Printed on 8/26/08
< Back to Global Warming
Hot Potato or Blowing Steam?
Home / The Issues / Global Warming
By Laura Lundberg
Introduction
The debate over global warming has been the center of research and vehement debate for over thirty years. The debate can be consolidated into several main questions: are rising carbon dioxide levels anthropogenic (man made), is carbon dioxide (CO2) the culprit of global warming, and is there a significant problem that can be solved through human intervention? Despite common misconceptions, CO2 has never been conclusively identified as the cause of global warming and anthropogenic sources of CO2 have never been proven to be a significant contributor to the overall composition of the atmosphere.
Scientific Consensus
According to Al Gore, "[t]he misconception that there is serious disagreement among scientists about global warming is actually an illusion that has been deliberately fostered by a relatively small, but extremely well-funded cadre of special interests, including Exxon Mobil and a few other oil, coal, and utilities companies" (63). This opinion is in opposition to an international survey of scientists from twenty-seven countries conducted by Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, two German environmental
scientists, in 1996 and 2003. They found that only 31.9 percent of scientists strongly agree with the statement that global warming is already underway (Bast and Taylor 3).
GHG Processes
In order to come to a reasonable conclusion, a fundamental grasp of greenhouse gases and their effects on environmental temperatures is necessary. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) act like a blanket around the earth. They allow heat from the sun to reach and warm the surface and then trap that heat within the atmosphere. Without GHGs, the surface of the earth would be unable to sustain life due to drastic temperature swings.
There is a correlation between the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and the mean temperature of the earth. CO2 makes up 0.33% of the earths atmosphere. The largest deposit of CO2 is in the earths crust in form of limestone and organic carbon. The amount of buried Carbon is fifty times larger than the amount found in the atmosphere. The CO2 in the atmosphere and the geologic structure is balanced through chemical weathering. When the earths temperature is warmer, more limestone is formed through chemical weathering and the amount of CO2 is decreased. Conversely, when temperatures cool, chemical weathering decreases and CO2 continues to build up in the atmosphere (Plummer, Carlson and McGeary 130).
When the atmosphere is warmer, it can absorb more water in the form of vapor. Increased water vapor allows more heat to be absorbed. This, in turn, continues the cycle of increase. TC Chamberlin explains how this cycle can be effected by an increase in other GHGs.
"[W]ater vapor, confessedly the greatest thermal absorbent in the atmosphere, is dependent on temperature for its amount, and if another agent, such as CO2, not so dependent, raises the temperature of the surface, it calls into function a certain amount of water vapor which further absorbs heat, raises temperature and calls forth more vapor" (qtd. in Held and Soden 442).
Without clouds, this cycle of increasing temperatures would continue unchecked. Dr. William Gray of the Department of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University presented an illustration of the relative magnitude of the suppression of outgoing long-wave radiation (OLR) by water vapor and CO2 to the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Gray stated that the global models assume that as CO2 doubles, water vapor increases and causes more suppression of OLR and Warming. The opposite is true (2).
Water vapor follows the same pattern as CO2. When the atmosphere is cool, GHGs increase, warming mean temperatures. Warming precipitates a decrease in atmospheric saturation of GHG chemicals resulting in an overall cooling effect.
Model Reliability
How do scientists predict what the future holds? They use computer models to simulate future occurrences based on suppositions and previous research. Simulations can be a valuable tool to help discern what lies ahead. However, they are anything but simplistic. There are many variables that can go wrong in even the most controlled simulation. Slightly less than half of the scientific community believes that computer models can predict climatic conditions with accuracy (Bast and Taylor 6). Skillful initial value GCM [Global Climate Model] climate prediction is not possible and probably never will be (Gray 2). Most scientists believe that computer models are not capable of adequately dealing with the influence of precipitation, water vapor, and clouds (Bast and Taylor 7-8). Clouds reflect heat from the surface of the earth and dramatically reshape temperatures. Without minute accuracy regarding all of the factors involved, computer models cannot be trusted.
"[I]n official comparisons all models fail miserably to replicate observed distributions of cloud cover. Thus the model predictions are critically dependant on features we know must be wrongthe treatment of clouds involves errors an order of magnitude greater than the forcing from a doubling of CO2. While the IPCC allows for the possibility that the models get water vapor right, the intimate relation between water vapor and clouds makes such a conclusion implausible" (Lindzen 23).
