DOCSLIB.ORG

The Greenhouse Effect

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Greenhouse Effect The Greenhouse Effect I. SUMMARY AND OVERVIEWa This chapter examines what is variously called “climate change,” “global warming” and the “Greenhouse Effect.” These are all names for the same phenomenon: an increase in the Earth's temperature when heat is trapped near the surface. Most of this trapping is due to natural constituents of the air—water vapor, for example. But air pollutants also can trap heat, and as their concentrations increased so, too, can the Earth's temperature. Energy enters the Earth's atmosphere as sunlight. It strikes the surface, where it is converted into infrared radiation. Although the atmosphere is largely transparent to the visible radiation spectrum—sunlight—it is not to the infrared range. So heat that would other radiate into space is instead trapped in the atmosphere. That heat-trapping effect is good fortune for humanity and other life currently on Earth, because it raises the average temperature roughly 33 degrees Celsius above what it otherwise would be, making life as we know it possible.1 Over time, the energy entering the air has reached equilibrium with the energy leaving, creating Earth's current climate and, with it, the weather with which we are familiar on a day-to- day, week-to-week or year-to-year basis. With a Greenhouse Effect either greater or less than what has prevailed for millennia, the Earth would be quite different. In the absence of a Greenhouse Effect, the Earth would be ice covered. What it would be like with an enhanced Greenhouse Effect is the subject of this discussion. Weather versus climate The fundamental distinction between “weather” and “climate” is time span: climate is the average weather, including seasonal extremes and variations, either locally, regionally, or across the globe. In any one location, weather can change very rapidly from day to day and from year to year, even within an unchanging climate. These changes involve shifts in, for example, temperatures, precipitation, winds, and clouds, all of which make it a challenge to predict what will happen next. In contrast to weather, climate is generally influenced by slow changes in features like the ocean, the land, the orbit of the Earth about the sun, and the energy output of the sun.2 Climate does not vary monthly, daily or even yearly. Because climate is controlled by the long-term balance of energy of the Earth and its atmosphere, changes occur over decades or even centuries. a Much of this summary discussion is drawn from United Nations Environment Program and World Meteorological Organization, “Common Questions About Climate Change,” http://www.gcrio.org.ipcc.qa. “Common Questions” was written and reviewed by scientists who participated in the IPCC process, and it attempts to answer some of the most commonly asked questions about these issues, based upon information contained in the IPCC reports. STAPPA - PRIMER draft 1 July 17, 1998 1 Natural events. Natural events cause temporary changes in climate. For example, large volcanic eruptions put tiny particles in the atmosphere that block sunlight, resulting in a surface cooling of a few years' duration. Variations in ocean currents change the distribution of heat and precipitation. El Nino events (periodic warming of the central and eastern tropical Pacific Ocean) typically last one to two years and change weather patterns around the world, causing heavy rains in some places and droughts in others. Permanent changes in climate—at least permanent from the perspective of living things— occur over much longer time spans, hundreds of thousands of years. Natural changes in the geographical distribution of energy received from the sun and the amounts of greenhouse gases and dust in the atmosphere have caused the climate to shift from ice ages to relatively warmer periods, such as the one we are currently experiencing.3 The Impact of Human Activity Human activities also change the climate. Some of the gases that trap heat are natural— water vapor, for example. Other gases are created by both natural and human activities. Carbon dioxide, for example, is created when coal and oil are burned, as well as when plants and animals rot. Still other gases—methyl bromide and other chemicals containing chlorine, bromine and iodine, for example—either don't occur in nature at all or in vanishingly small amounts. The atmospheric amounts of many greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide, are increasing. The concentrations have carbon dioxide have jumped by roughly 30 percent over the last 200 years, and at current trends pollution levels will double sometime in the next century.4 Except for some of the chlorofluorocarbons, the family of chemicals that destroy stratospheric ozone, concentrations of almost all other human-generated greenhouse gases are also rising. These include methane (more commonly known as natural gas), tropospheric ozone (smog), and nitrous oxide (laughing gas). Temperature increases. As releases and concentrations of Greenhouse Gases have risen, so too has the Earth's temperature, according to the World Meteorological Organization. It states that the globally averaged temperature of the air at the Earth's surface has warmed between 0.3 and 0.6 degrees Celsius (about 0.5 and 1 degree Fahrenheit) since the late nineteenth century.5 The four warmest years on record since 1860 have all occurred since 1990. The warming has been greatest at night over land in the mid-to-high latitudes of the northern hemisphere. The warming during the northern winter and spring has been stronger than at other seasons. In some areas, primarily over continents, the warming has been several times greater than the global average. In a few areas, temperatures have actually cooled, e.g., over the southern Mississippi Valley in North America.6 Other effects. Other evidence of global temperature increases since the nineteenth century