Last week, the United Nations released a new report outlining the need for immediate action regarding climate change if we want to avoid a disaster the likes of which humanity has never seen. The importance of this report was underlined by the devastating impact of Hurricane Michael on Florida, where entire towns were flattened by the storm surge and high winds. Despite this report and an example of what is in store for our future, Republicans around the country said that there is nothing to be concerned about. As a Republican, I am not surprised, but I am ashamed, because it is clear that climate change is real and that it is caused by humans.
Allow me to frame why it is so absurd to say that climate change is not manmade using the example of you and your doctor. Your doctor says: “I am 99 percent certain that the cigarettes you are smoking are the cause of your lung cancer, and, if you stop smoking them, I may be able to help you recover.”
If you responded, “I don’t believe you because one doctor disagrees,” then you would be rightfully ridiculed. Instead, you would probably respond, “OK. What are some good methods to quit?” This is the question that my fellow Republicans need to be asking, but they are instead asking, “What about the businesses?”
At multiple points in history, businesses that are no longer suited for the needs of society have been allowed to fail, and I believe that we must allow that to happen today. As old businesses fail, entrepreneurs will come up with new businesses to replace them. Firms utilizing new renewable technologies will replace companies that rely on non-renewable energy to turn a profit. In the same mold, non-energy companies using non-renewables will adapt by changing their products to work with renewables. Car manufacturers are doing this already. Heck, according to multiple news outlets this past week, the storied car maker Jaguar is considering going fully electric within the next decade.
Placing reasonable and sensible regulations on the emission of greenhouse gasses does not stymie the economy and innovation — it drives them. When weighed against the long-term benefits of reducing or reversing climate change, these regulations are not burdensome.
We as a nation should be encouraging the creation and adoption of new and environmentally friendly technologies because they stand to improve the lives of us all.
In addition to solving climate change, renewable sources of energy stand to improve our health thus reducing government and individual spending on healthcare. For example, phasing out coal burning plants will improve the air quality and reduce asthma rates in addition to ending water contamination from coalmines.
Moving away from the internal combustion engine will decrease the amount of oil that ships, oil-rigs and pipelines spill into our oceans and streams while also decreasing smog, which has been linked to thousands of deaths and increased rates of disease. These health benefits alone were reason enough for Republicans to support the regulation of air and water quality all the way back in the 1970s. Today, these health benefits in addition to the likelihood of improving our planet’s environment and country’s economy should be enough for them to act on climate change.’
Adam Gillmor, a Contributing Writer for the Voice, can be reached for comment at AGillmor19@wooster.edu.