313506

Governments are constantly concerned about the welfare of their citizens and they will do everything in their power to make sure that all issues are resolved, even at the expense of other nations. The leaders of each country need to make sure that they take on a diplomatic approach to each problem and they must see to it that the issues around which they structure their policies are important both to their economy and to their people because structuring policies around insignificant issues is not particularly beneficial. However, when it comes to a widespread crisis such as global warming the problem seems almost insurmountable. The proposed solutions must be economically pragmatic and every country must work together in a combined and cooperative effort. In addition to this, countries must provide economic incentives to spur their citizens to “go green” while making sure not to harm neighboring countries, as well as motivate the citizens to follow through with the decision to save the environment.

Many leaders are ready to cut their greenhouse gas emissions significantly and though they can make policies that all citizens must follow, the leaders must take into consideration whether the solutions are economically pragmatic. Currently the United States has an almost defunct economy. Therefore, when the government officials make decisions they must make an accurate assessment of how prepared the country is to be able to effectively implement their plans because not only will most solutions cost a significant amount of money, but they could harm another facet of their own country or neighboring countries. Recently, "more than 160 mayors have pledged to curb greenhouse gases in their cities" (Source C) but the mayors must specify how exactly they will be able to execute this plan. Leaders should also consider how their policies may affect the economy. For example: in a recession, the ideal government action is to cut taxes. However, if the United States cuts their taxes, the government will have less revenue and they will no longer have the money to follow through with their plans for curbing the spread of global warming. Coupled with no incentive for people themselves to join the global effort to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, the government's current economic standing are some of the key issues that policy leaders must take into consideration when passing mandates that affect global warming.

A significant portion of the current problem with global warming is motivation among the citizens (or lack thereof) to “go green”. President Obama has set the goal that by the year 2015 all cars on the road will be electric and that greenhouse gas emissions will be cut by around 17%. ﻿ However, "U.S. Carbon Dioxide emissions have already risen by 12%... and are predicted to rise by more than 30% by 2012" (Source E). ﻿ To counter this study-based prediction in a matter of four years seemsimpossible. The only way this could be accomplished is with the support of every citizen, so the government should provide citizens with incentives to "go green.” To ask a middle class citizen to convert their entire home into an electricity based home would be ideal, but it would cost the citizens thousands of dollars. If they were offered some sort of incentive in exchange for converting their homes to electricity-based homes, the probability  of them converting their homes would be significantly greater. Unfortunately, in order for the government to be able to provide people and businesses with incentives, the government needs money. Still, if the people are not motivated to save the planet, any policies created, however noble, are likely to be ineffective. Incentives require money and so far, most policy makers have mindlessly spent the government's money on solutions that have not been examined completely. Leaders should consider the readiness of the economy when creating policies that affect globa l warming.

As governments are primarily concerned with the welfare of their own people, they tend to disregard how their own decisions ﻿ ﻿ ﻿ may impact their neighboring nations. It is simple to say that all nations must cut their greenhouse gas emissions in order to save the planet, but in order for that to be accomplished it needs to be a collective effort with every country in the world. For instance, the United States and Australia, "which together account for a quarter of the world's greenhouse gas emissions" did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, an international environmental effort aimed at stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations around the world in order to prevent detrimental impacts on the earth (Source A). The business monopolies of the United States and Australia largely produce greenhouse gases, and it is naturally difficult for them to agree to stop the use of something they depend on already. For example, the electric company Pepco burns coal for fuel. This fuel in turn produces carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that is harmful to the environment. If the government were to offer Pepco an incentive in exchange for limiting or eliminating the production of carbon dioxide, Pepco would need to find an alternative energy source such as corn-based ethanol. This alternative energy source may seem harmless on the surface, but it could potentially harm the animals, as corn-based ethanol is part of their main food supply. The Kyoto Protocol, like many other proposed solutions, "does not go far enough" (Source E). Leaders need to come up with a solution that will be considerate of all nations, because an issue like global warming has a domino effect; if one country does not participate, the whole globe will be affected.

<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10.5pt; line-height: 15.2pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px !important; text-indent: 0px !important;">It is possible to achieve the ambition of limiting greenhouse gas emissions, but it will take a collective effort. This feat can only be accomplished if a huge combined effort is put in affect to ameliorate the current environmental situation. For an issue such as global warming, if one country fails to participate in an effort to bring about change, it could have a detrimental impact on the globe as a whole. Leaders need to have a healthy dose of both patience and optimism to be able to effectively deal with this issue. It will be helpful if the government can provide incentives for the individual citizens to participate in the global effort, however, for this to be accomplished, the government needs to progress to a better economic standing. Government leaders must publicly emphasize how the effort will help citizens individually, as a large majority of citizens in the world will only help save the planet if they are beneficiaries. Leaders must motivate their citizens to participate in the effort, by bringing to their attention how it will benefit them individually.It will take more than just a few years to solve such a grave problem, and all aspects of the problem and solutions must be thoroughly examined prior to passing any mandate that will affect global warming. <span style="color: #e42f2f; font-size: 10.5pt; line-height: 15.2pt; margin: 0px; padding: 0px !important; text-indent: 0px !important;">