includes— • a rise in sea level of 10 to 25 centimeters (about 4 to 10 inches); • the shrinkage of mountain glaciers;7 STAPPA - PRIMER draft 1 July 17, 1998 2 • a reduction of northern hemisphere snow cover (1973 to present); and, • increasing sub-surface ground temperatures.8 Data, derived from measurements of tree rings, shallow ice cores, and corals, and from other methods of indirectly determining climate trends, suggest that global surface temperatures are now as warm as or warmer than at any time in the past 600 years.9 Because higher temperatures lead to higher rates of evaporation and precipitation, global warming increases frequency of snow and rain storms, as well as other very heavy and extreme precipitation events. Although analyses of observed changes in precipitation intensity have been conducted only for a few countries, scientists have documented increases in North America, Australia, and South Africa.10 The observed increases in global temperature are larger than those that would be caused by solar cycles, volcanic eruptions or other natural variables. However, the increases are similar in size and timing to those predicted by models that take into account the combined influences of human factors and solar variability. Also, the patterns of temperature change—that is, not only changes at the Earth's surface, but those in vertical sections through the atmosphere—are consistent with model predictions.11 The Greenhouse Gases The pollutants that cause global warming have been reasonably well identified, together with their principal sources. They include the following: Carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is produced when coal, oil, and natural gas (fossil fuels) are burned to produce energy used for transportation, manufacturing, heating, cooling, electricity generation, and other applications. The use of fossil fuel currently accounts for 80 to 85 percent of the carbon dioxide being added to the atmosphere.12 Land use changes are responsible for 15 to 20 percent of current carbon dioxide emissions. Clearing land for logging, ranching, and agriculture releases carbon contained in the vegetation contains carbon. Conversely, re-growth of long-lived vegetation such as trees and shrubs removes carbon dioxide from the air and stores it.13 Tropospheric ozone (smog). According to some calculations, ozone in the troposphere, that is, in the lower part of the atmosphere, is the second largest contributor to global warming. However, because it is created naturally as well as by human pollution and because the human share it is difficult to assess in rural areas, it is usually excluded from inventories. Methane. Methane (natural gas) is the second most important of the greenhouse gases resulting from human activities. It is produced by rice cultivation, cattle and sheep ranching, and by decaying material in landfills. Methane is also emitted during coal mining and oil drilling, and by leaky gas pipelines. Human activities have increased the concentration of methane in the atmosphere by about 145% above what would be present naturally.14 Nitrous oxide. Nitrous oxide is produced by various agricultural and industrial practices. STAPPA - PRIMER draft 1 July 17, 1998 3 It is also emitted by catalytic converters. Human activities have increased the concentration of nitrous oxide in the atmosphere by about 15% above what would be present naturally.15 Chlorofluorocarbons. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) have been used in refrigeration, air conditioning, and as solvents. However, the production of some CFCs is being eliminated under existing international agreements because they deplete the stratospheric ozone layer. Other fluorocarbons that are also greenhouse gases are being used as substitutes for CFCs in refrigeration and air conditioning.16 Impacts of Greenhouse Gases Based on computer models developed over the past two decades and study of previous periods of warming, scientists have reached a consensus on some of the consequences of increasing pollution by Greenhouse Gases. Much of this information has been either accumulated by The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an international effort cosponsored by the United Nations Environment Program and the World Meteorological Organization.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Open PDF File, 8.71 MB, for February 01, 2017 Appendix In
    Case 4:16-cv-00469-K Document 175 Filed 02/01/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID 5923 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, § § Plaintiff, § v. § No. 4:16-CV-469-K § ERIC TRADD SCHNEIDERMAN, § Attorney General of New York, in his § official capacity, and MAURA TRACY § HEALEY, Attorney General of § Massachusetts, in her official capacity, § § Defendants. § APPENDIX IN SUPPORT OF EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION’S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THIS COURT’S PERSONAL JURISDICTION OVER THE DEFENDANTS Exhibit Description Page(s) N/A Declaration of Justin Anderson (Feb. 1, 2017) v – ix A Transcript of the AGs United for Clean Power App. 1 –App. 21 Press Conference, held on March 29, 2016, which was prepared by counsel based on a video recording of the event. The video recording is available at http://www.ag.ny.gov/press- release/ag-schneiderman-former-vice-president- al-gore-and-coalition-attorneys-general-across B E-mail from Wendy Morgan, Chief of Public App. 22 – App. 32 Protection, Office of the Vermont Attorney General to Michael Meade, Director, Intergovernmental Affairs Bureau, Office of the New York Attorney General (Mar. 18, 2016, 6:06 PM) C Union of Concerned Scientists, Peter Frumhoff, App. 33 – App. 37 http://www.ucsusa.org/about/staff/staff/peter- frumhoff.html#.WI-OaVMrLcs (last visited Jan. 20, 2017, 2:05 PM) Case 4:16-cv-00469-K Document 175 Filed 02/01/17 Page 2 of 10 PageID 5924 Exhibit Description Page(s) D Union of Concerned Scientists, Smoke, Mirrors & App.
