MOTION #96: THIS HOUSE BELIEVES
WE'RE TOO LATE ON GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
Global Climate Change, formally referred to as global warming, is the
largest threat facing the long term survival of the human species. The leading
authority on climate change is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), a scientific intergovernmental body tasked with reviewing and assessing
the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced
worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. Although debates in
the media still rage over the causes of climate change, today the majority of
climate scientists believe that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs),
of which carbon dioxide (CO2) is the best known, are building up in the
atmosphere causing global temperatures to slowly rise. The continued rise of
atmospheric GHGs (measured in parts per million [PPM] of CO2 equivalent) may
have catastrophic consequences for earth and its inhabitants. While some people
hold out hope that new government policy, new technology, and/or greater
individual action will reverse the pattern of rising annual GHG emissions,
others are less optimistic and believe that by the time humanity recognizes the
true costs of climate change, it will be too late mitigate the consequences.
Pros
|
Cons
|
450 PPM. The IPCC's
Fourth Assessment Report determined that atmospheric GHG emissions needed to
stabilize at 450ppm in order to avoid a temperature rise of more than 2-2.4C.
Atmospheric ppm are currently at 393 and are rising at a rate of about 2 ppm
per year. In order to stabilize at 450 ppm, the developed world would need to
reduce its emissions by 25-40% by 2020 and 80-90% by 2050 along with
significant reductions in the emissions growth rate of developing countries.
Only a handful of countries (all of them in Europe) have achieved any
reduction in annual GHG emissions despite promises to do so going back to the
1997 Kyoto Protocol.2 As a result, there is no evidence on which to
reasonably conclude that atmospheric GHGs will be stabilized at 450ppm.
|
The fossil fuels which account for the majority of GHG
emissions are finite resources. As oil and coal becoming increasingly scarce,
markets will naturally switch to more efficient or renewable resources thus
stabilizing global GHG emissions. The growth of fuel efficient hybrid and
fully electric automobiles are a good example of the market responding to
higher fuel prices. (Also see New Technology)
|
Developing world. Developing countries such as China and India are growing rapidly and
causing massive increases in global GHG emissions through fossil fuel use and
deforestation. It took developed countries 100s of years to create a standard
of living high enough for an environmental movement to develop. It is more
likely than not that developing countries will continue to increase their
annual emissions for decades, greatly eclipsing any potential reductions in
the developed world. According to Joseph Romm, former US assistant secretary
for energy efficiency and renewable energy, "China's growth in emissions
could erode all other countries' efforts to stabilize the world's
temperature" . As a result, atmospheric GHGs will continue to increase,
causing greater climate change.
|
Rising countries, such as India, China, and Brazil, are
adopting more efficient technologies than are currently in use in much of the
world. While the developing world is contributing to net GHG emission growth,
their GHG per person is still far below that of a developed country. And, as
a result of the adoption of newer technologies, it is unlikely that their GHG
per person will ever equal that found in the developed world. If reductions
can be made in the developed world, where it is a fact that the economic
resources exist to do so, then net emissions can be stabilized even while
emissions in the developing world continue to grow.
|
Failure to reach global accord. The Kyoto Protocol failed to reduce global GHG
emissions and in the midst of an economic crisis, world leaders were unable
to even agree to a replacement treaty when it expired. There is no meaningful
global emissions reduction treaty ready for ratification and no reason to be
optimistic that one is forthcoming. The developing world believes it has a
legitimate right to expand economically without emissions caps because the
rich world is responsible for the vast majority of emissions over the last
200 years and per capita emissions in developing countries are still far
lower than in the developed world. As such, developing countries will only
agree to a global accord that pays for their emissions reductions/abatement.
