Climate Debate
There are four debates concerning global warming: (1) whether it is happening; (2)
whether or not it is caused by humans; (3) what effects it will have and (4) what should
be done about it.[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6] The debates about whether or not global warming is taking
place is no longer part of mainstream climatology (global warming is generally accepted
as real) [2, 4, 7] though this debate is still going in the public domain.[1, 2, 3, 6]
Various people take different positions in each debate. The principle readings for this
assignment were two articles in Farmer’s Weekly: an article against global warming and
the impacts of global warming by Rudi Bezuidenhout that presented the opinions of Prof.
William Alexander[1] and a response taking the opposite view by 4 scientists.[2]
Prof. Alexander, whose expertise is in civil and biosystems engineering, is arguing that
global warming isn’t happening but in the same breath that its effects will not harm South
Africa.[1] It seems to me that admitting an effect of global warming is tacitly admitting
that global warming is happening but doubtless Prof. Alexander would say that he is not
saying that the climate is not variable…
Prof. Alexander notes increases in heavy rainfall in South Africa.[1] This agrees with the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Working Group I
Summary for Policymakers (IPCC4 Summary for Policymakers) which indicates
increased frequencies of heavy precipitation events over most land masses.[7] My
personal impression is that the showers where I live are becoming shorter and heavier.
What is debatable is Prof. Alexander’s contention that heavy rainfall “saturates the soils,
…, replenishes groundwater...”[1] Heavy rainfall is more likely to cause splash erosion
which results in a decrease in soil porosity[8] and therefore a decrease in water penetration
into the soil and an increase in runoff. That means that soil saturation and groundwater
replenishment probably decrease.
I think Midgley et al.’s response to Prof. Alexander[2] was fairly comprehensive and that
they proved their point that global warming is affecting South Africa and could have
damaging impacts in this country. Their greater knowledge of plant physiology was
particularly telling given that the issue was raised in Farmer’s Weekly.
The understanding of the effects of climate change is hampered by lack of data in some
regions.[7] This does not mean that there is a lack of scientific evidence of the types of
effects of global warming. The IPCC4 Summary for Policymakers lists observations of
climate change including records of the warmest years on record, temperature increases
in the troposphere, increases in atmospheric water vapour, increases in ocean
temperatures, declines in snow and glacier cover, sea level rise and changes in
precipitation and evaporation[7] – and the list given here is not complete.
What the IPCC4 Summary for Policymakers does indicate is that attributing the effects of
anthropogenic forcing factors on a local scale involves considerable uncertainty.[7] This
suggests that local weather could lend itself to those wishing to deny the anthropogenic
causes of global warming or even deny that global warming exists.
Andrew Bolt, journalist for the Herald Sun in Australia, gives a list of scientists who
doubt that global warming is real or anthropogenically caused.[9] Bolt is guilty of
misrepresentation because his article includes skeptics of both the debate about the reality
of global warming and the anthropogenic causes of global warming – two separate issues
– which inflates the total number of doubters he lists. It is also worth noting that not all
the names listed are climatologists… The Oregon Petition prompted by Dr Frederick
Seitz may have included 17 800 signatures but 85% of the scientists were not
climatologists! That said, 2 600 climatologists who doubt the anthropogenic cause of
global warming[9] is a large number.
The background to the debate about the anthropogenic causes of global warming includes
the knowledge that there is a natural greenhouse effect which is essential for the existence
of life here on earth.[4] The earth’s orbit around the sun is also a factor, as is the tilt of the
earth’s axis and the intensity of solar irradiation.[6, 9] Some scientists consider these
factors adequate explanation for global warming.[9]
On the issue of skeptical scientists, no one in the debate seems to have defined what they
mean by a scientist…
I think the most important debate is probably what to do about climate change… The
Bush Administration does not want to do anything[5, 10] – presumably because it is
controlled by vested interests. Blair has indicated that something must be done on a
global scale.[10] The reason for this difference may lie in the Stern Review. The Stern
Review looks at the economics of climate change. The report takes the scientific
projections and does economic analyses of their consequences. It predicts that not acting
strongly now will harm future economic growth and that strong action now is the
cheapest way of preventing harmful economic impacts.[11] Those sound like pretty
compelling reasons for action to me. The Stern Review findings appear to be supported
by historical evidence that the collapse of some previous civilisations (e.g. the Mayan
civilisation) coincided with an increase in CO2.[12] I would suggest that the precautionary
principle should be applied which would mean taking drastic action now.
