Global warming, or climate change, is an increase in the earth’s atmospheric temperature since the late nineteenth century. In politics the debate over global warming is centered on whether this increase in temperature is due to greenhouse gas emissions or is the result of a natural pattern in the earth’s temperature. In 2022 Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act which included hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies for investing in renewable-energy projects and producing energy from renewable sources. The bill also included credits to help factories retool to turn…
Read moreThese active users have achieved advanced knowledge of the terminology, history, and legal implications regarding the topic of Climate Change
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
Yes
@9F9W6Y91yr1Y
Top Agreement
Due to deforestation less and less c02 is being taken out of the atmosphere. This is causing our globe to heat up and our planet to die faster and faster and faster.
@9F7Z7JD 1yr1Y
Renewable energy is energy produced from sources like the sun and wind that are naturally replenished and do not run out. Renewable energy can be used for electricity generation, space and water heating and cooling, and transportation (Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy).
@9FCJQ5F1yr1Y
Renewable energy is not a consistent or reliable energy source yet. And usually these methods require certain weather conditions and certain locations to be proficient which adds to its inconsistencies.
I understand your concerns, but I wanted to share that innovative solutions are being developed to tackle these challenges. For instance, Tesla's Powerpack and Powerwall storage systems allow renewable energy to be stored and used when needed, not just when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. What about the idea of further incentivizing research and development in this area? Perhaps this could lead to more breakthroughs that make renewable energy more reliable and consistent.
@9FBQ5RHRepublican1yr1Y
Costs money to build solar panels and wind turbines but we already have nuclear power plants and things of that sort that we don't need to spend money on building
@9F9MKGZRepublican1yr1Y
Climate change is a natural occurrence and shouldn't be shoved down our throats about how it'll end the world in x amount of years when it still hasn't really done anything.
@9F9WF631yr1Y
Until the costs of renewables match or fall below fossil fuels, renewables will continue to provide only a fraction of our energy needs.
@9F7ZKV21yr1Y
climate change is scientifically proven to exist, there is no further discussion needed. Its happening, its dangerous, and ignoring it because youre scared will solve nothing. There is no conspiracy, there is no ignoring it, and it must be fixed
@9FG46J8 1yr1Y
Animals such as polar bears and penguins are moving farther and farther south due to the icebergs melting and are suffering because of it.
@9FG9MX61yr1Y
The US could propose a plan to decrease carbon emissions, to decrease this problem starting with the melting of the icebergs.
yes. It's removing habitats and is, in a way, worse than deforestation as we can plant more trees but we can't replace icebergs.
@9FG9XJ51yr1Y
many animals like these are suffering due to the climate change in America and other countries. It just shows the true damage we’ve made to these innocent living beings.
@9FG6DWK1yr1Y
I agree that people should do somehting to stop climate change. It is affect nature and will soon affect us.
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
Yes, and provide more incentives for alternative energy production
@9F7Z3881yr1Y
Nuclear fission energy is a source that provides a insane amount of energy and until we can either improve our discoveries of nuclear fusion or have better batteries and more efficient energy production, then we need it.
@9F8G2X21yr1Y
California has seen two hurricanes in two years in a row, after only receiving the remnants of a few hurricanes over the past 150 years. Oregon has broken its heat records in recent years and the summers are becoming more intense.
@9F7HX7T1yr1Y
Hopefully if we start as soon as possible we can prevent global warming from drastically ruining our planet and providing more incentives for alternative energy production would help to do just that.
If there are more incentives, the people and companies are more likely to contribute to help battling against climate change.
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
No
@9F7Z7JD 1yr1Y
Top Disagreement
If we want humans to continue living on this planet, we need to step up and take care of the big issues in the world. If we continue our ways of throwing trash into forests and distributing uneeded amounts of oil, we may run out of very valuable things like coal that run our society. That's why we need to turn to renewable resources like wind energy and solar energy in order to salvage oil, coal, fossil fuels, and natural gas.
@9FBFYWKRepublican1yr1Y
It is sometimes hard to believe what you hear about climate change as there are two vastly different sides of the debate. I believe most of what is said about the topic is exaggerated and do not believe that completely changing our way of life and increasing spending on renewable resources is at all necessary.
@6avin8mos8MO
Of course it's not necessary. Because it doesn't affect you. We have much more to gain (resources, profits, stability) by incrementally applying proven methods that strengthen the ecosystems that allow us to breathe and eat. Ultimately, it's not about us. It's about future generations thriving.
@9F9GBVHRepublican1yr1Y
Climate change has been a fact for billions of years, CO2 is good for plants, therefore there is more green than ever.
@6avin8mos8MO
The issue with this statement is that there isn't more green than ever. Firstly, plants have multiple needs like other nutrients, water, and sunlight. Plants don't grow more and healthier because you give them a single nutrient like how any human wouldn't do well off a single nutrient. Secondly, deforestation is still a problem. Older and richer ecosystems like rainforests are capable of absorbing more carbon and putting it in the ground.
That's why it's so important to properly preserve our national parks (among other reasons), only cut down trees that are grown to be cut down - opposed to clearing old ecosystems, and preserve the high seas which provide about 50-80% of our oxygen
@9F9HTHJ1yr1Y
The planet naturally changes, man made climate change has had a negligible impact on the environment and most of the change is from natural causes
@9F9TYK71yr1Y
I deny the premise - climate change is not a real issue so we should stop treating it as such. The climate changes; that's how the world works. It's not a bad thing to try to be smart with how we use energy and resources, but we need to stop treating climate change as a real problem.
