I don't like to comment on topics where I have less intellectual knowledge than a basic college education provides. So while I believe that Global Warming is real, because I only took the Science of Music (I do understand why vibrations produce sound) in college, I generally keep my opinions on this to myself.
However, with the political campaign picking up, the shrillness of some commentators on Global Warming (believers and disbelievers) has reached an irritating level for me that compels me to put fingers to the keyboard.
First let me side with the disbelievers. Global Warming did not cause the devastation of Irene in the Catskill and Green Mountains that have been my home for most of my life. 100 year floods happen every 100 years or so. The East Sidney Dam was built to control flooding in the Susquehanna in the 1950's. But that did not prevent Sidney from having its flood plane inundated with a flood in 2006. Man can only do so much to control water. Building plans have to take 100 year floods into account when designed. Such farm land needs to be managed around the periodic floods.
I also do not believe that any other periodic bouts of weather are caused by global warming in any specific case. Irene was the 1st hurricane to hit the U.S. in 3 or 4 years, when "normal" is for us to be hit by at least one somewhere.
However, the disbelievers in global warming are ignoring one basic reality. The earth is warming and ice caps are melting. The less intellectually honest disbelievers shout that the believers are cooking the data. Most of those, I believe, probably don't believe in evolution either and probably believe in any other number of conspiracies. The somewhat more intellectually honest believe the earth goes through regular warming and cooling cycles and you cannot attribute this warming to green house gases. In their view, the market will generate the signals to provide solutions to global warming when it becomes real.
I don't think this should be left to the market. Lack of regulation led to the free enterprise system dumping toxic waste into any number of waterways and the air. Does anyone want to return to those days? I have been to China and their toxic waste is not managed well and that is the primary reason I don't ever want to go back despite the many interesting tourist activities. Now, the Chinese people want good regulation of toxic waste and the pressure is on the politicians to do so. Pollution imposes a societal cost that is not priced. So either the government puts a price on it in a form of a tax or regulates it without putting an explicit cost on it. But every government should do something to try and reduce green house gases.
The decline in ice caps is proof to me that the earth is warming. There are scientific studies that show this in other ways. The U.S. needs to be a leader for the rest of the world in this. Cap & Trade was designed by members of both political parties to let the market figure it out. But this has gone nowhere with the current state of partisanship by the Republicans.
Believers in global warming need to promote non-fossil fuel energy in an economic manner. That means, do not be a NIMBY if there is an economic location for solar, wind or water power. Figure out a way to improve your car's cash mileage. That will create demand for such products and reduce their cost.
The earth started to warm with the Industrial Revolution. The pace of this warming as far as we can tell is unprecedented in history. Even the CIA believes this and ranks in its top 5 global concerns for creating future conflicts. A rational discussion is needed on what mix of regulation and economic signals should be put in place for the U.S. to be a leader in moving towards a less fossil fuel centric economy.
No comments:
Post a Comment