CHAPTER1: INTRODUCTION

Global warming is the observed increase in the average temperature of the

Earth's atmosphere and oceans in recent decades and the projected continuation of rising
temperatures. Models referenced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) predict that global temperatures are likely to increase by 1.1 to 6.4 °C (2.0 to 11.5
°F) between 1990 and 2100. The uncertainty in this range results from both the difficulty
of predicting the amount of future greenhouse gas emissions and uncertainties regarding
climate sensitivity.

Global mean surface temperature anomaly relative to 1961–1990

Global average near-surface atmospheric temperature rose 0.6 ± 0.2 °Celsius (1.1 ± 0.4
°Fahrenheit) in the 20th century. The prevailing scientific opinion on climate change is
that "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th
century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas
concentrations,"[1] which leads to warming of the surface and lower atmosphere by
increasing the greenhouse effect. Greenhouse gases are released by activities such as the
burning of fossil fuels, land clearing, and agriculture. Other phenomena such as solar
variation have had smaller but non-negligible effects on global temperature trends since
1950.[2]

1
 Mean surface temperature anomalies during the period 1995 to 2004 with respect to the average
temperatures from 1940 to 1980

An increase in global temperatures can in turn cause other changes, including a rising sea
level and changes in the amount and pattern of precipitation. These changes may increase
the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, such as floods, droughts, heat
waves, hurricanes, and tornados. Other consequences include higher or lower agricultural
yields, glacier retreat, reduced summer streamflows, species extinctions and increases in
the ranges of disease vectors. Warming is expected to affect the number and magnitude
of these events; however, it is difficult to connect particular events to global warming.
Although most studies focus on the period up to 2100, even if no further greenhouse
gases were released after this date, warming (and sea level) would be expected to
continue to rise for more than a millennium, since CO2 has a long average atmospheric
lifetime.

Remaining scientific uncertainties include the exact degree of climate change expected in
the future, and especially how changes will vary from region to region across the globe.
A hotly contested political and public debate has yet to be resolved, regarding whether
anything should be done, and what could be cost-effectively done to reduce or reverse
future warming, or to deal with the expected consequences. Most national governments
have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol aimed at combating global warming.

2
1.1 TERMINOLOGY

The term global warming is a specific example of the broader term climate change,
which can also refer to global cooling. In principle, global warming is neutral as to the
period or causes, but in common usage the term generally refers to recent warming and
implies a human influence. The UNFCCC uses the term "climate change" for human-
caused change, and "climate variability" for other changes. Some organizations use the
term "anthropogenic climate change" for human-induced changes.

1.2 HISTORY OF WARMING

Two millennia of mean surface temperatures according to different reconstructions, each

smoothed on a decadal scale. The unsmoothed, annual value for 2004 is also plotted for
reference. Relative to the period 1860–1900, global temperatures on both land and sea
have increased by 0.75 °C (1.4 °F), according to the instrumental temperature record.
Since 1979, land temperatures have increased about twice as fast as ocean temperatures
(0.25 °C/decade against 0.13 °C/decade) (Smith, 2005). Temperatures in the lower
troposphere have increased between 0.12 and 0.22 °C per decade since 1979, according
to satellite temperature measurements. Over the one or two thousand years before 1850,
world temperature is believed to have been relatively stable, with possibly regional
fluctuations such as the Medieval Warm Period or the Little Ice Age. Based on estimates
by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, 2005 was the warmest year since
reliable, widespread instrumental measurements became available in the late 1800s,
exceeding the previous record set in 1998 by a few hundredths of a degree. Estimates
prepared by the World Meteorological Organization and the UK Climatic Research Unit
concluded that 2005 was the second warmest year, behind 1998. A number of
temperature records are available based on different data sets with different time frames.
The longest perspective is available from various proxy records for recent millennia. An
approximately global instrumental record of temperature near the earth's surface begins in
about 1860. Global observations of the atmosphere well above the Earth's surface using
data from radiosondes began shortly after World War II, while satellite temperature
measurements of the tropospheric temperature date from 1979. An earlier suspicion that
the urban heat island effect was inflating surface measurements and hence responsible for

3
a discrepancy between satellite and surface records could not be confirmed. As of 2007,
all temperature records are in good general agreement. The attribution of recent climate
change is clearest for the most recent period of the last 50 years, for which the most
detailed data are available. Note that the anthropogenic emissions of other pollutants—
notably sulphate aerosols—exert a cooling effect; this partially accounts for the
plateau/cooling seen in the temperature record in the middle of the twentieth century,
though this may also be due to intervening natural cycles.

1.3 CAUSES

The climate system varies through natural, internal processes and in response to
variations in external "forcing" from both human and natural causes. These forcing
factors include solar activity, volcanic emissions, variations in the earth's orbit (orbital
forcing) and greenhouse gases. The detailed causes of the recent warming remain an
active field of research, but the scientific consensus identifies greenhouse gases as the
main influence. The major natural greenhouse gases are water vapor, carbon dioxide,
methane, and ozone.

Components of the current radiative forcing as estimated by the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report.

4
Adding carbon dioxide (CO2) or methane (CH4) to Earth's atmosphere, with no other
changes, will make the planet's surface warmer. Greenhouse gases create a natural
greenhouse effect without which temperatures on Earth would be an estimated 30 °C
(54 °F) lower, so that Earth would be uninhabitable. It is therefore not correct to say that
there is a debate between those who "believe in" and "oppose" the greenhouse effect as
such. Rather, the debate concerns the net effect of the addition of greenhouse gases when
allowing for compounding or mitigating factors.

Evidence that CO2 is Cause

carbon dioxide vs global temperature graph

One example of an important feedback process is ice-albedo feedback. The increased
CO2 in the atmosphere warms the Earth's surface and leads to melting of ice near the
poles. As the ice melts, land or open water takes its place. Both land and open water are
on average less reflective than ice, and thus absorb more solar radiation. This causes
more warming, which in turn causes more melting, and this cycle continues.

Due to the thermal inertia of the Earth's oceans and slow responses of other indirect
effects, the Earth's current climate is not in equilibrium with the forcing imposed by
increased greenhouse gases. Climate commitment studies indicate that, even if
greenhouse gases were stabilized at present day levels, a further warming of about 0.5 °C
(0.9 °F) would still occur.

5
1.4 PHYSICAL BASIS OF GLOBAL WARMING

Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere

Greenhouse gases are transparent to shortwave radiation from the sun, the main source of
heat on the Earth. However, they absorb some of the longer infrared radiation emitted by
the Earth, thereby reducing radiational cooling and hence raising the temperature of the
Earth. How much they warm the world by is shown in their global warming potential.
The measure of the response to increased GHGs, and other anthropogenic and natural
climate forcings is climate sensitivity. It is found by observational and model studies.
This sensitivity is usually expressed in terms of the temperature response expected from a
doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere. The current literature estimates sensitivity in the
range of 1.5 to 4.5 °C (2.7 to 8.1 °F).

Recent increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). The monthly CO2 measurements display small
seasonal oscillations in an overall yearly uptrend; each year's maximum is reached during the Northern
Hemisphere's late spring, and declines during the Northern Hemisphere growing season as plants remove
some CO2 from the atmosphere.

The atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane have increased by 31%
and 149% respectively above pre-industrial levels since 1750. This is considerably higher
than at any time during the last 650,000 years, the period for which reliable data has been

6
extracted from ice cores. From less direct geological evidence it is believed that carbon
dioxide values this high were last attained 40 million years ago. About three-quarters of
the anthropogenic (man-made) emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere during the
past 20 years are due to fossil fuel burning. The rest of the anthropogenic emissions are
predominantly due to land-use change, especially deforestation.

The longest continuous instrumental measurement of carbon dioxide mixing ratios began
in 1958 at Mauna Loa. Since then, the annually averaged value has increased
monotonically by approximately 21% from the initial reading of 315 ppmv, as shown by
the Keeling curve, to over 380 ppmv in 2006. The monthly CO2 measurements display
small seasonal oscillations in an overall yearly uptrend; each year's maximum is reached
during the northern hemisphere's late spring, and declines during the northern hemisphere
growing season as plants remove some CO2 from the atmosphere.

Methane, the primary constituent of natural gas, enters the atmosphere both from
biological production and leaks from natural gas pipelines and other infrastructure. Some
biological sources are natural, such as termites or forests, but others have been increased
or created by agricultural activities such as the cultivation of rice paddies. Recent
evidence indicates that methane concentrations have begun to stabilize, perhaps due to
reductions in leakage from fuel transmission and storage facilities.