Anthropogenic Causation
If CO2 is the primary factor to consider in climate change, the first question to ask is whether significant CO2 emissions are anthropogenic. According to Mary Cooper there is no debate about whether global warming is occurring and anthropogenic.
"Climate-change skeptics once argued that the globe was not warming and that, even if it were, there was no proof that human activity had triggered the change. Now few hold such views. Instead, debate centers on whether the changes are likely to be dangerous to humans and the planet" (7).
However, Coopers view is inconsistent with an international survey of scientists. Only 31.9 percent of scientists strongly agree with the statement that global warming is already underway. Also in contradiction to Coopers statement that few hold such views, only 55.8 percent of scientists agree with the statement that climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic (man-made) causes (Bast and Taylor 3-4).
Economic Ramifications
"[I]f we do the right thing, then we're going to create a lot of wealth, jobs, and opportunity" (Gore 271). What Gore is calling "the right thing" is developing a carbon-neutral, green economy. Where it makes economic sense, a green economy is a good thing. The inconsistency in his logic is the insistence that it must be carbon neutral. This requires that we must abandon our most efficient energy sources. This contradicts the statement that a carbon neutral economy is economically beneficial. Eventually renewable energy sources will make the most economic sense. However, it would crush current economic systems to rush into wholesale reliance on renewable energy until it makes good economic sense.
To insist that rapidly converting to a carbon-neutral, green economy will create economic opportunity is predicated upon the assumption that a nation can regulate and tax itself into prosperity. Real economic opportunity and prosperity thrive when free-market principles are upheld. For example, buying compact fluorescent light bulbs makes good economic sense when they are cost effective and readily available. However, running those light bulbs with photovoltaic panels that are ten times more expensive than conventional electric rates would bankrupt the nation's economy if government mandates insisted that all our electrical grids be powered by renewable energy sources. Colorado's current 20% energy renewable portfolio is already forcing the demand for renewable energy to outstrip the supply. This makes all renewable energy solutions less cost effective. A reliance on renewable energy sources, to the extent being insisted upon, is simply beyond a reasonable analysis of the industry's capacity.
Conclusion
There is clearly a divide within both the general pubic and the scientific community. When looking at the debate over climate change, it is necessary to carefully analyze all sides and examine the credibility of both sources and information. When all the facts have been carefully examined, a reasonable conclusion can be reached. The basic contention that controlling man-made carbon dioxide emissions will somehow cure the predicted disasters, is a simplistic solution to a complex issue that may be completely wrong. If it is incorrect, the steps taken in the wrong direction could cause more problems than were predicted by the original issue of climate change.
Works Cited
Baer, Hans. "Global Warming as a By-product of the Capitalist Treadmill of Production and Consumption-The Need for an Alternative Global System." Australian Journal of Anthropology 19.1 (Apr. 2008): 58-62. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Keifer Library, Loveland, CO. 23 Apr. 2008 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=31341365&site=ehost-live.
Bast, Joseph, and James M. Taylor. Scientific Consensus on Global Warming: Results of an international survey of climate scientists. Chicago: The Heartland Institute, (2007)
Cooper, Mary H. "Global Warming." CQ Researcher 6.41 (1996): 968. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Keifer Library, Loveland, CO. 28 April 2008 http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre1996110100.
Gray, William. "The Role of Science in Environmental Policy-Making." U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works: Hearing Statements. (Sept. 2005):2. 29 April 2008 http://epw.senate.gov/hearing_statements.cfm?id=246768
Gore, Al. An Inconvenient Truth: The Crisis of Global Warming. New York: Rodale,(2006)
Held, Isaac M., and Brian J. Soden. "Water Vapor Feedback and Global Warming." Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 2000. 25:441-475
Lindzen, Richard S. "Is the Global Warming Alarm Founded on Fact?" Global Warming: Looking Beyond Kyoto. Ed. Ernesto Zedillo. Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 2008: 21-33
Plummer, Charles C., Diane H. Carlson, and The Late David McGeary. Physical Geology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2007
Singer, Fred S., and Dennis T. Avery. Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2008
Introduction
The debate over global warming has been the center of research and vehement debate for over thirty years. The debate can be consolidated into several main questions: are rising carbon dioxide levels anthropogenic (man made), is carbon dioxide (CO2) the culprit of global warming, and is there a significant problem that can be solved through human intervention? Despite common misconceptions, CO2 has never been conclusively identified as the cause of global warming and anthropogenic sources of CO2 have never been proven to be a significant contributor to the overall composition of the atmosphere.
