The global warming debate is a heated one because the stakes could not be higher. The best scientific consensus - ie the IPCC report - shows a likely increase of 3C by the end of this century with further increase beyond, and there is a lesser but all to possible rise to around 6C by end of this century. Such rises put the future of civilization at risk. Even though weather in Canada, Scandinavia and Russia may improve - the mass starvation of billions in over heated drought affected tropics and subtropics and flooded low lying cities to the stress on the global political and security systems of our civilization to breaking point - and in a world with several nuclear powers that is very very bad.
There are at least as many scientists who think the IPCC is seriously underestimating the risks and temperature rises as there are scientists thinking it is not as bad. But the vast majority of the science is with the IPCC - that is why it has said what it has said.
The way to avoid such temperature rises is around a 70% reduction in CO2 production by 2050. But continued reliance on current fossil fuel technology will see a large increase. We need to consume less, pour investment and subsidies into solar (concentrating solar power stations in the world's deserts can power much of the globe with current technology), wind, geothermal, tidal energy, we should drive hybrid or electric plug in cars, better yet take public transport and walk/cycle, stop going on so many airplane holidays, become essentially vegetarian and divert money to preserve the rainforests rather than demolish them at the rate of a small European country per week.
All that will cost, and it means a move away from simple market forces because market forces can't make the right moves in time. But the market is still necessary because it creates efficiency. Taxes and subsidies need to be set to push it towards sustainability. The free market may be an "invisible hand" as Adam Smith said, but it is not an invisible brain. There is opportunity here in the creation of new industries such as solar. A cleaner healthier environment for all can be the side-effect of addressing global warming.
Some costs are worth paying. You insure your house against fire on the remote chance of it burning down. The chances of our planet metaphorically burning are much much higher according to the IPCC report than your house. If you have a potentially terminal illness and there is a possible cure you pay for it even if its expensive, the IPCC report says our planet is sick and could get very sick. We don't have another planet in the same way each of us don't have another body if we get a terminal illness.
Such need for radical changes offends a lot of vested interests and means sacrifices by all of us. It is natural to try and hope and believe this is all bunk. But we either accept science as a way to base our decisions or wishful thinking. The sooner we go with the rational science the better the future for us and all our children and their children ad infinitum.
Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.
Other reader comments on this article
Comment
By
Date
Your pro-Republican bias is showing! Even without definitive proof, with severak BILLION machines that pump multi-tons of carbon oxides and... [MORE]
Alan Breslau
Feb 13, 2007 15:22
The earth has been warmer than it is now. 800 to a 1000 years ago there was warming that exceeded... [MORE]
theduke49
Feb 14, 2007 11:20
Can anyone give the citation for those quotes from Karl Popper?
I note that the Independent has retracted its claims about... [MORE]
John A
Feb 13, 2007 12:57
Books in which Karl Popper makes the argument against absolute certitude and against a deterministic view of the universe include:... [MORE]
Richard L.A. Schaefer
Feb 14, 2007 14:12
Regarding:
Manchester / Boston Regional Airport - Manchester New Hampshire Transportation Security Administration -Department of Homeland Security
4 Technology Drive Londonderry, NH... [MORE]
Security Screeners
Feb 12, 2007 22:14
Climate change is an undeniable natural phenomenon, but anthropogenic climate change is debatable. The chemical composition of dry air at... [MORE]
Peter Risbergs
Feb 12, 2007 14:40
In National Post, Joseph Breen outlined the arguments for environmentalism being the new religion, pseudo-religion, or quasi-religion. He also went... [MORE]
Richard L.A. Schaefer
Feb 12, 2007 13:35
Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring substance, which has actions that we don't entirely understand. Currently it has been discovered... [MORE]
ElKoz
Feb 14, 2007 12:46
People tinkering with the climate is a very scary scenario. Climate change is a cyclical thing. No one knows why... [MORE]
Jude
Feb 12, 2007 13:15
Thanks to the Sun for a very timely article. It's a fact, our climate has changed (up & down) for... [MORE]
Bill Sanford
Feb 12, 2007 12:37
I would really like to know the facts.
I know about the Ice Age and certainly there has been warming since... [MORE]
Mike Sorensen
Feb 12, 2007 11:45
Why doesn't anyone seem to take into account the effects of Earth's shifting orbit around the sun and the measurable... [MORE]
Michael
Feb 12, 2007 11:40
All the tactics of the global warming deniers will not make the problem go away. You might find minor flaws... [MORE]
Peter F. Cannavo
Feb 12, 2007 11:37
Does anyone else find it ironic that many climatololgists and meteorologists, who can't accurately predict the weather for next week,... [MORE]
theduke49
Feb 12, 2007 11:08
The 19th Century produced two "Scientific Redefinitions Of Mankind's Pathway To Bliss" that could not be falsified at reasonable expense... [MORE]
Cllaude Bogardus
Feb 12, 2007 11:04
The IPCC's previous report used the famous Hockey Stick graph as its main piece of evidence that the "consensus" agreed... [MORE]
Jeff
Feb 12, 2007 10:57
Global warming is a fact. It's happening right now, and the current warming cycle very likely is a natural one... [MORE]
Irascible Professor
Feb 12, 2007 10:48
If we take the consensus of global warming being a threat to Mankind as a fact, and if the global... [MORE]
Ray
Feb 12, 2007 12:16
You say: "If we act, there will be economic consequences. But if we don't act there also will be economic... [MORE]
J. Elink
Feb 12, 2007 13:45
The temperature on planet earth is changing? Amazing! What a shock it is that something as complex and awesome as... [MORE]
Not Buying the hysteria
Feb 12, 2007 14:03
I do not know whether man is responsible for the global warming issue. However, I would like to hear from... [MORE]
Stephen W. Robertson
Feb 12, 2007 10:08
The global warming debate is a heated one because the stakes could not be higher. The best scientific consensus -...
ruckrover
Feb 12, 2007 06:00
The faith of people, like ruckover, have in computer models is astounding. It would actually be a joke if the... [MORE]
Jim Temple
Feb 12, 2007 09:13
Consensus is not a scientific method. There's a reason it's called Greenland rather than Whiteland. [MORE]
sasquatch
Feb 12, 2007 09:29
The article addresses the politicization of the global warming debate, and the tactic of demonizing skeptics and those who want... [MORE]
Peter
Feb 12, 2007 10:52
Arguably, global warming is better than an ice age. In the 70s did you move south when the consensus was... [MORE]
Bill
Feb 12, 2007 12:47
Why is the proscription of capitalism, meat-eating, and technological advance the solution for any and all issues that the eco... [MORE]
PWF
Feb 12, 2007 12:53
Ruckrover, like many of similar ilk lumps what for lack of a better term could be called "good clean livin'"... [MORE]
PhreddJoanz
Feb 13, 2007 11:22
It was named Greeland by the Vikings to encourage their enemies to send their time and resources on a fools... [MORE]
Debunker
Feb 14, 2007 12:09
Okay, so before you open you're mouth and write about something you clearly know nothing about - do some research.... [MORE]