Future carbon dioxide levels are expected to continue rising due to ongoing fossil fuel
usage. The rate of rise will depend on uncertain economic, sociological, technological,
and natural developments. The IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios gives a wide
range of future carbon dioxide scenarios, ranging from 541 to 970 parts per million by the
year 2100. Fossil fuel reserves are sufficient to reach this level and continue emissions
past 2100, if coal and tar sands are extensively used.

Carbon sink ecosystems (forests and oceans) are being degraded by pollutants.
Degradation of major carbon sinks results in higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.

Globally, the majority of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions arise from fuel
combustion. The remainder is accounted for largely by "fugitive fuel" (fuel consumed in

7
the production and transport of fuel) , emissions from industrial processes (excluding fuel
combustion), and agriculture: these contributed 5.8%, 5.2% and 3.3% respectively in
1990. Current figures are broadly comparable. Around 17% of emissions are accounted
for by the combustion of fuel for the generation of electricity. A small percentage of
emissions come from natural and anthropogenic biological sources, with approximately
6.3% derived from agriculturally produced methane and nitrous oxide.

Positive feedback effects, such as the expected release of methane from the melting of
permafrost peat bogs in Siberia (possibly up to 70,000 million tonnes), may lead to
significant additional sources of greenhouse gas emissions..

1.5 OTHER HYPOTHESES

Contrasting with the consensus view, other hypotheses have been proposed to explain all
or most of the observed increase in global temperatures. Some of these hypotheses
include:

• The warming is within the range of natural variation.

• The warming is a consequence of coming out of a prior cool period, namely the
Little Ice Age.
• The warming is primarily a result of variances in solar radiation, possibly via
modulation of cloud cover. [1] It is similar in concept to the operating principles
of the Wilson cloud chamber, but on a global scale where Earth's atmosphere acts
as the cloud chamber and the cosmic rays catalyze the production of cloud
condensation nuclei. Henrik Svensmark says that fewer cosmic rays entering the
atmosphere are causing a natural period of low cloud cover. [2]

Solar variation

Modelling studies reported in the IPCC Third Assessment Report (TAR) found that
volcanic and solar forcings may account for half of the temperature variations prior to
1950, but the net effect of such natural forcings has been roughly neutral since then. The
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) gives a best estimate for radiative forcing from

8
changes in solar activity of +0.12 watts per square metre. This is less than half of the
estimate given in the TAR. For comparison the combined effects of all human activity are
estimated to be an order of magnitude greater at +1.6 watts per square metre

Solar variation over the last thirty years.

Some researchers (e.g. Stott et al. 2003) believe that the effect of solar forcing is being
underestimated and propose that solar forcing accounts for 16% or 36% of recent
greenhouse warming. Others (e.g. Marsh and Svensmark 2000) have proposed that
feedback from clouds or other processes enhance the direct effect of solar variation,
which if true would also suggest that the effect of solar variability was being
underestimated. In general, the IPCC describes the level of scientific understanding of the
contribution of variations in solar irradiance to historical climate changes as "low."

The present level of solar activity is historically high. Solanki et al. (2004) suggest that
solar activity for the last 60 to 70 years may be at its highest level in 8,000 years;
Muscheler et al. disagree, suggesting that other comparably high levels of activity have
occurred several times in the last few thousand years. Solanki concluded based on their
analysis that there is a 92% probability that solar activity will decrease over the next 50
years. In addition, researchers at Duke University (2005) have found that 10–30% of the
warming over the last two decades may be due to increased solar output. In a review of
existing literature, Foukal et al. (2006) determined both that the variations in solar output

9
were too small to have contributed appreciably to global warming since the mid-1970s
and that there was no evidence of a net increase in brightness during this period.

Some scientists assert that a warming of the stratosphere, which has not been observed,
would be expected if there were a significant increase in solar activity. AR4 asserts with
90% confidence that observed tropospheric warming and stratospheric cooling is due to
the combined influences of greenhouse gas increases and stratospheric ozone depletion.

1.6 ATTRIBUTED AND EXPECTED EFFECTS

Some effects on both the natural environment and human life are already being attributed
at least in part to global warming. Glacier retreat, ice shelf disruption such as of the
Larsen Ice Shelf, sea level rise, changes in rainfall patterns, increased intensity and
frequency of hurricanes and extreme weather events, are being attributed at least in part
to global warming. While changes are expected for overall patterns, intensity, and
frequencies, it is difficult or impossible to attribute specific events (such as Hurricane
Katrina) to global warming.

Sparse records indicate that glaciers have been retreating since the early 1800s. In the 1950s measurements
began that allow the monitoring of glacial mass balance, reported to the WGMS and the NSIDC.

10
Some anticipated effects include sea level rise of 110 to 770 mm by 2100, repercussions
to agriculture, possible slowing of the thermohaline circulation, reductions in the ozone
layer, increased intensity and frequency of hurricanes and extreme weather events,
lowering of ocean pH, the spread of diseases such as malaria and dengue fever, and mass
extinction events.The extent and probability of these consequences is a matter of
considerable uncertainty. A summary of probable effects and recent understanding can be
found in the report of the IPCC Working Group II.

MITIGATION

The consensus among climate scientists that global temperatures will continue to increase
has led nations, states, corporations and individuals to implement actions to try to curtail
global warming. Some of the strategies that have been proposed for mitigation of global
warming include development of new technologies; carbon offsets; renewable energy
such as biodiesel, wind power, and solar power; nuclear power; electric or hybrid
automobiles; fuel cells; energy conservation; carbon taxes; improving natural carbon
dioxide sinks; deliberate production of sulfate aerosols, which produce a cooling effect
on the Earth; population control; carbon capture and storage, and nanotechnology. Many
environmental groups encourage individual action against global warming, often aimed at
the consumer, and there has been business action on climate change.

Kyoto Protocol

The world's primary international agreement on combating global warming is the Kyoto
Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol is an amendment to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Countries that ratify this protocol commit to
reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases, or engage in
emissions trading if they maintain or increase emissions of these gases. Developing
countries are exempt from meeting emission standards in Kyoto. This includes China and
India, the second and third largest emitters of CO2, behind the United States.

11
1.7 CLIMATE MODELS

Scientists have studied global warming with computer models of the climate (see below).
Before the scientific community accepts a climate model, it has to be validated against
observed climate variations. As of 2006, models with sufficiently high resolution are able
to successfully simulate summer and winter differences, the North Atlantic Oscillation,
and El Niño. All validated current models predict that the net effect of adding greenhouse
gases will be a warmer climate in the future. However, even when the same assumptions
of fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emission are used, the amount of predicted warming
varies between models and there still remains a considerable range of climate sensitivity
predicted by the models which survive these tests. Part of the technical summary of the
IPCC TAR includes a recognition of the need to quantify this uncertainty: "In climate
research and modeling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-
linear system, and therefore that the prediction of a specific future climate is not
possible. Rather the focus must be on the probability distribution of the system's possible
future states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions.". An example of a study
which aims to do this is the Climateprediction.net project; their methodology is to
investigate the range of climate sensitivities predicted for the 21st century by those
models which have first been shown to give a reasonable simulation of late 20th century
climate change.

As noted above, climate models have been used by the IPCC to anticipate a warming of
1.1 °C to 6.4 °C (2.0 °F to 11.5 °F) between 1990 and 2100. They have also been used to
help investigate the causes of recent climate change by comparing the observed changes
to those that the models predict from various natural and human derived forcing factors.
In addition to having their own characteristic climate sensitivity, models have also been
used to derive independent assessments of climate sensitivity.

Climate models can produce a good match to observations of global temperature changes
over the last century.[7] These models do not unambiguously attribute the warming that
occurred from approximately 1910 to 1945 to either natural variation or human effects;
however, they suggest that the warming since 1975 is dominated by man-made

12
greenhouse gas emissions. Adding simulation of the carbon cycle to the models generally
shows a positive feedback, though this response is uncertain (under the A2 SRES
scenario, responses vary between an extra 20 and 200 ppm of CO 2). Some observational
studies also show a positive feedback.[8]

The representation of clouds is one of the main sources of uncertainty in present-

generation models, though progress is being made on this problem. There is also an
ongoing discussion as to whether climate models are neglecting important indirect and
feedback effects of solar variability. Further, all such models are limited by available
computational power, so that they may overlook changes related to small-scale processes
and weather (e.g. storm systems and hurricanes). However, despite these and other
limitations, the IPCC considered climate models "to be suitable tools to provide useful
projections of future climates."

In December, 2005, Bellouin et al. suggested in Nature that the reflectivity effect of
airborne pollutants was about double that previously expected, and that therefore some
global warming was being masked. If supported by further studies, this would imply that
existing models under-predict future global warming.

