The environment is in jeopardy

Chandy Clemens

Where will we actually be in 100 years? Will we have sucked dry all our natural resources, battled societies over water, watched countries become a modern-age Atlantis from rising sea levels, drive millions of creatures to the precipice of extinction, or as a civilization, completely turn against ourselves?  I fear the future because, despite constant denial to believe otherwise, it’s not looking so good.

The environment  is in jeopardy. I know what you’re thinking, yet another article targeted towards our fluctuating environment; however, this article isn’t riddled with statistics, nor situational theories about global meltdown. Simply, this is a plea for attention. For years now, the U.S. and countries around the globe have made it so curbing the effects of environmental destruction are simply unimportant. Instead of doing the opposite, it has become a sort of pasttime  to sweep the threat of Global Warming out of public opinion, and the people usually holding the broom our own political parties. It still boggles me that the U.S. is second behind China as top polluter across the globe, and yet our legislation for capping green house gases is still parked in neutral.

Does the word bipartisanship exist any longer? Getting along is so much simpler than a continuous divide. The world is at odds with facing the reality of our steaming planet, and yet we can’t come to a consensus because the world functions on money. Conservative driven Big Coal is so bent on not allowing their coal industry to see lose and therefore, have launched a public crusade against any sort of climate and energy bill that may pass. This booming demand for coal across the globe continues to get more aggressive. By 2020, the Appalachian Mountains and Australia could be sucked dry from hungry, over-populated nations.

Baby-boomers wanted money, success, and all the riches of the world. Generation X simply let the baby-boomers continue to operate the world. And our generation, well, how can we be defined? The tragedy of that question is complete uncertainty. We could end up becoming a mass landfill; we’re  all the world’s  problems are dumped on our laps for disposal. Or, we could be the ones who start a mass rebellion targeted towards all the broad-shouldered companies and careless legislators, antagonists of any attempts to mend the horrible state of our environment.

I’m hoping for the latter. Maybe then everyone will wake up, put the earth at the forefront of their minds, and stop taking advantage of the necessary and the beautiful. Hoax? Come to your senses and feel the smog. Can we have a functioning economy in a ravaged environment? We can’t.