human
Write a shift from climate change awareness under new president research paper that. Start with the words 'A shift from climate change'.
assistant
A shift from climate change awareness under new president research paper. A recent research paper examined the potential shift from climate change awareness under new president research paper. The paper found that while Trump has withdrawn from international cooperation on preventing climate change, this does not necessarily mean that he has also withdrawn from the goal of creating a safer living and working environment for Americans. The paper also found that while Trump has appointed Scott Pruitt as a chief of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), this does not.
human
essay based on the summary above.
assistant
##Introduction
Donald Trump recently has been noticed to withdraw from the international cooperation on climate change issues (“Trump Administration Deletes Mentions of ‘Climate Change’ from Climate Change Website.”). Moreover, Trump appointed Scott Pruitt as a chief of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). He explicitly stated that he does not believe in the environmental impact of climate change and the significance of the role that humans play in this process. This could lead to serious changes in domestic and foreign policies and have a significant impact on relationships and cooperation with other countries. In light of this, it is paramount to review the possible changes that might occur as a result of such decisions.
##Domestic Issues
A new leader of the EPA has recently stated his position on the climate change, arguing that there is no sufficient evidence to support the claims of any substantial influence of human activities on global warming. Such statements raised concerns among American journalists and general population relating to future of the organization as one of the main forces who advocated for the safe and healthy environment of Americans and the global society. Judging by the information retrieved from the organization’s website, there is no cause to be alarmed. The organization’s values have not changed and still revolve around safe living and working conditions for people (US EPA). The top priority of EPA is human’s health, which implies creating safer and friendlier environment. The views of the organization’s head on global warming do not influence those values as directly as many may believe.
Global warming prevention might be a noble cause but if it were taken away from the list of goals, it would change nothing. Climate change prevention is a perquisite for the creation of the safer living and working environment. The range of task to achieve this goal would still include measures such as reducing CO2 emissions, extensive use of renewable energy sources, natural resource preservation, and non-polluting daily behaviors. With or without Climate change those goals still need to be achieved for the sake of raising the standard of living. The possible result of such wording strategy (if it was indeed an intentional avoidance) is more focus on raising and maintaining living standard for American citizens without pretentious goals and slogans.
The withdrawal from international cooperation on preventing climate change could mean the allocation of saved funds into other projects that could be more useful for the citizens of the United States. On the other hand, international cooperation on mutually or even universally beneficial projects is often positively affects the politician’s approval. Trump does not seem to be bothered by the question of his rating among the citizens and practically does the best he can for his compatriots in a way he sees suitable. Perhaps, the president plans to channel the positive energy of those who wants to save the planet for something more down-to-earth and practical. If we assume that each president acts to fulfill the will of his voters, which means the majority of Americans, then it will be safe to say that quitting the widely acknowledged as positive international program he has some reason behind it that may imply benefit for his fellow citizens.
Another implication of the set course could be that the country is now concentrates more on its own pollution problems instead of following guidelines and agreements proposed by other countries. The idea of an international agreement, especially the one with many participants, is to reach a consensus or to agree on a solution that more or less benefits all of the countries. However, such approach is flawed in a sense that it may hinder the possibilities of one country to fulfill its duties before its citizens to the full extent.
McGraw indicates that the US decision to pull out of the Paris agreement could affect the relationships between the government and the company’s officials. However, the Exxon Mobil CEO did not imply any offence or indicate strong opposition. He just conveyed his company’s concern for the balance of powers at the table of negotiation. Assuming that company officials of such level does not let themselves set the world leader against themselves, it would probably a sad remark rather than a statement of discontent.
Another possible implication for domestic situation is the formation of new or growth of popularity for not-for-profit non-governmental movements that advocate for global warming prevention. The reason for this is that there will always be activists who do not agree with the official strategy demonstrated by Trump office. Essentially, for the country as a whole nothing would change dramatically. American people follow the trends created by the industry and the industry is regulated by demand.
However, in case of, for instance, sustainable solutions the main goal is make energy cheaper by reusing whatever is suitable for recycling. It is a purely capitalistic approach but it seems to be smarter. People start to realize that the investments into sustainable infrastructure that in the long run will save money and thus will be more effective. Saving the earth’s resources and the care for global warming prevention is only a bonus to that. Therefore, the trend that Trump might intentionally effected is aimed at people realizing that there is no need for sacred vows before the humanity and the Earth to contribute to progress and sustainable future. The future that implies human race existence becoming non-threatening to the environment.
##Foreign Issues
The possible consequences of Tramp’s new policy might be a negative reaction from international society. For example, European nations are widely recognized as zealous advocates of global warming or climate change prevention. The withdrawal of the US from programs that are intended to work for common good might worsen the relationships with some countries across the US. It is especially probable because Trump is known to have promised support for oil and coal industry in America to grow and prosper, which for some countries may serve as an indication of a first step towards fulfilling these promises.
On the other hand, the United States are one of the most significant and influential powers on international arena. The actions and trends set by the US are often promoted abroad. Hollywood movies, street food, or Silicon Valley as a center of a technological progress contributes to the spread of similar items across other nations. Same could happen with the trend on global warming prevention. A loss of interest in distant future and concentration in the immediate issues of the internal present demonstrated by the US may set certain countries in the mood to do the same. Another example of the US trendsetting influence is its policy to lower the consumption of coal. Thus, it is estimated that the amount of workers in the solar energy industry would surpass those in coal processing sector by 50% (McGrath).
According to McGrath a unilateral withdrawal of the US from the Paris climate agreement could result in a strategic loss. China as one of the closest rivals of the US for global dominance could easily take the lead. The political landscape might change towards the EU and China engaging in a more close collaboration with mutual exchange of sustainable technologies pushing the US out of this race.
If the intent of the US president for abandoning the mission of global care for the environment, this could potentially undermine the process of goal achievement. According to the Paris agreement, all of the powers of participating countries should be concentrated on holding the level of mean temperature across the globe below 2 degrees Celsius. The US contributes one of the most sizable amount of CO2 emissions that actively destroy the ozone layer. It would be harder for the other remaining countries to maintain that level without one of the major players not participating.
##Conclusion
All things considered, there is a large amount of possible consequences of the Trump’s new course of actions in the field of climate change. Some of them are more probable than the others but, given the eccentric nature of the US president, there can be no certainty in what else could he do next. The most possible consequence for domestic environment include a more US-tailored policy for pollution reduction, growing support for non-governmental climate-change movements, and decline in the ratings of the US president. The foreign implications may include the loss of strategic dominance in the foreign policy to China, rising trend for withdrawal from Paris agreement, negative reaction from the international society and formation of a climate change coalition without the participation of the US.