UN-led Scientists report on Climate Change puts people firmly in the frame but we'll have to wait for solutions
- 2 Feb 07, 01:04 PM
The Intergovernmental panel on climate change have the first of 4 reports - this one on the physical science basis of climate change.
John Mitchell, Chief Scientist at the UK Met Offie, who we have interviewed for PEuT, was on 91热爆 News 24 late this morning - he believes it's getting very difficult to not say that climate change is a result of human activity - he says there simply aren't any other explanations. This report points the rapidity of a warming climate, linked togreen house gas emissions, verymuch at the feet of humanity. It says, as we report in PEuT, that this whole process began at the dawn of the industrial revolution.
Global warming is one of the characters of todays climate change - and embodied in the same expression, climate change also includes other climatic nasties: hotter weather, droughts, localised torrential rain, localised increased snow fall, warmer seas and increased frequency of stormy weather. All this leads to well reported flooding, sea level rises, coastal erosion, desertification, water shortages, extended periods of drought, longer growing seasons - And more. It all depends where you are.
John Mitchell says one of the roles of the is to now generate more accurate regional and local predictions so governments and businesses can adapt.
But the report on solutions is coming later. And what are the solutions ? What ever the causes of climate change - and plenty believe it's not of our doing - the climate, no one disagrees with, has changed many tims before. In the past, species have moved left, right and centre - many became extinct in regions they once flourished. Some were wiped off the face of the Earth to be only visiblei n the fosil record. But things were different then, the world wasn't being concreted over at a phenomenal rate as it is today, natural resources (fish, trees,water) weren't being harvested like they are now - a changing climate forcing changes in the natural world is poses problems - they butt up against the foot print of mankind.
Right now, most experts would agree that habitat loss, exploitation of natural resources and the introduction of alien species are a greater threat to the natural world than climate change. But this report today, together with the myriad of experts we interviewed for PEuT believe that cc will become the single greatest force to threaten life on earth during the next 100 or so years. They also believe the momentum of climate change will keep up for hundreds of years.
a Scottish conservationist, believes the here and now is crucial to save wildlife. He believes we mustn't let go of the basics - we should crack on with the well trusted skills of habitat restoration and species preservation and be careful not to use climate change as an over arching reason for species demise . There are important things to carry on doing now - he has a point - grabbing 30% of land area for wildlife, being one of them for exmple. He also reiterates some of the content in PEuT - the earth is a heartless planet, it doesn't care about us and wildlife would no doubt benefit if we weren't around.
There's much comment that climate change is far more serious to us than wildlife as a whole.
And as you'll hear in a weeks time on 91热爆 Radio 4 at 11.00 GMT the protection of biodiversity is an absolute imperative if we are to save ourselves. . Land grabbing in the interests of preserving our much needed diversity wildlife might be a hugely important conservation approach - Roy Dennis might be ambitious, but many would agree with him. , the only sustainable approach is to make sure people are included in that protected land - put back in the ecology.
I understand that the average carbon foot print of an individual in India is 1/10th that of a European and 1/20th that of a North American. It's going to be tough to ask India to slow down their economic growth to help us all combat the problem. China in two years time will exceed the carbon dioxide emissions of the USA if they continue to burn fossil fuels at the current rate - so irrespective of the carbon footprint of an average citizen of China, if she doesn't become part of the solution we're probably on a hiding to nothing. But the good news, this and no doubt the other 3 reports coming out of the IPCC, put a clear label of human causation on climate change....if it really is this hideous spectre looming, all of us are going to have to get our act together.......... And we need some convincing leadership.
Echoing an early posting of mine, who is going to be the global environmentalist who can communicate the need for us all to do the right thing for everyone. Who has got the cred to do that?
Comments Post your comment
Hello radio 4
after listening to the discussion regarding eco fashion/textiles and dyes I would suggest Richard Blackburn fabric dye scientist look at www.craftynotions.com This company use environmentally undamaging colourful dyes which I use for my felt making.
Many thanks from Jo King.