@9K2SJT47mos7MO
It's not a problem for you
@9FG46J8 1yr1Y
Melting of the icebergs, the arctic is clearing fading away and we are doing nothing to help, millions of animals are losing their home.
@9F8BM7J1yr1Y
Look, man. I don't care how much money it costs, or how long it takes, but if Earth one day becomes uninhabitable, even if only for the very short time period of hundreds of years, that's it. I don't know if you've noticed, but only rich people and professional astronauts get to go to space. Everyone else is going to die. We, as a worldwide community should be working towards fixing the damage done, but if the US has to be the leader for putting a large effort towards it then so be it.
It's definitely true that the Earth's condition is something we should all be concerned about. However, I believe that the approach should be balanced and well-thought-out. The main challenge with environmental regulations is that they can have significant economic costs. For instance, the coal industry, which has been heavily regulated in recent years, has seen significant job losses.
Moreover, while the U.S. taking leadership is a noble idea, climate change is a global problem. Even if the U.S. completely cut its emissions, it wouldn't be enough if other big polluters like Chi… Read more
@9K2SJT4 7mos7MO
It needs to be balanced and well thought out - absolutely - reinforced by global cooperation. A big issue for arguments countering environmental regulation with costs as a point is that it's for the short term. Job losses in the coal industry are a valid concern. But it's not a reason. Its effects are detrimental to the health of all breathing organisms while it is still subsidized. I strongly advocate for preserving ecosystems and regenerative agriculture because wealth comes from natural resources and labor. A healthy ecosystem is a healthy economy.
@9F85PW71yr1Y
Climate change is something that is going to significantly impact the world, and it is our duty to minimize this as much as possible.
While there's no denying that climate change is a significant global issue, it's crucial to consider the potential economic impact of increased environmental regulations. For example, stringent regulations can potentially slow down industrial growth and lead to job losses in certain sectors. How can we strike a balance between protecting the environment and ensuring economic stability?
@VulcanMan6 1yr1Y
Jobs/industries that perpetuate climate disaster should be abolished in favor of green alternatives. The solution to help workers would be instituting strong social safety nets that protect and provide for those who previously worked in those industries so they can transition elsewhere, but the owners and companies themselves deserve to collapse and suffer for their crimes against humanity.
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
No, and global warming is a natural occurrence
There has been much scientific research pointing to humans being the main cause of climate change. While it may occur naturally, we humans have greatly sped up the process and the fault lies within our actions.
@9F7Z3881yr1Y
Scientist have proven the effects of carbon emission to the climate. Sure the ideology of the climate is natural, but the rate of which it’s raising is not natural and caused because of how much green house gasses we am it. We could physically see the effects of little carbon emission from the pandemic because we were in lock down and the skies seemed clear and felt cleaner.
@9F7HX7T1yr1Y
Global warming has clearly changed over time due to the increase and ongoing use of fossil fuels. It is not a natural occurrence and is awful for the environment and our planet.
@9F7H93M1yr1Y
Yes, it is a natural occurrence but we are speeding up the process with our emissions at a rate the Earth can't handle.
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
No, provide more incentives for alternative energy production instead
Irrelevant, even if can't provide incentives for alternative energy the fact of Human generated Climate Change remains and we must do something about it to continue existing.
@9CG8ZWW1yr1Y
The US and Canada are major traditional energy producers — an advantage that will keep us ahead of our competitors for generations. Investing in renewable energy will save consumers money in relation to capitalists within our society, but maintaining our competitive advantages increases the value of that money. Climate change will primarily impact countries in the Global South: Africa, South America, The Middle East, Southeast Asia. These regions are not our allies and they have large and growing populations. Weakening their economies and infrastructure gives us leverage over them in our diplomatic and economic relations, being able to deflate wages, exploit crises, and trade the resources, like freshwater, food and steel, which they will need to adapt to a post-climate crisis Earth. That's good for my descendants.
While it's true that the US and Canada are major traditional energy producers, it's important to consider the long-term consequences of relying solely on these resources. History has shown us that relying on finite resources can lead to economic instability. For instance, the oil crises of the 1970s had a significant impact on the global economy.
Investing in renewable energy not only saves consumers money but also promotes economic diversification, creating new industries and job opportunities. Countries like Germany and Denmark have successfully transitioned to renewable energy,… Read more
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
No, tax carbon emissions instead
@9FPX4DZ1yr1Y
I believe, the only way for our society to survive, is for our planet to be alive, and with doing that, everyone needs to be held accountable and pay up.
@939V736Independent1yr1Y
Are we soley taxing corporations that have carbon emissions or is it an all encompassing tax on all emissions including drivers. I know for a fact that under this capitalistic umbrella i cannot afford a reliable EV for another 10 years. If i would have to be taxed as a driver so that the governement can take more of my money, and use it on wars and and weapons, then i see no point in taxing the American people even more than they are taxed.
I think companies should be taxed based on the amount of pollution they place in the air, as it helps them be greener, and more environmentally friendly.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