Scientific Consensus
According to Al Gore, "[t]he misconception that there is serious disagreement among scientists about global warming is actually an illusion that has been deliberately fostered by a relatively small, but extremely well-funded cadre of special interests, including Exxon Mobil and a few other oil, coal, and utilities companies" (63). This opinion is in opposition to an international survey of scientists from twenty-seven countries conducted by Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, two German environmental
scientists, in 1996 and 2003. They found that only 31.9 percent of scientists strongly agree with the statement that global warming is already underway (Bast and Taylor 3).
GHG Processes
In order to come to a reasonable conclusion, a fundamental grasp of greenhouse gases and their effects on environmental temperatures is necessary. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) act like a blanket around the earth. They allow heat from the sun to reach and warm the surface and then trap that heat within the atmosphere. Without GHGs, the surface of the earth would be unable to sustain life due to drastic temperature swings.
There is a correlation between the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and the mean temperature of the earth. CO2 makes up 0.33% of the earths atmosphere. The largest deposit of CO2 is in the earths crust in form of limestone and organic carbon. The amount of buried Carbon is fifty times larger than the amount found in the atmosphere. The CO2 in the atmosphere and the geologic structure is balanced through chemical weathering. When the earths temperature is warmer, more limestone is formed through chemical weathering and the amount of CO2 is decreased. Conversely, when temperatures cool, chemical weathering decreases and CO2 continues to build up in the atmosphere (Plummer, Carlson and McGeary 130).
When the atmosphere is warmer, it can absorb more water in the form of vapor. Increased water vapor allows more heat to be absorbed. This, in turn, continues the cycle of increase. TC Chamberlin explains how this cycle can be effected by an increase in other GHGs.
"[W]ater vapor, confessedly the greatest thermal absorbent in the atmosphere, is dependent on temperature for its amount, and if another agent, such as CO2, not so dependent, raises the temperature of the surface, it calls into function a certain amount of water vapor which further absorbs heat, raises temperature and calls forth more vapor" (qtd. in Held and Soden 442).
Without clouds, this cycle of increasing temperatures would continue unchecked. Dr. William Gray of the Department of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University presented an illustration of the relative magnitude of the suppression of outgoing long-wave radiation (OLR) by water vapor and CO2 to the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Gray stated that the global models assume that as CO2 doubles, water vapor increases and causes more suppression of OLR and Warming. The opposite is true (2).
Water vapor follows the same pattern as CO2. When the atmosphere is cool, GHGs increase, warming mean temperatures. Warming precipitates a decrease in atmospheric saturation of GHG chemicals resulting in an overall cooling effect.
Model Reliability
How do scientists predict what the future holds? They use computer models to simulate future occurrences based on suppositions and previous research. Simulations can be a valuable tool to help discern what lies ahead. However, they are anything but simplistic. There are many variables that can go wrong in even the most controlled simulation. Slightly less than half of the scientific community believes that computer models can predict climatic conditions with accuracy (Bast and Taylor 6). Skillful initial value GCM [Global Climate Model] climate prediction is not possible and probably never will be (Gray 2). Most scientists believe that computer models are not capable of adequately dealing with the influence of precipitation, water vapor, and clouds (Bast and Taylor 7-8). Clouds reflect heat from the surface of the earth and dramatically reshape temperatures. Without minute accuracy regarding all of the factors involved, computer models cannot be trusted.
"[I]n official comparisons all models fail miserably to replicate observed distributions of cloud cover. Thus the model predictions are critically dependant on features we know must be wrongthe treatment of clouds involves errors an order of magnitude greater than the forcing from a doubling of CO2. While the IPCC allows for the possibility that the models get water vapor right, the intimate relation between water vapor and clouds makes such a conclusion implausible" (Lindzen 23).
