If you thought the Bush administration had finally woken up, smelled the CO2, and decided to do something about global warming after discussing it with the G-8, you are sadly mistaken. Two recent decisions concerning greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions not only affirmed the White House's typical reluctance to act on this issue, they have signaled an absolute refusal to engage with it at all.

On July 11, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen L. Johnson announced that the EPA wouldn't take any new steps to regulate emissions before Bush leaves office. Instead, in defiance of a Supreme Court decision, the agency has extended the public commenting period on whether global warming constitutes a threat to public welfare.

While this announcement was hardly surprising, the extent to which the Vice President's office meddled with the EPA's decision-making process is extraordinary. As reported in The Washington Post, the White House refused to open e-mails containing the EPA's recommendations on emissions, forced the agency to alter its congressional testimony and simulated models to produce lower estimates of the benefits curbing high-carbon lifestyles would create.

"There's a lot of interference with the EPA's work because it's a federal agency that reports to the President," said Dr. Manik Roy, Director of Congressional Affairs for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, in a phone interview. "Usually environmental groups have to sue the agency to force them to carry out laws, as when the Supreme Court ruled in May 2007 that the EPA must regulate carbon emissions."

That the Supreme Court had to intervene to force a government agency to do its job is ridiculous. And the EPA doesn't seem to have learned its lesson.

In his July 22 testimony, a former EPA official alleged that the White House ordered Johnson to reverse his own decision, which had allowed California to regulate vehicle emissions. The reversal doesn't just affect California's ability to deal with emissions; it effectively halts 17 other states that had expressed an interest in enacting similar regulations, further delaying the U.S. transition to a cleaner environment and a more sustainable economy.

Some may argue that the G-8 summit, at which participating countries agreed to halve worldwide GHG emissions by 2050, demonstrated the U.S.' newfound resolve to combat global warming. But the agreement didn't specify whether 1990 levels or current levels of emissions would serve as the basis for reduction. And the disparity between rich and poor countries' attitudes toward industrialization and global warming further complicated negotiations.

According to Environmental Science professor Robert Giegengack, "Even if the U.S. embraces draconian measures to reduce output, it won't matter because India and China will produce so much more. The U.S. can't tell India and China not to pollute when it refuses to sign the Kyoto Protocol."

Because of the Bush administration's recklessness, it is our generation that will be left to deal with the effects of global warming. The way forward is evident: the impetus for change has to come from the bottom up when the top abdicates its responsibility to the country and to the world.

That change can begin on Penn's campus. In April, the University wisely appointed an Environmental Sustainability Coordinator whose job it is to implement energy-saving measures in coordination with the Penn Environmental Group.

"Our basic goal is to make people aware of their impact on the environment," Penn Environmental Group Administrative Chair and Wharton junior Lauren Boudreau said. "We're encouraging initiatives like partying in the dark, drinking local beer, and buying local produce."

The partnership between the University and the PEG is encouraging, and if they carry out even some of their proposals, it will reflect President Gutmann's dedication to creating a more sustainable campus.

Sarah Abroms, the Assistant Environmental Sustainability Coordinator, said that Penn will curtail energy waste in laboratories with a new program called Airacuity, which safely decreases air circulation and thus lessens carbon emissions. In addition, Penn will continue to invest heavily in wind power as an alternative to burning fossil fuels.

According to the Stern Report, the 2006 British-commissioned study on global warming, severe reductions in emissions levels must be implemented by 2050 in order to prevent irreversible changes to weather patterns that will affect food and water supplies. The Bush administration has failed to address the urgency of this issue and, more frustratingly, has displayed its inefficacy through a disjointed federal response.

The buck has been passed - the onus is on our generation to rectify the mistakes of our predecessors. If the Baby Boomers who dominate federal agencies refuse to act, we must. We need to transition to a low-carb lifestyle - one greenhouse gas at a time.

Julie Steinberg is a rising senior, 34th Street Editor, and former DP opinion blogger from Boca Raton, Florida. Her email address is steinberg@dailypennsylvanian.com.