The unabated rise in global warming is seen to kill at least 1/3 of the earth’s extinct animal species. Most of those that will suffer the sad consequences were identified to be roaming the forests of the developing countries. But this will not spare those that currently thrive in the glacial region where the polar bears and other mammals live.
Already, environmentalists and climatologists have expressed great concern over the increasing melting of the ice in some parts of the polar region. In fact, this phenomenon has already alerted politicians but nothing much has been done to mitigate the severe impacts of global warming that is mainly caused by the continued gas emissions from various industries thus aggravating air pollution.
Former vice president Al Gore, for instance, issued a strong statement before a panel of legislators recently to seek their attention on this dilemma. He told them that the "earth has a fever."
He added: "If your child has a fever, the first thing that a concerned parent has to do is do is to consult a doctor."
Political economists at this point in time have equated this environmental dilemma to the industrial advancements that are taking place in all corners of the world. As the countries’ economies grow, it’s always hard to discount developments that get in their way. But it could also mean destruction of natural resources like forests that provide sanctuary to the world’s wildlife species, and oxygen that is fit for humans to inhale.
What makes things even more complicated rest on energy explorations which have become an inseparable part of economic progress. These activities drive many countries with potential oil resources to accomplish their goals even at the expense of dislocating the marginalized of the lands they are tilling. A clear example are the forest farm lands where poor farmers cultivate to survive, who are either forcibly driven out by big companies to pave the way for energy or real estate developments. In some cases, complaints have turned on deaf ears because the private companies are in cahoots with government officials, who turn a blind eye on what’s happening.
As Ronald Browntein, a national affairs columnist wrote in L.A. Times recently: "Since the arrival of the white settlers, the American West has been shaped by the discovery and exploration of natural resources, beginning in the 19th century with silver and gold and then extending to timber, copper, uranium and fossil fuels such as oil, natural gas and coal."
These human endeavors have opened up the clamor by people for the federal government to open up millions acres of public lands for further resource exploration and development, he continued.
But among the most notorious activity, which created so much sensations and uproar, focused on energy exploration, a highly technological process to produce big quantities of oil and natural gas intended for domestic and international distributions. In a bid to sustain industrial operations on a wide scale, air pollutions are created in the process thus contributing to global warming.
In the U.S. alone, the heated debate centers on the choice between nuclear power and fossil fuel use. But legislators are split as to either to push though with the expansion of nuclear power plants or energy explorations. While the former does not produce so much greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, it was found to be unsafe because it produces radioactive wastes that are hard to dispose. As such, the U.S. Supreme Court has urged the Bush administration to introduce appropriate measures that would reduce greenhouse emissions into the air. But that still remains to be seen even as the country is operating more than a hundred nuclear power plants at this time.
Environmentalists said that carbon emissions from nuclear power plants are greater than the alternative energy sources now being used in some parts of the world. But the latter is considered to be much safer and cheaper to operate. Most developing countries are left without any choice but to use fossil fuels to run their industries. But not without heavy costs because the populace have nothing much to do but to absorb the effects of air pollution, just to keep up with the world’s progress. In most cases, the developing countries do not have a choice but to bite the bullet rather than be left behind.
Already suffering from strained basic services and degraded environment, most developing countries have to absorb the heavy consequences which is primarily caused by air pollution that emanate from carbon emissions of vehicles and industries.
It is about time that energy development and the processing of its by-products should be given enough attention, if only to save mankind, the animals and the atmosphere from serious effects of global warming. To act now is much better than having not acted at all.
Leave Your Comments