Published on February 10, 2004 By EMacy In Current Events
U.N. Scientists Warn of Catastrophic Climate Changes
Jennifer Mapes
National Geographic News
(February 6, 2001)


Scientists from 99 countries issued a dire warning last month: curtail air pollution or expect drastic climate change in the next century.

The Earth's average surface temperature rose 1.1°F (.6°C) in the last century, according to the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC's January report predicts temperatures may rise as much as 11°F (5.8°C) in the next hundred years.

The bulk of global warming, say the IPCC scientists, as well as the resulting havoc wreaked on the world's ecosystems, can be blamed on human activity.



"In the next decade or two we really need to mobilize," said Will Burns of California's Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and Security.

Burns said the IPCC report indicates that a 60 to 70 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions is needed in order to stabilize the level of pollutants in the air—an amount that has doubled since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.

"[The IPCC report] emphasizes what happens if we don't make those commitments," he said.

Although Burns called the 11° change predicted by the IPCC a "worst-case scenario," he said that the warming of the Earth has already begun.

A Changing Home

Carbon dioxide is an essential component of Earth's atmosphere. But since 1750, the gas's concentration has increased by 31 percent, the IPCC scientists note, reaching levels likely not exceeded in the past 20 million years.

An increased amount of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, trap heat in the atmosphere, upping the Earth's average surface air temperature.

Scientists blame a myriad of effects on the Earth's land, water, and air on the temperature change.

According to the IPCC report, snow cover decreased ten percent since the late 1960s. The 20th century saw a "widespread retreat of mountain glaciers," the scientists write, and sea levels rose.

The scientists also blame changing weather patterns on global warming.

Looming Changes Threaten Humans

Long- and short-term effects of global warming will worsen as greenhouse gases are added to the atmosphere, warned Burns, and could have "horrific implications."

The IPCC report predicts that warming will cause rising sea levels, increased precipitation, glacial melting, and greater extremes in El Niño weather events such as droughts and floods.

Each of these meteorological effects has the potential to dramatically affect life on Earth.

The loss of plant and animal species, "is one of the core long-term aspects of climate change," said Burns.

Marine species will be threatened by changing ocean temperatures, he said, resulting in a "catastrophic cascade in the food chain."

Land-dwelling animals, he added, will also be threatened, and may not be able to migrate fast enough to escape weather changes.

Humans, named as the primary cause of global warming, are not immune to its effects.

Burns said rising sea levels may result in the loss of small islands and "tremendous displacement of people in other coastal areas."

Warming may eventually change marine and terrestrial systems that humans depend on, said Burns. One model, he noted, predicts that 22nd-century Europe will become an arctic environment because "the system…becomes overwhelmed."

"That's by no means believed to be science fiction," said Burns.


Comments
on Feb 10, 2004
Good post,
How many warning before this message will be taken seriously?
on Feb 10, 2004
I don't think warnings will help. There are too many conservative talk shows that preach that this is hogwash or a temporary glitch. Others think the cause is sunspots rather than human activity.
on Feb 10, 2004
It was interesting to note the call for economic sanctions against polluting countries in the last world climate meeting. I think in the end this is what will happen to try to force the major polluters to concede there is a problem and deal with it. Initial studies have suggested that the WTO would support sanctions because of unfair advantage due to more lenient environmental laws.

Paul.
on Feb 10, 2004
If Zachariah Stitchin is once again proven correct, in that a unknown planet is approaching close enough to cause a wobble in our earth orbit, we won't have to worry about it much longer. Dr. Doom, Ed Dames, says the event will coincide with a nuke being set off by North Korea in probably 2005. We'll have a good indication of Mr. Dames' credibility if the crop failure, due to mold and fungii - which he calls for as well - occurs this year. Hate to be so pessimistic, but all of these are things virtually beyond our control. I mean how are we going to get this young generation to realize the acres of tropical rain forest that are destroyed to feed the cow they get in their 'happy meal' bag? Once we can do that, then I think we'll have the momentum to go after the corporate polluters, and internal combustion motivators. Getting rid of the worst anti-environment President we've had, George Bush, would be good start too.
on Feb 10, 2004
that a unknown planet is approaching close enough to cause a wobble in our earth orbit


Not the mysterous planet X again.

We got sensors that can find planets at other suns. OTHER SUNS! Finding a planet within our solor system is clinch compared to that. Yet none is discovered yet.

Once again, if you're quoting someone, cite the work.
on Feb 10, 2004
I think these warnings would be taken more seriously if these scientists actually acknowledged that it's normal for the world to have drastic changes in its climate, and unless these scientists, have evidence that humans were responsible for ice ages, they're going to have to explain why they're positive that the Earth isn't undergoing another climatic change on its own.
on Feb 10, 2004
There is a new book out addressing the current state of environmental challenges, Plan B, by Lester Brown. In it, one of the solutions he proposes is that the US gov't adaopt a tax structure partially based on pollution, where corporations would pay their taxes based on the amount of pollutants they discharge and are responsible for. Would be a good start with this kind of incentive.
on Feb 10, 2004
There is a new book out addressing the current state of environmental challenges, Plan B, by Lester Brown. In it, one of the solutions he proposes is that the US gov't adaopt a tax structure partially based on pollution, where corporations would pay their taxes based on the amount of pollutants they discharge and are responsible for. Would be a good start with this kind of incentive.
on Feb 10, 2004

It is up to these scientists to prove 2 basic things:

1) That climate changes are the result of humans.

2) That climate changes are bad for humans.

They haven't done so.  They have simply stated that temperatures worldwide increased slightly in the last 100 years. They have asserted, without compellling evidence, that humans are the cause.

I realize that non-scientists hear "tons of CO2" being put into the atmsophere as sounding like a lot. But to put things in perspective, a single volcanic eruption can dump more CO2 into the atmosophere than a couple year's worth from all the countries in the world combined.

There are also scientists pointing out that even the collection of average temperatures isn't particularly well done. For instance, cities act as heat sinks, temperatures in cities certainly have gone up as cities have icnreasingly moved from wood to concrete for their structures which in turn alter global weather patterns. One can't go and say "Aha, Greenland is warmer" and say that's that.

I'm not saying that the temperature hasn't increased slightly in the past 100 years, I'm just saying that some of you buy this stuff without seemingly given it a lot of thought.  Some of you may be too young but during the 70s there were worldwide warning that global cooling was slowly going to put us into another ice age (forget the fact we are in an ice age right now -- we're in an interglacial period, but the earth is still relatively cooler than it has been for most of its existence).  There are still books out on the market that predicted that we'd be out of tin, copper, and other metals by the year 2000. 

In other words, the track record of the "sky is falling crowd" is not good enough to justify drastic action.  It is, however, IMO, enough to justify putting an effort to curb pollution wherever possible. 

I assume you all will urge your representatives to try to push for measures to encourage nuclear energy, clean coal, and other sources of energy production that are practical today (those of you who advocate wind power feel free to actually research wind power to see how much it actually produces versus how much energy it costs to manufacture, set up, and integrate into a power grid).

If I were emperor, Id get nuclear energy going enmasse along with clean coal, get cars onto fuel cells ASAP and force older plants that aren't up to code to either clean up in 5 years or be shut down.