OpEdNews Op Eds

We Can't Wish Away Climate Change

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Funny 3  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to None 2/28/10

It would be an enormous relief if the recent attacks on the science of global warming actually indicated that we do not face an unimaginable calamity requiring large-scale, preventive measures to protect human civilization as we know it.

Of course, we would still need to deal with the national security risks of our growing dependence on a global oil market dominated by dwindling reserves in the most unstable region of the world, and the economic risks of sending hundreds of billions of dollars a year overseas in return for that oil. And we would still trail China in the race to develop smart grids, fast trains, solar power, wind, geothermal and other renewable sources of energy -- the most important sources of new jobs in the 21st century.

But what a burden would be lifted! We would no longer have to worry that our grandchildren would one day look back on us as a criminal generation that had selfishly and blithely ignored clear warnings that their fate was in our hands. We could instead celebrate the naysayers who had doggedly persisted in proving that every major National Academy of Sciences report on climate change had simply made a huge mistake.

I, for one, genuinely wish that the climate crisis were an illusion. But unfortunately, the reality of the danger we are courting has not been changed by the discovery of at least two mistakes in the thousands of pages of careful scientific work over the last 22 years by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In fact, the crisis is still growing because we are continuing to dump 90 million tons of global-warming pollution every 24 hours into the atmosphere -- as if it were an open sewer.

It is true that the climate panel published a flawed overestimate of the melting rate of debris-covered glaciers in the Himalayas, and used information about the Netherlands provided to it by the government, which was later found to be partly inaccurate. In addition, e-mail messages stolen from the University of East Anglia in Britain showed that scientists besieged by an onslaught of hostile, make-work demands from climate skeptics may not have adequately followed the requirements of the British freedom of information law.

But the scientific enterprise will never be completely free of mistakes. What is important is that the overwhelming consensus on global warming remains unchanged. It is also worth noting that the panel's scientists -- acting in good faith on the best information then available to them -- probably underestimated the range of sea-level rise in this century, the speed with which the Arctic ice cap is disappearing and the speed with which some of the large glacial flows in Antarctica and Greenland are melting and racing to the sea.

Because these and other effects of global warming are distributed globally, they are difficult to identify and interpret in any particular location. For example, January was seen as unusually cold in much of the United States. Yet from a global perspective, it was the second-hottest January since surface temperatures were first measured 130 years ago.

Similarly, even though climate deniers have speciously argued for several years that there has been no warming in the last decade, scientists confirmed last month that the last 10 years were the hottest decade since modern records have been kept.

The heavy snowfalls this month have been used as fodder for ridicule by those who argue that global warming is a myth, yet scientists have long pointed out that warmer global temperatures have been increasing the rate of evaporation from the oceans, putting significantly more moisture into the atmosphere -- thus causing heavier downfalls of both rain and snow in particular regions, including the Northeastern United States. Just as it's important not to miss the forest for the trees, neither should we miss the climate for the snowstorm.

Here is what scientists have found is happening to our climate: man-made global-warming pollution traps heat from the sun and increases atmospheric temperatures. These pollutants -- especially carbon dioxide -- have been increasing rapidly with the growth in the burning of coal, oil, natural gas and forests, and temperatures have increased over the same period. Almost all of the ice-covered regions of the Earth are melting -- and seas are rising. Hurricanes are predicted to grow stronger and more destructive, though their number is expected to decrease. Droughts are getting longer and deeper in many mid-continent regions, even as the severity of flooding increases. The seasonal predictability of rainfall and temperatures is being disrupted, posing serious threats to agriculture. The rate of species extinction is accelerating to dangerous levels.

Though there have been impressive efforts by many business leaders, hundreds of millions of individuals and families throughout the world and many national, regional and local governments, our civilization is still failing miserably to slow the rate at which these emissions are increasing -- much less reduce them.

And in spite of President Obama's efforts at the Copenhagen climate summit meeting in December, global leaders failed to muster anything more than a decision to "take note" of an intention to act.

Because the world still relies on leadership from the United States, the failure by the Senate to pass legislation intended to cap American emissions before the Copenhagen meeting guaranteed that the outcome would fall far short of even the minimum needed to build momentum toward a meaningful solution.

The political paralysis that is now so painfully evident in Washington has thus far prevented action by the Senate -- not only on climate and energy legislation, but also on health care reform, financial regulatory reform and a host of other pressing issues.

This comes with painful costs. China, now the world's largest and fastest-growing source of global-warming pollution, had privately signaled early last year that if the United States passed meaningful legislation, it would join in serious efforts to produce an effective treaty. When the Senate failed to follow the lead of the House of Representatives, forcing the president to go to Copenhagen without a new law in hand, the Chinese balked. With the two largest polluters refusing to act, the world community was paralyzed.

Some analysts attribute the failure to an inherent flaw in the design of the chosen solution -- arguing that a cap-and-trade approach is too unwieldy and difficult to put in place. Moreover, these critics add, the financial crisis that began in 2008 shook the world's confidence in the use of any market-based solution.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Nobel Prize Winner, Former VP of US, Former US presidential candidate. Oscar Winner for Inconvenient Truth

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

400 Parts Per Million

Don Siegelman is America's #1 "Political Prisoner"

We Can't Wish Away Climate Change

What Do the Debt Ceiling and Climate Crisis Have in Common?

Meet Paul Ryan

Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
12 people are discussing this page, with 20 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

you spent more than a million $'s to retrofit your... by Stanimal on Sunday, Feb 28, 2010 at 1:07:20 PM
I'm disappointed. I thought this was where you wer... by Ms Nan on Sunday, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:08:44 PM
"We need to get some broad based support, to capt... by Ms Nan on Sunday, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:18:39 PM
... science is not a PR machine. Science is full o... by Stefan Thiesen on Wednesday, Mar 3, 2010 at 8:24:34 AM
My family and I met Al Gore at Chautauqua, NY a co... by Suzi on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:08:21 AM
Anyone that does not know that climate change poli... by Mike Preston on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:40:28 PM
Marquis of Queensbury pugilistic Inquisition Rulez... by hommedespoir on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 5:47:10 PM
What you have here is one activist disqualifying a... by Stefan Thiesen on Wednesday, Mar 3, 2010 at 8:17:54 AM
Anyone that does not know that climate change poli... by Mike Preston on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:40:28 PM
The % of human caused CO2, the weakest of greenhou... by Richard Lee on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:52:41 PM
Why doesn't the box above allow choices to click l... by gravity32 on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:54:06 AM
Yeah, Rob.... if OpEdNews continues an admirably-d... by hommedespoir on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 4:41:07 PM
Listen to Mr. Bill Gates at the February 2010 TED ... by Andre Ouellet on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:53:51 PM
Houston Texas is only as far North as Cairo Egypt.... by sesquiculus on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:59:19 PM
your right on one count. We the people of this wor... by Quisno Smerski on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:46:49 PM
Mr. Gore, Let's say you're right, and human induc... by Bill Cain on Monday, Mar 1, 2010 at 5:39:30 PM
The dissenting comments here beautifully show the ... by Stefan Thiesen on Tuesday, Mar 2, 2010 at 4:56:01 AM
So we're stupid? Did I understand that?... by Ms Nan on Tuesday, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:28:49 AM
I was going to go on about the obvious solar forci... by Richard Lee on Tuesday, Mar 2, 2010 at 9:14:06 PM
I guess no - you didn't understand that. Unless "w... by Stefan Thiesen on Wednesday, Mar 3, 2010 at 6:13:24 AM