Your comment shall answer these two questions:
What did the Copenhagen Climate Conference tell us?
Pretend you're a senator, what law would you write which would help solve the climate crisis?
Copenhagen and the world's future
Meeting place: Copenhagen, Denmark
Purpose: To produce a new and binding climate change treaty to replace the Kyoto treaty
Participants: Representatives from 192 nations
Dates: December 7-December 18, 2009
The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said that by 2020 global emissions must fall 25 to 40 percent from 1990 levels to prevent the worst results of global warming. This would, they project, limit warming to 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Would the UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen meet this goal? The future of planet Earth hangs upon the answer to this question.
The Climate Change Conference resulted in an agreement called the "Copenhagen Accord." But it did not result in a legal, enforceable international treaty. As Reuters reported, "It set a target of limiting global warming to a maximum 2 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial times -- seen as a threshold for dangerous changes such as more floods, droughts, mudslides, sandstorms and rising seas. But it failed to say how this would be achieved." (www.reuters.com, 12/19/09)
Four questions
The executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Yvo de Boer, has declared that answers to four questions will determine the extent and worth of any international agreement. (www.en.cop15.dk)
1. How much are the industrialized countries willing to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions?
According to a New York Times report on a UN meeting in September 2009, none of the larger nations "want to take the lead in fighting for significant international emissions reduction targets, lest they be accused at home of selling out future jobs and economic growth." (9/20/09) The same problem hampered the Kyoto negotiators 12 years ago. Industrialized nations have so far pledged roughly half of the IPCC target.
The Accord does not commit any nation to specific targets for limiting greenhouse gas emissions, but leaves it up to each industrialized and developing nation to make its own target.
2. How much are major developing countries such as China and India willing to do to limit their emissions?
President Hu Jintao of China promised at the UN meeting to reduce the growth of his country's carbon dioxide emissions by "a notable margin" between now and 2020-but did not explain further. India's environmental minister, Jairam Ramesh, said that India's demands for an international accord were unchanged: India wants industrialized nations to agree to significant emissions reductions by 2020 and also provide financial and technical assistance to the developing world." (New York Times,10/4/09) China produces roughly 23 percent of all global emissions, India less than 5 percent. Other developing nations have agreed that they must cut emissions but have rejected mandatory limits and, like India, demand help.
Under the Copenhagen Accord, the position of the developing countries is essentially unchanged.
3. How will we pay for the help developing countries need to reduce their emissions and adapt to the impact of climate change?
One example of this dilemma: Many developing countries are cutting down their forests, both for lumber and to open up pasture and farmland. According to William Laurance, the former president of the Association for Tropical Biology and Conservation (www.news.mongbay.com), the destruction of tropical forests spews 5 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year, accounting for 20 percent of global emissions. (www.climateforestscommission.org). But if these countries are forced to limit deforestation, how will they be compensated for the economic loss?
The text of the Copenhagen Accord says: "Developed countries shall provide adequate, predictable and sustainable financial resources, technology and capacity-building to support the implementation of adaptation action in developing countries." The developed countries accepted a goal, again not a legally binding one, of providing $100 billion a year by 2020 to help the developing countries.
The accord recognized "the importance of reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation and the need to enhance removals or greenhouse gas emission by forests." The developed world agrees to provide "positive incentives" to fund such action.
The accord recognized "the importance of reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation and the need to enhance removals or greenhouse gas emission by forests." The developed world agrees to provide "positive incentives" to fund such action.
4. How is the money going to be managed?
The accord did not include an agreement on supervision of financial help.
Reactions to the Copenhagen Accord
World leaders:
President Obama: "Today we've made a meaningful and unprecedented breakthrough here in Copenhagen. For the first time in history all major economies have come together to accept their responsibility to take action to confront the threat of climate change…. We've come a long way, but we have much further to go."
"Finally we sealed a deal," UN Secretary-general Ban Ki-moon said. "The 'Copenhagen Accord' may not be everything everyone had hoped for, but this ... is an important beginning."