1.8 OTHER RELATED ISSUES

Ocean acidification

Increased atmospheric carbon dioxide increases the amount of CO2 dissolved in the
oceans.[12] Carbon dioxide gas dissolved in the ocean reacts with water to form carbonic
acid resulting in ocean acidification. Since biosystems are adapted to a narrow range of
pH this is a serious concern directly driven by increased atmospheric CO2 and not global
warming.

Relationship to ozone depletion

Although they are often interlinked in the mass media, the connection between global
warming and ozone depletion is not strong. There are five areas of linkage:

13
• The same carbon dioxide radiative forcing that produces near-surface global
warming is expected (perhaps somewhat surprisingly) to cool the stratosphere.
This, in turn, would lead to a relative increase in ozone depletion and the
frequency of ozone holes.

• Conversely, ozone depletion represents a radiative forcing of the climate system.

There are two opposed effects: Reduced ozone allows more solar radiation to
penetrate, thus warming the troposphere instead of the stratosphere; the resulting
colder stratosphere emits less long-wave radiation down to the troposphere, thus
having a cooling effect. Overall, the cooling dominates; the IPCC concludes that
"observed stratospheric O3 losses over the past two decades have caused a
negative forcing of the surface-troposphere system" of about −0.15 ± 0.10 W/m².

• One of the strongest predictions of the greenhouse effect theory is that the
stratosphere will cool. Although this cooling has been observed, it is not trivial to
separate the effects of changes in the concentration of greenhouse gases and
ozone depletion since both will lead to cooling. However, this can be done by
numerical stratospheric modeling. Results from the NOAA Geophysical Fluid
Dynamics Laboratory show that above 20 km (12.4 miles), the greenhouse gases
dominate the cooling.

• Ozone depleting chemicals are also greenhouse gases, representing

0.34 ±0.03 W/m², or about 14% of the total radiative forcing from well-mixed
greenhouse gases.

• Decreased ozone leads to an increase in ultraviolet levels. Ultraviolet (UV)

radiation may be responsible for the death of ocean algae, which operate as a
carbon dioxide sink in the ocean. Increased UV, therefore, may lead to a decrease
in carbon dioxide uptake, thereby raising global carbon dioxide levels.

14
Relationship to global dimming

Scientists have stated with 66-90% confidence that the effects of volcanic and human-
caused aerosols have offset some of global warming, and that geenhouse gases would
have resulted in more warming than observed if not for this effect.

For comparison of the relative significance of these factors:

• The best estimate for the magnitude of radiative forcing from the long-lived
greenhouse gases CO2, CH4, and N2O alone is +2.3 watts/m^2.
• Radiative forcing from the halocarbon class of long-lived greenhouse gases is
about +0.34 watts/m^2.
• The cooling effects of aerosols are estimated to be:
o Direct cooling effects of -0.5 watts/m^2
o Cloud albedo cooling effects of -0.7 watts/m^2
• Total warming effects from post-industrial human activity including the above
and other cooling and warming factors are estimated at +1.6 watts/m^2.

Pre-human global warming

The Earth has experienced natural global warming and cooling many times in the past,
and can offer useful insights into present processes. It is thought by some geologists that
a rapid buildup of greenhouse gases caused the Earth to experience global warming in the
early Jurassic period, with average temperatures rising by 5 °C (9.0 °F). Research by the
Open University published in Geology (32: 157–160, 2004) indicates that this caused the
rate of rock weathering to increase by 400%. As such weathering locks away carbon in
calcite and dolomite, carbon dioxide levels dropped back to normal over roughly the next
150,000 years.

15
The geographic distribution of surface warming during the 21st century calculated by the HadCM3 climate
model if a business as usual scenario is assumed for economic growth and greenhouse gas emissions. In
this figure, the globally averaged warming corresponds to 3.0 °C (5.4 °F).

Sudden releases of methane from clathrate compounds (the Clathrate Gun Hypothesis)
have been hypothesized as a cause for other past global warming events, including the
Permian-Triassic extinction event and the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.
However, warming at the end of the last glacial period is thought not to be due to
methane release. Instead, natural variations in the Earth's orbit (Milankovitch cycles) are
believed to have triggered the retreat of ice sheets by changing the amount of solar
radiation received at high latitude and led to deglaciation. Using paleoclimate data for the
last 500 million years Veizer et al. (2000, Nature 408, pp. 698–701) concluded that long-
term temperature variations are only weakly related to carbon dioxide variations. Most
paleoclimatologists believe this is because other factors, such as continental drift and
mountain building have larger effects in determining very long term climate. However,
Shaviv and Veizer (2003) proposed that the biggest long-term influence on temperature is
actually the solar system's motion around the galaxy, and the ways in which this
influences the atmosphere by altering the flux of cosmic rays received by the Earth.
Afterwards, they argued that over geologic times a change in carbon dioxide
concentrations comparable to doubling pre-industrial levels, only results in about 0.75 °C

16
(1.3 °F) warming rather than the usual 1.5–4.5 °C (2.7–8.1 °F) reported by climate
models. They acknowledge (Shaviv and Veizer 2004) however that this conclusion may
only be valid on multi-million year time scales when glacial and geological feedback
have had a chance to establish themselves. Rahmstorf et al. 2004[22] argue that Shaviv
and Veizer arbitrarily tuned their data, and that their conclusions are unreliable.

Snowball Earth

The greenhouse effect is also invoked to explain how the Earth made it out of the
proposed Snowball Earth period 600 million years ago. During this period all silicate
rocks would have been covered by ice, thereby preventing them from combining with
atmospheric carbon dioxide. As a result, the atmospheric carbon dioxide level would
have gradually increased until it reached a level that could have been as much as 350
times the current level. At this point temperatures would have increased enough to melt
the ice, even though the reflective ice surfaces would have been reflecting most sunlight
back into space. Increased amounts of rainfall would quickly wash the carbon dioxide out
of the atmosphere. The thick layers of abiotic carbonate sediment that have been found
on top of the glacial rocks from this period support this theory.

Pre-industrial global warming

Paleoclimatologist William Ruddiman has argued that human influence on the global
climate began around 8,000 years ago with the start of forest clearing to provide land for
agriculture and 5,000 years ago with the start of Asian rice irrigation.[23] He contends
that forest clearing explains the rise in carbon dioxide levels in the current interglacial
that started 8,000 years ago, contrasting with the decline in carbon dioxide levels seen in
the previous three interglacials. He further contends that the spread of rice irrigation
explains the breakdown in the last 5,000 years of the correlation between the Northern
Hemisphere solar radiation and global methane levels, which had been maintained over at
least the last eleven 22,000-year cycles. Ruddiman argues that without these effects, the
Earth would be nearly 2 °C (3.7 °F) cooler and "well on the way" to a new ice age.

17
Ruddiman's interpretation of the historical record, with respect to the methane data, has
been disputed.[24]

1.9 RECENT FINDINGS AND DEVELOPMENTS

International organizations

In November 2006, the World Meteorological Organization released a Statement on

Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change which provides "an updated assessment of the
current state of knowledge of the impact of anthropogenically induced climate change on
tropical cyclones."

In February 2007, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a

summary report for policymakers stating that it is "very likely" (>90% assessed
likelihood) that most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperature since the
mid-20th century was caused by human activity.

Joint declaration on global warming

In 2005 the national science academies of the G8 nations (including the U.S. National
Academy of Sciences) - and Brazil, China and India, three of the largest emitters of
greenhouse gases in the developing world, signed a statement on the global response to
climate change. The statement stresses that the scientific understanding of climate change
is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action.

18
CHAPTER 2: IMPACTS OF GLOBAL WARMING ON
DIFFERENT CONTINENTS OF THE WORLD
The Asian region spans polar, temperate, and tropical climates and is home to over 3
billion people. As the climate warms, many mountain glaciers may disappear, permafrost
will thaw, and the northern forests are likely to shift further north. Rapid population
growth and development in countries like China and India will put additional pressures
on natural ecosystems and will lead to a rapid rise in the release of greenhouse gases into
the atmosphere unless steps are taken to curtail emissions.

Higher sea level

• Higher temperatures on the earth cause sea water to expand with heat and glaciers to
melt, raising the sea level year after year.

• A 20 increase in earth's average temperature is expected to raise the sea level by about
50 cm (minimum: about 15 cm, maximum: about 95 cm).

• A higher sea level intensifies erosion on natural beaches, with particularly serious
impact on sandy beaches.

Impact on water resources and natural disasters

• Global warming accelerates the normal cycle of rainfall and evaporation, destroying
balance of water supply and demand and even possibly expanding worldwide gap in
water availability.

• For example, there would be areas that were frequently flooded on one hand, and
areas constantly suffering drought and water shortage on the other.

• In areas which already have a water shortage problem, the situation will worsen;
many other areas will face similar problems

Impact on agriculture

• Global warming will seriously affect agriculture as well.

