SHOULD COUNTRIES REDUCE CO2 OUTPUT?

Alexis Sheeler

AICE Global Perspectives- 9239

Gabriel - John Overton High School

Word count: 1609

Should countries reduce CO2 output?

The world runs on coal and oil, from the cars people use to get to work, to the electricity

generators used for commercially available electricity, which give people light, heat, and air

conditioning. But what else comes out of using coal and oil? Definitely something less beneficial

to people. Burning these materials releases CO2 and other harmful gases into the atmosphere,

leading to global impacts. Whether or not countries should be held responsible for CO2 output I

something that has recently become a global concern. Releasing the CO2 into the atmosphere has

catastrophic effects on the global environment and the ocean. But, if these outputs were to cease,

the outcome would be detrimental to the economy and everyday life of individuals.

CO2 output is the output of carbon dioxide (hereafter referred to as CO2) from certain

sources pertaining to the information given. Increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere can lead

to climate change (also may be referred to as global warming). Climate change is the change in

global climate over long periods of time. In recent years, the trend has been warming, hence the

term global warming. Recent studies have proven that there is a direct correlation between the

levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and the average global temperature. A rise in the global

temperature could lead to more extreme weather events and change in the seas. Extreme weather

events would include more severe hurricanes, droughts, heat waves, fires, and floods. Seas would

become more acidic, which kills marine life, and they would become warmer, leading to a sea

level rise and melting of the ice caps. This leads to an unending cycle, more warming and

melting until its all gone. CO2 is also produced as a byproduct when coal is burned. It is strongly

intertwined with those fuels, and those fuels are invaluable to the global economy. Many

products used in daily life depend on this industry to thrive, but are also statuses of thriving in
the world. Cars use liquid gas, and coal is burned to create energy and produce steel and

concrete, and these are all things used everyday life for many people. Without coal, the world

would not run. Many people also rely on the coal industry for a job, supporting their families,

and the countrys economy.

High amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can lead to more extreme weather

events. Extreme weather events such as droughts, floods, hurricanes, heat waves, and fires will

be an outcome if CO2 is continually released into the environment in high concentrations. This

also includes the global temperature change, which is on the rise. An increase of global

temperature over two degrees Celsius (about 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) is believed to be the turning

point. It would lead to more extreme weather events. These would be more fires and droughts,

but also storms, hurricanes, and floods. These would greatly impact peoples way of life, like if

they were farmers, floods or droughts would destroy their crops. This is cited in The Paris

Climate Agreement, stating that, The Paris Agreements central aim is to strengthen the global

response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well

below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature

increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Additionally, the agreement aims to strengthen the

ability of countries to deal with the impacts of climate change." The Paris Climate Agreement is

a global agreement between 126 countries that have all agreed on terms to help reduce climate

change and keep the temperature from rising for the benefit of the world (The Paris Agreement).

Ever increasing amounts of CO2 in the environment will also lead to changes in sea

composure, level, and temperature. As global temperatures rise, so will the sea temperatures.

This in turn, melts ice in the arctic, which leads to rise in sea level, which warms and melts more

of the ice, creating a perpetual cycle. The ocean is continually growing warmer, "Three
independent analyses show that the amount of heat stored in the ocean has increased

substantially since the 1950s. Ocean heat content not only determines sea surface temperature,

but also affects sea level and currents," (EPA) states the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA). This will likely lead to extreme flooding, " flooding is becoming more frequent along the

U.S. coastline as sea level rises. Nearly every site measured has experienced an increase in

coastal flooding since the 1950s (EPA), " from the EPA. The sea is also rising at a high rate,

"the rate of increase has accelerated in recent years to more than an inch per decade(EPA)," says

the EPA. The sea will also become more acidic, killing marine life. "Higher acidity affects the

balance of minerals in the water, which can make it more difficult for certain marine animals to

build their protective skeletons or shells (EPA)," also from the EPA. The EPA is a big supporter

of the Paris agreement, as it exists to help the environment. If these things were to happen, food

sources around the world would be destroyed, leaving people starving, as nearly 16% of the

worlds protein intake is from fisheries, and more than that in developing countries. The ocean is

a major source of food, and any changes in it could result in disaster. The EPA is a government

agency created with the sole purpose of protecting the environment. It also aims to gather more

information on the environment, giving a slight bias towards protecting the environment.

On the opposing side, the global economy could be affected by reduction of CO2 output.