German Chancellor Angela Merkel: "The decision has been very difficult for me. We have done one step, we have hoped for several more."
Leaders of developing nations:
Sergio Serra, Brazil's climate change ambassador: "We have a big job ahead to avoid climate change through effective emissions reduction targets, and this was not done here."
Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping, Sudanese delegate who represented the Group of 77 developing nations: "The developed countries have decided that damage to developing countries is acceptable….[The 2-degree target] will result in massive devastation to Africa and small island states." (Most of the developing countries want a 1.5 degree target.)
Environmental leaders:
Bill McKibben, a 350.org leader: "Our leaders have been a disappointment, and the talks have ended without any kind of fair, ambitious, or legally binding global agreement. It's unclear whether the weak 'accord' which emerged early this morning will provide a platform strong enough to deliver the kind of action we'll need in 2010 and beyond.
Nicole Granacki, chief organizer for Greenpeace: "The job of world leaders is not done. Today they failed to avert catastrophic climate change. The city of Copenhagen is a climate crime scene tonight....World leaders had a once in a generation chance to change the world for good, to avert catastrophic climate change. In the end they produced a poor deal full of loopholes big enough to fly Air Force One through."
Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club: "The world's nations have come together and concluded a historic--if incomplete--agreement to begin tackling global warming….It is imperative that negotiations resume as soon as possible."
Erich Pica, Friends of the Earth US: This is not a strong deal or a just one -- it isn't even a real one. It's just repackaging old positions and pretending they're new."
US government action
For the first time the United States government is now seriously considering actions to limit global warming.
1) On June 26, 2009, the House passed legislation to curb emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases through a cap-and-trade system. This would establish a limit, or cap, on how much pollution a particular company can emit per year. Permits would be issued to the company based on the level of greenhouse gases it has been authorized to emit.
Companies that exceed their limit would be allowed to purchase permits from companies that are in compliance--this is what the "trade" part of "cap-and-trade" refers to. Companies will be able to purchase someone else's emission reductions rather than reduce their own. For example, rather than cutting emissions at its US refinery, ExxonMobil could purchase "offsets" from an Indonesian farmer who plants trees. (Public Citizen News, July-August, 2009) Tightening the cap on emissions would push such polluters to meet targets by limiting their own emissions.
Some environmental organizations argue that the House bill would cut US emissions by only a fraction of what is necessary. Others support the cap-and-trade bill as a step in the right direction. Business and industrial groups are also divided. The Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers oppose the House bill. But Pacific Gas and Electric, a major California utility, supports the legislation, and withdrew its membership from the Chamber of Commerce as a result. The Senate is considering its own bill.
2) On September 30, 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it is preparing new regulations on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and other industrial facilities. The regulations would require these facilities to provide proof that they are using the best technology to curb emissions, or else suffer penalties. The rule would apply only to facilities that emit at least 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year. Such companies are reportedly responsible for nearly 70 percent of US greenhouse gas emissions.
According to the New York Times, major industries and utilities are working closely with Congress to ensure that a climate bill would circumvent such EPA regulations by substituting the cap-and-trade system.
President Obama said earlier that he prefers "a comprehensive legislative approach to regulating emissions and stemming global warming, not a piecemeal application of rules." But he has authorized the proposed new EPA regulation because it "could goad lawmakers into reaching an agreement. It could also provide evidence of the United States' seriousness as negotiators prepare for United Nations talks in Copenhagen in December…." (New York Times, 10/1/09)
Before you answer the two questions think about the following questions to organize your thinking:
1. What questions do students have about the reading? How might they be answered?
2. Did the Copenhagen Climate Conference achieve its stated purpose? Why or why not? Whatever your answer, how do you explain such very different assessments of the conference as that by the president, who called it a "meaningful and unprecedented breakthrough, " by Carl Pope, who hailed it as "a historic--if incomplete--agreement, and Nicole Granacki, who called Copenhagen "a climate crime scene"?