    [Show full text]
  • Ties That Blind: Case Studies of Corporate Influence on Climate Change Policy
    Ties that Blind 1 Ties That Blind: Case Studies of Corporate Influence on Climate Change Policy The 1996 campaign season, the recent publication of fie Buying of the President, and continuing efforts by watchdog groups to promote campaign finance reform highlight what has come to be recognLzed as a pemicious influence on American politics -- corporate and special interest money. Underlying this assumption is a belief that, either directly or indirectly, finds provided to candidates iriffuences their decision-making to the benefit of the donor. Increasingly, the public has demanded that candidates more filly disclosure their hnding sources. Similarly, spokespersons ranging from Vice President Al Gore to scientists testifying before the US Congress have alleged that the outcome of scientific inquiry is influenced by sources financing the research. Unlike campaign financing from political action committees to individual candidates, scientists are not required to disclose their finding prior to testifjring before Congress or offering comment before the media. Fortunately, in the majority of cases scientists clearly identify their sources of research hnding either by their organizational affiliation with a government agency or by electing to disclose their organizational and financial ties. The impact of undisclosed corporate money on climate change policy emerged in a series of hearings called by Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Congressman Robert Walker (R-PA). In several instances, the House Science Committee has called upon witnesses to teste who have received substantial amounts of undisclosed corporate finding from coal or energy interests such as Dr. Robert Balling, Jr. (who identifies himself with Arizona State University) and Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Smoke, Mirrors & Hot
    Smoke, Mirrors & Hot Air How ExxonMobil Uses Big Tobacco’s Tactics to Manufacture Uncertainty on Climate Science Union of Concerned Scientists January 2007 © 2007 Union of Concerned Scientists All rights reserved The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices. Union of Concerned Scientists Two Brattle Square Cambridge, MA 02238-9105 Phone: 617-547-5552 Fax: 617-864-9405 Email: [email protected] Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 3 Background: The Facts about ExxonMobil 4 The Origins of a Strategy 6 ExxonMobil’s Disinformation Campaign 9 Putting the Brakes on ExxonMobil’s Disinformation Campaign 25 Appendices A. The Scientific Consensus on Global Warming 29 B. Groups and Individuals Associated with ExxonMobil’s Disinformation Campaign 31 C. Key Internal Documents 37 • 1998 "Global Climate Science Team" memo 38 • APCO memo to Philip Morris regarding the creation of TASCC 44 • Dobriansky talking points 49 • Randy Randol's February 6, 2001, fax to the Bush team calling for Watson's dismissal 51 • Sample mark up of Draft Strategic Plan for the Climate Change Science Program by Philip Cooney 56 • Email from Mryon Ebell, Competitive Enterprise Institute, to Phil Cooney 57 Endnotes 58 Acknowledgments Seth Shulman was the lead investigator and primary author of this report. Kate Abend and Alden Meyer contributed the final chapter. Kate Abend, Brenda Ekwurzel, Monica La, Katherine Moxhet, Suzanne Shaw, and Anita Spiess assisted with research, fact checking, and editing.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Climate Deception Dossiers
    'May IS, 1991 Infomiation . Thank you for requesting additional information on global Climate change. The science o-fp?~~-'c!in!z*e cJ~~E~cis rsen, cowrltx !{'e 2re S?? ---_.- IC.: .-._:- scA z*c c. 1- -- -- :13r,:r.,: 0: ca-j-- b'.r-2S';a'*I .-. - ixeraa ujth eich o;>er. \I L Gc, bow aat yevs 2go the Earth was warmer; ve etation thrived, and there was more carbon dioxide in the atmosp% ere than there is now. We also how that during the last ice age, carbon dioxide levels were lower than they are now. We believe 3 is wrong IO predict that higher levels of carbon dioxide will bring a catastrophic global wanning. The Information Council for the Environment was created to help foster better ublic understanding ofglobal warming and to emure that any legisP ation passed by Congress is based on scientifjc evidence. The environment must be protected. We want a clean environment and we want a green Earth. We also believe we mw mnduct more scienti' reseatdr before we can acuuazeb UndeCJImtd the complex fom ofglobal climate change. Change often begins with one son. YOUcan make a difference by sharing what you've learne rwith others. Thank you for Caring enough to request this additional information. .tcicncr .rds iwp Panc.1: DR. RORCET C B4lU~G..IR. Dm-cwr oht d Ulniatolo~g) ~ninnaVZ:~ 1nit emty Tenipr.. .I% Dr. Patrick Michaels May 15, 1991 X X X X Infomation Council r. for &e Environment Thank you for requesting more information about global climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Defeating Kyoto: the Conservative Movement's Impact on U.S. Climate
