signed up to meet or exceed Kyoto
Protocol targets to reduce GHG emissions even though the national government refused to
sign the protocol (Hoornweg & Sugar & Gomez, 217). This shows that cities are often able
to be more effective in promoting environmental standards than the national government.
Because cities are the main producers of CO2 emissions, cities should take the lead in

Talal9

beginning to manage energy resources in a way that will benefit the environment. Also, my
research has shown that when cities begin to protect the environment, they can also begin to
save money. The government should support this alternative.
Another solution to the problem of global warming is to think harder about the future.
If the United States continues to use Cheap-Fossil-Fuels and to produce CO2 emissions, the
future is at risk. This is partly due to the political difficulties that are in the United States
when discussing global warming. There is no common consensus about the issue, and it is
unlikely that politicians will begin acting on global warming when it is too late. James G.
Speth makes a good statement when he says, regulation expresses what we believe, what
we are, what we stand for as a nation (Speth, 105) It is important to say that America is
the leader in CO2 emissions alongside of China (Davis & Caldeira, 5688), and America
should take the lead in beginning to protect the environment and cut down CO2 emissions. To
add to this, The further and faster market transformation is pursued, the better off our
children and grandchildren will be (Speth, 106). If America doesnt start looking to the
future now, it is probable that future generations in America will have the consequences of
the poor decisions that the politicians make today. The American people and the American
government today are sacrificing the future for the present. They want to use all of the cheapfossil-fuels and live a lavish life, but this will greatly disrupt the future by leaving nothing to
the future generations. It is a selfish policy, and if the United States doesnt realize this, there
will be severe consequences as James Howard Kunstler explains.
- Sum up all suggested solutions:
Kunstler is a very good source when we want to find out what are the best solutions to
the energy problem in the United States. It looks as if America has put itself in a bad
situation. Because of the large amounts of cheap fossil fuel, America has been able to produce
and to grow at a very fast rate. However, the consequences of this growth are very noticeable.

Talal10

Global warming is beginning to warm the earth and to disrupt the natural landscape of the
planet. For example, the icecaps are beginning to melt at a rapid rate. In a study done by the
Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, it was concluded that . Over the past 15 years, the ice sheets
of both Greenland and Antarctica have changed from a nearly balanced mass flux (in other
words, snowfall kept pace with glacial outflow and melting) to losing 100 to 200 gigatons per
year from each ice sheet to the oceans The rate of mass loss appears to be increasing yearly
(Scambos, 29) Also, CO2 emissions are at a historical high and there doesnt seem to be
any decline in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. This rapid growth has changed peoples
outlooks and has made them unwillingly to change their lifestyles in any way that will stop
the growth of CO2 in the atmosphere. What people dont understand is that their way of life
will have to change if cheap fossil fuels are used up and America is left with a power outage.
Suburbia America would come to an end and people would have to change their lives and not
live so lavishly. This is why America should look to solutions to cut down the levels of CO2
in the atmosphere and to prepare for the future
- Conclusion:
In conclusion, CO2 emissions are one of the most important issues facing the United
States and the world today. However, people are still not recognizing this, and the American
government is not doing enough to cut down CO2 emissions. Is it like people dont even
realize that it is not only CO2 emissions that are a danger to the future, but also running out
of resources like Cheap-Fossil-Fuels. If America does run out of fossil fuels, the results could
be devastating. Suburbia America would come to an end and people would have to change
their way of life. The evidence is clear, and if America wants to continue to lead the world it
should act on global warming. For this reason, the democratic government of America should
face reality and realize that sacrificing the future for the present is not only unhealthy for the
environment, but it also not good for future generations. The government in America is the

Talal11

leader in American society and they should listen to the environmentalists and start lowering
CO2 emissions.

Talal12

Work Cited
- Charts and Figures from An Inconvenient Truth. Web.ncf.ca. Dec. 2006. Web: 21 March
2013.
- The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change: How Do We Know Were Not Wrong?.
Lpl.arizona.edu. Web: 22 March 22 2013.
- Global Warming Seen as a Major Problem Around the World Less Concern in the U.S.,
China and Russia. Web pewglobal.org. Dec.2009
- Who is responsible for Chicagos crazy weather? Web internationalchicago.com.
Feb.2013
- JUSTIN, GILLIS. "Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded." New York
Times 4 Dec 2011, Web. 1 Apr. 2013.
- Thomas R. Karl, Jerry M. Melillo, and Thomas C. Peterson, Global Climate Change
Impacts in the United States Cambridge University Press, 2009
- Lovins, Amory B. "Profitable Solutions to Climate, Oil, and Proliferation." Ambio. 39.3
(2010):

236-248. Print.

- Speth, James G. The Bridge at the Edge of the World: Capitalism, the Environment, and
Crossing from Crisis to Sustainability. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008.
- Davis, SJ, and K Caldeira. "Consumption-based Accounting of Co2 Emissions."
Proceedings

of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 107.12

(2010): 5687- 92.

- Hoornweg, Daniel, Lorraine Sugar, and Gomez C. Trejos. "Cities and Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Moving Forward." Environment and Urbanization. 23.1 (2011): 207-227.

Talal13

- Hayhoe, Katharine, Scott Sheridan, Laurence Kalkstein, and Scott Greene. "Climate
Change,

Heat Waves, and Mortality Projections for Chicago." Journal of Great Lakes

Research.

36 (2010): 65-73

- The Long Emergency. Rolling Stone. Web: 19 March 2013.

- Scambos, Ted. "Earth's Ice: Sea Level, Climate, and Our Future Commitment." Bulletin of
the

Atomic Scientists. 67.1 (2011): 28-40. Print.