Dr. Pachauri, one of the world's leading experts on climate change, says that although people are now beginning to recognize the importance of cutting car and air journeys, insulating their homes and recycling, people don't fully realize the impact of livestock production on climate change, let alone its future impact:
"Meat production represents 18 per cent of global human-induced GHG emissions, including 37 per cent of global methane emissions, which has 23 times the Global Warming Potential of CO2 and 65 per cent of nitrous oxide, which has 296 times the warming potential of CO2," says Dr Pachauri. (2008, p 7)
Just about every part of the planet except Antarctica has warmed since the 1970s. Glaciers are melting, spring is coming earlier and the ranges of many plants and animals are shifting pole wards. For most people, this has made little difference. We may have sweltered through more heat waves, but winters have been milder. The next decade or two will also be a mixed bag. Heating bills will go down; air conditioning bills will go up. Heat waves may cause some deaths but there will be fewer cold-related deaths. This does not sound too bad, and for many people it won't be. In cooler regions the benefits could outweigh the downsides, depending on your point of view. Wealthy individuals and countries will be able to adapt to most short-term changes, whether it means buying an air conditioner or switching to crops better suited to a warmer climate and changing rainfall patterns. Overall, agricultural yields could increase at first. Some regions will suffer, however, and soon: Africa will fare worst, with yields predicted to halve in some countries as early as 2020. There are many moral questions one could ask oneself at this point. What can be done to balance benefit to the masses and what cultures and regions are of upmost importance to help adjust? The answers to these questions are as endless as the predictions of global warming, and even more confusing. Wildlife will also be in trouble. Certain plants and animals will thrive as CO2 rises, but at the expense of others. Coral reefs, which are already suffering frequent bleaching episodes, will be especially hard hit. (Brahic, C., Chandler, D. L., Le Page, M., McKenna, P., Pearce, F., 2007)
Jurgen Scheffran, a research scientist in the Program in Arms Control, Disarmament and International Security and the Center for Advanced BioEnergy Research at the University of Illinois, is among those raising concerns. In a survey of recent research published earlier this summer in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Scheffran concluded that:
“The impact of climate change on human and global security could extend far beyond the limited scope the world has seen thus far. Environmental changes caused by global warming will not only affect human living conditions but may also generate larger societal effects, by threatening the infrastructures of society or by inducing social responses that aggravate the problem. The associated socio-economic and political stress can undermine the functioning of communities, the effectiveness of institutions, and the stability of societal structures. These degraded conditions could contribute to civil strife, and, worse, armed conflict." (Scheffran, J., 2008, p 113)
Scheffran's review included a critical analysis of four trends identified in a report by the German Advisory Council on Global Change as among those most possibly destabilizing populations and governments: degradation of freshwater resources, food insecurity, natural disasters and environmental migration.
He also cited last year's report by a working group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change indicating that climate change would affect species and ecosystems worldwide, from rainforests to coral reefs. In his analysis, Scheffran noted that the number of world regions vulnerable to drought was expected to rise. Water supplies stored in glaciers and snow cover in major mountain ranges such as the Andes and Himalayas also are expected to decrease. All these things would, no doubt lead to disaster.
Adding threat and potential disaster to the entire picture, permafrost blanketing the northern hemisphere contains more than twice the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, making it a potentially mammoth contributor to global climate change depending on how quickly it thaws. The estimated 1,672 billion metric tons of carbon locked up in the permafrost is more than double the 780 billion tons in the atmosphere today. Dependant upon how fast the carbon is released could be life threatening to all species on the planet. No matter how big the forest, it would not be big enough to cover the emissions of carbon dioxide from the permafrost layer. (University of Florida, 2008)
In the 1970s, scientists thought aerosols could make the earth colder and that carbon dioxide could make it warmer. Simply, they didn't know which would have most effect. The indecision didn't last long. Today, global warming - as if you needed reminding - is the consensus. There are also a large number of very serious and knowledgeable scientists who thoroughly disagree with the notion that climate change is a global catastrophe in the making. Until recently, however, audiences in North America have not had access to the British documentary, The Great Global Warming Swindle. It was shown, with great fanfare, on television in the UK and Australia, but with the exception of brief appearances of the film on the Internet, American audiences, whose daily lives are otherwise saturated with global-warming scare stories from the Weather Channel, the History Channel, the Discovery Channel, and others, have not been given the other side of the story. The film points out that most of the warming of the last century occurred before 1940 and that the world cooled for decades following World War II. Professor Syun-Ichi Akasofu, director of the international Arctic Research Center, is one expert Durkin interviewed on the subject. In the film, the scientist notes: "CO2 began to increase exponentially in about 1940. But, the temperature actually began to decrease in 1940 and continued until about 1975." This is clear and unmistakable evidence, he notes, that CO2 is not causing climate change. "When the CO2 is increasing rapidly, but yet the temperature decreasing," he pointed out in the film, "then we can not say that CO2 and the temperature go together."
