Jonathan Baker: Defending the environment and the movement to save it

Before we went on break, Dan Gomez wrote an ill-informed column attacking most aspects of environmentalism. This mischaracterization is too great to be ignored.

The tactic taken by Gomez is to deride the environmentalist movement as a fringe element of society and discredit any statement that suggests humans might not be treating the environment responsibly. By presenting all environmentalists as eco-terrorists, Dan discredits the movement and thus avoids having to confront the very real problems facing the human race.

The truth is that environmentalism is mainstream. As co-chairman of the Penn Environmental Group, I can tell you that we do not spend our time discussing the impacts of a fence on the Mexican border on insects and birds. There are far bigger problems.

For a long time, it was thought that the world was too big for humans to change; now we are seeing that we can have a measurable impact on the planet. Despite reports from oil companies that claim otherwise, we know that the human race is consuming at a faster rate than the earth can regenerate. By pretending that the people who burn the ski resorts are at the core of environmentalism, you do a disservice to not only those that are working for a better world, but also to future generations who will live with the consequences of our actions.

Issues of sustainability and ecological justice and recognizing the value of the services that the Earth provides are what the majority of environmentalists spend their time advocating. Accusations of being unpatriotic are baseless and have no merit. Accepting that resources are finite and adjusting behavior accordingly will do infinitely more for safety than building a 40-mile long fence in Texas.

What will be the security implications when the Middle East fights a war over water resources? Or when millions of people in Asia cannot grow enough food? Of course environmentalists care about freedom. For us, though, the freedom of access to safe drinking water and clean air is more important than the freedom to drive a car that gets 12 miles to the gallon.

The environmentalist movement is about educating the public so that each person realizes it is within his or her best interest to take meaningful steps for the environment now. The shift toward sustainability can be done out of choice and not out of necessity. I only wish that these problems were made up. The truth is that there is a growing body of evidence that suggests that the time to act is now.

Many critics often try to create ambiguity as to what the effects of global warming are and whether they are indeed caused by humans. Certain facts, however, have never been in doubt. We have always known what the greenhouse gases are and how much the different gases absorb. We know that the 370 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the environment is the highest it has been in 400,000 years, and that atmospheric concentrations have responded in direct proportions to human emissions.

In terms of real effects, we have seen the ocean levels rise, snow-capped mountains melt and damages from storms increase. Some have even quantified the number of deaths due to global warming at 110,000. These deaths are attributed to the expansion of the habitat of malaria-carrying mosquitoes. Climate change will need to be addressed in some form in the 21st century. And global warming is not the only issue. Depleted fisheries, the over-harvest of timber and a scarcity of freshwater will all be problems that need solutions in the 21st century.

Finally, the declarations that the Bush administration is actually trying to alleviate environmental problems are false. While too brief of a forum to respond in great detail, I can assure any readers that the "Healthy Forests Initiative" is a gift to the logging companies, not to the American people. I also encourage people to look up the "Clear Skies Act" to see how it would actually increase pollution.

Take the time to research these issues yourself, and make up your own mind. The temptation to tell yourself that our actions have no consequences for the environment is great. To accept otherwise is to recognize that change is needed. Look beyond the next few months, toward the next few decades, and know that issues of resource management and sustainability will become increasingly important.

I encourage everyone to think of what they can do to help alleviate some of the pressures facing the Earth right now. Reducing consumption and practicing conservationism are not as hard as many would have you believe. You might even feel better knowing that you are making a contribution to the world around you.

Ultimately, the idea behind environmentalism is the exact opposite of what Gomez suggested. The idea is to increase security and safety by ensuring that the planet will be able to provide life for not just ourselves, but also our descendants. So if you think that sounds reasonable, come and join us this semester. And don't worry -- despite what Gomez suggests, there will be no firebombing involved.

Jonathan Baker is a sophomore Political Science and Environmental Studies major and co-chairman of the Penn Environmental Group.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.