• Some species of agricultural crops will be adversely affected by higher temperatures,

increased weeds and harmful insects.

• It is also possible that global warming will lead to global food shortages.

19
• It is also possible that global warming will trigger frequent natural disasters,
including accelerated activity of weeds and harmful insects, allowing harmful insects
from the tropical and subtropical zones to spread to the temperate zone and damage
harvests.

Impact on human health

• Climatic change affects human health in many different ways, most of which are
adverse.

• Direct causes of death will include intensified heat waves and diseases.

• Indirect causes will include expanded geographical sphere of activity of organisms

carrying contagious diseases, and their extended period of activity, resulting in an
increase in contagious diseases, including malaria, dengue fever and yellow fever.

• Higher atmospheric temperatures and more frequent flooding are expected to result in
higher rates of salmonella poisoning and cholera.

• The negative impact of hot summer weather on the elderly is also worrisome. It is
reported that the death rate increases, especially among those aged 65 and above,
when the daily maximum temperature exceeds 33 .

Impact on animals and plants

• Global warming will cause animals and plants to shift their habitats to northern and
mountainous areas.

• It is anticipated, however, that some will become extinct if they cannot migrate due to
topographical obstacles, urbanization or habitat changes much slower than climatic
changes.

2.1 THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL WARMING IN SOUTH AMERICA

The people of South America are heavily dependent on the continent?s natural resources
—from the rangelands at the foothills of the Andes, to the plants and animals of the
Amazon rainforest, to the fisheries off the coast of Peru. The region?s ecosystems are
particularly vulnerable to the changes in water availability expected with a changing
climate. Higher global temperatures along with more frequent El Ni �may bring
increased drought, and melting glaciers in the Andes threaten the future water supply of

20
mountain communities. Signs of a warming climate have already appeared both at high
elevations—in glacial retreat and shifting ranges of disease-carrying mosquitoes—and
along the coast—in rising sea level and coral bleaching.

2.2 THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL WARMING IN NORTH AMERICA

The vast North American continent ranges from the lush sub-tropical climate of Florida
to the frozen ice and tundra of the Arctic. Within these extremes are two wealthy
industrialized countries with diverse ecosystems at risk. Yet the United States and
Canada are two of the largest global emitters of the greenhouse gases that contribute to a
warming climate. Examples of all 10 of the "hotspot" categories can be found in this
region, including changes such as polar warming in Alaska, coral reef bleaching in
Florida, animal range shifts in California, glaciers melting in Montana, and marsh loss in
the Chesapeake Bay.

For North America we have many more hotspots than for some other regions of the
world, although impact studies have been emerging in larger numbers in recent years
from previously under-studied regions. This higher density of early warning signs in the
US and Canada is due in part to the fact that these regions have more readily accessible
climatic data and more comprehensive programs to monitor and study environmental
change, in part to the disproportionate warming that has been observed over the mid-to-
high-latitude continents compared to other regions during the last century, and in part to
capture the attention of North Americans who need to take action now to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.

2.3 THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL WARMING IN OCEANIA

The Oceania region ranges from the lush tropical rainforests of Indonesia to the interior
deserts of Australia. The climate is strongly influenced by the ocean and the El
Ni �henomenon. Small island nations and the coastal regions—where much of the
population is concentrated—are very vulnerable to increasing coastal flooding and
erosion due to rising sea level. Warming sea temperatures in recent years have damaged

21
many of the region?s spectacular coral reefs, threatening one of the world?s most diverse
ecosystems.

2.4 THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL WARMING IN AFRICA

The African continent is a rich mosaic of ecosystems, ranging from the snow and ice
fields of Kilimanjaro to tropical rainforests to the Saharan desert. Although it has the
lowest per capita fossil energy use of any major world region, Africa may be the most
vulnerable continent to climate change because widespread poverty limits countries?
capabilities to adapt. Signs of a changing climate in Africa have already emerged:
spreading disease and melting glaciers in the mountains, warming temperatures in
drought-prone areas, and sea-level rise and coral bleaching along the coastlines.

2.5 THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL WARMING IN ANTARCTICA

The impacts of warming temperatures in Antarctica are likely to occur first in the
northern sections of the continent, where summer temperatures approach the melting
point of water, 32?F (0?C). Some ice shelves in the northernmost part of Antarctica—the
Antarctic Peninsula—have been collapsing in recent years, consistent with the rapid
warming trend there since 1945. Scientists are also concerned about future changes in the
large West Antarctic ice sheet on the main continent because its collapse could raise sea
level by as much as 19 feet (5.8 meters).

2.6 GLOBAL WARMING NOT AFFECTING INDIA

FORMER scientific adviser to the Prime Minister and eminent scientist Vasant
Gowarikar feels that global warming has not affected the Indian climatic system.

Speaking at the inauguration of a National Council for Science & Technology

Communication (NCSTC) sponsored workshop at Yashwantrao Chavan Academy of
Development Administration (YASHADA), Gowarikar pointed towards the India

22
Meteorological Departments data on cyclones and rainfall, which are indicators of global
warming.

‘‘If we look at the last 115 years of data on cyclones, we will find that the highest number
of cyclones (10) hit the country in 1893, 1926 and 1930. If we check last 20 years’ data,
the highest number of cyclones in that period, which is six, hit the Indian shores in 1992
and 1998,’’ Gowarikar said. He then pointed out that the highest rainfall recorded in the
country was in 1917, with 1457.3 cm of rainfall and the lowest was around 913 cm in
1918. ‘‘In the last 20 years, the highest rainfall was recorded in 1988 with 1288 cms
while the lowest was in 2000 with 939 cms. If climate change has taken place in terms of
warming, that should reflect on this data. But there is nothing to indicate the claims of
warming affecting the Indian climate system,’’ Gowarikar said.

According to him, many scientists across the world have claimed that the global warming
has affected India, which was not true. ‘‘Many point out to the heavy rainfall over
Mumbai on July 27 in 2005. But it is to be noted that while places like Santa Cruz
received 94.4 cms of rainfall, Colaba recorded only 7.3 cms of rain in a period of 24
hours,’’ Gowarikar said. According to him, the monsoon is one of the most complex
weather phenomenon as it involves both local and global factors. Gowarikar blamed the
western countries for global warming and suggested that the developed nations should be
putting in more efforts to undo the harmful effects of all these years. ‘‘India should not be
made the part of a gang responsible for global warming. It is a phenomenon that is
affecting the western nations more,’’ he said. Gowarikar also expressed his concerns
about the damage been done to the hills in the name of development. ‘‘Without the hills,
we won’t have any rains. Moreover, the ground water levels are depleting day by day.
This will eventually lead to desertification, which is an irreversible process,’’ he said.

2.7 EVERY COUNTRY, INCLUDING INDIA, NEEDS TO READ THE

CLIMATE PANEL’S FINDINGS WITH CARE
A four letter word can make a world of difference. In 2001, the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC) had observed that it was ‘likely’ that global warming was

23
caused by human activity. On Friday, it added the word ‘very’ to its earlier prognosis.
Decoded, the word signifies that there is an overwhelming possibility that global
warming is indeed the result of human activity.
Now when 2,500 of the world’s finest climate scientists from 130 countries come to such
a conclusion, it certainly makes the issue one of urgent international concern and puts
pressure on every country — including India — to understand the new evidence. If global
temperatures are likely to rise by up to 4.5 degrees Celsius by the end of this century, as
is projected, it has implications for every country and inhabitant on the planet. China,
which incidentally tried hard to push for less ‘alarmist’ language at the IPCC, has just got
a reality check from home. Meteorological data has shown that the average national
temperature in China this January was 1.4 degrees higher than normal and its northern
regions are currently witnessing unprecedented drought. As indeed is the case in
Australia, thousands of kilometres away.
It would be useful to read the IPCC findings along with the Nicholas Stern report of last
October. Stern argues that responding with urgency to the global warming challenge
makes not just environmental, but economic sense. Global warming, he has projected,
could shrink the global economy by 20 per cent, but if action is taken promptly it would
cost just 1 per cent of global gross domestic product. In other words, initiatives and
investments in new technology, carbon offsets, renewable energy, fuel cells, hybrid cars,
and forests — which act as natural carbon dioxide sinks — along with the deployment of
financial instruments like carbon taxes and carbon trading, will be worth their weight in
gold. Global warming has just become a global warning.