However, the developed world is unwilling to transfer wealth in exchange for
a right to emit, particularly at a time when so many have large budget
deficits. Given that the growth of annual emissions is being driven by developing
countries, many developed countries (like the US) believe that any treaty
that does not include developing countries (particularly China) would be
fruitless.
|
Despite the failure of the Copenhagen Protocol, local,
regional, national, and international organizations are all still working on
solutions for climate change. The Kyoto Protocol was a failure by virtue of
its design (too many credits would have gone to former Soviet countries whose
GHG reductions were entirely attributable to economic collapse, which would
have resulted in a cash transfer but no real reductions). Discussions
continue on how best each country can reduce their GHG emissions while
remaining economically competitive. The EU ETS trading scheme is an example
of just such an endeavour. (See Carbon Trading Schemes)
|
Consequences of increased GHGs. Increased GHGs in the atmosphere have numerous
significant consequences:
-glaciers, ice sheets, and perma frost will continue to
melt. This will increase water levels, release more GHGs (methane, which is
twenty times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than CO2 and CO2), and reflect
less heat back into the atmosphere exacerbating climate change.
-the oceans (which are a natural carbon sink) are
becoming increasingly acidic which will significantly damage ecosystems such
as coral reefs. Additionally, changes in the chemistry of the ocean could
affect the amount of CO2 it can absorb and process annually.
-there will be increasing incidents of extreme weather
such as hurricanes, floods, and record high/low temperatures. Extreme weather
can destroy ecosystems that capture CO2 such as forests and peat bogs leading
to less natural CO2 absorption.
These events will accelerate climate change making it
more difficult for humans to reduce GHG ppms to a sustainable level. Once
average temperatures are above 2.5C, events will be triggered that will be
irreversible and it will take 1000s of years of lower GHG emissions for the
earth to return to normal.
|
These consequences are often speculation. With such a
large and complex system we have no way of knowing what the consequences of
climate change. There may well be some tipping points that will accelerate
climate change but we do not know when each of these will become a problem
and there may also be tipping points that act in the other direction.(See
Earth's Resiliency)
|
Carbon trading systems may have the effect of slowing
the rise in CO2 emissions, and possibly even creating a fall. However this
will not solve the problem as changes are already occurring and there may be
no way to stop feedback that creates more emissions.
|
Carbon Trading
Schemes. The EU ETS is an example of a
viable carbon market, it covers thirty countries from the EU as well as
Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Countries within the ETS are using market
mechanisms to force domestic emitters to meet national caps as the amount of
allowances reduces over time emissions fall. In 2020 under the ETS emissions
will be 21% lower than in 2005. The IPCC report contains recommendations for
how emissions can be abated through the simultaneous application of numerous
small reductions and the implementation of abatement technologies and this is
exactly what schemes like the ETS encourage. Part of the reason that the ETS
is successful is that it is ensuring an even playing field between countries
by (more or less) applying its rules equally across borders and industries.
|
While climate models may be imperfect they are the best
tool presently available to predict the future. Most predict dire consequences
if GHGs continue to rise through the 21st century, which is what seems most
likely.
|
Earth's Resiliency. All the conclusions about the effects of rising
atmospheric GHGs are based on computerized climate models. Even those that
develop and use the models admit that the models are not nearly complex
enough to be 100% accurate. Climate science is incredibly complicated and
different models sometimes produce vastly different results 1.Increased
carbon dioxide will increase plant life which may mitigate other damages of
climate change and protect species currently considered threatened by climate
change. Therefore, it is far too early to conclude that humanity is going to
be destroyed. The earth's climate is continuously changing, with or without
anthropogenic effects, and life has always found a way to continue.
|
Technological improvements will almost certainly be
developed for those who can afford them (as most technology is). However,
climate change will have the greatest effect on poor countries that cannot
afford mitigation. Potentially, being able to protect the wealthy does not
mean that we are not too late on global climate change.
|
New Technology. Humanity has revolutionized the world repeatedly
through such monumental inventions as agriculture, steel, anti-biotics, and
microchips. And as technology has improved, so too has the rate at which
technology improves. It is predicted that there will be 32 times more change
between 2000 and 2050 than there was between 1950 and 2000. In the midst of
this, many great minds will be focussed on emissions abatement and climate
control technologies. So, even if the most severe climate predictions do come
to pass, it is unimaginable that humanity will not find a way to intervene.
Even small changes will make a difference – more efficient coal power
stations can emit a third less emissions than less efficient ones. Renewable
energy will become more competitive and scalable and technology develops we
may even be able to remove carbon from the atmosphere so undoing the damage.
|
0 Comments