3. Why do you think that the world leaders at Copenhagen did not achieve a binding agreement? What specific evidence can you cite for your opinion?
4. What actions are the US Congress and the Environmental Protection Agency proposing? What concerns do American industries have about these actions? Environmental groups?
further research:
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe copenhagen climate conference told us that we need to start trying harder to stop global warming. Our nations are coming up with ways to try and stop the earth from getting any warmer than it already is. If we dont before it is to late the result maybe catastrophic. more animals will die out, sea levels will rise and glaciers will begin to melt.
ReplyDeleteIf i was a senator i would increase the penalty for littering and polluting.
I would try to make it a law that all cars be electronic. I would try to reduce the costs of the cars to people would buy more without attacking their wallets and without hurting the economy.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference has told us that it will take more than just one day to change the world. Since nature is changing, it is not easy to change with it as well. It may take more than a couple of days and a couple of people to figure out a way to decrease the increasing temperature of the Earth. Due to the climatic change, more living things are loosing their homes, food supply, and even their family members. People have to act fast, but intelligently, in deciding how to decrease the hotness of the planet.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a senator, I would make a law that would say smoking should be illegal. Smoking should be illegal because people think that they are hurting themselves when, in fact, they are harming the environment as well. When a person smokes, they release toxic fumes into the air, which causes the atmosphere to become polluted. This is one example of how cigarettes and people smoking them affect the increase of the temperature. Also, if cigarettes were to be illegal, people would use the money for something more important than cigarettes and lighters. There are many other reasons why and how, but the main idea is to ban smoking or at least make it illegal. That would be the law that I'd make if I were senator.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe Copenhagen Climate Conference has told us that we have to do more to end the global warming crisis. In around 50 years, Long Island might go underwater as a result of global warming - along with the extinction of animals. It will take time to stop global warming but it is the same thing as saying,"Rome wasn't built in one day!" The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it is preparing new regulations on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and other industrial facilities. This may start helping gloal warming end, but people could do so much more then they are doing right now. If I was a senator I would propose a law that states that the government should gradually reduce taxes on incomes and increase taxes on energy, pollution and wastes. As those get more expensive, people will find ways to avoid them. And to make sure that the poor aren't adversely affected by this transition.
ReplyDeleteThe Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that everyone has to lend a hand to decrease global warming. For example, industrialized countries are setting their own goals to decreasing global warming because each country produces different amounts of carbon dioxide. Developed countries are lending their sustainable technology, financial resources, and capacity building to support developing nations. If everyone takes part in solving this problem, the progress of global warming will definitely slow down.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would make a law that everyone owning a house or apartment also have a compost bin or garden. People have lots of excess food that they throw away and fill up landfills, making waste pile up. Compost bins or gardens break down organic material into rich soil to be used by the Earth again.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that everyone must pitch in to achieve the greater goal. Everyone can make a difference and they should do what they can to help. Climate change is one major reason for global warming. The change in temperature is greatly affected by the dangerous fumes and pollution. These fumes are created from the power plants and industrial facilities. That is why all the nations are willing to come to compromise. They will provide financial resources, technology and capacity-building to support the actions of the developing countries. They will also set targets for limiting greenhouse gas emissions. This way, they hope to reach the reduction of global warming emissions to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius) by 2020.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would set forth a law that would state that vehicles are prohibited from idling. If a vehicle is found idling, then the vehicle owner will be fined heavily. Gas is used to power many everyday items. It is used to heat stoves and to run moving vehicles. Gas is produced from fossil fuels, and is hazardous to the environment. If a vehicle is left idling, then it would emit the hazardous gas into the air, which would cause the air to be polluted. This would lead to climate change, which will over time hasten global warming. If not for global warming, then consider the more immediate negative effects of idling. Currently, we have vehicles idling while they are dropping off/ picking up their kids to and from school. Take a step outside and experience the gas fumes draped all around and suffocating your lungs. Take a look at all the double parked cars idling while they are waiting for a parking spot or waiting for passengers to return from shopping/errands. If every such car turned off their engines, it would amount to a giant step towards cleaner air. If people would stop idling, then the environment would be healthier. In addition, if people would stop idling, they would also be saving money. When vehicles are left idle, gas is being emitted, and more money must be spent to refill gas sooner. That is why abolishing idling will be an advantage to your wallet, your lungs, as well as to the earth. But everyone must work together to make a pledge towards a healthier earth. For some people, and nations, it is hard to stop doing what they are used to, so just take baby steps. Little by little, cut back on the emissions and pollution. Try to help the earth, one step, and one dollar, at a time.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference states that the world can't be changed, or, fixed, just like that. That it will of course take time, and a lot of time at that. I agree totally. So many terrible things are happening, animals going extinct, acres and acres of land getting ruined, hearts getting torn apart, and these life-changing things can't be fixed in a plain blink of an eye. Everyone needs to chip in a great amount, and even with that it'll probably take a very long time.