    Defeating Kyoto: The Conservative Movement’s Impact on U.S. Climate Change Policy AARON M. McCRIGHT, University of Chicago RILEY E. DUNLAP, Åbo Akademi University, Finland In this article, we argue that a major reason the United States failed to ratify the Kyoto Protocol to ame- liorate global warming is the opposition of the American conservative movement, a key segment of the anti- environmental countermovement. We examine how the conservative movement mobilized between 1990 and 1997 to construct the “non-problematicity” of global warming. After we describe how conservative think tanks mobilized to challenge the global warming claims of mainstream climate science, we examine how these counter- movement organizations aligned themselves with prominent American climate change skeptics known for their staunch criticism of mainstream climate research and their afliations with the fossil fuels industry. We then examine how the efforts of these conservative think tanks were enhanced by the shift in the political opportunity structure created by the 1994 Republican takeover of Congress. This study demonstrates how a powerful counter- movement effectively challenged the environmental community’s denition of global warming as a social prob- lem and blocked the passage of any signicant climate change policy. Since the early 1980s a robust international consensus about the reality and seriousness of climate change has emerged, as evidenced by several comprehensive reports from the National Academy of Sciences (National Research Council 1983, 2001), Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1990, 1995, 2001), and World Climate Program (1985). By the early 1990s, the environmental community in the United States—comprised of members of the envi- ronmental movement, sympathetic climate scientists, and environmental policy-makers— successfully dened climate change, or anthropogenic (human-induced) global warming, 1 as a legitimate social problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Exxon: Denial and Deception
    DENIAL AND DECEPTION: A Chronicle of ExxonMobil’s Efforts to Corrupt the Debate on Global Warming A Report by May 2002 Acknowledgements The report was written and researched by Janet Sawin and Kert Davies, using research and reports by Greenpeace United Kingdom, Ross Gelbspan, Kirsty Hamilton and Bill Hare. Special thanks to the Ozone Action files. Greenpeace is grateful to the founda- tions, donors and members who support our global warming campaign. Foreward One way to look at human history is through the peri- experiment on the global climate. We have already odic struggles between those embodying the cor- been provided a glimpse of what happens as global rupting influence of power and those who have kept warming goes unabated, from the loss of low lying such power in check or even successfully under- island nations and beaches the world over, to the mined it. The American Revolution is arguably the spread of infectious diseases, disrupted agriculture, birth of the freedom movement in the Western world, more severe weather cycles including super storms, although the British might argue that the birth of the more droughts, more floods, and ultimately the mas- "rights of man" came from the issuing of the Magna sive die-off of the great forests, the disappearance of Carta and frankly, all cultures can point to great liber- many glaciers, and the further accelerated loss of ators of one era or another. biodiversity. Regardless of where it began, every massive center ExxonMobil’s role in defeating efforts to stop global of unaccountable power, whether it be the Roman warming is impressive.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    December 31, 2014 CURRICULUM VITAE Dr. Robert C. Balling, Jr. Home Address: School of Geographical Sciences 406 East Erie Drive Arizona State University Tempe, Arizona Tempe, Arizona 85287-0104 85282 Tel: 480-965-7533 Tel: 480-968-6793 FAX: 480-965-8313 Cell: 480-522-9202 [email protected] Personal Data: Born - December 16, 1952, Uniontown, Pennsylvania Citizenship - USA Education: A.B. Wittenberg University, 1974 M.A. Bowling Green State University, 1975 Ph.D. University of Oklahoma, 1979 Certification: GISP GIS Certification Institute Awards: 2011 Professor of the Year, Awarded by Order of Omega Greek Honorary Society Professional Positions: 1979-1981 Research Fellow, Center for Agricultural Meteorology and Climatology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln 1979-1984 Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, University of Nebraska- Lincoln 1985-1986 