801353

Global warming, among the most controversial and widely debated issues of our time; arguments on possible legislation to stall the onslaught of the world's rising global temperature have dominated world politics and worked its way onto foreign policy agreements. Advocated for taking direct, immediate action to halt global warming's immanent approach argue that if this issue is brushed under the carpet as conspiracy and not taken seriously, it can have disastrous consequences on the environment, people and nature. Adversaries of this motion claim policies would place limitations on businesses and undercut the economy. Legislators are given the task of balancing different factions' interests while also observing their own beliefs. Leaders have the duty of actively protecting the environment while also implementing strict policies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions taking into account politics, environmental impacts and economic influences.

Since global warming is such a controversial issue, passing legislation that is able to please all parties is extremely difficult, making progress even more note-worthy. The biggest step forward in 'green' politics is the "Kyoto Protocol [which is] a key first step to help slow the onslaught of global warming and benefit conservation effects" (Source A). This piece calls for the "one hundred forty one countries that ratified" it to "reduce their greenhouse-gas emissions to below 1990 levels over a five year period" (Source A). The treaty, though note-worthy, is not significant enough to provide a significant defense to protect the deteriorating environment because the most polluting countries, such as the United States and Australia, did not ratify it. Leaders should strictly enforce such protocols, and push nations to join and honor the clauses of the agreement so that major gas emitting countries that refuse to sign other works like Kyoto Protocol are held responsible for their actions. Combating global warming is not an overnight campaign, it requires effort and attention from all. Current policies are not enough to meet the "suggested up to 60% global cut [that] is required to prevent major climate change" (Source E). If all the major gas emitting nations and leaders were compelled to place the natural world in higher priority than money, the environment would be saved.

Global warming has start a movement that is devoted to limiting mankind's degrading industrial byproducts. Opponents of the green movement are unaware of the potential nature could play in saving itself. If the environment could be harnessed and used to fight back pollution, it would eliminate much of the opposition's claims of potential economic degradation and pave way to compromise. If the "combustion of fossil fuels" were limited and special attention was paid to"protection and restoration of forests, [we] may be able to offset up to 20% of carbon dioxide emissions over the next 50 years" (Source A). Planting trees is a relatively easy and inexpensive way to begin reversing the tide of global warming. Preservation on nature and active restoration of trees can help policy makers transfer the effort put into negotiation towards direct, positive action. Due to the rising temperature of the world, "the global environment is changing so fast that the slow evolutionary process of species adaptation can't keep up" (Source F). The disruption caused by the last few decades of human pollution has began to reverse and effect evolutionary trends that took centuries to establish and stabilize. If leaders do not come to a fast consensus in these issues, whole communities and ecosystems will be torn apart for the sake of feeding mankind's greed.

The most heated opposition to the green movement comes from the proponents of economy over environment. As "environmental development stems from economic development," this debate "has [created] implications [for] prioritization" (Source D). Contrary to this argument, protection of the environment doesn't necessarily demand complete disregard for capital and economy; it merely calls for a reform in the way individuals treat the environment. Initially, policies to oppose increasing global warming sheds light on the "potential for fuel-saving technologies and renewable energy as oil and gas prices reach record levels" (Source C). Leaders should not use the prospect of the negative economic impacts limits on gas emissions could bring about because technological introductions in gas saving vehicles and solar powered homes can both, stimulate economic growth and protect the environment.

When legislating important issues such as global warming, leaders must take into account, many controversial issues, but chiefly politics, natural impacts and economic implications. Through careful consideration of these issues, legislators can appease numerous opposing factions' viewpoints.