Global warming could cast chill on India’s growth story: UK report

Global warming and climate change could affect India’s growth story unless a range of
steps are taken to address the effects of increased surface temperature and its effect on
monsoon pattern and river flows.
This is according to a report released in London today commissioned by UK Chancellor
Gordon Brown and authored by Nicholas Stern, former chief economist of the World
Bank. In his 700-page report, Stern calls for an urgent shift to a low-carbon economy in

24
countries like India which could translate into huge business opportunities for the
developed world.
UK Prime Minister Tony Blair called the report the “final word’’ on why the world must
act now. “The case for action is the final piece of the jigsaw to convince every single
political leader, including those in America, China and India, that this must be top of their
agenda,” he said.
There is a wealth of evidence quantifying the economic costs of climate change in India.
Experts from the University of Reading have estimated that mean summer rainfall in
India will increase by 10% — along with rainfall intensity — and this will be
accompanied by more regional variations. This is likely to affect agriculture and,
therefore, GDP growth.
The review identifies three elements of policy required for an effective response: carbon
pricing, through tax, trading or regulation, so that people pay the full social cost of their
actions; policy to support innovation and deployment of low-carbon technologies and
removal of barriers to energy efficiency and measures to inform, educate and persuade.
Some of the key predictions, according to the Stern report, of changes over the next 100
years:
• Regional climate models suggest 2.5-5 degrees Celsius rise in mean surface
temperature. Regionally within India, northern India will be warmer.
• 20% rise in summer monsoon rainfall. Extreme temperatures and precipitations are
expected to increase.
• All states will have increased rainfall except Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu where it
will decrease. Extreme precipitation will increase, particularly along the western coast
and west central India.
• Hydrological cycle is likely to be altered. Drought and flood intensity will increase.
Krishna, Narmada, Cauvery, Tapi river basins will experience severe water stress and
drought condition and Mahanadi, Godavari, Brahmani will experience enhanced flood.
• Crop yield decrease with temperature and rise with precipitation. Prediction of loss of
wheat is more. Rabi crops will be worse hit which threatens food security.
• Economic loss due to temperature rise estimated between 9-25%. GDP loss may be to
the tune of 0.67%. Coastal agriculture suffers most (Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka),

25
Punjab, Haryana, Western UP will face reduction in yield; West Bengal, Orissa, Andhra
Pradesh will gain marginally.
• 100-cm sea level rise can lead to welfare loss of $1259 million in India equivalent to
0.36% of GNP.
• Frequencies and intensities of tropical cyclones in Bay of Bengal will increase
particularly in the post-monsoon period and flooding will increase in low-lying coastal
areas.
• Malaria will continue to be endemic in current malaria-prone states (Orissa, West
Bengal and southern parts of Assam north of West Bengal). It may shift from the central
Indian region to the south-western coastal states of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala. New
regions (Himachal Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur and Mizoram) will
become malaria prone and transmission duration window will widen in northern and
western states and shorten in southern states.

Posted Online, Indian Express, Saturday, Feb 03, 2007,

26
CHAPTER 3: SCIENTISTS ISSUE GRIM WARNING ON
GLOBAL WARMING

Global warming is so severe that it will ''continue for centuries,'' leading to a far different
planet in 100 years, warned a grim landmark report from the world's leading climate
scientists and government officials. Yet, many experts are hopeful that nations will now
take action to prevent the worst scenarios.
They tried to warn of dire risks without scaring people so much they would do nothing -
inaction that would lead to the worst possible scenarios.
''It's not too late,'' said Australian scientist Nathaniel Bindoff, a co-author of the
authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report issued Friday. The worst
can be prevented by acting quickly to curb greenhouse gas emissions, he said.
The worst could mean more than 1 million dead and hundreds of billions of dollars in
costs by 2100, and adapting to a warmer world with more extreme weather such as
droughts, hurricanes, and wildfires, study co-author Kevin Trenberth said in an interview.
''It's sooner than we think,'' said panel co-chair Susan Solomon, the U.S. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientist who helped push through the
document's strong language.
Solomon, who remains optimistic about the future, said it's close to too late to alter the
future for her children - but may be it's not too late for her grandchildren.
The report was the first of the four to be released this year by the panel, which was
created by the United Nations in 1988. It found:
- Global warming is ''very likely'' to be caused by man, meaning more than 90 per cent
certain. That's the strongest expression of certainty to date from the panel.
-If nothing is done to change the current emission patterns of greenhouse gases, global
temperature could increase as much as 6 degrees Celsius (11 degrees Fahrenheit) by
2100.
- But if the world does get greenhouse gas emissions under control - something scientists
say they hope can be done - the best estimate is about 1 to 2 degrees Celsius (3 degrees
Fahrenheit).

27
- Sea levels are projected to rise 18 to 59 centimeters (7 to 23 inches) by the end of the
century. Add another 10 to 20 centimeters (4-8 inches) if recent, surprising melting of
polar ice sheets continues.

Sea level rise could get worse after that. By 2100, if nothing is done to curb emissions,
the melting of Greenland's ice sheet would be inevitable and the world's seas would
eventually rise by around 20 feet (six meters), Bindoff said.
That amount of sea rise would take centuries, said Andrew Weaver of the University of
Victoria in Canada, but ''if you're in Florida or Louisiana, or much of western Europe or
southeast Asia or Bangladesh ... or Manhattan ... you don't want that,'' he said.

The report spurred bleak reactions from world leaders.

''We are on the historic threshold of the irreversible,'' warned French President Jacques
Chirac, who called for an economic and political ''revolution'' to save the planet.
''While climate changes run like a rabbit, world politics move like a snail: either we
accelerate or we risk a disaster,'' said Italy's environment minister, Alfonso Pecoraro
Scanio.

And South Africa's Environmental Affairs Minister Marthinus van Schalkwyk said
failure to act would be ''indefensible.''
In Washington, Bush administration officials praised the report, but said they still oppose
mandatory cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. The problem can be addressed by better
technology that will cut emissions, promote energy conservation, and hasten development
of non-fossil fuels, said Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman.
About three-fourths of Americans say they expect global warming will get worse,
according to a recent AP-AOL News poll. However, other recent polls have found they
do not consider it a top priority for the U.S. government.
But doing nothing about global warming could mean up to a 10 degree Fahrenheit (5.5
degree Celsius) increase in temperatures by the end of the century in the United States,
said report co-author Jonathan Overpeck at the University of Arizona.
Elsewhere, the projected effects of global warming would vary in different parts of the

28
globe.
Temperatures would spike higher closer to the poles, according to the report.
Dramatic and noticeable temperature spikes are likely to be seen within 22 years in most
of the Northern Hemisphere, whether greenhouse gases are controlled or not, the report
showed. Northern Africa and other places will see dramatically less rainfall.
The harmful effects during the 21st century ''would very likely be larger than those
observed during the 20th century,'' the report said.

People experience the harshest effects of global warming through extreme weather events
- heat waves, droughts, floods, and hurricanes - said study co-author Philip Jones of
Britain's University of East Anglia. Those have increased dramatically in the past decade
and will get even worse in the future, he said.
Given all the dire predictions, why are scientists nearly all optimistic? They think their
message is finally getting through to the people in charge.

United Nations environmental leaders say they heard the message and are talking about a
global summit on climate change for world leaders that they hope U.S. President George
W. Bush would attend.
''The signal that we received from the science is crystal-clear,'' said Yvo de Boer, the
executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, a
multi-national body that tries to change policy to fight global warming.
''That makes it imperative that the political response that comes from this crystal-clear
science is as crystal-clear as well.''
''I sense a growing sense of urgency to come to grips with the issue,'' de Boer said. ''I
think the major challenge is to further the negotiating agenda in a way that makes major
players feel safe to step forwardly on this issue.''
The major player that has at times been absent is the United States, the biggest emitter of
greenhouse gases.
''The world cannot solve the climate change problem without the United States,'' Achim
Steiner, who heads the UN Environment Program, told AP.
''The world is looking to the Bush administration and to the United States and how it has

29
to be a key part'' of solving global warming, he said.
De Boer was optimistic, there too. In an interview, he said that despite U.S. greenhouse
gas emissions increasing 16 per cent since 1990, change is afoot.
Citing congressional interest and carbon dioxide emission limits requested by top
industry CEOs, de Boer said: ''I see a very important momentum building throughout the
country.

http://content.msn.co.in/News/International/InternationalAP_030207_1212.htm#top

3.1 GLOBAL WARMING IS RAPIDLY RAISING SEA LEVELS,

STUDIES WARN

Water from melting ice sheets and glaciers is gushing into the world's oceans much faster
than previously thought possible, sending scientists scrambling to explain why.

The unexpected deluge is raising global sea levels, which scientists say could eventually
submerge island nations, flood cities, and expose millions of coastal residents to
destructive storm surges.

By the end of this century the seas may be three feet (one meter) higher than they are
today, according to a pair of studies that appear in tomorrow's issue of the journal
Science.

"After that we'll be committed to multiple more meters of sea level rise that will occur at
rates of up to a meter—or three feet—per one hundred years," said Jonathan Overpeck,
an earth scientist at the University of Arizona in Tucson, who co-authored the studies.