ReplyDeleteI think that a good way to get this "world-fixation" up and running would be to make sure that everyone truly sees the terror of this global crisis. After that is accomplished, I would make sure that, most importantly, people would just stop wasting so much! Left over papers, plastic bottles, tin cans, wood scraps, it can all be conserved! Recycle, reduce, reuse! All of those things can be recycled and used again in every single home, of every single human being, in every single part of the world, big or small.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that global warming is catching up to us. It is becoming a serious problem and action needs to be taken. This meeting has set targets that will help us avoid disaster in future years. However, this conference didn’t make a legally based treaty that would show us how to reach those targets. This shows us that nations are not willing to make too many sacrifices. Making compromises will not be easy, but they are essential. It will take time, effort, and money to achieve our goals, but we cannot give up. This meeting showed us that we have a long way to go before our goal is reached, but this is the first step.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a senator, there would be one main law that I would create that would help stop global warming. I would make deforestation illegal. Trees are what take in a lot of the world’s carbon dioxide. Because of their big size they are more helpful at reducing greenhouse gas emissions than other plants. They are the main source to our lives and should not be cut down. Some people may be outraged by this because they make money from cutting down trees. However, saving the earth is more important than financial setbacks. Making deforestation illegal is a small fraction of what can be done to stop global warming, but it would be a great step toward our goal.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference had a meeting about global warming and our environment. Global warming is becoming a serious problem and we need to start acting before it is too late. The meeting has made some targets to help our future. But the conference didn't make any specific guidelines to show how to reach those goals. This shows that people are not willing to take enough action. This meeting is hopefully the first of many.
ReplyDeleteIf I were senator, I would make a few laws to help our planet. The first law would be for everyone to switch to electric cars. Cars use fossil fuels which pollute the air we breath. The second law I would make is to cut down at least 50% less trees. Trees clean our air and the less trees we have, the less clean air we have to breath. The last law I would make is to have heavier consequences for littering. When you litter, the garbage goes into the ocean and kills animals and harms our oceans.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that everyone must lend a hand and try to help our environment. Global warming is catching up to us. We need to act faster, before it is too late. Global warming is a very serious problem, and there are more than just a handful of people who have not realized this yet. This meeting set goals to help protect and save our environment and our planet. Targets were set to help avoid any further disasters. However, this conference failed in making a legal treaty that could help reach these targets. The drastic changes in climate and temperature are affected by large amounts of pollution and fumes. These fumes come from factories and power plants. All the nations are not willing to sacrifice that much, so it is hard to compromise. Although it won’t be easy, it has to be done. To achieve out goals, time, effort and money will be required. But it is worth it, to have a healthy planet. This meeting was the first step to reach out goals, but we still have a long way to go.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, and I could make a law to help stop global warming, I would make deforestation illegal. It is very true that so many forests are being cut down. Not only is this hurting the environment, but it is destroying the habitats of some animals. Deforestation increases global warming because it takes away some oxygen supply. Also, if an industrial factory comes in place of the forest that was cut down, pollution increases. Deforestation does a harmful thing to the environment and it must be stopped.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe Copenhagen Climate Conference has told us that to change our world and climates, we must work hard and keep trying. The world will not change after just a few days. It could take months or years to change the planet. With the changing temperatures, everything around us is changing too. Many animals are losing their habitats; trees are being cut down everywhere. And to change all of this from happening it will take more then a few people to come up with a “cure” for this problem. It will take a lot more then a couple of days too. They tell us to help with the climate change; everyone must try to do as much as they can to stop all the emissions.