A UN panel has issued one of the bluntest warnings on global warming yet — indicating that it is indeed a threat to earth and in some ways many people do not usually realize:
Climate experts issued their starkest warning yet about the impact of global warming, ranging from hunger in Africa to a fast thaw in the Himalayas, in a report on Friday that increased pressure on governments to act.
More than 100 nations in the U.N. climate panel agreed a final text after all-night talks during which some scientists accused governments of watering down conclusions that climate change was already under way and damaging nature.
The report said warming, widely blamed on human emissions of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels, would cause desertification, droughts and rising seas and would hit hard in the tropics, from sub-Saharan Africa to Pacific islands.
“It’s the poorest of the poor in the world, and this includes poor people even in prosperous societies, who are going to be the worst hit,” said Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
“This does become a global responsibility in my view.”
The report indicates that up to 30 percent of the earth’s specifices could face a higher risk of vanishing if the temperatures continue to rise.
And note that this is what some consider a watered down version of the conclusions. Even these conclusions are likely to be disputed by some in the U.S. who continue to assert that global warming is simply a creation of a liberal agenda (even though there are Republicans who also feel it is a vital issue).
And according to the AP, the report was watered down at the insistence of three countries. The United States was one of them:
Several scientists objected to the editing of the final draft by government negotiators but in the end agreed to compromises. However, some scientists vowed never to take part in the process again.
The climax of five days of negotiations was reached when the delegates removed parts of a key chart highlighting devastating effects of climate change that kick in with every rise of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, and in a tussle over the level of scientific reliability attached to key statements.
There was little doubt about the science, which was based on 29,000 sets of data, much of it collected in the last five years. “For the first time we are not just arm-waving with models,” Martin Perry, who conducted the grueling negotiations, told reporters.
The United States, China and Saudi Arabia raised the many of the objections to the phrasing, often seeking to tone down the certainty of some of the more dire projections. The final IPCC report is the clearest and most comprehensive scientific statement to date on the impact of global warming mainly caused by man-induced carbon dioxide pollution.
Reuters includes this FACT SHEET on global warming.
The Australian’s science writer offers more details on how the panel’s conclusions were watered down:
This week, as a working group meeting in Brussels thrashed out the final wording of the summary for policy-makers, extinction became a topic of heated debate between government officials and scientists such as Australian David Karoly, now with the University of Oklahoma.
Dr Karoly — who will move to Melbourne University later this year — and other lead authors claimed diplomats attempted to water down their warnings.
They said officials, presumably from the US, forced last-minute changes. US officials were reported to have argued to reduce “quantification”, while the Europeans sought to send a strong message about the impacts of climate change.
A final draft, obtained by The Australian, showed the phrase stating that 20-30 per cent of species “will be committed to extinction” had been softened by inserting a reference to species “assessed so far”.
Retired scientist Ian Burton — attending the meeting on behalf of the Stockholm Environment Institute — said the section had been “diluted”.
But Australian lead author CSIRO scientist Kevin Hennessy disagreed with Dr Burton’s claim. “In any process there will be differing opinions,” he said. “(US officials) simply wanted to ensure the report conveyed the most robust science, if it needed to be defensible.”
The U.S. Supreme Court recently gave those concerned about the global warming issue what they considered to be a major victory in a ruling. President George Bush later indicated that it doesn’t mean the U.S. government’s going to dramatically change its often-criticized policy. The Los Angeles Times:
President Bush, acknowledging that humans are at least partly responsible for global warming, said Tuesday that he took “very seriously” the Supreme Court’s ruling that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles as pollution.
However, the president attached two conditions that appeared likely to retard EPA regulation of carbon dioxide and other gases that trap heat at the Earth’s surface: He said that any regulatory program should not slow economic growth, nor should its benefits to the atmosphere be offset by mounting emissions from China, India and other growing economies.
Bush’s stance sets up a potential conflict with the Democratic-controlled Congress, which wants stricter regulation of greenhouse gases.
“The president still doesn’t get it,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.
The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, ruled on Monday that the EPA was required by law to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases as pollutants. The administration, siding with automakers, had argued that carbon dioxide was not a pollutant as defined by the Clean Air Act, but the court held that it was merely a different kind of pollutant.
Look for the issue to remain at center on the world stage — and in the U.S. political arena, where some will continue to dismiss this issue that is of increasing concern to scientists and a growing number of Republicans as the creation of liberals who are “tree huggers.” And the U.S. Congress will (once again) face off against the Bush administration.
UPDATE: The New York Times weighs in:
Earth’s climate and ecosystems are already being affected, for better and mostly for worse, by the atmospheric buildup of smokestack and tailpipe gases that trap heat, top climate experts said today.
And while curbs in emissions can limit risks, they said, vulnerable regions must adapt to shifting weather patterns and rising seas.
The conclusions came in the latest report from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has tracked research on human-caused global warming since being created by the United Nations in 1988. In February, the panel released a report that for the first time concluded with 90-percent certainty that humans were the main cause of warming since 1950. But in this report, focusing on the impact of warming, for the first time the group described how species, water supplies, ice sheets, and regional climate conditions were already responding.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.