"And it could go faster," he added.

But scientists don't know if it will. They believe global warming triggered the ice's
seaward gallop, but they say the dynamics at play are poorly understood.

30
"We did not expect that the ice sheets can react to warming on such a short time scale,"
said Konrad Steffen, a geographer at the University of Colorado at Boulder who has
spent the past 15 years monitoring ice sheets in Greenland (map).

Scientists thought ice sheets and glaciers would respond to warming slowly over
hundreds of years. The current acceleration could be a short-term adjustment to the
warmer temperatures, Steffen said.

"Something dramatic is happening," said Göran Ekström, a seismologist at Harvard

University in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Ekström and colleagues report tomorrow in Science that glacial earthquakes—seaward

lurches of glaciers—in Greenland have more than doubled in number since 2002.

Most of the glacial earthquakes occur in July and August, at the height of the Northern
Hemisphere's summer melt.

The finding complements a study published in Science last month that found some of
Greenland's glaciers have doubled in speed over the past five years, said Jay Zwally, a
glaciologist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.

Zwally added that both findings are "alarming" given that Earth has only experienced the
full effects of greenhouse gases for about a decade.

"As these changes take place, we're still in the process of learning what happens to the
ice. We are discovering new things," he said.

Ancient Rise

About 130,000 years ago, global sea levels were 13 to 20 feet (4 to 6 meters) higher than
they are today. Scientists have determined this by studying ancient coral reefs that now
sit high and dry, and other so-called paleo-climate clues.

31
The University of Arizona's Overpeck and his colleagues wanted to understand what sort
of climate conditions were necessary to create such high sea levels.

Scientists believe that Earth's orbit had shifted slightly at the time, giving the Northern
Hemisphere greater exposure to the sun.

When Overpeck's team plugged those orbital conditions into a computer model, they
found the Arctic warmed 5º to 8ºF (3º to 5ºC), sufficient to melt enough Arctic ice to
explain the sea level rise.

But the researchers also know how much the Greenland ice sheet, which holds most of
the Arctic water, melted at the time. When they plug that data into the model, the melt
only accounts for 7.2 to 11.2 feet (2.2 to 3.4 meters) of the water rise.

"That means we got a substantial amount [of water] from Antarctica," Overpeck said.
"And that is a big discovery."

The finding suggests that, even though the Antarctic itself did not warm, the ocean
warming and sea level rise in the Arctic were sufficient to drive melting in Antarctica.

When the team used the same climate model to predict what will happen over the next
140 years from increasing greenhouse gases, they found that by 2100 the Arctic will be at
least as warm as it was 130,000 years ago.

But unlike 130,000 years ago, today's atmospheric warming is global.

"So it will be even more conducive to melting parts of the Antarctic ice sheet in the future
than it was 130,000 years ago," Overpeck said.

"And indeed that jibes nicely with a lot of observations coming in that suggest parts of
the Antarctic ice sheet are already melting."

32
Irreversible Decline?

According to Zwally, the NASA glaciologist, humans can limit the effects of global
warming by acting now to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

But if we continue to pollute at the current pace, he says, by the end of the century the
Greenland ice sheet and part of Antarctica could be undergoing irreversible decline.

"Man is doing an experiment with the ice sheets, which is a scientifically interesting
experiment, except it is going to have some serious consequences," he said.

"And the longer we wait to do something about climate warming, the more serious it's
going to be."

3.2 HUMANS RESPONSIBILITY FOR GLOBAL WARMING

The case for attributing the recent global warming to human activities rests on
the following undisputed scientific facts:
� C arbon dioxide (CO2) is a greenhouse gas that warms the atmosphere.
�Since pre-industrial times, atmospheric CO2 concentrations have increased from about
280 partsper-million (ppm) to almost 380 ppm.
�Independent measurements of the carbon isotopes in atmospheric CO2, as well as the
variations in the concentration of atmospheric oxygen (O2), show that the increase in CO2
can be attributed to the burning of fossil fuels and biomass, such as forests.
�Since pre-industrial times, global average temperatures have increased by about 0.7ºC,
with about half of the warming occurring over the past few decades.
�The only quantitative and internally consistent explanation for the recent global
warming includes the enhanced greenhouse effect caused by the increase in CO2 and
other greenhouse gases.
Some argue that the recent global warming is due to natural fluctuations and not to
human activities.
This argument and its fallacies are discussed below.

33
Argument 1: We do not know why climate varies
The global climate has fluctuated considerably over the Earth’s history, either for
unknown reasons or because of “internal variability” in the climate system. We do not
know enough about the climate system to attribute the present global warming to any
specific cause.
The Facts
It is true that the Earth’s climate has exhibited wide swings. However, we do have
explanations for these swings. In fact scientists have reasonable qualitative explanations
for most of the significant variations in climate over geologic time; 1 they can be largely
attributed to specific processes, not to unknown internal oscillations. Many of the major
climatic changes can be traced to changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun. Others can
be linked to specific events (such as the impact of a comet or meteorite or the assembly
or breakup of supercontinents) that led to large changes in the concentration of
atmospheric greenhouse gases.
Argument 2: The Medieval Warm Period disproves global warming
The current warming trend is analogous to the Medieval Warming Period (MWP). Since
the MWP was obviously a natural event, the current warming is also likely caused by
natural processes.
The Facts
The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) refers to an unusually warm period lasting from
about the 10th to the 14th century.2 However, the initial evidence for the MWP was largely
based on data3 gathered from Europe, and more recent analyses indicate that the MWP
was not a global phenomenon. A number of reconstructions of millennium-scale global
temperatures using global data sets have indicated that the maximum globally-averaged
temperature during the MWP was not as extreme as present-day temperatures. Perhaps
the most well-known of these reconstructions is that of Michael Mann and colleagues
(Nature, 392, 1998, pg. 779). Their reconstruction produced the so-called “hockey stick”
graphic for variations in global temperatures over the past 1,000 years that was used in
the 2001 assessment of the International Panel on Climate Change to conclude that the

34
“…'Medieval Warm Period' appear(s) to have limited utility in describing trends in
hemispheric or global mean temperature changes in past centuries."
The accuracy of the “hockey stick” graphic was widely discussed in the press last year
when the Mann et al. methodology was criticized by McIntyre and McKitrick (Geophys.
Res. Lettr, 32, 2005, pg. L03710). Less attention was given to a subsequent study by
Moberg and colleagues (Nature, 433, 2005, pg. 613) that relied on a different statistical
methodology from that of Mann et al. but reached similar conclusions. However, the
reconstruction of millennial-scale global temperatures is a difficult process, fraught with
technical and statistical challenges. Significant uncertainties must necessarily be
associated with such reconstructions.
To avoid the statistical problems associated with the reconstructions discussed above,
Osborn and Briffa (Science, 311, 2006, pg. 841) adopted a completely independent
method to compare the MWP to the current warming trend. Rather than depending on
complex statistical methods to infer globally averaged temperatures over time, they
assessed the temperature variations in individual temperature proxy records over time.
Periods of widespread warmth or cold were identified by the existence of simultaneous
positive or negative deviations in the individual records; thus there was no need to apply
complex statistical techniques to combine data based on different proxies, from various
locations, to derive a globally representative average temperature. Their analysis
confirmed that relatively warm temperatures did occur at many locations during the
MWP, but there were also many locations with relatively cold temperatures. Moreover,
the widespread warming of the late 20th century was found to be unique over the past two
millennia (see Figure 1). The authors concluded “The proxy records indicate that the
most widespread warmth occurred in either the mid- or late-twentieth century …
instrumental temperatures provide unequivocal evidence for continuing geographic
expansion of anomalous warmth through to the present time.”

Thus, the present-day warming is anomalous over the past two millennia. More
specifically, the MWP is not analogous in its spatial extent (and possibly also in the
magnitude of the warming) to the presentday warming.

