What about the Americans?

This article misses the biggest problem to combating climate change, humans, specifically, Americans. He does address the aspects of motivation and people’s need economic incentives to change. However, he never addressed the issue of people not believing in climate change. Since the Guardian is a British newspaper I’m going to say that he forgot that people don’t believe in climate change, because Europeans are less skeptical of climate change than Americans. That being said, American climate skepticism needs to be considered. America is a huge contributor of Green House Gas and if Americans do not get on board with climate change policies little change will be possible. However, as long as climate skeptics are prevalent in the US, not much change will occur in the country. If more people that accept climate change and its implications then greater the pressure on the government to create more environmentally friendly policies.

The article also leaves out wind energy as a potential source for renewable energy. While listing all the potential renewable energy sources would be overwhelming, wind is a big industry that deserves to be mentioned. Considering the amount of wind that the British coast gets, I was shocked he did not think of it. Focusing on only one renewable energy source is not practical since one such source cannot satisfy the energy demands of the world. Instead an approach that integrates multiple renewable energy sources would be more stable and able to meet the world’s energy needs.

The third problem that I had with the article was the discussion of coal as an energy source. The article focused on carbon capturing techniques. Instead of focusing on slightly improving coal, I think we should focus on replacing coal with cleaner energy sources. Continuing to use coal, and oil, as a primary energy source will not change the situation we are facing with climate change. However, different cleaner energy sources can have a great impact on changing the path of climate change.