Climate change: Let’s get out of the tipping point

Fun fact: Mixologist Steven Dragun of the World Bar created a drink named “The Tipping Point” to represent the onset of climate change.

But it’s not the Tipping Point I’m concerned with.

I’m talking about the Tipping Point upon which we’ve precariously placed ourselves. Of course, when this one goes up in flames, it’s not quite as charming as a bar trick. 

However, this past year has seen a significant shift in climate change conversation. Yet, fear-driven dialogue continues to threaten progress. For our nation to economically and environmentally develop responsibly, we must provide job alternatives to individuals facing the economic backlash of environmental regulations, rather than submit to dogged pessimism. On Sept. 21, 2014, more than 400,000 people marched in New York to raise awareness for climate change. Later that month, the United Nations Climate Summit brought world leaders together to discuss plans addressing the imminent danger that climate change poses. The Summit’s opening followed the first world conference of indigenous peoples. The groups’ representation at the summit was a hallmark milestone on the path to making peace with our planet.

While the U.S. historically has been adamant about refusing to ratify legally-binding deals, Obama recently struck a deal with China to double the rate at which we reduce emissions. This, in turn, encouraged China to begin reducing its emissions output, as well as rely more on alternative energy. 

Gradually, we are moving from the discourse raised over the reality of climate change. After all, we’ve heard the facts, and we have no reason to believe that a majority of the scientific community is plotting to destroy the modern world by insinuating that we may be at the root of our planet’s demise. 

According to NASA, 97 percent of climate scientists believe that human activity has influenced warming trends over the past century. 

Yet, when it comes to polarized issues like that of climate change, debate is unavoidable. 

The factor of economic perils recently began to dominate the climate change debate. 

With so much of our society reliant on fossil fuels, opponents of Obama’s ambitious deals warn that over-regulation of emissions producers will hurt the economy. 

Some Republicans have dubbed Obama’s climate initiatives a “war on coal.”

Well, when you consider small towns like that of Grundy, Va., it’s not hard to see climate reform as a “war” against the coal industry — and, more importantly, the many employees that it encompasses. 

But to insinuate that we should not advance with climate reform in order to preserve the livelihood of coal towns like Grundy is absurd. 

Grundy is strictly a coal-mining town. If you’re not working in the coal mine, there are few alternatives for employment. There are only 18 businesses in all of Grundy, ranging from a YMCA to a Pizza Hut. 

But work in coal is hardly sustainable. As author John C. Tucker wrote in “May God Have Mercy”: “For a miner who avoids being crippled, burned or buried alive, the usual question is which will give out first — his lungs, his back or his knees.”

As a result, about a fifth of Grundy’s population receives disability payments. 

Martin Wegbreit, director of litigation at the Central Virginia Legal Aid Society, described of Grundy, “Here you have a Pandora’s box of every social issue that might contribute to disability.” 

A conglomerate of issues: the town’s association with coal, lack of access to medical care, indulgence in tobacco and alcohol has earned Grundy the title of “the sickest town in America.” 

Given that coal is the largest private employer in Grundy, it’s also safe to say that the town’s members aren’t pleased with the government enacting measures to decrease our dependence on coal. When the town faced a slew of layoffs, citizens blamed the Environmental Protection Agency’s stringent regulations. 

Grundy is the perfect example of where climate change resolution reaches a dead end. 

At its simplest, climate change can be explained as an excess of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere, adding to an accumulating greenhouse effect. We are currently living in high-carbon societies. The first step in addressing climate change is to make the transition to a low-carbon society. 

That involves adhering to global agreements that set specific targets for emission reduction. However, it also means making deep structural changes to our way of life. 

And it’s possible, because many communities have already taken the initiative to do so, and a great number of indigenous communities already model relatively sustainable lives.

On Jan. 22, the Global Studies Center held a video conference at Pitt, titled “‘Sustainability’ or Survival? Popular Responses to Global Climate Change,” . The conference was part of a 5-part video series addressing issues associated with climate change. Speakers Jacqueline Patterson and Ahmina Maxey spoke on effective mobilization efforts already being enacted by communities, but they also highlighted the disproportionate effects that climate change has on low-income communities, as opposed to those that are more affluent. 

It isn’t right that climate change should affect low-income communities like Grundy to a more substantial degree simply because of location. Being situated in the Appalachians makes Grundy a prime location for coal-mining, but it also makes the town susceptible to environmental disasters. Grundy has had to relocate to higher ground after facing nine major floods within the past century, which is not only an economically taxing process, but also an emotional one. 

It’s also clear that we cannot continue to be as reliant on fossil fuels like coal, and need measures enacted that reduce emissions — measures that citizens in towns like Grundy will, understandably, oppose. 

But preserving the livelihood of Grundy citizens means maintaining our already swamped disability systems. Are we so desperate to continue to rely on coal that we are willing to pump tax dollars into the disability system to do so?

More importantly, however, there are alternatives for Grundy citizen’s employment — certainly, there is room for more than 18 businesses in Grundy. Our government can help make more white collar positions available to Grundy citizens, which will dissipate their dependence on disability systems. It cannot, however, make alternatives for our planet. 

Fears of economic downfall should not halt our advancements in climate legislation, as economic alternatives should inspire environmental change. 

It’s the only way we’re going to get out of the Tipping Point. 

Bethel primarily writes about social issues and current events for The Pitt News. 

Write Bethel at beh56@pitt.edu.