The film’s producer Durkin, has vigorously defended his work when the film had its share of critique and slander after it’s debut. In a response to critics published in the London Telegraph, he responded:
"The remarkable thing is not that I was attacked. But that the attacks have been so feeble. Too many journalists and scientists have built their careers on the global-warming alarm. Certain newspapers have staked their reputation on it. The death of this theory will be painful and ugly. But it will die. Because it is wrong, wrong, wrong." (Durkin, 2007, p 3)
Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee even held a hearing to dispute the idea that the Earth is warming, at least in part because of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere produced by industrial activity. This was however counter addressed by geologist Brian Nuttell who stated, “Science is not where you vote on something and 100 percent of the people agree. It is based on compiling evidence and on a majority of scientists coming to a conclusion that is supported by the evidence," Nuttall said. "When you see people who deny that global warming exists, they are frequently either not scientists or they are scientists funded at least in part by corporations with a financial interest in debunking global warming." (Cheves, J., 2008, p 2).
If the stance that global warming is something that needs to be dealt with immediately as to avoid cataclysmic damage is correct, there are steps that need to be immediately implemented. Such a program would include four major strategies: increased energy efficiency in such things as buildings, automobiles, and appliances, coal mitigation (which includes increased use of solar, wind, geothermal, and perhaps nuclear power, as well as carbon capture and sequestration for coal-fired power plants), the development of new biofuels, and reversal of deforestation. These strategies can stabilize atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases at acceptable levels and for acceptable economic costs. (Stauffer, H., 2007)
There are some issues that take a neutral stance as to whether global warming does or does not exist. Things such as, even if global warming is no threat to mankind, why not study the topics of emissions to better help the world as a whole and bring up world citizens and future generations? Also, all theories aside, what helps the Earth the most in the long run? Such speculations are definitely worth thought and study so as to benefit each of us.
To be so different the Earth has remained the same in many respects over the eons. The trend of global warming and cooling could well be one of them, but it has created quite a moral dilemma worldwide. As more is researched and read on the topic of global warming, it becomes easier to see why the diverse morale stands the way it does. It is a very complex and age old topic that is hard to gain insight about with the scope of just one lifetime. Perhaps one day, the world as a whole will be able to better understand and agree upon the diverse topic of global warming.
References
Andrew Curry (2008, August). How Did People Reach the Americas :Ancient DNA sheds light on the prehistoric humans who colonized a hemisphere. U.S. News & World Report, 145(3), 44. Retrieved September 14, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1517346791).
Baker, Robert G V., Robert J. Haworth, and Peter G. Flood. "An Oscillating Holocene Sea-level? Revisiting Rottnest Island, Western Australia and the Fairbridge Eustatic Hypothesis." Journal of Coastal Research, Fall 2004.
Behreandt, D. (2008, January). GLOBAL-WARMING: Myths Exposed. Review of The Great Global Warming Swindle. The New American, 24(1), 31-32. Retrieved September 16, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1417203691).
Brahic, C., Chandler, D. L., Le Page, M., McKenna, P., Pearce, F., (2007, May). Climate myths. New Scientist, 194(2604), 34-42. Retrieved September 16, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1284864921).
Cheves, J (15 November). Legislators hear global warming disputed: Called a myth of Gore, U.N., media. McClatchy - Tribune Business News, 2-3. Retrieved September 19, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Complete database. (Document ID: 1382999021).
Compassion in World Farming Ltd; World's Leading Climate Expert Urges Massive Dietary Change. (2008, September). Global Warming Focus,7. Retrieved September 19, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1556046761).
Stauffer, H., (2007, May). Global-Warming Myths. Technology Review, 110(3), 34. Retrieved September 19, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1295051381).
University of Florida; Bad sign for global warming: Thawing permafrost holds
vast carbon pool. (2008, September). NewsRx Science,53. Retrieved September 16, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1552682681).
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Climate change could be impetus for wars, other conflicts, expert says. (2008, September). NewsRx Science,113. Retrieved September 14, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1552683151).
Unknown, 2008. Interfaith Works Or The Olympian. (3 May). Hope, certainty in uncertain times. McClatchy - Tribune Business News, 1-3. Retrieved September 14, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Complete database. (Document ID: 1472561301).