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a senator, I would make a law saying that factories need to lower the emissions they let out. The smoke that most factories emit causes pollution in the air, which is causing a lot of problems with the climate temperatures. Factories with large smoke stacks cause the biggest problems, even more then the thousands of cars that drive around everyday. Cars emit quite a bit of pollution into the air, but many factories send out smoke into the air that causes global warming to warm the Earth more.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference met to discuss the current worldwide issues: global warming and climate change. Climate change is the cause of global warming. The Copenhagen Climate Conference concluded that in order to make change and help fix our environment, countries must be willing to put in an effort. As President Obama said, it is everyone’s responsibility to take action and make a difference. The Copenhagen Climate Conference said that the only way the goal of reducing carbon dioxide emissions can be reached is if everyone does their part. All the countries compromising and coming together can help solve this problem through teamwork.
ReplyDeleteIn order to solve the climate crisis, small steps should be taken slowly. If I were a senator, I would pass a law about recycling. Factories must label food products and their containers saying “Please Recycle”. I believe this action may help families take their first step towards helping the planet. By having such labels on recyclable food containers, families can set up recycling bins in their home, along with the garbage cans they already have. Another law that I would pass would say that littering is not allowed and those disobeying this law will be fined. To help this law, more garbage cans should be put out on streets. Pollution is harming our environment and we must help reduce it.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference told us many things. One of the main messages that spoke to me is that in order to put an end to global warming we are going to work together, as one united world. We will need to put aside our differences and work toward the common goal. Humans have started global warming and now it is our job to put an end to it. We humans have polluted the earth with carbon emissions, garbage, and many other harmful chemicals now it is our turn to pitch in and change what we started. Who knows what consequences may happen in the near future if this problem is not addressed. The Copenhagen Climate Conference has made it clear that global warming is real and we need to put a stop to it.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a senator I would enforce a few laws in order to reduce the affects of global warming. All plastic bags would be banned so that oil can be used less. Using paper bags saves more energy and is better for the environment. Also each year every human should plant one tree. Trees provide the oxygen needed for living things. Trees take in carbon dioxide and give us oxygen; with all of the carbon dioxide in the air all of the trees can produce more oxygen, making our planet greener and healthier. With these new laws in put into place global warming can slowly be reversed. Every small action can have a big affect on the world.
The Copenhagan Climate Conference told us that it is very important to reduce or end global warming. The consequences would be severe if we don't reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Small islands could be destroyed due to rising sea levels. As humans, we must be able to take care of our planet and right now, we are endangering it. We are polluting the air, endangering both us and the other animals. Global warming is real and deadly so we must do all that we can to prevent it.
ReplyDeleteIf I were senator, I would make sure that the people understand just how serious global warming is. This way, people would actually really try to stop it. Many people right now believe that global warming doesn't exist and so, they aren't doing anything. I would also have trees in the rainforests planted. Paper products would be made out of more recycled materials as well. The trees would help reduce the carbon dioxide levels and increase non-polluted oxygen levels. Usin recycled materials to make paper products would be very efficient. We us paper daily and throw it away quickly. Thousands of trees die just to make a few packs of looseleaf and we must stop this.
Each small tree could help make a giant difference for the entire world.
