Attacking the Greenhouse
The threat of global warming caused by the greenhouse effect of pumping civilization’s waste gases into the atmosphere presents an environmental problem of staggering proportions. It is so staggering, in fact, that any practical corrective effort that one nation could attempt might seem puny and futile. But the effort must begin. And Sen. Timothy E. Wirth (D-Colo.) has introduced legislation that, while it might not provide the total solution, certainly is a good starting point for discussion.
First, there must be a continuing public debate that convinces Americans that a serious problem exists. Second, scientists and politicians must get across the message that a significant effect on global warming can be achieved without traumatic changes in American life or the economy. Only then will there be the political support for a program like that suggested by Wirth.
The issue has come to the public’s attention in a dramatic way this year because of the severe drought of 1988. No one is certain that the drought is a direct result of the greenhouse effect. But scientists know that the Earth is getting warmer. They are convinced that it is doing so because of the accumulation of gases in the atmosphere that are trapping the heat of the sun reflected off the Earth’s surface. If this year’s drought is not a direct result of the greenhouse effect, it is an example of the problems that are certain to occur as the warming continues.
Wirth’s legislation would attempt to attack the problem from several directions. The most direct approach is to set a goal of a 20% reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions by the United States over the next dozen years. Carbon dioxide results almost entirely from the burning of fossil fuels, and it is believed responsible for 50% to 60% of greenhouse gases.
The Wirth program also would require the drafting of a national energy plan to conserve fossil fuels and develop the use of renewable energy sources, provide $450 million for alternative energy research, renew energy conservation efforts, attempt to halt the destruction of tropical rain forests and encourage reforestation, summon an international conference on greenhouse gases and authorize $600 million in new atmospheric research over a three-year period. Wirth also proposes research into new forms of nuclear-power production that might not have the risks or environmental problems of existing nuclear plants and a renewed program of international population control.
Wirth’s proposals make sense on their own. This country should be promoting the development and use of non-fossil fuels for energy. It should make conservation a vigorous part of its energy ethic. Wholesale destruction of rain forests must be halted. As a separate measure, he also is proposing greater fuel-efficiency requirements for autos. The United States should be doing all these things and reaping the obvious benefits; one of them is long-term reduction in national energy costs. Taken together, these proposals also can begin to make significant headway against the greenhouse effect.