Visiting Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, Arizona State University 1985-1987 Research Associate, Laboratory of Climatology and Department of Geography, Arizona State University 1987-1988 Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, and Assistant Director, Laboratory of Climatology, Arizona State University 1988-1989 Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, and Director, Laboratory of Climatology, Arizona State University 1 1989-1998 Associate Professor, Department of Geography, and Director, Office of Climatology, Arizona State University 1998-2004 Professor, Department of Geography, and Director, Office of Climatology, Arizona State University 2004- Professor, School of Geographical Sciences & Urban Planning, and Director and/or Associate Director, Masters of Advanced Study, Geographic Information Systems Program Books: 1992 Robert C. Balling, Jr. The Heated Debate: Greenhouse Predictions Versus Climate Reality. San Francisco, California: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, xxxvi + 195 pp. 1994 Martin A.J.
    [Show full text]
  • GLOBAL CLIMATE COALITION: Big Business Funds Climate Change Denial and Regulatory Delay
    THE GLOBAL CLIMATE COALITION: Big Business Funds Climate Change Denial and Regulatory Delay As corporations are increasingly being held accountable for deception of shareholders and the public on climate risk, as authors and journalists explore this history, and as lawmakers investigate it, Climate Investigations Center embarked on a year- long investigation of the Global Climate Coalition (GCC), arguably the most impactful industry group ever to campaign against climate change regulation and science. The United States woke up to climate change in 1988 after extreme weather caused drought across half the country and newsworthy Senate hearings on the science stressed urgent action. In 1989, the Global Climate Coalition, the first industry organization to challenge government action on climate, was launched from the offices of the National Association of Manufacturers, with leadership dominated by coal-vested electric utility interests, fossil fuel companies (oil, coal) and their trade associations, and heavy manufacturing (i.e. steel, aluminum, railroads, and automobiles). The GCC was corporate America’s primary vehicle of climate change science denial and regulatory delay during its existence until 2002. Now, nearly two decades after the group disbanded, the Climate Investigations Center has collected the most comprehensive collection of GCC documents, and made them publicly available in its archival portal, Climate Files. Curated from research by advocates and journalists, and from private archives, litigation, FOIA requests, and IRS filings, this collection reveals the broad industry coalition that led, staffed, and coordinated the GCC’s efforts. The documents show GCC’s work to carefully pick apart established climate science, emphasize uncertainty, and advocate for regulatory inaction to the public, media, lawmakers, and government representatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Heartland Climate Scientists List
    U.S. Climate Scientists Mailing List May 29, 2017 Name Contact Information Email Address Qualifications Akasofu, Syun-Ichi International Arctic Research Center Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu was director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks from its establishment in 1998 until January 2007. As director of the Geophysical Institute (1986-1999), Dr. Akasofu concentrated his effort University of Alaska Fairbanks on establishing the institute as a key research center in the Arctic. Wrote an excellent piece on the “pause in 2013: On the Present Halting of Global Warming,” Open Access Climate, May 3, 2013. Spoke at ICCC-2. Signed Cato’s open letter to Obama. Ph.D. geophysics University of Alaska Fairbanks https://www.heartland.org/about-us/who-we-are/syun-ichi-akasofu Alexander, Ralph B. Former associate professor at Wayne State University (Detroit). Author of Global Warming False Alarm (Canterbury Publishing, El Dorado Hills, CA 2012) Phone: (NOAA Letter Signatory) Ph.D. Physics, Oxford Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ralph-alexander-3624141a Alliegro, Mark Senior scientist, Marine Biological Laboratory, ran for Congress in the 9th Congressional District of Massachusetts in 2016 and lost. A noted cell biologist with a background in biochemistry and molecular biology, Mark has worked as a Senior Scientist at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, and as a Professor of Molecular Biology, Cellular Biology and Biochemistry at Brown University. The author of more than 40 scientific papers, Dr. Alliegro served as a Program Director for Molecular & Cellular Biosciences at the National Science Foundation and as an Instructor of Medical Histology at Harvard Medical School.
