Contrary to public perception, few scientists dispute that human activity – specifically the burning of fossil fuels for energy – is increasing the concentration of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. For instance, between November 2012 and December 2013, 9136 scientists published some 2258 peer-reviewed climate articles and only one author rejected the scientific consensus that human activity is the driving force of climate change. Considering this practically unanimous scientific concurrence and recognizing the detrimental effect of excess CO2 on the climate, the United States should lead the world on a comprehensive, large-scale, worldwide reduction in carbon emissions from fossil fuel use.
Carbon Dioxide is a naturally-occurring gas that exists in small amounts in the atmosphere. Although it is often named the culprit of climate change, it is not a pollutant and is necessary since plants use it as an energy source for photosynthesis. Besides serving as basis of oxygen creation by plants, CO2 also plays a role in temperature moderation within the carbonate-silicate weathering cycle. In this way, when surface temperatures on Earth fall, the chemical weathering of rock slows and more CO2 is permitted to accumulate in the atmosphere, causing temperatures to rise back up. For humid-tropical conditions, chemical weathering is comparatively intense. This rapid weathering process increases the rate at which CO2 is removed from the atmosphere, having a cooling effect on global temperatures. However, human activity has caused the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere to rise from its pre-industrial level of 280 ppm to 379 ppm in 2005 and far exceeds the naturally-occurring levels of the past 650,000 years, as observed in ice cores taken out of the Antarctic ice shelf and from Greenland. In fact, current CO2 concentration has risen to 397 ppm in December 2013 from 394 ppm in December 2012.
The significance of this increase in CO2 is its effect on average global temperature and by extension, its effect on everything affected by the average global temperature. Carbon Dioxide, aside from existing naturally in the atmosphere, is a greenhouse gas. Greenhouse gases trap long wave solar radiation in the lower atmosphere, driving up temperatures. The higher the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the more solar radiation will be kept inside Earth’s energy budget. This impact on temperatures can be observed here at home. The summer solstice is the longest day of the year in the northern hemisphere. To demonstrate rising local temperatures, my research took the mean daily temperature on the summer solstice in twelve American cities over a fifty year period. The results are eye-opening and correspond with greenhouse gas data inferring rising global temperatures. Over the past fifty-two years, the mean temperature on June 21 for the Midwestern cities in my study has seen a positive trend of 2.5 - 9 degrees Fahrenheit (F). The greatest rise in mean temperature was in the north, particularly near the Great Lakes. For example, the mean temperature on June 21 for Duluth, Minnesota has seen a positive trend of approximately 9 ˚F from 1960 to the present while St. Louis, Missouri and Kansas City, Kansas have seen a positive trend of approximately eight and seven degrees, respectively. This independently-conducted, regionally-specific research corresponds with data from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which claims that the global surface temperature was approximately 1˚F warmer in 2012 than it was during the 1951 – 1981 base period average. Furthermore, these warming trends correspond with the 2007 Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
These higher global temperatures have caused massive glacial melting, especially in Greenland and the greater Arctic region. However, although the Greenland ice sheet is rapidly retreating at unprecedented speeds, it is not currently collapsing altogether in what Penn State glaciologist Richard Alley has claimed would be one of the “scariest possibilities” . That means we still have time to act. There are small Pacific islands at risk of submersion due to sea level rises brought about by climate change. In fact, if the Greenland ice sheet were to melt completely, sea levels would rise by almost 25 feet globally. Virtually anywhere situated within 25 feet of the current sea level would be under water in this hypothetical disaster. Much of southern Florida, including most of the Florida Everglades, would be submerged under the sea. The southern shores of Long Island, parts of Brooklyn, the Bronx, Queens, Staten Island and the surrounding New Jersey region would also suffer a similar fate. Much of the settlements on the west coast would be safe from the rising sea, save for example, massive widening of the Columbia River north of Portland, Oregon, and some relatively minor and spatially-scattered coastal intrusions.
Aside from the displacement of millions of people around the world and the literal abandonment of coastal urban areas affected by the rising sea level, the melting of the glaciers is a source of positive feedback – a self-reinforcing cycle – on the system. Specifically, without snow and ice, the Earth’s albedo is weakened, and even more solar radiation is allowed into the Earth’s energy budget as less of it is reflected away. This will serve to only exasperate the problem and cause global temperatures to rise further. In fact, the real danger lies in arctic methane release. Methane (CH4) is an even more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and if only 1% of the methane frozen under the Arctic permafrost were released, it would be enough to triple the current trend of global warming. Like Carbon Dioxide, methane is also naturally-present in the atmosphere and its primary source are wetlands but if global temperatures continue to rise – which humans are contributing to – the northern permafrost will begin to thaw, enhancing the bacterial degradation of plant matter stored in the soil. As a result, not only will CH4 be released as a byproduct of these bacteria, but it would also release the CO2 which has long been frozen under the surface of the Earth in that region of the world.
Unfortunately, regardless of the fact that there truly is a scientific consensus on the issue of global warming and the human link to it, there are those who continue to deny the facts. Acceptance of this research appears to be linked to the health of the economy. There is also a well-organized and well-financed misinformation campaign in play working to protect those who would likely be the “losers” of reduced use of fossil fuels and curbed carbon emissions. For example, some climate change deniers claim that the temperature rises observed over the past decades have not continued into this decade, regardless of the fact that CO2 has undeniably continued to rise. Their conclusions tend to be born out of ignoring or suppressing evidence or the fallacy of incomplete information. James Taylor, a contributor to Forbes Magazine, published a piece in March 2013 entitled “As Carbon Dioxide Levels Continue To Rise, Global Temperatures Are Not Following Suit” in which he referenced a report on greenhouse gases for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The word “temperature” appears in that report a total of zero times even though he reports that “New data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are continuing to rise but global temperatures are not following suit.” The media is the problem. They don’t present the science properly and create an illusion that there is controversy over climate science when there really is not. We will not be able to change the course of anthropogenic global warming and climate change so long as the media and those who stand to lose from this change in course continue to misinform the public.
The science of climate change is solid and virtually universally accepted among those educated in the environmental sciences. To doubt this science and oppose its recommendations is to seal the fate of this planet to higher global temperatures which will inevitably lead to higher sea levels. The disruption and chaos higher sea levels will cause to the global economic and political systems, as well as local economic and political systems, ought to be of concern warranting immediate action. To say the economic costs of reducing carbon emissions are too great is extraordinary shortsightedness. Without a comprehensive, large-scale, worldwide reduction in CO2 emissions, our very geographic landscapes will change, international borders will be affected, millions will be displaced, cities will be lost and the world will never be the same. This must be a priority over preserving the economic or political status quo.