35
Argument 3: Recent predictions of a new ice age disprove global
warming
In the 1970s climate scientists were saying an ice age was imminent. Now they say the
Earth is warming. They don’t know what they are talking about.
The Facts
The Earth’s climate for the past 2 million years has been characterized by ice ages lasting
about 100,000 years, punctuated by relatively short (10,000- to 20,000-year) warm
periods or interglacials. The swing from glacial to interglacial is caused by changes in the
Earth’s orbit around the sun. The Earth entered the present interglacial about 10,000
years ago. All things being equal (i.e., in the absence of a large human-produced source
of CO2) it is highly likely that the Earth will swing back into a glacial period or ice age in
the next several thousand to 10,000 years. The link between ice ages, interglacials and the
Earth’s orbit was elucidated in the 1970s, most notably in a paper by Hays and colleagues
(Science, 194, 1976, pg. 1121). On the heels of this discovery there was a good deal of
discussion about the likelihood that the Earth would inevitably return to ice age
conditions in the future. However it was always understood that the time frame for a new
ice age is thousands of years, much longer that the decade-to-century time scale of
relevance for global warming from fossil-fuel burning. Hays et al. make this clear
“Future climate. Having presented evidence that major changes in past climate were
associated with variations in the geometry of the Earth's orbit, we should be able to
predict the trend of future climate. Such forecasts must be qualified in two ways. First,
they apply only to the natural component of future climatic trends - and not to
anthropogenic effects such as those due to the burning of fossil fuels. Second, they
describe only the long-term trends, because they are linked to orbital variations with
periods of 20,000 years and longer. Climatic oscillations at higher frequencies are not
predicted.”
While the work of Hays et al. has been misquoted and misinterpreted by some to discredit
the science of global warming, there is in fact no inconsistency. Concern about global
warming relates to climate changes over decades to centuries. Climatic fluctuations
between interglacials and ice ages occur over thousands of years. The globe can warm

36
over the next hundred years due to greenhouse gas pollution with devastating effects
upon society and still have another ice age thousands of years later.

Argument 4: Scientists cannot “prove” current warming is not

natural
Climate scientists can not prove that the current warming is not due to natural processes
and therefore can not claim with certainty that the warming is due to human interference.
The Facts
It is of course true that, in a complex system like climate, it is virtually impossible to
prove a negative; i.e., that natural processes are not causing the current warming. What
we can do is eliminate every possible natural explanation that we can posit.
Thermodynamics tells us that the warming of the Earth’s lower atmosphere must arise
from one or more processes that supply excess heat to the lower atmosphere. Besides the
greenhouse effect, the only viable processes that we can identify are (1) increased output
from the sun; (2) increased absorption of heat from the sun due to a change in the Earth’s
planetary reflectivity or albedo; and (3) an internal variation in the climate system that
transfers heat from one part of the Earth to the atmosphere. Direct observations confirm
that all three processes are incapable of explaining the observed warming over the latter
half of the 20th century. The solar output has increased, but the excess heat supplied to the
Earth is significantly less than that from the enhanced greenhouse effect and less than the
amount needed to explain all of the observed warming.
Satellite data reveal that the Earth’s reflectivity increased (causing cooling instead of
warming) from approximately 1960 to 1990 and decreased modestly in the 1990s; 4 the
overall warming from the recent decrease in reflectivity is also small compared to the
greenhouse warming. In the case of internal variations, the ocean is the only viable
reservoir of internal heat that could have caused the atmosphere to warm on decadal time-
scales. However, observations show that the heat content of the ocean has increased
instead of decreased over the past few decades. This indicates that the atmosphere has
been a source of heat to the ocean rather than vice versa. Moreover, the amount of heat
increase in the ocean is consistent with what is needed to balance the Earth’s energy

37
budget given the excess heating from the enhanced greenhouse effect and the amount of
excess heat observed to be stored in the atmosphere (Hansen et al. Science, 308, 2005, pg.
1431). In other words, the amount of heat stored in the ocean over recent years matches
the amount of heat that models predict should be trapped on Earth due to the increase in
greenhouse gases.

Conclusion
�The Medieval Warm Period does not represent an analogy to the warming of the late
20th century, and the evidence strongly suggests that the MWP was a regional, rather than
a global phenomenon.
�Our understanding of the climate system is sufficient to provide qualitative models for
most global or hemispheric climatic variations over geologic history.
�The Earth’s climate may return to ice age conditions in thousands of years, but this
does not preclude devastating effects from global warming over the next century.
�All known natural processes that could have caused the current global warming trend
have been eliminated by direct observations. The human-enhanced greenhouse effect
provides the only quantitative explanation for the current warming trend.

38
CHAPTER 4: CORPORATE STRATEGIES TO COMBAT
GLOBAL WARMING

STAGE I: DEVELOP A CLIMATE STRATEGY

This stage involves determining how climate change creates risks and opportunities for a
company and outlines steps for developing a strategy to address them.

Step 1: Conduct an Emissions Profile Assessment

The first step in developing a climate strategy is to analyze a company’s GHG emissions
profile throughout the value chain. This is a fundamental starting point for identifying
and prioritizing emissions reduction options, the means to reduce emissions, products and
services that may be affected by carbon constraints, and potential strategies that are
complementary to the core business. To identify sources, types, and magnitude of
emissions, as well as the vulnerability of business lines, companies need a basic
awareness of the tools and protocols available to gather such information.

Step 2: Gauge Risks and Opportunities

Emissions alone do not reveal a company’s exposure to carbon constraints. Companies
must also consider potential impacts on product and service lines. The next step in
climate-strategy development is consideration for how operations and sales may be
affected—both for the positive and the negative—by climate change-related factors and,
as a result, how such factors may alter competitive positioning. As part of this analysis,
companies should consider their emissions profile relative to industry peers, the
industry’s position relative to other sectors, potentially relevant future regulatory
developments, trends in input costs, and potential changes in customer preferences.
Identifying risks and opportunities must flow from an understanding of the company’s
current and future GHG footprint in the context of a current and future carbon-
constrained society and economy.

Step 3: Evaluate Options for Technological Solutions

After developing an emissions profile, the next task is to evaluate options for reducing
emissions. This step is often conducted in an iterative fashion with goal setting. Some

39
companies set goals and then search for ways to achieve them. Others consider their
options for reducing emissions and then set goals accordingly. The precise ordering is a
matter of individual management style.

Step 4: Set Goals and Targets

The companies in this report have made a wide range of commitments to reduce GHG
emissions, the specifics of which differ in such aspects as timetable, objectives, baseline
year, and types of emissions covered. For example, DuPont‘s goal of reducing GHG
emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2000 was set in 1994. That target was
met in 1999, and the company established a new goal to reduce net GHG emissions 65
percent below 1990 levels by 2010. Whirlpool’s target, set in 2003, calls for reducing
total GHG emissions from global manufacturing, product use, and disposal by 3 percent
from a 1998 baseline by 2008, while also increasing sales by 40 percent over the same
period.

Stage II: Focus Inward

This stage involves integrating climate goals and targets inside the organization by
developing supportive financial instruments and engaging employees.

Step 5: Develop Financial Mechanisms to Support Climate Programs.

What are the costs associated with meeting emission-reduction goals and what financial
instruments are available for supporting them? This section discusses the pros and cons
of internal and external trading, and describes other financial mechanisms used for
implementing climate-related initiatives.

Step 6: Engage the Organization

Employee buy-in is crucial to the success of any climate-related strategy. As Alcoa’s Van
Son explains, “Our people link our systems and our success. The best technology only
gets you so far. Employees will devise innovative ways to achieve clearly stated goals
when they understand the linkage with the company’s vision and values.” Edan Dionne,
Director of Corporate Environmental Affairs at IBM believes that the company’s climate
strategy “has had a positive impact on recruitment and retention.” This section describes

40
techniques for promoting workforce buy-in, identifies common sources of resistance, and
describes ways to
move climate goals from the periphery of the organization to its core.

Stage III: Focus Outward

This stage of climate-strategy development involves engagingimportant external
constituencies that directly impact strategic success. To have external legitimacy,
companies first need to establish a track record of credible internal action.

Step 7: Formulate a Policy Strategy

Companies must consider how different external GHG policies can affect their business
objectives. At the most basic level, this means monitoring and anticipating pending
government actions. Beyond that, companies must be aware of the policy options being
considered and decide which would most benefit their own business strategy. At the
highest level, companies will want to gain (and maintain) a seat at the table when future
regulations are designed.

Step 8: Manage External Relations

One final component of a successful climate strategy is engaging external constituents
including competitors, trade associations, suppliers, customers, regulators, and NGOs.
All case study interviewees note that these groups provide vital information and
expertise, can help develop markets and support for climate-related initiatives, and are
important adjudicators of credibility and reputation. As described in this section, firms
must identify critical target audiences and understand their connection to company
objectives.
The prospect of GHG controls is already altering existing markets and creating new
ones.90 As in any market transition there are risks and opportunities and there will be
winners and losers. All companies will be affected to varying degrees, and all have a
managerial and fiduciary obligation to at least assess their business exposure to decide
whether climate-related action is prudent.91 The companies in this report believe a
proactive approach is necessary to prepare for the coming market transformation and that
doing nothing means missing myriad near-term financial opportunities and setting
themselves up for long-term political, operational, and financial challenges. Looking

41
ahead, these companies identify three key drivers that will hasten the transformation to a
carbon-constrained world.
The first driver is very clearly the establishment of regulations. When policy is set, the
business landscape will change. Market signals will emerge that will drive technology
and products toward a reduced carbon footprint. Companies hope to be fully prepared for
that transformation and, ideally, to have a hand in shaping the policy. The second driver
is rising energy prices which will have different implications for different industries and
companies. Rising energy prices help companies like Whirlpool or Intel promote more
energy-efficient products in the marketplace. Conversely, they pose a threat to energy-
intensive industries such as aluminum and cement. According to Cinergy’s Leahy, “The
sudden ramp up in energy prices may be changing the political landscape around this
issue. On the one hand, it makes it easier to talk conservation but harder to talk about
using a carbon price to pull new technologies along. People haven’t made the connection
between the fact that energy prices move up and down all the time—sometimes a lot—
and the fact that an entry level carbon price shouldn’t be that noticeable to consumers, yet
it will change behavior at the margin.”

