
To say the United States must do better is, at this point, self-evident.
Over the last two weeks, nations around the world gathered in Katowice, Poland to revisit the goals set forth in the 2015 Paris climate negotiations. Over 20,000 leaders convened to discuss the world’s future and the necessity of cutting global carbon emissions in order to keep temperatures from rising no more than 1.5°C. After deliberations surpassed the deadline late into Saturday night, more than 190 countries finally agreed to move forward with the original plan outlined in Paris.
However, left off on a shortlist from the 190-country coalition, was the United States. The small victory of collective climate action in Poland, though still far from what is needed, was undermined by America’s refusal to cooperate.
If one thing was made clear in the past two weeks, it is that America will not be a leading voice in climate action. The Trump administration reaffirmed its lack of concern for climate change and its potentially devastating effects. In a press conference, Department of Energy Official Wells Griffith said, “We strongly believe that no country should have to sacrifice economic prosperity or energy security in pursuit of environmental sustainability.” Effectively, the Trump administration declared that the environment is an afterthought to economic development.
Though Griffith’s statement doesn’t outright deny the existence of climate change, it points the current administration’s greater inability to acknowledge the dangers that climate change poses, which, perhaps, is even worse. They know we are degrading our planet. They just don’t seem to care.
They don’t care that temperatures are rising—that the ten hottest years on record have occurred in the last twenty years alone. They don’t care that carbon dioxide is at its highest atmospheric content in 650,000 years. And, they don’t care that these rises in temperature and carbon emissions have directly correlated with more severe droughts, floods, and storms.
It’s one thing for an individual citizen to prioritize their wallet over environmental sustainability: initial expenses might be difficult to finance, the benefit is hard to see, sustainability is not always on our minds. It’s another thing entirely for the government to employ these same reasons to explain their lack of action.
Yet still they push the false narrative that economic prosperity must operate counter to environmental sustainability—that the two are mutually exclusive. But this simply is not true. Economic development can exist without drowning the atmosphere in carbon. Look at a country like Iceland, where their economy flourishes despite being one of the most environmentally sustainable countries in the world.
If the Trump administration truly cared about economic prosperity, they would want to ensure its longevity by securing environmental sustainability as well. Damages from hurricanes alone in the last two years have cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars. Is this the sacrifice we seem to be avoiding? Is this the true price of economic prosperity that the current administration envisions?
As I consider the immediate aftermath of the recent events in Poland, I’m left to ponder the best way to move forward. If our government won’t take action, should we?
Unfortunately, while individual action—habits like recycling, driving low-emission vehicles, or eating less meat—is great, it cannot actually amount to tangible change. Collective governmental action must be our approach if we hope to make a sizeable difference. But when the Trump administration continues to spew rhetoric that is backwards and mistaken, individuals are faced with an unfair burden to make up for our leaders’ lack of response.
To suggest that not pursuing negotiations in Poland would avoid economic sacrifices is to completely overlook the environmental sacrifices we make everyday by continuing to pollute.
President Trump, we deserve better. People of Congress, you must do better, too. Our future depends upon it.
Ellis Laifer is a senior at Bowdoin College, where he studies Environmental Science and Music. He can be contacted at elaifer@bowdoin.edu
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less