Anthropogenic Climate Change - Annotated Bibliography Example

Anthropogenic (human-caused) climate change Introduction “The new religion of global warming…is agreat story, and a phenomenal best seller. It contains a grain of truth and a mountain of nonsense. And that nonsense could be very damaging indeed. We appear to have entered a new age of unreason, which threatens to be as economically harmful as it is profoundly disquieting” (Lawson, 2008, 106). Human-caused or anthropogenic climate change has turned into an environmental and social cause to champion, right from the start of the 21st century. The alarmist camp that feels anthropogenic changes have harmed the environment causing global warming and is likely to create further adverse effects in the future includes the Western governments, the United Nations, large corporations, majority of the free press, churches, various scientific bodies and a large segment of the common public (Boykoff, 2007, 477). Despite the widespread support, there are no scientific evidences that conclusively distinguish the dangers stemming from human-induced climate change. Therefore, there is a strong conflict between the level of alarm raised and an evidence-based justification to prove the cause for alarm. According to experts, climate change encompasses both meteorological and geological aspects, and all forms of climate changes that include both cooling and warming, create social and environmental hazard. Geological hazards are dealt with by providing evidence-based, accurate information about impending events like floods, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions and earthquakes, and later by adjusting to and managing the adverse effects of the natural calamity. Therefore trying to halt climate change, by decreasing carbon dioxide emissions by humans is both expensive and futile (Wagner, Aaby and Visscher, 2002, 12013). Therefore, climate policies logically must be founded on adapting to the adverse changes as and when they take place, irrespective of causes and signs. This essay provides a brief review and analysis of various scientific articles on whether humans caused the current climate change and derives that climate change being a natural hazard encompasses both meteorological and geological issues. Therefore, climate change must be handled in a manner geo-hazards are tackled, rather than framing policies based on alarmist views of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the UN. Discussion Major part of the argument on anthropogenic climate change is predicated by two self-contradictory hypotheses. The first one claims of a ‘consensus’ of various climate experts and scientists that human caused climate changed have led to global warming which is dangerous and threatening the world; while the second one claims is despite being ‘two sides to the argument,’ the side that supports global warming is quantitatively stronger. However, a closer review shows that both the hypotheses are untenable. This is because primarily scientific facts are never supported by consensus, but are based on experiments, derived data and testable theories. Furthermore, regarding quantitative support to the climate change debate, under real circumstances it is only the small parts within the intricate climate change system are better or less comprehended. Besides these, there are no established theories on climate, akin to theories as observed in Newtonian physics. In case of all established theories that start from hypotheses, they are constantly tested against different empirical data, wherein the researcher derives the predictive power of the theories. In the context of the most used hypothesis as regard adverse effects of climate change, it is based on the presumption that 20th century global warming was caused mainly by greenhouse gas emission (carbon dioxide emission) from various human activities. Climate change will always take place The issue of dangerous anthropogenic climate change is rather complex in nature. This issue can be valuated only against the knowledge acquired on natural climate change that remains largely vague and incomplete, and in some areas even rudimentary. Besides this, there is no Theory of Climate; thus, no computer model or the General Circulation Models (GCMs) as used by the IPCC, can correctly infer future climate at global or regional levels. The palaeoceanographers and palaeoclimatologists have however devised certain methods that give a clearer understanding of some of the natural patterns and methods of climate change. The most significant evidence is derived from sediment cores from the Antarctic and Greenland ice caps and from beneath the seafloor. While any one core does not reflect the global climate, different cores of an appropriate nature yield data that represent climate of a wide region, and approximating a global pattern. From such data, the inferences are: During the Pliocene period, there were small temperature changes ranging from warm to cold, and climatic changes occurred around an average temperature that was much warmer than the current day. After this period, global temperatures decreased at a steady rate that gave rise to an