Anthropogenic Causation
If CO2 is the primary factor to consider in climate change, the first question to ask is whether significant CO2 emissions are anthropogenic. According to Mary Cooper there is no debate about whether global warming is occurring and anthropogenic.
"Climate-change skeptics once argued that the globe was not warming and that, even if it were, there was no proof that human activity had triggered the change. Now few hold such views. Instead, debate centers on whether the changes are likely to be dangerous to humans and the planet" (7).
However, Coopers view is inconsistent with an international survey of scientists. Only 31.9 percent of scientists strongly agree with the statement that global warming is already underway. Also in contradiction to Coopers statement that few hold such views, only 55.8 percent of scientists agree with the statement that climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic (man-made) causes (Bast and Taylor 3-4).
Economic Ramifications
"[I]f we do the right thing, then we're going to create a lot of wealth, jobs, and opportunity" (Gore 271). What Gore is calling "the right thing" is developing a carbon-neutral, green economy. Where it makes economic sense, a green economy is a good thing. The inconsistency in his logic is the insistence that it must be carbon neutral. This requires that we must abandon our most efficient energy sources. This contradicts the statement that a carbon neutral economy is economically beneficial. Eventually renewable energy sources will make the most economic sense. However, it would crush current economic systems to rush into wholesale reliance on renewable energy until it makes good economic sense.
To insist that rapidly converting to a carbon-neutral, green economy will create economic opportunity is predicated upon the assumption that a nation can regulate and tax itself into prosperity. Real economic opportunity and prosperity thrive when free-market principles are upheld. For example, buying compact fluorescent light bulbs makes good economic sense when they are cost effective and readily available. However, running those light bulbs with photovoltaic panels that are ten times more expensive than conventional electric rates would bankrupt the nation's economy if government mandates insisted that all our electrical grids be powered by renewable energy sources. Colorado's current 20% energy renewable portfolio is already forcing the demand for renewable energy to outstrip the supply. This makes all renewable energy solutions less cost effective. A reliance on renewable energy sources, to the extent being insisted upon, is simply beyond a reasonable analysis of the industry's capacity.
Conclusion
There is clearly a divide within both the general pubic and the scientific community. When looking at the debate over climate change, it is necessary to carefully analyze all sides and examine the credibility of both sources and information. When all the facts have been carefully examined, a reasonable conclusion can be reached. The basic contention that controlling man-made carbon dioxide emissions will somehow cure the predicted disasters, is a simplistic solution to a complex issue that may be completely wrong. If it is incorrect, the steps taken in the wrong direction could cause more problems than were predicted by the original issue of climate change.
Works Cited
Baer, Hans. "Global Warming as a By-product of the Capitalist Treadmill of Production and Consumption-The Need for an Alternative Global System." Australian Journal of Anthropology 19.1 (Apr. 2008): 58-62. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Keifer Library, Loveland, CO. 23 Apr. 2008 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=31341365&site=ehost-live.
Bast, Joseph, and James M. Taylor. Scientific Consensus on Global Warming: Results of an international survey of climate scientists. Chicago: The Heartland Institute, (2007)
Cooper, Mary H. "Global Warming." CQ Researcher 6.41 (1996): 968. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Keifer Library, Loveland, CO. 28 April 2008 http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre1996110100.
Gray, William. "The Role of Science in Environmental Policy-Making." U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works: Hearing Statements. (Sept. 2005):2. 29 April 2008 http://epw.senate.gov/hearing_statements.cfm?id=246768
Gore, Al. An Inconvenient Truth: The Crisis of Global Warming. New York: Rodale,(2006)
Held, Isaac M., and Brian J. Soden. "Water Vapor Feedback and Global Warming." Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 2000. 25:441-475
Lindzen, Richard S. "Is the Global Warming Alarm Founded on Fact?" Global Warming: Looking Beyond Kyoto. Ed. Ernesto Zedillo. Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 2008: 21-33
Plummer, Charles C., Diane H. Carlson, and The Late David McGeary. Physical Geology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2007
Singer, Fred S., and Dennis T. Avery. Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2008
< Back to Global Warming