    [Show full text]
  • Expert Assessment of Uncertainties in Detection and Attribution of Climate Change
    EXPERT ASSESSMENT OF UNCERTAINTIES IN DETECTION AND ATTRIBUTION OF CLIMATE CHANGE BY JAMES S. RISBEY AND MILIND KANDLIKAR The problem of detection of climate change and attribution of causes of change has been formalized as a series of discrete probability judgements by experts he study of detection and attribution of climate and further on "attributing" any detected signal to change addresses the issue of whether, and to increases in greenhouse gases or other possible causes Twhat extent, human-induced increases in green- (Hasselmann 1998; Hegerl et al. 1997; Santer et al. house gases have caused climate changes. Communi- 1996a; Zwiers 1999). Summary assessments of the cation of the science and role of uncertainties on this detection and attribution issue have tended to take a issue has been hindered by the lack of explicit formal qualitative approach to characterizing uncertainties approaches for making overall conclusions on detec- (Santer et al. 1996a; Barnett et al. 1999; Mitchell et al. tion and attribution. We have developed a protocol 2001). This study outlines some of the major uncer- to quantify uncertainties in each component of the de- tainties in detection and attribution, uses expert tection and attribution process and to provide a struc- judgements to quantify them, and gives an overall tured way to make overall conclusions (Risbey et al. quantitative assessment of detection and attribution 2000). Here we describe results from use of the pro- of climate change. tocol with a set of climate experts. In making overall assessments on detection and Studies of detection and attribution of climate attribution of climate change, a variety of scientific change have focused first on "detecting" climate judgements are called for.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists Versus Scientific Forecasts
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Marketing Papers Wharton Faculty Research 2007 Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists versus Scientific Forecasts Kesten C. Green Monash University, [email protected] J. Scott Armstrong University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/marketing_papers Recommended Citation Green, K. C., & Armstrong, J. S. (2007). Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists versus Scientific Forecasts. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/marketing_papers/168 Suggested Citation: Green, K.C. and Armstrong, J.S. (2007). Global Warming: Forecasts by Scienctists Versus Scientific Forecasts. Energy & Environment. Vol. 19(7-8). p. 997-1021. Publisher URL: http://multi-science.metapress.com/content/121493/ This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/marketing_papers/168 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists versus Scientific orF ecasts Abstract In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Working Group One, a panel of experts established by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme, issued its Fourth Assessment Report. The Report included predictions of dramatic increases in average world temperatures over the next 92 years and serious harm resulting from the predicted temperature increases. Using forecasting principles as our guide we asked: Are these forecasts a good basis for developing public policy? Our answer is “no”. To provide forecasts of climate change that are useful for policy-making, one would need to forecast (1) global temperature, (2) the effects of any temperature changes, and (3) the effects of feasible alternative policies. Proper forecasts of all three are necessary for rational policy making.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change Deniers
    Herrell 1 Climate Change Deniers: A Research Paper on the Misinformation Campaigns Spread by the Fossil Fuel Industry By: Jasmyn Herrell 11/29/16 Honors English Composition 1028 Dr. Kevin O’Donnell Over the past few decades the fossil fuel industry has been exposed of financing a long-term climate change denial movement. This paper discusses the movement and the multiple aspects that make up the fraudulent scam. Herrell 2 Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Anthropogenic Global Warming and How to Stop it ............................................................................ 4 Climate Change Skepticism: Why the Fossil Fuel Industry doesn’t want you to believe in Global Warming ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Climate Deception ............................................................................................................................... 5 Peabody Energy................................................................................................................................... 5 ExxonMobil ........................................................................................................................................ 6 Front Groups ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Corrupt
    [Show full text]