oscillatory pattern, ranging between severe glacial to interglacial phases (Mix, Pisias, Rugh, Wilson, Morey, and Hagelberg, 1995, 373-375); From around 0.6 million years ago, the glacial-interglacial oscillation started taking place on a longer rate, at 100 ky-long periodicity, and the earth’s mean temperature remained cooler than what we observe today (ibid); At the time of Holocene, a climatic cycle of 1-2℃ scale occurred for almost 1,500 years. During this cycle in Greenland, warm peaks were reached that exceeded the late 20th century temperatures under global warming and from the various derived global data, an estimate for global temperature in the last 1,500 years confirmed greater warmth in the Mediaeval times when compared to the late 20th Century Loehle, 2004, 443); From the study of trapped air bubbles within glacial ice cores scientists have derived that carbon dioxide cannot be the primary agent for causing temperature changes at a global range (Mudelsee, 2001, 584). When ancient climate data is compared to the current pattern, it is noted that temperatures in the late 20th century did not show any signs of rapid changes nor were they particularly high. Prior to the Holocene era, during the three interglacial period temperatures in Antarctica were almost 5℃ higher than today, and during Pliocene the temperatures were 2-3℃ higher globally (Carter, Evans, Stewart, and Kininmonth, 2011, 3-5). Therefore, it is quite evident that a warmer planet existed prior to the late 20th century climate pattern, while it is also clear that changes in the climate are natural and occurring all the time. Therefore, the argument that global warming issue emerged post industrial revolution period, mainly owing to human emissions, does not hold much ground, as change is an integral part of global climate, and this pattern has been observed from the ancient times, so the current climate change is not unusual. While taking into consideration the wide scale and variability in the natural climate change patterns, it is beyond any doubt that human activities have had some amount of effect on the climate, mainly at local levels. This is evident in the buildings that use steel, glass, and concrete for construction, tend to absorb and retain more daytime heat, than did natural resources used for construction prior to the modern industrial era. This has often resulted in local warming, referred to as urban heat island effect, often increasing local temperatures by several degrees (Zhen-Shan and Xian, 2007, 117-118). On the other hand, after clearing of forested regions, there has taken place planting of crops, which due to their lighter color results in greater reflection of the heat from the sun, causing more cooling. Therefore, owing to changes in land usage and building materials by humans, there has been an impact on the climate at a local level varies from cooling to heating. However, in the context of whether human activities can produce an impact on global climate and if it can be measured, various observations revealed that has been no identification or measurement of human effect on the global climate. Therefore, while some scientists predict on theoretical basis that from an overall perspective global warming is likely, there are no actual evidences that prove warming as dangerous. Is carbon dioxide emission harmful? Carbon dioxide or CO2 is an odorless, colorless gas present in trace amounts in the atmosphere from ancient times, and it ranges from hundred to thousand in parts per million or ppm. From the data inferred from ice cores, estimated atmospheric values in the past few hundred thousand years vary from 280 ppm during interglacial periods to 180 ppm during glacial periods (Kouwenberg, Wagner, and Visscher, 2005, 34). Evidences from paleo-botanical studies of plant stomata indicate that CO2 during the Holocene reached the present day level of 380 ppm (ibid, 35). Further researches have shown that almost all estimates of CO2 levels since the start of post-industrial modern era are quite low when compared to the ancient geological periods, wherein CO2 levels have decreased from an average 1000 ppm during the Cenozoic period (Carter, Evans, Stewart, and Kininmonth, 2011, 4-5). Therefore, it is quite evident that it is neither dangerous nor unusual to have ‘extra’ CO2 in the atmosphere currently observed in the atmosphere, which is being contributed by human activities (it only amounts to around 3 % of the natural annual CO2 movement). Along with oxygen, CO2 is essential element for the survival of life on earth, as plant metabolism is dependent on the absorption of CO2. Increasing levels of CO2 between 200 - 1000 ppm has been proven as beneficial for growth of plants and their efficient use of water for food preparation (Saxe, Ellsworth and Heath, 1998, 397). Therefore, from the various evidences it is quite clear that there are no reasons for claiming that CO2 levels of 1000 ppm or less can produce adverse effects on the environment. Rather, atmospheric CO2 of and around 1000ppm level are highly beneficial for plant growth and development. Can the GCM models used by the IPCC predict climate changes accurately? None of the current GCM models