Two months after the United Nations Climate Change Conference (UNCCC) and one month before Earth Day, President Obama indicated his commitment to reducing America’s carbon footprint earlier this March with his first payment of USD 500 billion to the Green Climate Fund. He has promised a total donation of USD 3 billion toward the fund during the UNCCC, and in his last year of office, Obama’s climate plan will ensure environmental protection long after the end of his presidency. Obama’s commitment to environmental improvement is not only visible through his monetary support of environmental protection initiatives. Under Obama’s “Clean Power Plan”, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will have the legal authority to force coal-fired power stations to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by approximately one third over the next fifteen years—the largest carbon pollution reduction in America’s history. According to White House reports, if successful the plan will not only greatly reduce the number of premature deaths, asthma attacks, and non-fatal heart attacks among Americans, but will also save enough energy by 2030 to provide power to 30 million homes. Not all Americans, however, are happy about Obama’s push to improve America’s environmental standing. After Obama’s official release of the Clean Power Plan in 2013, 24 states filed lawsuits against his actions, holding that federal regulation of state carbon pollution is an overreach of power from the EPA.On Feb. 9 of this year, the U.S. Supreme Court decided place a temporary block on Obama’s regulation of coal-fire power station carbon emission output—a central component of his climate change plan presented at the UNCCC. After the Court’s decision, White House press secretary Josh Earnest spoke on behalf of the White House, saying: “The Clean Power Plan is based on a strong legal and technical foundation, gives states the time and flexibility they need to develop tailored, cost-effective plans to reduce their emissions, and will deliver better air quality, improve public health, clean energy investment and jobs across the country…We remain confident that we will prevail on the merits.” On the other side of the globe, China’s leaders also look toward a greener future. In 2014, China and the United States announced plans to reduce their carbon footprint in the coming years. While the U.S. promised to reduce its emissions, China, the world’s largest contributor to greenhouse gasses, will place limits on its emissions for the first time within the next fifteen years. Additionally, China has promised to increase its reliance on zero-emission sources by 20 percent by 2030. At a press conference at China’s Great Hall of the People, Obama said, “As the world’s largest economies and greatest emitters of greenhouse gases we have special responsibility to lead the global effort against climate change.”National support from both the United States and China in terms of environmental protection signals a greener future for the entire globe – as long as these two leaders in environmental damage remain true to their promise to change. With the U.S. Presidential election right around the corner, a Supreme Court waiting for the approval of it’s newest judge, and a Congress full of representatives often opposed to closing environmentally harmful factories, the fight for climate change in the United States is likely an uphill battle. China, the largest polluter in the world, also must find a way to balance its rapid economic growth with the damage it inflicts on the environment. Despite these difficulties, improving environmental conditions is crucial for our current and future communities. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, global temperatures are predicted to rise as much as ten degrees Fahrenheit in the twenty-first century. Sea levels have already risen by eight inches in the past 35 years, while the strength and frequency of hurricanes also increases. Whether or not global pollution is going to have quantifiable negative impacts on our environment is no longer a controversial subject among mainstream scientists. We can see the impacts of our environmental damage in the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the (rapidly disappearing) nature we build factories on. We lost the luxury of wondering whether or not humans are responsible for significant and long-lasting environmental damage years ago. We are. It’s important that governments acknowledge the impact their countries have in contributing to global warming, push legislation to ensure environmental protection, and maintain momentum towards reducing environmental damage in the face of opposition. This article was written by Lizzy Leclaire. Please send an email to [email protected] to get in touch. Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons