Why Bother? The article “Why Bother” written by Michael Pollan explains how the climate change and the carbon footprint effects the world. He states that there are many ways that we can do better to handle climate change and how to slow the process down. He thinks that it will take laws and a lot of money to stop this climate change because it’s going to take more than one person to solve this phenomenon. He proclaims that people are all waiting around on each other to make the first move but no one is moving. He says politicians want us to change our light bulbs to more efficient light bulbs s that use less energy. He understands how bad the world had gotten and people have to start going green by driving hybrid cars and buying “greener products” that will be better on the environment. This cannot be fixed by just one person he thinks that people have to influence each other and he hopes it will cause a chain reaction. He concludes that having your own garden or even a community garden will help reduce the carbon footprint. …show more content…
He says that biking to work and doing things that are better on the environment but he says that on the flip side there is people out there doing the exact opposite. He doesn’t want to do everything he can to slow down the CO2 being exposed in the atmosphere, if other people aren’t going to care and keep doing their regular routine so why should he care if others don’t. The purpose of the three paragraphs is to show some examples of the positive and negative effects of options to help the environment. He tells us about a couple politicians which is Al Gore and Jimmy Carter. He wants to know if the people will bother or if they won’t bother about this environmental
In Chapter 14, “What’s Motivating this Writer?” One key point is that the author can be writing based on an argument that he or she is responding to. They usually build arguments over issues that may be overlooked by their readers. Rather than having one argument, they have multiple and include the actual standpoint of the argument and also have their own response to it. Also, the reader should try to visualize what the author is arguing about so they can understand what they are retorting to or know what the argument is about.
Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson have written a book that many people may find difficult to read. Why? Because it is like holding a mirror in front of one’s own face and looking into it. The book is about something most, if not all of us, have done: Justified our actions or words no matter how wrong they were. As Tavris and Aronson (2007) wrote in their book, “. . . most of us find it difficult, if not impossible to say, ‘I was wrong; I made a terrible mistake.’ The higher the stakes – emotional, financial, moral – the greater the difficulty.”
“Why are we so angry” is a name of an article by Dianne Hales. She is a former contributing editor for Parade magazine and she is a published writer. This article is from a Parade magazine article she wrote in 2001. In the article Dianne Hales talks about a social phenomenon that more and more Americans are getting angrier and rage full more than before. Then they are pushed to the breaking point from this angry and rage. Dianne Hales then gives several recommendations which could help you calm down from the anger and rage. The ideas that Dianne Hales writes about in this article I feel is true and should be taken seriously and should be followed.
A similar message that appears in his book that appeared in the aforementioned speech was the impact of the media speculation. The book addresses this in two examples. One was presented with the news of a lawsuit that an island called Vantu would file against the EPA; yet the lawsuit would never move forward due to it only serving a purpose to launder money and raise awareness to global warming that was never proven to affect the island. The other was shown to be environmental scientist who received their funding from environmental organizations, such as NERF in the book. These scientists would often have to go against their findings and report what the organizations wanted them to, or possibly lose their funding. Additionally, the book profoundly took opposition to the claim of global warming. This is presented in the form of the main character, Peter Evans, who has been manipulated into believing everything that the media has told him about global warming. It isn’t until John Kenner is introduced, that Peter begins got learn the truth about global warming. The author uses specific evidence to back his claims, specifically he uses a wide array of resources to verify his claim that Antarctica is not in fact melting, but getting colder and thickening. Furthermore, another essential concept that that book introduces is environmental extremists, or bioterrorism. These characters in the book would stop at nothing to make sure that everyone believed in global warming, and tried to destroy parts of the world to succeed in their mission. Bioterrorists are best represented as a warning of what could happen if people continue to buy into the media’s lies without having conclusive evidence to back up their
Pollan even agrees that becoming friendlier to the environment may seem like a bit too much. Scientists may even show that it could even be too late to save the planet from the climate change. One NASA climate scientist, James Hansen, began warning about global warming 20 years ago. According to Hansen, the amount of carbon we are emitting is going to change the world as we know it. Scientists have seen the climate change affect the world on a grander scale as of today and we are seeing ice caps melt at both poles. The sunlight that used to reflect off of the ice back into space is now being absorbed into the soil and creating a warmer environment. This is causing global warming to occur faster than most scientists predicted. There are ways to possibly slow down the carbon footprint each person is leaving on the world. By growing a garden and even making some of your own food can lessen the carbon footprint each person
Malcom Gladwell, is an author of numerous New York Times Best Sellers, who uses several techniques in his writing to clarify and support his argument. Gladwell’s techniques are using stories to appeal to the reader’s emotions. Using scientific facts and research to logically strengthen his argument. Also, writing about controversial issues to establish credibility with the readers. These techniques are found in “Offensive Play”, “Small Change”, and “Harlan, Kentucky”, works by Gladwell.
