M7 (Fraser)

Research and find an alternative/opposing point of view to Climate Change as proposed in the Introduction.

Most skeptics of climate change agree that the Earth is warming, but for the reason why is where the differences lie. Warming to skeptics may be due to a longer period of solar activity, the end of a “Little Ice Age,” or any other reason than greenhouse gases. Skeptics of climate change argue that the problem has been blown way out of proportion and is a ploy for the environmentalist to pursue an agenda of their own. Skeptics believe they are being attacked by the media and scientists on a subject that lacks solid evidence. In 2009, leaked emails corroborated well known scientists from withholding data that helped skeptics’ arguement. There arose questions of whether the country should trust scientific research and whether scientist’s integrity existed in this world. Lastly, skeptics believe that capping greenhouse-gas emissions may do more economic harm than environmental good; while warming could improve morality rates. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) debunks many of these claims with research and firm evidence (Johnson, 2010).

What environmental responsibilities do we have to the rest of the world?

The effects of pollution is shared among all nations, but developed nations like the US, has produced a better portion of the carbon dioxide released in the atmosphere by humankind. Is it ethical for other nations to have to bare the burden brought upon other nations? And when policymakers from those companies come up with a solution, do they consider those other nations? Richard   Somerville believes policymakers should consider the ethical consequences upon the rest of the world from the policies powerful nations are creating. People must consider how climate change will affect different cultures and economic sectors (2008).

Is our commercial exploitation of animals immoral?

The commercial exploitation of animals is immoral. These animals feel pain and sadness just like we do. When considering moral actions, we must consider the animals suffering and welfare. Experiments and tests, critic Peter Singer contests, are unjustifiable on moral grounds. The largest, most impactful animal production is factory farming. Billions of birds and mammals are killed in the United States each year for food. The environmental impact is astronomical and is shielded from the consumers. The confined spaces, darkness, and drugs these animals experience is shocking when one first realizes the truth. The animals are born in a stressful climate and are never able to roam free and enjoy life. They are raised to be slaughtered and suffer in between (Shaw, 2017).

Who should pay the cost for protecting the environment — those responsible for causing the pollution or those who stand to benefit from protection and restoration. Explain your position.

I believe those who are responsible for causing the pollution should pay the cost for protecting the environment. People and companies who produce pollution should be held accountable for the waste they create and the area they infect. Poor air and water quality can cause serious health effects to people who have no knowledge that they are being polluted. Companies aren’t held accountable for the large amounts of pollution they create and so the people have to fight to protect their environment. William Shaw   points out that people who do pollute benefit from the efforts to reduce pollution yet, do not make an effort themselves. The companies “ride for free” while producing more pollution without paying the cost. The prices of the products companies make do not include the cost to the environment as the natural world is often seen as free and without limits. The tragedy of the commons describes a public land for which people take advantage of and exploit for their own benefit. Leaving a the land worst off and a disparity in equality. It is true that consumers continue to buy these products and produce their own waste and yet do not bare the cost. However, by having companies take ownership for the pollution they create, pushes them to change their manufacturing processes and find better alternatives for their own profit. Europe has initiated pollution permits for companies to take responsibility of the pollution they create (2017). In a perfect world, everyone would take responsibility and pay on a scale based on how much the individual pollutes.


Johnson, Toni. “Alternative Views on Climate Change.’ Council on Foreign Relations, Council on Foreign Relations, 23 Feb. 2010, www.cfr.org/backgrounder/alternative-views-climate-change.

Shaw, William H. Business Ethics. 9th ed, Cengage Learning, 2017

Somerville, Richard. “The Ethics of Climate Change.’ Yale E360, 2 June 2008, e360.yale.edu/features/the_ethics_of_climate_change.

2 Comments for “M7 (Fraser)”

Kim Duffield


I completely agree that in a perfect world, everyone would share the responsibility on a pay scale that is based off how much they contribute to the pollution. However, the specifics are harder to work out than it seems. You make a good point that even though consumers continue to buy the products, it starts with the companies that make them take ownership. Many consumers are naive about how the products they buy and discard are produced. It is the companies’ responsibility to make them aware of that and make efforts towards bettering the environment. It is possible to make these goods without ruining the environment and that starts with recognizing that all of us in some way contribute to the problem and can all benefit from improvements. It may be a slow progress, but if both consumers and companies work together now, we will be better off in the end with a safer environment.



While I agree that big companies should clean up after themselves, they are not the sole cause of pollution. A regular citizen pollutes every time they start their vehicle, or ride the bus, or buy beef from the store. I believe it is naive to think that the average citizen of earth does not share some of the blame for polluting our planet. I believe it should be a shared responsibility.