No excuse to reject climate change reality
I HAVE never written to a local newspaper before, but I am called to respond to I Richard of Craigcefnparc and his letter on Tuesday regarding climate change. He either doesn’t know or choses to ignore the 97% of published scientific papers that support global warming and consequent climate change as a result of human action.
The International Panel on Climate Change is the gold standard on climatology. It examined 6,000 scientific studies, compiled by more than 200 authors from all over the world and scrutinised by some 1,100 peer reviewers. This examination of the scientific basis for climate change produced a consensus: burning fossil fuels and destroying our carbon-absorbing natural ecosystems is responsible for the climate crisis.
Faced with overwhelming scientific evidence, in 2018 they told the world that unless we cut
our use of fossil fuels dramatically and protect the natural world, we are heading for planetary warming that could ultimately threaten all life on Earth.
In contrast, Richard doesn’t tell us where he got his information from, but we know that only 3% of scientific papers deny our role in climate change and these are riddled with flaws. Much of this work is sponsored by oil companies, reminding me of British American Tobacco who spent years and millions of pounds funding scientists to deny the impact of tobacco on our health.
The basic truth is not in question: human-made climate change exists. Furthermore, unless we take mitigating action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions we are on a disastrous trajectory.
I Richard’s letter really saddens me in the language used. He sneers at and mocks those who seek to bring climate change to everyone’s attention. What makes him think he knows more that the scientists who have spent their lives painstakingly researching the issue? More than the IPCC panel?
I suspect I Richard doesn’t want to entertain any challenge to the high carbon footprint that sustains our affluence. He would rather present his non-scientific “alternative facts” about climate science and pour scorn on those who are trying to do something, rather than think about the part he plays in climate change and what to do about it.
Indeed, it is hard for any of us
living our comfortable fossil-fuel driven lives to respond to the truth of how things really are, not just our use of fossil fuels, but the despoliation of our natural environment that ultimately sustains all life on Earth. Thanks to people like David Attenborough, none of us have any excuse to not know what is happening to the natural world but I Richard doesn’t mention this.
Swansea council declared a climate emergency to acknowledge that climate change is a serious issue that deserves serious attention. It is not like the hole in the ozone layer that can be fixed with advanced technology and international regulations.
At the moment the UK Government’s own environmental agency predicts widespread flooding of our coasts in the next 30 years unless we can limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. If we don’t take rapid and effective action, the combination of existing carbon concentrations in our atmosphere and new emissions added all the time will raise temperatures above 1.5°C. If we hit 2°C, then some ecosystems will be irreversibly damaged or lost.
Fortunately, the Welsh Government has recognised the seriousness of the challenge and has made Julie James the minister in charge of the new climate change ministry that brings together the environment, energy, housing, planning and transport. This portfolio makes it clear that all aspects of our lives will have to change, how we use the environment, where we get our energy, how we heat our houses and how we move around.
The words of I Richard are the kind of distraction we must avoid, we all need to pull together to face the climate emergency.
Dr Susan Lyle
Swansea