The importance of taking care of our environment is not a mystery to most people. It isn’t difficult to find people willing to throw away their Starbucks cups into the recycling bin, turn the water off when brushing their teeth, turn the lights off before leaving the house, or attempt to cut food waste by eating more leftovers. These small acts are easy to fit into our daily routines, and they make us feel good about ourselves as we convince ourselves that we have done our part in saving the Earth. While these are all very good things, they don’t go far beyond passive changes that have little effect on our lifestyles. This line is where discrepancies emerge.
Many of the actions that have a much bigger effect on the environment — such as composting, eliminating one’s carbon footprint, using sustainable energy, and drastically cutting meat and dairy consumption— are much harder to come by among your average Joe. These impactful changes require a shift in lifestyle that most people are unwilling to undergo. In this lies the fundamental problem with changing attitudes on the environment and environmental action. People become happy with minor changes and consequently don’t find urgency and importance in other more demanding dynamics. This paper will explore the attitudes on the environment within the United States of America. It will analyze how the political, social, and other contextual environments serve as barriers to US inhabitants changing their opinions, and how such barriers systematically inhibit necessary change.
The mass consumption of meat and dairy products create an astounding negative effect on our environment.1 77 billion livestock are raised annually around the globe, and these animals account for 37% of our carbon emissions and a whopping 65% of our nitrous oxide emissions. These harmful releases deplete our ozone layer, and contribute to rapid climate change that has caused the earth’s sixth mass extinction. Mankind is polluting at rates thousands times more than mother nature is detoxing through photosynthesis and its conversion of carbon dioxide into oxygen. Animal agriculture is also the leading cause of deforestation and habitat loss, which destroys complex ecosystems and has profound effects on the future of our planet. With figures as shocking as these, one may wonder why so few people have had their attitudes changed on animal product consumption.
A key barrier to this problem being solved is the animal agriculture industry itself. The animal agriculture industry is immensely powerful, and does everything in its power to suppress information and movements that bring light to the dangers of its operations. Their lobbying power is sickening. According to Forbes2, when videos leaked showing animal abuse done by large players in the industry, animal agriculture lobbyists convinced congress to pass a law that draws immense fines for anyone who distributes such media. The 2017 House Agricultural Appropriations bill has been mended so that the big players in the agriculture industry to do not have to comply with demands from the Freedom of Information Act3. People have been jailed and severely fined for speaking out against this corrupt machine, effectively censoring much of the persuasive content that would reach the public and serving as a barrier to change.
Sustainable energy is another area where Americans aren’t particularly concerned, especially in comparison to European counterparts. American’s get roughly 14.3% of its energy from renewable sources, while other more energy-forward countries such as Iceland get every single watt of their energy from a sustainable source. Now, that’s not to say that Americans aren’t fond of renewable energy. It’s widely understood that fossil fuels are bad for the environment and that we are rapidly running out of this heavily used resource. Most Americans would gladly use renewable energy sources over nonrenewable alternatives on an even playing field. However, the issue is that the scale is far from even. While Americans like the idea of renewable energy, they do not find it important enough to pay the extra money needed to purchase cars, panels, and generators that would allow them to use energy sustainably. “Going green” is easy until it requires one to drop an extra $20,000 on a fully electric car, or Tesla solar roof innovations that can cost upwards of $35,0004. We can blame Americans for being lazy or ignorant for their lack of attitude change, but in fact, significant barriers exist that contribute to this situation.
The fossil fuel industry, much like the animal agriculture industry, is ubiquitous and unquestionably powerful. In fact, six of the world’s largest companies are in the market of oil and gas. With such a behemoth presence comes an unfortunately proportional influence in politics. While energy-forward governments promote renewable energy socially and provide subsidies to incentivize its use, the United States government, especially as of late, has been working in the opposite direction5. Where citizens may look for information that could change their opinion on fossil fuel consumption in the Department of Energy3, they find an entity headed by Rick Perry who previously advocated for the abolishment of the entire department.
Additionally, oil has always been an international affair for the United States. Wars have been waged over oil, and where the United states could have an energy-forward international representative, it instead has newly minted oil mogul and secretary of state Rex Tillerson. Few excuses can be made for these decisions. The energy crisis is no short of urgent, with leading scientists estimating that the U.S. will run out of fossil fuels in just over 52 years, a time when many of us will still be alive5. While no handful of induvial alone can be blamed for barricading attitude change, it cannot be understated how much the government influences public opinion on environmental matters such as recycling or sustainable energy6. America has proven throughout its history that it can do just about anything when its government and people put themselves behind an issue. By not making renewable energy and resources a priority, and effectively pushing America’s society against renewable practice in White House staffing decisions, the U.S. government itself serves as the largest barrier to attitude change among the people of America7.