Bill McKibben's "The Environmental Issue from Hell" argues that climate change is a real and dire concern for humanity. His essay deals with the methods and persuasive arguments needed to spur American citizens and the government on to change to more eco-friendly choices. The arguments he proposes are based largely upon emotional appeals calling for empathy and shame, and examples of what in our daily lives is adding to the changes we're seeing in the climate.
He gives an example of helping push a car over a cliff with a passenger locked inside. It takes five people to push that car off a cliff and five people are already pushing. If we join, we cause harm to that passenger locked inside, even though our act is not necessary nor sufficient for that harm because we intended that harm and our act is unusual (Sinnott-Armstrong 335). Hence, we should not see the act of driving on a beautiful Sunday afternoon as a cause of global warming or its harms, since the harm is not intended and driving is not unusual. The harms of global warming result from the massive quantities of GHGs in the atmosphere. GHGs are perfectly fine in small quantities, however the problem only emerges when there is too much of it. The individual act of a Sunday pleasure drive by itself does not cause the massive quantities that are harmful (Sinnott-Armstrong 335). However, we might believe that a Sunday pleasure drive raises global temperatures by an extremely small amount. Regardless, the exhaust on that Sunday does not cause any climate change, therefore we have no moral responsibility to change our emissions-behaviour, since it is these climate changes that cause harms to people. Global warming by
This quote shows how the youth of today have been more at stake than the grownups of today. Another example is “Young people are more receptive to new ideas, not having yet invested heavily in the status quo and therefore being able to see with greater clarity”. This quote is significant because it shows how today’s young and innocent people are the best candidates to save the environment because they do not already have their opinions in place. The young youth of today need to understand how important it is to keep our environment clean, to not pollute and to not think that they’re always right when they really aren’t “unsustainable and unnecessary waste and pollution” this shows how this type of pollution is extremely unnecessary and harmful to the
“At present, the global system for carbon emissions trading is embodied in the Kyoto Treaty,” said Al Gore, which points out that Global Warming is not a national problem, but global problem. The Kyoto Treaty states that parties involved will reduce greenhouse emissions in their nation (United Nations). These facts introduce the idea of transforming this perilous world into an innocuous one. It supports his claim for having a preferable future for all, where there will be no droughts, devastations, deaths, or poverties due to global warming. His repetition of the word “reduce” engages the audience of having a solution to climate change. Mr. Gore continues with his ideas to reduce Global Warming by saying, “...Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CSS)...will play a significant...role as one of the major blocks of a solution to climate crisis.” This fact is an example of a paradox as before this statement he mentioned that CSS, a method to capture the CO2 burned from the burning coal, is an expensive method which most companies resist from using. His use of paradoxes throughout his speech makes the audience rethink their opinions. These statistics are part of many other logically statements that Mr. Gore used to support his claim. Some of these logical procedures include; electronic cars, reduction of renewable
The two essays by Michael Pollan and Curtis white talk about climate change in regards to the relationship between the environment and human beings. Although the two essays share the same topic, they take the subject and engage the readers in totally different points of views. Pollan’s essay talks about global and ecological responsibility being a personal virtue while Curtis discusses the socio-economic or political issues underlying sustainability (Pollan; White). These two essays are very different in terms of voice; however these pieces of writing are both important for people all over the world to read. Climate change and environmental disasters are a real issue. Just this year, there have been more storms, cyclones, earthquakes and typhoons all over the world. One cannot look at the state of many developing counties where the majority of the population is exposed and vulnerable to the effects of climate change. This issue on developing a viable solution for the problem of anthropogenic gases and global warming is long from being found. Not only this, many people do not want to hear about this issue since they do not think it is real. Unless people have tangible proof that their cars, thermostats and aerosol cans are contributing to climate change, they are not going to give up their lifestyles. By synthesizing the two essays, one can see that there is a need for change and that it is not an issue which should be dealt with in terms of ecological factors or even personal virtue. The social, economic and political factors affecting this problem and the move towards real sustainability should also be a topic that will raise awareness.
