Friday, January 21, 2005
More gloom from the Hadley Centre
According to a piece on the BBC news website today: "The amount of fresh water entering the Arctic Ocean from the rivers that feed it is increasing, UK scientists report.
Writing in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, they say the increase is caused in part by human activities and is an early sign of climate change.
The rise in fresh water entering the Arctic Ocean could change the global distribution of water, the team says.
It could also affect the balance of the climate system itself and even possibly alter the behaviour of the Gulf Stream.
The team is from the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, part of the UK Met Office. " (For the full story, follow the link below).
It is now received wisdom that Mankind's effect on the planet is entirely negative, and that our latest sin is to change the global climate. Let's look at the facts:
Writing in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, they say the increase is caused in part by human activities and is an early sign of climate change.
The rise in fresh water entering the Arctic Ocean could change the global distribution of water, the team says.
It could also affect the balance of the climate system itself and even possibly alter the behaviour of the Gulf Stream.
The team is from the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, part of the UK Met Office. " (For the full story, follow the link below).
It is now received wisdom that Mankind's effect on the planet is entirely negative, and that our latest sin is to change the global climate. Let's look at the facts:
- Climate is always changing, and there have certainly been some significant changes in our lifetimes: earlier Springs, for example.
- Carbon dioxide levels are undisputably higher now than in pre-industrial times, and the rate of use of fossil fuels must have been a major contributor to this.
- Carbon dioxide is not the major contributor to the greenhouse effect: there is vastly more water vapour in the atmosphere, the effect of which is overwhelming, and methane (another trace gas) also has a greater influence. The concern about carbon dioxide is because it has a much longer residence time in the atmosphere (several decades) and therefore its effect might only be apparent in the longer term.
- Despite the statements from the IPCC and other official sources, the science of climate change is uncertain: we really don't understand the system and can only model effects in a mechanistic way. In the last thousand years or so, there have been several well-documented warm and cold periods. These may have been influenced by Man's activities (eg clearing of forests) but were certainly not due to industrial emissions.
- We really don't know the consequences of trying to reduce our emissions drastically. It may make no difference to the current changes; it may actually bring forward the next glaciation.
In the meantime, rather than put growth at risk by pursuing Kyoto goals (which very few countries will meet) there are a number of global problems where activity now could make a real difference to people's lives: providing fresh water, increasing food security, fighting disease, to name but three. And healthy, well-fed people can lift themselves out of poverty and adapt to changes in climate far better. After all, Mankind has become the dominant species by being more adaptable than the competition.
But this is not a fashionable view: most people seem to prefer (to a greater or lesser degree) to feel the guilt of despoiling the Earth. I seem to be out of step. Is anyone else?