1. The Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that the only way to end global warming is for everyone to work together and do their part to help the environment. We were the ones who caused global warming by polluting the earth with hazardous fumes, carbon emissions and other dangerous chemicals created by industrial facilities and power plants. Therefore, since we brought global warming into this world, we are the only ones who have the ability to take it out. Seeing as all the nations are willing to compromise, so are we. Those nations will provide financial resources and technology to support other countries. They will also limit greenhouse gas emissions so by 2020, global warming emissions will be reduced to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit.
ReplyDelete2. If I were a senator, I would enforce a few laws to solve the climate crisis. My first law would be to ban vehicles from idling. If a vehicle was found idling, then the owner should be forced to pay a heavy fine. Gas is a very important resource and should be savored. When a vehicle is idling, it is not moving, but the engine is running. Therefore, the hazardous gas produced by fossil fuels pollutes the air when it could be saved instead. Idling is one of the many reasons global warming is such a big problem nowadays and with all those cars wasting the precious oil, even for a few minutes to drop their children off or wait for a parking spot, global warming is only getting worse. Another law I would pass would be to make deforestation illegal. Trees are our main source of oxygen. Deforestation not only limits the amount of oxygen in the air, but also destroys the homes of so many animals. With these laws being put into action, one step at a time, the world could become a happier and much healthier place.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference had told us that global warming is HERE. It tells us that global warming needs more actions taken to be stopped. Global warming has become a serious problem and if this crisis isn’t stopped, then the whole world will suffer. The planet’s climate will rise at an increasingly high rate, more animals will become extinct, and more land will be destroyed (especially in the arctic). This conference has showed that people and the government are starting to “notice” the harmful effects of global warming, and are starting to take action to put an end to this climate crisis.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would enforce a law that makes Earth Day mandatory. When Earth Day comes every year, people will start planting trees in their yards. And if they live in an apartment, then they need to find a way to plant trees in parks, gardens, etc. I would also propose a law that illegalizes deforestation. This would help because when trees are being cut down, we lose air that we breathe, which is bad for the environment. Deforestation also increases the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Forests naturally cool down because trees help retain moisture in the air. But without trees, this isn’t possible and will lead to an increase in temperature and a change in climate. Global warming should be stopped or consequences WILL be suffered.
The Copenhagan meeting has told us that we must work together as a team, and as individuals to try to stop global warming. Global warming might have been a natural thing, but we have turned it into a major threat to nature, and ourseleves by releasing large amounts of fumes, and carbon into the atmosphere. We must work hard and long, to face this issue, and not make it a threat.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a senator, I would propose a law, that would protect some forests, and trees, that have not been touched by humans. Companies are know cutting down millions of trees, in some places where there were many. without trees, it will not help us fight global warming, since trees take in carbon, and give us oxygen. If most of the trees were cut down, then the atmosphere will be thick with carbon, and it might be harder to live. If global warming is not stopped, it might be the end of us.
Global warming is a well known problem that all the nations are currently facing. The Copenhagen Climate Conference was an appropriate start for the resolution of it. The most positive outcome from this conference was that all the countries got together to discuss and try to find the ways on how to save our planet, our one and only home. Unfortunately the goal of the Copenhagen Climate Conference was not completely achieved because not all countries are willing to contribute to the cutting of emission and deforestation. Not all of the developed countries have the laws for greenhouse gas control. The developing countries are asking for more funds to minimize the rising of the carbon dioxide concentration but don’t have concrete plans on how to use this money wisely and improve the current situation. If we all help, every single country, global warming could be brought to a standstill. This will not be easy because there is already so much carbon dioxide in the air and the temperatures keep rising. This can be fixed if everybody is not only willing to help but are really doing something and then coming up with new ideas and technologies to slow global warming and to prevent the destruction of our planet.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator I would propose a law that would control the amount of greenhouse gas production by industrial companies and by every single owned car. There should be penalties for those who are not following these laws and rewards to those who do. Also, I would create a special fund for researchers who would be able to come up with new ideas and technologies to minimize the carbon dioxide concentration and prevent global warming. All this should be done not only in one particular country but internationally. I believe that if all the nations got together, we would all be able to solve this serious problem.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that we have to work together to try to stop global warming. We have to work harder to stop global warming together because we all live on this planet and we all need it. Humans have been polluting this planet for too long and because of that we are in this crisis. We are using way too much gas and are we are responsible for dumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Together, we have to unite and protect this planet.
