A Habitable World is on the Ballot

On May 26, 2020 the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of American published an article---recently featured in the New York Times---about the continued and deleterious effects of climate change.

According to the report, roughly 1% of Earth currently experiences average temperatures of >29 degrees Celsius (84 degrees F)-- but by 2070, over 1/3 of people on earth will be subject to those temperatures. What's more, that 1/3 happens to be incredibly poor and therefore unable to respond adequately. 

While 84 degrees Fahrenheit does not seem too bad, remember this number is an average over the entire year. The majority of human beings currently live in regions which experience an 11-13 degree Celsius (51-55 degree Fahrenheit) variation, on average.

What this means practically is mass migration, civil and political unrest, wars over resources, and tough choices for those in the temperate regions of the world. As climate change pinches arid regions, developed countries in more temperate areas will be forced to accept hundreds of thousands---if not millions---of climate refugees, or else let them die of famine and war.

This topic is grim. Many resort to outright denial when confronted with this reality---choosing the comfort of ignorance over the harsh reality. However, the science of climate change and its consequences are overwhelmingly backed by the scientific community.

This leads us to the logical question: what is to be done?

We start by voting. 

There are two viable candidates for the highest office in the land: Joe Biden and Donald Trump. As much as I would prefer this problem be solved locally---states and localities cannot or will not move fast enough to prevent catastrophic consequences. This problem requires federal leadership and action. Hence, who we decide will be the president this November is of existential importance.

Leaving other political considerations aside, there is only one candidate who would move to prevent global catastrophe due to climate change: Joe Biden.

Not only has Donald Trump not proposed any semblance of a plan to combat climate change, he appears to not even believe it exists. Rather, he has claimed it was invented by the Chinese as a conspiracy theory to undermine American growth. This is---definitively---not true.

Trump's defenders may say: as he made this claim many years ago, he either no longer believes it or has had some change of heart. One need only look to his horrifying record of rollbacks, deregulation, and support for fossil fuel companies to understand this falsehood.

On the other hand, Joe Biden recently proposed a massive climate plan to reduce emissions and invest in American infrastructure. This plan aims to decarbonize energy production by 2035 and reach net zero carbon by 2050. There has never been a more ambitious climate plan from any viable presidential candidate in America's history. 

Fundamentally, climate change policy should be a non-partisan issue. What we choose to do now will have serious consequences for the future. If we choose Donald Trump in November, we are choosing 4 more years of climate change denial-- whether in word or action. 

If we choose Joe Biden, regardless of the other political issues he may have, we are at the very least choosing a candidate who understands the risks of inaction. We are choosing a candidate who would move to reduce emissions in the US and help avert a catastrophic climatic shift. 

We have wasted so much time. There is not much time left for the US (the second biggest per-capita polluter) to change its policies. We are voting for two futures in November. 

Please, pick the one with a habitable planet.