TEN MAJOR COMPANIES CALL FOR CLIMATE ACTION

Industry leaders support hard limits on global warming pollution
A group of high-level corporate and environmental leaders made a groundbreaking
announcement today in Washington, D.C., calling for a cap-and-trade system to combat
climate change. Their historic proposal, "A Call to Action," urges the federal government
to set limits for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, to create market-based incentives
and, most of all, to act swiftly and thoughtfully. General Electric, the World Resources
Institute and Environmental Defense proposed the idea and it quickly gained momentum.

With no fewer than eight pieces of legislation at play in Congress, the group's call serves
as a powerful catalyst for action. "This is a game changer for action on global warming,"
said Environmental Defense President Fred Krupp, one of those who originated the
corporate-environmental group discussions. Krupp stressed the importance of involving
business not only to increase pressure on Congress, but ensure that any plan for fixing
climate change was also a boost for the U.S. economy.

42
"We chose a cap-and-trade approach because it guarantees the emissions cuts we need,
while it unleashes cash and creativity from the private sector. This plan is a jobs winner
as well as an environmental winner."

Who the companies are

The companies involved in today's announcement are well-known corporations from the
energy, manufacturing and financial services sectors: Alcoa, BP America, Caterpillar,
Duke Energy, DuPont, Florida Power & Light, General Electric (a founding
member), Lehman Brothers, Pacific Gas & Electric, and PNM Resources.
They have joined Environmental Defense, the Pew Center on Global Climate Change,
Natural Resources Defense Council and the World Resources Institute (a co-founder) to
form an unprecedented alliance — the United States Climate Action Partnership (US-
CAP).

The partners pledged to work together to support six recommendations for national
action:

• Account for the global dimensions of climate change – the U.S. government
should become more involved in international arrangements for addressing global
warming;

• Recognize the importance of technology – the cost-effective deployment of

existing energy efficient technologies should be a priority;

• Be environmentally effective – mandatory requirements and incentives must be

stringent enough to achieve necessary emissions reductions;

• Create economic opportunity and advantage – a climate protection program

must use the power of the market to establish clear targets and timeframes;

• Be fair – global warming solutions must account for the disproportionate impact
of both global warming and emissions reductions on some economic sectors,
geographic regions, and income groups; and

• Encourage early action – prior to the effective date of mandatory pollution

limits, every reasonable effort should be made to reduce emissions.

43
CHAPTER 5: CASE STUDY FOR GLOBAL WARMING

THE LITTLE ICE AGE OFFERS CLUES TO HOW OUR SOCIETY

MIGHT HANDLE A MAJOR CLIMATE CHANGE

In the mid-17th century in the Swiss Alps, the inhabitants of Les Bois feared
destruction by an unusual enemy: a glacier. The immense sheet of ice was slowly
advancing through mountain passes to their village. In those days no one suspected that
the danger was at least partly connected with the sun?specifically, with a curious absence
of dark splotches on its shiny surface 93 million miles away. Instead they assumed what
any devout European peasant of those days would have assumed, namely, that God was
angry and punishing humanity for its sins. The bishop of Geneva took action: he led 300
locals to the village and blessed the glacier. Some years afterward a warming trend forced
it into retreat.

The Les Bois incident was one of the odder episodes of the so-called Little Ice Age, a
prolonged cold snap that lasted many decades and possibly more than five centuries
(experts disagree). Nowadays scientists are paying growing attention to the Little Ice Age
for two reasons. First, it might shed light on subtle links between solar activity and
terrestrial climate; curiously, sunspots largely disappeared between 1645 and 1705.
Scientists have debated for years whether the sunspot drought caused terrestrial cooling?
and if so, why. If the Little Ice Age really lasted between 1300 and 1850 (as some
scientists believe), then the cooling must have had several causes other than a transient
lapse in solar activity.

44
CONCLUSION
Many efforts are being made by various nations to cut down the rate of global
warming. One such effort is the Kyoto agreement that has been made between various
nations to reduce the emissions of various green house gases. Also many non profit
organizations are working for the cause.

But an interesting side of the global warming episode is that there are people who
do not consider global warming as something that is creating a problem. Skeptics of
global warming think that global warming is not an ecological trouble. According to the
global warming skeptics, the recent enhancement in the earth's average temperature is no
reason for alarm. According to them earth's coastlines and polar ice caps are not at a risk
of vanishing. Global warming skeptics consider that the weather models used to establish
global warming and to forecast its impacts are distorted. According to the models, if
calculations are made the last few decades must have been much worse as compared to
actually happened to be. Most of the global warming skeptics believe that the global
warming is not actually occurring. They stress on the fact the climatic conditions vary
because of volcanism, the obliquity cycle, changes in solar output, and internal
variability. Also the warming can be due to the variation in cloud cover, which in turn is
responsible for the temperatures on the earth. The variations are also a result of cosmic
ray flux that is modulated by the solar magnetic cycles.

Addressing climate change is no simple task. To protect ourselves, our economy,

and our land from the adverse effects of climate change, we must ultimately dramatically
reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

To achieve this goal we must fundamentally transform the way we power our
global economy. This demands shifting away from a century’s legacy of unrestrained
fossil fuel use and its associated emissions in pursuit of more efficient and renewable
sources of energy. Such a transformation will require society to engage in a concerted
effort, over the near- and long-term, to seek out opportunities and design actions to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

45
WHAT CAN WE DO

1. Avoid air travel whenever possible, and if you must travel, choose a daytime flight
instead of a nighttime flight, as air traffic at night has a higher net warming affect than air
travel during the day.

2. Reduce car trips, carpool or take public transportation wherever possible. If all
Americans between the ages of 10 and 64 substituted about three miles of walking or 12
miles of bicycling for an equivalent amount of driving each day, this would reduce U.S.
greenhouse gas emissions by about 11 percent relative to 1990 net emissions.

3. Switch to the most fuel-efficient car possible. Hybrids are one of the best options
currently available. Simply switching from a typical SUV to a Toyota Prius can reduce
greenhouse gas emissions from your driving by 70 percent. Maintain proper tire inflation
and lower your speed to increase fuel economy.

4. Reduce energy use in the home and office by turning off lights, appliances, computers
and other items when not in use. Unplug items to eliminate energy waste from standby
modes. Weatherize and insulate your home to lower both cooling and heating needs. Set
the thermostat higher in the summer and lower in the winter. Lower the thermostat on
your hot water heater, take shorter showers and wash clothes in cold water. Dry clothes
on a clothesline instead of using an electric dryer. Replace incandescent bulbs with
compact fluorescents. Reduce, reuse and recycle trash.

5. Buy locally produced food to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of food transport.
The food choices you make can impact your overall greenhouse gas emissions as much as
the car you drive.

6. Compost food waste use for home gardening.

7. Install solar panels at your home. In many areas, a system can be financed for the same
amount as your current electric bill and will continue to provide free energy after the
system is paid off. If you cannot install solar panels, you can still buy energy from
renewable sources, either directly from your electricity supplier or via clean energy
certificates, which pay for renewable energy elsewhere in the country.

46
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Environmental Protection Agency Global Warming Site

www.epa.gov/globalwarming/
 Climate change: UNEP.Net, the U.N. Environment Programme Network
{http://climatechange.unep.net/}
 International Energy Agency Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme
www.ieagreen.org.uk/
 Global Warming International Center
www.globalwarming.net/
 Climate Change Solutions
{http://www.pembina.org/climate-change/}
 National Resources Defense Council: Global Warming
www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/
 Global Warming Information Page
{http://www.globalwarming.org/}
 Global Warming: Focus on the Future
globalwarming.enviroweb.org/
 New Scientist Global Environment Report: Climate Change
{http://www.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/}

Journals and Magazines

 Global Change: Electronic Edition
{http://pacinst.org/globalchange.org/}
 Network Newsletter: Climate-Related Impacts International Network
{http://www.isse.ucar.edu/newshp/index.html}

47