971181

Global warming has been known to cause world wide events and catastrophes. some countries have started taking steps to try and hinder, stop, or regress global warming. Countries and their leaders should consider the reality of global warming, the economy, and possible dangers before implementing policies related at all to global warming. People argue that the Earth's temperature has always been capricious, constantly rising and dropping, and that the planet's general temperature is cyclical. however, although it is true that throughout Earth's history there has been at least one Ice Age and thaw, the rate at which the temperature is rising now is unprecedented. In the past, the Earth's temperature generally changed by less than .6 degrees Fahrenheit in a century, but in the 20th century, "the world's average surface temperature rose by approximately 1 degree Fahrenheit"(Souce A). (What significance does this rise in temperature have?) Not only that, even though global temperatures fluctuate, the general trend has been increasing from 1880 (source B). Therefore, governments and leaders must take into consideration that global warming is a present isue that will only worsen if ignored. Also, economies must be considered when dealing with global warming linked policies. most working class individuals are unable to afford the high priced alternatives, such as hybrid cars. It would therefore be impractical, unrealistic even, to implement requirements on buying more "green" cars. However, if the governments of the world worked together, the problem of global warming could at least be halted. It was projected by Oxford UP in 2004 that "$8 trillion or 2% of the world's GDP,"(Source E) is what it would cost to stabilize global warming. The articled conintues to argue that "2% of the world GDP is a very small cost if we can ensure that the world economy continues to grow by 2-3%"(Source E). Therefore, if it is not going to cripple or even injure the world's economy, why not invest the worl's resources to help it? It is seen on the newspapers, TV, etc; global warming is causing polar ice cpas to melt, which in turn causes sea levels to rise. however, polar bears are not the only ones losing their homes. With sea level rising, it is logical to assume that shore lines are creeping up ( Odd word choice and too casual) ( which they are). If the world keeps burning more and more fossil fules with no regard, cities could sink underwater. Cities built by the shore, or at low altitudes, like Venice, are noticeably sinking. Venice, a city literally built on water, has sunk 24 inches alone in the past century. If coastal cities and cities like Venice were to sink, thousands of people would be forced to emigrate, crowd another city, leading to a lower standard of living. The world is already overpopulated, according to research, because of better lifestyles and medicines. If the Earth's land surface area decreases, we would be stuck on less land with ever more people. In spite of this, many countries continue chugging and burning fossil fuels, only exacerbating global warming. Global warming threatens to endanger human life as we know it. Governments must cooperate to at least stabilize a worsening condition. If countries continue with disregard toward this problem, future leaders will be stuck with an even worse problem than that which is presented to us today. (Perhaps expand this?)