Part of the debate concerning what to do concerns the effectiveness of different options.[5]
To my mind, this is positive as long as the options are implemented so that the actual
effectiveness can be judged.
To conclude, I believe that global warming is happening and is exacerbated by
humanity’s actions. Because of the debate, our natural inertia and the short-term
expense, I am extremely doubtful that any concerted action will be taken to combat
climate change.
References
1. Bezuidenhout R. 2005. Climate change – fact or fiction? Farmer’s Weekly 26 Aug.:
52, 54.
2. Midgley G, Scholes R, Hewitson B, Schulze R. 2005. Climate change: no trivial
threat. Farmer’s Weekly 16 Sept.: 10—11.
3. Gore A. An Inconvenient Truth Transcript [Internet]. An Inconvenient Truth (Film);
First released 2006 [cited 2007 Jun. 8]. Available from:
http://connected.uwc.ac.za/blog/index.php?/site/comments/an-inconvenient-truth/.
4. Kolbert E. The Climate of Man – I. The New Yorker [Internet]. 2005 Apr. 25 [cited
2007 Jun. 5]. Available from:
http://planet.uwc.ac.za/nisl/climate_change/course_documents/Kolbert_2005_NY_Clima
te%20of%20ManI.pdf.
5. Kolbert E. The Climate of Man – III. The New Yorker [Internet]. 2005 May 9 [cited
2007 Jun. 5]. Available from:
http://planet.uwc.ac.za/nisl/climate_change/course_documents/Kolbert_2005_NY_Clima
te%20of%20ManIII.pdf.
6. Philander SG. Why global warming remains controversial [Internet], BCB Eco- and
Geo-infromatics Blog, Biodiversity and Conservation Biology Department, University of
the Western Cape; Updated Feb. 2007 [cited 2007 Jun. 7]. Available from:
http://connected.uwc.ac.za/blog/index.php?/article/global-warming-controversy/.
7. IPCC. 2007. Summary for Policymakers. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z,
Marquis M, Avery KB, Tignor M, Miller HL, editors. Climate Change 2007: The
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom
and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. Available from:
http://planet.uwc.ac.za/nisl/climate_change/course_documents/AR4WG1_Pub_SPM.pdf.
8. Anonymous. Splash Erosion (Rain Drop Impact) [Internet]. Managing Natural
Resources, Department of Primary Industries and Water, Tasmania; Updated 2007 May
29 [cited 2007 Jun. 8]. Available from:
http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/TPRY-5Z522V?open.
9. Bolt A. “Aunty catches cold.” [Internet] The Herald Sun (Australia); 2007 Mar 25
[cited 2007 Jun. 8] Available from:
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_a
unty_catches_cold/
10. Knight R. 2007. Global Warming, Warning or Waring: Bush vs Blair issue
[Internet]. Eco- and Geo-informatics blog, Biodiversity and Conservation Biology
Department, University of the Western Cape; Updated 2007 May 10 [cited 2007 Jun. 8].
Available from: http://connected.uwc.ac.za/blog/index.php?/article/global-warmingwarning-or-waring-bush-vs-blair-issue/.
11. Stern N. Executive Summary Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change
[Internet]. Her Majesty’s Treasury, United Kingdom Government. First Issued 2006
[cited 2007 Jun. 8]. Previously available from: http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_rev
iew_report.cfm. (I downloaded it last year)
12. Kolbert E. The Climate of Man – II. The New Yorker [Internet]. 2005 May 2 [cited
2007 Jun. 5]. Available from:
http://planet.uwc.ac.za/nisl/climate_change/course_documents/Kolbert_2005_NY_Clima
te%20of%20ManII.pdf.