ReplyDeleteIf I were senator, I would make a law saying that we should have less trees cut down because we need them to produce our oxygen. With more trees we can also lower our carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Trees also supply a habitat for animals. I would also make another law that says that cars must not be turned on when needed. That wastes gas and damages our atmosphere. If everyone in the world turned their cars off, it would be a great help. So if people work together, we have a better chance of saving our planet.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe Copenhagen Climate Conference(CCC) told us that if we don't stop Global Warming soon, it could be a fatal mistake. The CCC said that if we try to lower our emissions as much as possible, we could have warming limited to 3.6 degrees fahreinheit. The CCC told us that we should use more fuel-efficient cars, burn less fossil fuels, and try to conserve electricity before total disaster ensues.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would have to write a law to try and solve our climate crisis. My law would be that cars that get less than 20 mpg(miles per gallon) should be outlawed. I would also write a law saying that cars with 20-25mpg could not be driven with less than 2 people in the car. I would make laws on de-forestation much more strict and try to pass a law making people use artificial Christmas trees instead of real ones. Hopefully, these laws would be enough to help fight in the war against Global Warming.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
The Copenhagen Climate Conference has told us that we require taking more action in Global Warming, a global climate crisis. They said that if we don’t take action, there will start to be more floods, droughts, mudslides, sandstorms and rising sea levels. It is not that easy to prevent this from happening. It doesn’t just take a couple of months of hard work and examination, it takes a couple of years to figure everything out and change it. Scientists and the Copenhagen Climate Conference have predicted that by 2020, global emissions must fall 25 to 40 percent from 1990 levels to prevent the worst results of global warming. The temperature is increasing daily, so soon most of the crop land (green healthy land) will dry out and the water in lakes and rivers would dry up. Everyone around the world is making up ways to stop Global Warming. If we don’t take control, the matters will get worse, such as animal extinction, the levels of the seas getting higher, and the ice caps will start to melt.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would make a law that there has to be more trees in each neighborhood to clear the air of all harmful gases. Some private houses should have gardens. There should be less carbon dioxide released in the atmosphere. The cars should be replaced with hybrid cars, a car run by battery-operated technology. Also, if we use solar energy as a source of electricity, it would be better and more efficient for the environment. More people should start recycling so we can reuse our wastes.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that everyone has to pitch in and start working hard to stop global warming. The reason that everyone has to pitch in is because everyone lives on the Earth making it their home. As I know it, you have to take care of your home and keep it clean and nice. Also, we only have one Earth making it special to the people who live on it.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would make a law stating that you need to have two or more people per car to drive on the streets. If someone didn’t have two people, he would have to take the public transportation which makes the streets have fewer cars. I would also make a law stating that everyone had to do community services for seven hours per week. During those hours, everyone in the communities would something better to the Earth together like plant trees, make compost bins, and pick up recyclables from the trash and ground. It might sound gross, but it would help the Earth a lot.
