As repeatedly noted, they, i.e., almost the entire Senate, have chosen to ignore their official responsibility to respond to degradation of the atmosphere brought about by anthropogenic emissions. This is even after the Administration released a study, which represented the compilation of work done by 12 federal agencies, among them the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Defense, NASA, and Department of Commerce.
“Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal. The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas), with additional contributions from the clearing of forests and agricultural activities.”
Thomas Schueneman noted that the report focused upon “specific geographic regions, economics sectors, and facets of society, the study is aimed at providing the best and latest information for society, government, and individuals.”
Key Findings
- Global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced.
Global temperature has increased over the past 50 years. This observed increase is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. (p. 13) - Climate changes are underway in the United States and are projected to grow.
Climate-related changes are already observed in the United States and its coastal waters. These include increases in heavy downpours, rising temperature and sea level, rapidly retreating glaciers, thawing permafrost, lengthening growing seasons, lengthening ice-free seasons in the ocean and on lakes and rivers, earlier snowmelt, and alterations in river flows. These changes are projected to grow. (p. 27) - Widespread climate-related impacts are occurring now and are expected to increase.
Climate changes are already affecting water, energy, transportation, agriculture, ecosystems, and health. These impacts are different from region to region and will grow under projected climate change. (p. 41-106, 107-152) - Climate change will stress water resources.
Water is an issue in every region, but the nature of the potential impacts varies. Drought, related to reduced precipitation, increased evaporation, and increased water loss from plants, is an important issue in many regions, especially in the West. Floods and water quality problems are likely to be amplified by climate change in most regions. Declines in mountain snowpack are important in the West and Alaska where snowpack provides vital natural water storage. (p. 41, 129, 135, 139) - Crop and livestock production will be increasingly challenged.
Agriculture is considered one of the sectors most adaptable to changes in climate. However, increased heat, pests, water stress, diseases, and weather extremes will pose adaptation challenges for crop and livestock production. (p. 71) - Coastal areas are at increasing risk from sea-level rise and storm surge.
Sea-level rise and storm surge place many U.S. coastal areas at increasing risk of erosion and flooding, especially along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, Pacific Islands, and parts of Alaska. Energy and transportation infrastructure and other property in coastal areas are very likely to be adversely affected. (p. 111, 139, 145, 149) - Threats to human health will increase.
Health impacts of climate change are related to heat stress, waterborne diseases, poor air quality, extreme weather events, and diseases transmitted by insects and rodents. Robust public health infrastructure can reduce the potential for negative impacts. (p. 89) - Climate change will interact with many social and environmental stresses.
Climate change will combine with pollution, population growth, overuse of resources, urbanization, and other social, economic, and environmental stresses to create larger impacts than from any of these factors alone. (p. 99) - Thresholds will be crossed, leading to large changes in climate and ecosystems.
There are a variety of thresholds in the climate system and ecosystems. These thresholds determine, for example, the presence of sea ice and permafrost, and the survival of species, from fish to insect pests, with implications for society. With further climate change, the crossing of additional thresholds is expected. (p. 76, 82, 115, 137, 142) - Future climate change and its impacts depend on choices made today.
The amount and rate of future climate change depend primarily on current and future human-caused emissions of heat-trapping gases and airborne particles. Responses involve reducing emissions to limit future warming, and adapting to the changes that are unavoidable. (p. 25, 29)
“In the last two years,” writes Joseph Romm, “our scientific understanding of business-as-usual projections for global warming has changed dramatically.” Yet denial by members of Congress persists at a time when “inaction is inexcusable” and insufficient measures, malignant
Furthermore, if the conclusions drawn from climate models are correct, and, so far, the forecasts have erred on being too conservative, then by the time that the corrupt influence of the carbon/nuclear lobby over our government is counteracted, it will be too late. A rise in global temperatures and a concentration of carbon emissions in the atmosphere will be such that abrupt and irreversible climatic shifts will occur which will be harmful and in some cases catastrophic to life on the planet as we know it.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Another Brick in the Wall (timesunion.com)
4 Comments
Speaking of mendacity, some will say they are unable to see the danger.
The GOP’s star witness testifying against serious climate and clean energy action is Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS). Daniel J. Weiss and Alexandra Kougentakis of the Center For American Progress Action Fund have explained the Republican Party’s choice of Barbour for this role.
This blog would argue that Barbour’s testimony is medacity rather than denial because of 1) the interests he represents and 2) the extentive damage from climate related disasters that his state encounted during his term as governor of Mississippi.
And, while we are on the subject of mendacity, Brooklyn, New York Treehugger Brian Merchant relays word from FactCheck.org that the $3,100 figure used by Republicans speaking against H.R. 2454 was a misrepresentation of Obama’s Proposal and the study from which the number is derived.”
Despite the $3,1000 a year figure being absolutely false, and, the author repeatedly contacting the RNC about the misrepresentation, Repugnants continued to “repeat the debunked myth that the American Clean Energy and Security Act will raise costs by $3,100 a year.”
Media Matters has compiled a list of at least 24 Republicans who cited the false figure on the House floor, well after the figure had been disproved. And they’re still doing it, and will likely pass the line onto their Senate colleagues.
Further on the topic of mendacity, or as another example of the disconnected power elite, take your pick, Climate Progress speaks to the continuing lack of responsible journalism from mainstream media, specifically in regards to a headline article in Newsweek: “Big Oil Goes Green for Real“
And, while on the subject of timing, who was President in 1992?