Complain about this post
If anyone would like to listen or read a transcript of US scientist Sherwood Rowland's comments on Global Warming an interview is available at Sherwood Rowland obtained a Nobel Prize in Science for his work on Ozone Depletion.
Complain about this post
Either we act NOW or we will become like Venus.
Complain about this post
It seems to me that the debate regarding the problem of human induced climate change is logically flawed in the sense that all this emphasis on cause and remedial options deliberately avoids the main issue which is what we term human behaviour in its various aspects ? When animals are studied their behaviour is meticulously studied because otherwise any measures taken that depend for their success on behaviour would be invalid ? Where humans are concerned the opposite approach is taken ? Yet the evidence for human behavioural aspects being paramount is unmistakeable ? So my proposition is that any suggested remedial measures must take into account the known behaviour of all of the human groups ? Now I must also propose that each group will act to minimise the impact of any and every measure for long term reduction of greenhouse gases on the local human economy ? This can be seen by refusal to sign the Kyoto Agreement ? Setting limits that are not onerus ? Cheating on measurement of greenhouse gases ? Refusal to move to kyoto part 2 ? More fundamentally refusal by humans to significantly change their group's way of life and in particular take any action that will reduce economic growth or inhibit popular activities ?
So what to do ? The group most dedicated to minimising climate change appears to be the european union ? No one else ? So they should ignore the rest of the world but set up one simple rule that must supercede all other agreements ? Any group that wishes to visit or trade with the european union must do so on terms that take into account the EU's limits on greenhouse gases ? Of course there would be a world wide row but compare this with the drift into the changed and dangerous planet of 2100 + ? Thus the EU would act like the so called locomotive of growth argument but related in this case to the climate change problem ?
I would propose a top down assembly of measures related to targets and ramping them up every 2 years to get everyone used to the idea and to allow for some adjustment ? Of course one would attempt to persuade and negotiate but nonetheless the EU locomotive would roll out and increase speed whatever the others did ? Every trading partner would know that a car sold to the EU would have to change over time ? Every traded item would have to meet criteria ?
I could go into utmost detail but you must get the idea ?
Of course science and engineering and adjustment speed would be monitored ?
The great mistake is to try and get agreement as a precursor to taking action ? Any trading block that did not take account of the EU's accelerating adjustments would effectively come under inceasing pressure to adjust similarly ?
Complain about this post
Looking at what we ,as a species, are doing to the body of Planet Earth,I can only equate us to the dread disease of cancer which besets the human body.As the cancerous cell replicates itself and eventually kills it's host, so Homo sapiens has invaded every crack and crevice,taken it's pollution and poisonous odours from the depths of the oceans to the highest peaks and by increasing the population will eventually kill its host body, our Earth.Our besetting sin is that we assume we are special and DESERVE preferential treatment.We are arrogant.
Complain about this post
Whats all the noise about global Warming ? Oil companies are declaring Record Profits.
And why pretend Fission power is risky? The French are already very successful with it, and all Europe lives under the cloud of a possible french Fission plant malfunction.
EU and the USA must follow the French, and invest massively on fission generators to supply all their power requirements within 3 years. For security and and strategic reasons, the usA has even more urgency in this matter.
An Apollo-type 'moon-landing' urgency,JFK style, is needed, if all US power needs is to be generated from Fission Plants before 2010. This is acievable, and feasible.
Getting rid of fission plant waste? Lob 100-ton batches of fission waste into far Space, using the US Shuttle Rockets. No need for heavy concrete containment of waste.
engr. Ken Wilson-Iteke
kaduna, Nigeria.
Complain about this post
Fellow Earthlings,
For those who might be interested, informed (and some not so) discussion of the can be seen at , a site involving some serious climate scientists.
ed
05/02/2007 at 19:21:54 GMT
Complain about this post
This is madness! I used to be a confirmed believer in AGW, but the science just isn't there! We've had warming without high CO2, we've had high CO2 without warming. For the past two decades (that's all!!!) we've had high CO2 coinciding with high temperatures. But that's it! Is this how science is going to be now? Oh, so we've got a short correlation, so it must be true. It's bizarre. Most of the warming we're seeing is going to turn out to be solar-related. We'll get a big (BIG!) freeze in less than 20 years (look it up - lack of sunspots) and everyone will realise that the Sun is driving climate, not us!