One thing is the reduction of oil use, which is a major supporter of the economy. Burning coal

and oil release large amounts of greenhouse gases, mostly carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere,

but many things in the modern world are reliant on coal or oil for everyday activities. The coal

and oil industries also supply a large number of jobs. In places where other jobs are scarce, many

people rely on coal and oil to live. Cutting CO2 use would reduce jobs for people, not only where
it is produced, but also where it was used. If there was no coal, people who work in car plants

would be out of a job. This would also impact people who use those products

Many countries economies are based on production of oil. Many products throughout the

world work because of oil. If countries were to reduce their CO2 output, the oil industry would

fall apart. This means many products that are used on a daily basis, including cars and many

factory-made products such as plastics and steel, would not be available. Attempts are being

made to impose a carbon tax, but that would be detrimental too. Many major cities in the

Middle East are coastal and therefore vulnerable to sea level rise. Muscat, Kuwait City, Doha,

Abu Dhabi and Dubai have large areas of valuable property close to sea level including oil

platforms, pipeline landings and desalination plants. They all are the life-blood of these states

and all are under threat. (Times of Oman). Nordhaus economic model shows that an overly

ambitious and/or inefficiently structured policy can swamp the potential benefits of a perfectly

calibrated and efficiently targeted plan. For example, Nordhaus (Newbold) optimal plan yields

net benefits of $3 trillion ($5 trillion in reduced climatic damages and $2 trillion in abatement

costs). Yet, other popular proposals have abatement costs that exceed their benefits.

A fall in the economy (and specifically the oil industry), would lead to decreased jobs and

job opportunities. Many people, who make a living by working in the oil industry, would be

without work. This would not only hurt them, but those who rely on them for food and shelter.

The oil industry is a very important part of life for many people, especially those where oil is the

countrys main export. This would also affect the people who rely on oil and coal for their jobs

in other countries, especially those who rely on gasoline for transport.

To pose the question again, should countries reduce CO2 output? Countries should reduce

their output to protect the environment and the world they live in. If nothing is done, sea levels
will rise, and there will be a greater risk of extreme weather events that will occur. They should

not address the issue because it would be damaging to the local, national, and global economy.

Countries who rely on CO2 heavy operations could be at risk for an economic failure, as well as

everyone that works under those companies. As many risk as there are for economies and jobs,

the environment is more important. Without the earth, there would be no need for jobs or

economies.

Countries should reduce their CO2 output as it is harmful to the environment. If life is to

be continued on Earth without any adverse effects, a change needs to be made. If outputs are left

where they are, or they are allowed to increase, the world will be more subject to extreme

weather events, such as flooding or droughts. Living on a planet with these events would be

possible, but if amounts continued to increase from there, events could become so severe that

they would last for days at a time, and could destroy entire ecosystems. Many lives would be

lost. A falling economy is a small price to pay for a healthy, safe planet. There is recovery if the

economy fails, but there is no earth number two that people could live on. The hypothesis made

at the commencement of this research has not been changed, and is now more heavily supported.

It has also been shown that the global economy can grow while reducing coal use, rebutting the

idea that reducing the creation would hurt the economy, but it could still hurt the people (Soyas

et al.) (Sumner). This problem could potentially be solved by introducing renewable energy

sources; meaning getting energy from renewable sources such as wind energy, solar energy, and

water energy. This could benefit the economy by creating jobs, and help the earth because they

are not harmful to the environment like coal. Renewable sources are important, because

eventually non-renewable sources like coal will run out. They are resilient, but there is a high
upfront cost to implement these materials and tools. The pay off after the initial creation will be

worth paying more up front.

Works Cited

The Paris Agreement. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 28 Nov.

2016, http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php. Accessed 12 Dec. 2016.

EPA, US. Climate Change Indicators: Oceans. Environmental Protection Agency, 2 Aug.

2016, https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/oceans. Accessed 12 Dec. 2016.

Times of Oman. The Low Price of Oil Will Affect Middle East Environmental Efforts. Help

Rescue the Planet, Wordpress.com, 11 Mar. 2016,

https://helprescuetheplanet.com/2016/03/11/the-low-price-of-oil-will-affect-middle-east-

environmental-efforts/. Accessed 9 Nov. 2016.

Newbold, Stephen C. Summary of the DICE Model. 2010.

Soytas, Ugur, et al. Energy Consumption, Income, and Carbon Emissions in the United States.

Ecological Economics, vol. 62, no. s 34, 1 May 2007, pp. 482489,

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800906003430,

10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.009. Accessed 12 Dec. 2016.

Sumner, Thomas. Global Carbon Emissions Fell in 2015, Despite Economic Growth. Science

News, 8 Dec. 2015, https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/science-ticker/global-carbon-emissions-

fell-2015-despite-economic-growth. Accessed 8 Nov. 2016.