Even though The Copenhagen Climate Conference didn't achieve very high results, it told us that the nations of the world are willing to take the first step in fighting Global Warming. But, there wasn't a target goal set, leaving the nations to decide for themselves their own goals. I believe that this will be a problem since, some countries will most likely put it off until later. All of the people will need to chip in to at least delay Global Warming or it will be upon us before we know it.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a senator, I would write a law forbidding the construction of gas-using cars, allowing only electrical and water-powered cars to be made. This would decrease carbon dioxide emissions more efficiently than putting limits on the amount of pollution a company can produce per year. I would also write a law to make a polar bear-saving organizations, which would scout for polar bears that wear about to drown in the arctic and save them. This wouldn’t help Global Warming, but it would help the polar bears.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that global emissions must fall 25 to 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020. This would limit earth’s warming to 2 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial times, and resultantly prevent the worst outcomes of global warming. To achieve this goal a compromise was reached. Industrialized countries are setting their own targets for decreasing emissions because each country produces different amounts of toxic emissions. Many developing countries agreed that they must cut emissions but rejected mandatory limits unless they get enough financial and technical help. Thus, the developed countries would provide $100 billion a year by 2020 to help support the developing countries’ economies as they work to produce less toxic emissions from their industries and find other environmental-friendly ways to make more money. Also, the developed countries agreed to provide funds to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and enhance removals or greenhouse gas emissions by forests.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would write a law to help solve the climate crisis. One of the main sources of pollution that is causing the climate crisis is cars that are powered by gas. Therefore, I would propose that by 2020 there should no longer be any production or purchasing of gas-powered cars from countries other than the U.S. By 2025, gas–powered cars should no longer be allowed on the roads. To replace the gas, other sources of energy should be used such as electricity or solar power. These sources are emission-free and renewable which make them environment-friendly. To implement this plan, car companies would have to produce 10% less gas-powered cars every year so that by 2020 production of gas-powered cars will stop. The prices on gas-powered cars should be 20% higher compared to prices on the cars that are powered by emission-free energy. This will attract the consumers increasing demand on new types of cars and decreasing popularity of gas-powered cars. To ensure the transition to emission-free cars consumers can exchange or upgrade their gas-powered cars from 2015 until 2025 for affordable fees.
The Copenhagen Climate Conferance told us that it will not be easy to stop it, bit we need to start trying harder to stop global warming. If we don't, the consequences will be devastating. Temperatures will rise, glaciers will melt, and sea levels will rise. There is a possibility of the world ending as we know it, and no one on this Earth wants that (except the fishes).
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would try to make it a law that every month an amount of at least 30 lbs. of recyclable goods (that are neatly organized) be collected from every community.
This way we won't waste whatever we use.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that it will take time to stop global warming. It will take years to figure out what to do next. But, nations around the world are ready to do whatever it takes to stop global warming. If everyone lends a helping hand, it will be easier to stop global warming. If we don't do anything about it, disastrous things can happen. The ice caps will melt, causing the sea levels to rise. There will also be more floods, tsunamis, and many other natural disasters.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would make a law that would require all cars to be hybrids. Cars that are harmful for the environment would either be recycled, or turned into a hybrid. Hybrid cars are expensive, and not everyone can afford them, so in my law I would write that the price of hybrid cars would have to be decreased so that more people can buy them.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that we need to work hard together in order to stop global warming. If we don't try, soon enough the devastating effects of global warming will take place. It won't be that easy to prevent global warming, as it may take months or even years for scientists and researchers to plan things out. We have started global warming, and it is our job to stop this.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would make it law that people would take better care of trees. We exhale carbon dioxide, and trees produce oxygen so it would only make sense to stop cutting down trees. More trees mean less carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. I would also make sure people would switch to hybrid cars instead of polluting the air. As expensive as it may seem, this is for an important cause. Working together, we can accomplish something big.
The Copenhagen Climate Conference told us that we need to work together as a planet to stop global warming. These weather changes can have serious consequences. We all need to work to stop global warming. This is our planet, and we are responsible for it’s wellbeing. Global warming is partially a result of our greenhouse gas emissions. We brought this on our planet, and it’s our job to stop it.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a senator, I would make a law that 1,000,000 new trees have to be planted every year. Trying to reduce carbon dioxide emissions is very hard, considering we have many cars an factories in our country. Planting trees will help convert all the access carbon dioxide in the air into oxygen. This way our environment will have oxygen in the air without as much carbon dioxide.