One of the most compelling and difficult environmental problems society is facing today is climate change. People do not realize how much the environment has changed for the worse in the last ten years, until they are told that the last two decades of the 20th century have been the hottest in the last 400 years, according to climate studies (Conserve Energy Future). Today the carbon dioxide levels have reached 396.81 parts per million (ppm). “Carbon dioxide (CO2) has also increased over the last 100 years-- from about 300 ppm to 370 ppm. Interestingly, the majority of these additions have occurred in the last 50 years, when temperature increases have been slowest” (geocraft). There are no known solutions yet to reverse these effects in the environment, however there are many things people can do to prevent it from increasing. By implementing a carbon tax the government can tax corporations on how much carbon they emit into the atmosphere. With the extra money from the tax, scientist can invest in alternative ways to reduce how much carbon is emitted. Reducing climate change is going to take years and so nothing is going to get fixed anytime soon, but meanwhile we can use that extra money to begin cleaning up the atmosphere. There are many ways to explain climate change, some say its due to the emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere, others say it is the burning of the fossils fuels, some even say it’s the greenhouse gases. All of these sayings mean the exact same thing, no matter how one says it. I believe there are more convenient ways to solve climate change; and if the government would to implement a carbon tax on companies they will then be forced to re-evaluate all the carbon they emit to the environment and red...
In the article “Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math”, written by Bill Mckibben, he firstly opens up by saying that back in 2012, according to the statistics, we surpassed the global record high for climate temperature in our nation, destroying other previous records. Despite the research and the displaying of data, nobody is doing anything to adress the following issue. Mckibben outlines three distinctive numbers that outline the following issue., 2 degrees celsius, 565 gigations, and 2795 gigtons, which he uses to validitate and support his argument. Firstly, the ongoing problem of climate change in society is fundamentally a matter of individual moral responsibility that is inspired by the insight individuals are intentionally harming the environment. Secondly there is yet to be an effective collective state response to the issue of global warming, despite approaching two full decades of ongoing and reoccuring negotiations and the very near universal participation by states in the UNFCCC. Thirdly, because this issue has been put on hold for longer than it was innitially expected, greenhouse gases are being emitted into our atmosphere, polluting our environment. The South-North issue and an ongoing debate comes into effect as all the greenhouse gases that are created and used in the Northern hemisphere are being emmited into the southern hemisphere. Hence, my thesis is; despite the fact that global warming and climate change has been an ongoing problem globally for years, humanity has failed to resolve thiis issue as it quickly begins to escalate.
A prevalent issue in today's society is the use of fossil fuels and the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Transportation, deforestation, and technology are all factors associated to climate change. This issue is significant to me due to the fact that I was born and raised in California, and the recent drought in California can be linked to global warming. Every day an excess of CO2 is released, the world is drastically changing. However, there are steps that the public can take to counter the devastation these changes will cause.
The actor told members of the governing body that it is too late for indiviudals alone to make a difference: "To be clear, this is not about just telling people to change their light bulbs or to buy a hybrid car. This disaster has grown BEYOND the choices that individuals make. This is now about our industries, and governments around the world taking decisive, large-scale action," he said. DiCaprio told the assembled delegates that we must take action now agains the use of fossil fuels and embrace clean energy solutions if we are going to make the needed impact against the damage that man has done to the planet. He explained that clean energy was not only good policy for the planet, but also good economic policy.