used by the IPCC could successfully predict temperature changes that took place in 1990 – 2007, wherein there were universal predictions of global warming uniformly, on the contrary rising temperature reached a maximum level in 1998 and started declining after that. The current fall in temperature shows that global temperature is currently trending outside the IPCC projections (Carter, Evans, Stewart, and Kininmonth, 2011, 3-6). This forecast failure by GCM models is not surprising, as they do not take into account climatic phenomena such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and North Atlantic Oscillation (Keenlyside, Latif, Jungclaus, Kornblueh, and Roeckner, 2008, 86-87). Furthermore, on detailed review, it is observed that the GCM models fail to take a correct estimation of surface evaporation in response to temperature, which is a major failure since water vapor is crucial factor in any greenhouse gas. GCMs cannot predict future climate changes, can merely give ‘projections,’ that might or might not take place. According to IPCC scientist Kevin Trenberth, “.. There are no (climate) predictions by IPCC at all. And there never have been". Instead, there are only "what if" projections of future climate that correspond to certain emissions scenarios… [GCMs] do not consider many things like the recovery of the ozone layer, for instance, or observed trends in forcing agents…None of the models used by IPCC is initialised to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models corresponds even remotely to the current observed climate…the science is not done because we do not have reliable or regional predictions of climate” (cited in, Carter, “Online Opinion,” 2007). Conclusion From the above review it is clear that claims about adverse environmental effects owing to anthropogenic climate change is unsubstantiated and lacks scientifically backed evidence. Climate change remains a natural hazard, much like a meteorological or a geological issue, and needs to be managed like any other geo-hazards, encompassing monitoring for the start of calamities and keeping a disaster response plan ready to tackle any emergency issues that take place. References Boykoff Maxwell. “Blackwell Publishing Ltd From convergence to contention: United States mass media representations of anthropogenic climate change science.” Royal Geographical Society, 477–489. 2007. Web. 20th March 2014, http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/admin/publication_files/resource-2744-2007.38.pdf Carter Bob. Climate recantation: IPCC models dont predict and are unscientific. Online opinon- Australia’s e-journal of social and political debate. 2007. Web. 21st March 2014, http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=6043&page=0 Carter Bob, Evans David, Stewart Franks and Kininmonth William. Scientific audit of a report from the Climate Commission. 2011. Web. 20th March 2014, http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/debunk/climate-commission/cc-critical-decade-report-may-2011-audit-complete-file.pdf 1 Differences in the response sensitivity of stomatal index to atmospheric CO2among four genera of Cupressaceae conifers 2 Differences in the response sensitivity of stomatal index to atmospheric CO2among four genera of Cupressaceae conifers 3 Differences in the response sensitivity of stomatal index to atmospheric CO2among four genera of Cupressaceae conifers Keenlyside Noel, Latif Mojib, Jungclaus Johann, Kornblueh Luis, and Roeckner, Erich. “Advancing decadalscale climate prediction in the North Atlantic sector.” Nature 453, 84-88, 2008. Print. Kouwenberg Lenny, Wagner Frederike and Visscher Henk. “Atmospheric CO2 fluctuations during the last millennium reconstructed by stomatal frequency analysis of Tsuga heterophylla needles.” Geology 33, 33-36, 2005. Print. Lawson Nigel. An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming. New York: Duckworth Overlook, 2008. Print. Loehle Craig. “Climate change: detection and attribution of trends from long-term geologic data,” Ecological Modelling 171, 433-450, 2004. Print. Mix, A., Pisias, N., Rugh, W., Wilson, J., Morey, A., and Hagelberg, T. “Benthic foraminiferal stable isotope record from Site 849, 0-5 Ma: Local and global climate changes.” In, Pisias, N., Mayer, L., Janecek, T., Palmer-Julson, A. and van Andel, T. (eds.), Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program 138, 371-412, 1995. Print. Mudelsee Manfred. “The phase relations among atmospheric CO2 content, temperature and global ice volume over the past 420 ka.” Quaternary Science Reviews 20, 583-589, 2001. Print. Saxe Henrike, Ellsworth David, and Heath James. “Tree and forest functioning in an enriched CO2 atmosphere.” New Phytol. 139, 395- 436, 1998. Print. Wagner Frederike, Aaby Bent, and Visscher Henk. “Rapid atmospheric CO2 changes associated with the 8,200-years-BP cooling event.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99, 12011-12014, 2002. Print. Zhen-Shan Lin, and Xian Sin. “Multi-scale analysis of global temperature changes and trends of a drop in temperature in the next 20 years.” Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics, 95:115-121, 2007. Print. Read More