In this week’s SojoMail, Avery Davis Lamb wrestles with the undoing of U.S. policy to address climate change. Given the current administration’s unwillingness to listen, when do we keep advocating for better legislation and when do we focus our efforts on protecting those who are in harm’s way?
In July, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced an intention to revoke the Endangerment Finding. This 2009 ruling is the EPA policy that says greenhouse gases harm people—a finding that gives the EPA the authority to regulate climate-warming pollution. If successful, the revocation would enshrine climate change denial as the official policy of the U.S. government and make it much harder to regulate fossil fuel emissions. The authors of the report cited to legitimize this move are a veritable all-star team of five climate-change-denying scientists, an extreme minority who contract the 97% of global scientists who believe humans are causing climate change. The absurdity is compounded by timing: Zeldin’s announcement came in the midst of the summer “Danger Season” when heat waves, floods, fires, and hurricanes leave millions reeling from weather crises exacerbated by climate change. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, 98% of people living in the United States have faced an extreme weather alert since May 1, with over half of those alerts exhibiting clear, scientifically established connections to climate change. It’s tempting to respond to this kind of political maneuver with a proportionately political response: to submit public comments, attend hearings, call our representatives. That impulse is understandable—and it has worked before. But the ecological realities of the climate crisis and the ethical undercurrents of the gospel push us to ask whether it’s enough. | 
No comments:
Post a Comment