Complain about this post
Thank God for the scientists of the IPCC and all the environmental campaigners. They are going to save us from our sins in the "nick of time". It must be divine intervention.
The Paradox is that without our sin of Carbon Based Technology the scientists and environmentalists wouldn't be able to predict there might be a problem in the future, and wouldn't be able to see and measure our ever changing climate!
Complain about this post
Global production of CO2 = Indivdual Production per Person x Number of People.
Why is it that we hear endless discussion about ways of reducing CO2 production by individuals, important though that is, but hardly anything about the more fundamental problem of global over-population? (More fundamental because population also determines every other kind of pollution or exhaustion of world resources, which would still be major problems even if we come up with some technological 鈥渇ix鈥 for CO2.) Shouldn't we also be addressing the political, moral and economic questions raised by the need to reduce world population in a steady, comfortable and fair way.
Complain about this post
Global production of CO2 = Indivdual Production per Person x Number of People.
Why is it that we hear endless discussion about ways of reducing CO2 production by individuals, important though that is, but hardly anything about the more fundamental problem of global over-population? (More fundamental because population also determines every other kind of pollution or exhaustion of world resources, which would still be major problems even if we come up with some technological 鈥渇ix鈥 for CO2.) Shouldn't we also be addressing the political, moral and economic questions raised by the need to reduce world population in a steady, comfortable and fair way.
Complain about this post
How marvellous that even S C Rambler,has seen through the hype. The arch denizen of global warming on the old Weather Boards is now viewing the future through rather more critical eyes. I too have seen the reports on the effect of sunspot activity ( though it is largely ignored by our atrocious media). Seems that the Political Report of the IPCC ( which is what it is, the science appears in May)has been nobbled by a vested interest, it is even rumoured that Greenpeace has a delegate at the Tyndal Centre. I recommend everyone listens to Radio Four's "The Investigation" programme on all this ( and to how both Stern and IPCC are callously used). Even Mike Hulme at the Tyndal Centre is in despair that only the most apocalyptic scenarios are used. Notice the IPCC does not refer to "tipping points" and even that rising sea levels are less of a worry. Pardoxically, the interest which will gain most out of this are the big energy companies queuing up to sell us their "friendly" wares.
Complain about this post
Anyone who predicts the weather usually ends up wishing they hadn't bothered.
Is AGW real?, the whole of human history is littered with the wreckage of scientific consensus from Divine Creation, Flat Earth Theory,etc. to more recent examples like the non existent Y2K bug, SARS etc.
Will AGW end up in the wreckage, who knows ! who cares !lets get on with our lives, why must we always have "the end of the world is nigh" hanging over our heads, what is it in our character that demands this ?
Why do humans want to believe this, its quite easy to believe something else, and even the IPCC aren't saying it will be the end of the world are they!
Why must the prophets of Doom win the arguement, why don't we celebrate the achievements of our civilisation and build on them, not try to destroy.
Complain about this post
I think that global warming is an excelent thing because eventually everyone will die!
Complain about this post
There's a lot of noise out there (check any blog on climate change) and in the end most of us don't have the scientific knowledge to decide what is right and what is wrong. In the end belief replaces knowledge and this can block any possibility of serious discussion. All we can do is check the credibility of the sources of information -we have a duty to do that at least. There's always an possibility of error in scientific research especially in the complex issue of predicting climate but there seems to be a large consensus that humans have something to do with climate change so all we can do is use an analogy. Imagine you went to your doctor and he told you that he was 70% sure you had cancer but because he wasn't 100% sure he wanted to wait until he was. What would your reaction be. This is the situation we find ourselves in with climate change.
Complain about this post
Climate change - cooling and warming has been detected as ocurring for many thousands of years. It has been observed throughout the Solar System, where man,s Carbon Footprint has yet to appear. An entirely naturaland cyclical Sun driven process, in which puny Man thankfully, has very little hope of affecting in the smallest way.
Complain about this post