Blog Post 1 (Week 2) - Is Banning Fossil Fuels the Way?


Welcome to my first weekly blog post for Senior Seminar! For my first week, I decided to start off with a CNN article by CNN's Chief Climate Correspondent Bill Weir, titled "Why West Virginia is central to Biden's climate crisis plans." I will be judging whether science has been misused in the development of the policies implemented into President Biden's climate crisis plan.

Summary of Article:
Joe Manchin, a Democratic senator representing West Virginia, has, at least in the past, not supported his party's plans to tackle the climate crisis. West Virginia relies heavily on the fossil-fuel industry, and with President Biden's plans to end destruction by fossil fuel and halt overheating, it may be difficult to convince Manchin to support new legislation addressing the president's agenda. However, over the last decade, the climate crisis has become undeniable, and more officials, on both the left and right, are recognizing the need for the US to step up their game in addressing climate change. However, with many Republican senators (ie. Ted Cruz) likely to not support Biden's agenda, Biden desperately needs unanimous support from all Democrats in the Senate, including Manchin, especially because the Senate breakdown is 50-50.

Science in the Article:
While much of this news article focuses on political obstacles in Congress, it does mention some scientific concerns centered around climate change, particularly regarding the destruction by fossil fuels in the environment. In Biden's climate crisis plan, he wants to aggressively reduce our reliance on fossil fuels by working to end drilling and fracking. The damage that fossil fuels do to our environment is immeasurable. According to a scientific article titled "Will we ever stop using fossil fuels?", the authors discuss how without ending fossil fuels, significant climate change is unavoidable. However, the difficulty of reducing our dependence on fossil fuels will be quite difficult. According to a scientific article titled "Fossil fuel addiction and the implications for climate change policy," the authors analogized attempts to decrease our country's dependence on fossil fuels to trying to get out of a smoking addiction, in that we all would like to stop so we can live healthier, but we typically do not do enough to achieve that outcome. Instead, they suggest that policies that reduce the cost of non-carbon energy sources (solar panels, wind turbines, etc) may be more effective. In the scientific article, "Environmental damage due to fossil use," the authors propose another method to discourage fossil fuel use. They evaluate the damage caused by fossil fuels by converting it to an economic form and propose that damage costs should be deducted from its market value, reducing profit for those who rely solely on fossil fuels because of the damage they cause to the environment. Scientists believe these methods will be more effective in reducing our dependence on fossil fuels.

Assessment: Was Science Misused?
Biden's climate saving plan involves ending fracking and drilling - that is, he hopes to eventually stamp out our fossil fuel dependence completely. In this sense, science is not misused because fossil fuels are indeed the biggest contributor to significant and dangerous levels of climate change. However, according to some scientists, this method alone may not be as effective. They suggest instead that reducing the costs of non-carbon energy sources and decreasing the market value of fossil fuels may be more effective measures to discourage the use of fossil fuels. While Biden is not wrong in his assessment of the most important variable to address in the climate change crisis, his plan would benefit from incorporating additional measures that would be more effective at motivating people to reduce their use of fossil fuels.

This concludes my first weekly blog post. Thanks for reading!

Feel free to comment below about your thoughts on this topic!

Comments

  1. Hello!
    I think your discussion is an excellent example of the entangled relationship between science and politics. You did a fantastic job explaining both perspectives; I believe this is especially important when discussing a topic such as climate change. One interesting point I noticed was the difference in approach between the Biden Administration and Climate scientist. It would be interesting to see if any of the recommendations brought forward by the climate experts are added to Biden's plan.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment