KIDS AND COMMUNITY by Judy Sheppe Battle: We need to deal with environmental problems now, not later
"We owe it to future generations to deal with this problem."
George W. Bush, Sept. 7, 2002
Last week President George Bush spoke the above words with regard to taking immediate action to disarm Saddam Hussein’s nuclear capacity. While I hope the price of ensuring nuclear peace will not involve war-like activities, I thoroughly applaud the president’s recognition of the seriousness of nuclear war and his stated commitment to the well-being of future generations.
I strongly urge Mr. Bush to apply the same intensity of commitment to resolving life-threatening environmental issues in our country and the world.
I exhort him to draft a statement of unwavering insistence, coupled with mandatory action objectives, on the protection and restoration of the environment, and to fully participate with other world leaders in such a plan.
Global warming is a side effect of industrialization, yet adequate action steps have not been taken to prevent potentially fatal consequences.
Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in the issue of environmental pollutants.
Ten years ago world leaders gathered in Rio de Janeiro for the first Earth Summit. There they signed an agreement to limit emissions of greenhouse gases, contaminants which are contained in automobile exhaust and industrial pollutants, and which are thought to contribute to global warming.
Yet despite this seeming consensus on the importance of clean air, levels of greenhouse gasses continue to rise.
Carbon emissions have increased by 9 percent since the Earth Summit. The major contributors to this pollution are the developed countries, with some rates increasing by as much as 18 percent. The pollution rate in the United States has risen an average of 1.3 percent per year over the past decade.
Critics say this is because compliance with the 1992 agreement was voluntary; there were no legal measures for enforcement built into the document. Countries were expected to do the morally right thing. Instead, many opted for personal gain.
It is clear that when the interests of the present personal comfort and business profitability are weighed against the needs of the future for clean air, the scale tips in favor of immediate gratification.
It is this imbalance of priorities that must be addressed when searching for solutions to a clean environment. As long as actions reflect "me now," future generations will be ill-served.
A follow-up conference on global warming was held in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997 and a new treaty the Kyoto Protocol was created, and ratified by most nations. A key requirement of the Kyoto Protocol was that all industrial countries reduce emissions within a decade to levels below those of 1990.
The United States originally signed the Kyoto Treaty but withdrew last year.
A Bush Administration spokesman said that to meet pre-1990 levels would require reducing energy use by 30 percent, and this reduction could be achieved only by shutting down all manufacturing plants or taking all cars off the road.
Critics have said that without the leadership of the United States, the Kyoto Treaty will be ineffective. I believe these authorities are correct.
Earth Summit II, formally known as the World Summit on Sustainable Development, took place in Johannesburg, South Africa, began in late August and ended in early September of this year.
President Bush was absent from the World Summit (sending Secretary of State Colin Powell in his place), although more than 100 heads of state and government attended.
Germany offered $500 million to the Summit over five years to support renewable energy projects. The United States offered no financial assistance.
The issue of renewable sources of energy, such as wind and solar energy, was presented as key to reducing environmental contaminants. Participants were urged to agree to increase current use of renewable sources to 15 percent by 2010.
The United States and OPEC states opposed the setting of that measurable outcome.
The final document of the Summit, the Johannesburg Declaration, includes only an "urgent" commitment to "substantially increase" the use of renewable energy sources and does not specify wind and solar energy.
Without agreed upon and measurable target goals, rewards for achievement, and penalties for failure to meet objectives, there is no incentive for any country to comply with these expensive yet life-saving remedies.
No amount of political rhetoric concerning our "obligation to future generations" can negate the self-serving actions taken by our government with regard to environmental protection.
As the grandmother of two very young citizens whose future is endangered, I object to the Bush Administration posture regarding Kyoto and Johannesburg.
As a citizen of the world, I am ashamed of the choices my country is making in this matter.
In the words of General Kofi Annan to the leaders of the Johannesburg Earth Summit: "Let us not be deceived when we look at a clear blue sky into thinking that all is well…Let there be no disguising the perilous state of the Earth, or pretending that conservation is too expensive, when we know that the cost of failure to act is far greater."
Judy Shepps Battle is a New Jersey resident, addictions specialist, consultant and freelance writer. She can be reached by e-mail at [email protected]. Additional information on this and other topics can be found at her web site at www.writeaction.com.

