Energy consumption and the environment


How We Slept Through the Climate Alarm

Until the end of the 20th Century, most
scientists thought they understood the natureHowever, with their old ideas now challenged
of our climate system. As the veryby these new theories, scientists began to
foundation of their science, geologistsnotice the evidence of abrupt changes in
cherished the "uniformitarian principle" thattheir data. Pollen records and improved
held that the fundamental forces that moldedcarbon dating techniques in the 1970's
the Earth's features and climate weredepicted stable climate periods interrupted
gradual, natural, stable processes that didby radical discontinuities that took only one
not vary over time scales less than tens ofor two centuries to totally change the
thousands  of  years.vegetation  of  a  region.
This idea became central to their trainingSince then, evidence from other studies such
through a century of debate over naturalas cores of glacial ice and ocean sediments,
catastrophes such as the biblical account ofhas continued to accumulate as methodologies
Noah's flood. The concept of catastrophichave been progressively refined. This has
climate change became 'tainted byfurther built justification for heroic
association' with creationist zealots seekingresearch, by intrepid teams braving hazardous
scientific backing for fundamentalistconditions on heaving oceans or bitter, high
interpretations of Bible passages. And so,altitude polar ice sheets, to win samples
such stories came to be considered as purelydeep and distinct enough to provide an
supernatural events, with no place within theunambiguous picture of the Earth's geological
objectivity  of  science.and climatic past, a picture that shows that
violent, spectacular short-term shifts were
Any evidence to the contrary...and there was,common.
in retrospect, plenty of it... was at first
readily dismissed. Sudden climate change inAs a result, scientists en masse were
the Earth's past was blurred by imperfectbeginning to entertain the possibility of
data and lack of refinement in earlyabrupt change, this new attitude reflected in
scientific methods. Where abrupt changes ina statement from the Intergovernmental Panel
the geological record were indisputable,on Climate Change in a 1996 report that
these were written off as regionalconcluded that 'climate surprises' were
curiosities, arising from purely localpossible. The point was not emphasized at
impacts - such as a forest fire or thethe time, and received little press
introduction of agriculture - impacts thatattention. Many scientists also passively
had  nothing  to  do  with  climate.rejected the facts by refusing to revise
their accustomed ways of thinking about
Until dating methods were perfected,climate.
chronological correlation of data collected
at different locations around the globe wasNot until 2000 did paired ice-cores,
not possible, and even when it was possible,extracted by competing teams in Greenland,
was not at first even pursued. Globalmatch to show irrevocable proof of abrupt
changes in climate had different effects inclimate shifts taking effect over mere
different areas, further complicating thedecades (see R.B. Alley's book 'The Two-Mile
issue and obscuring the true scope of abrupt,Time Machine'). Similar cores were drilled
world-wide  climate  shifts.in Antarctica and revealed the global scale
of the shifts. This forced the climate
In fact, the uniformitarian climate paradigmcommunity  to  arrive  at  consensus.
was scarcely doubted until the 1950's when a
group of scientists set up a physical oceanNow respected climate scientists concur that
system model that demonstrated thatthe potential for fast climate change
circulation could flip rapidly from oneevidently does exist, and could surprise
stable state to another. Scientists began tohumanity with a climate shock within the
concede that change may only take thousandslifetimes of you and I. However, the new
of  years.paradigm has not extended beyond
geoscientists to the impacts community -
This view of the change-rate capacity ofeconomists and other specialists are slow to
climate was reduced to mere hundreds of yearsturn their attention to the consequences of
in subsequent decades, beginning in the earlyclimate change, and policy makers and the
1960's when mathematical models thatpublic are even more ignorant of the risks
incorporated climate feedback factors such ashumanity  faces.
snow and ice cover (albedo effects) suggested
that global climate really could changeBecause science has been late to wake up to
enormously  in  a  relatively  short  time.climate change, crucial information about the
potential behavior of our climate has only
In the mid 1960's deep sea sediment coresvery recently come to light. Relentlessly
finally revealed that the planet hademerging climate surprises have thrown into
experienced several ice-age cycles of gradualpainful relief just how inadequate our
glacial buildups over 90,000 year intervals,understanding of the climate system remains.
punctuated by more rapid 10,000 yearLike a snowball rolling down a mountain,
de-glaciations. Because of the huge lagclimate change is gathering momentum, racing
between global climate shifts and deep seaahead of even the most pessimistic
temperature responses, even this data beliedpredictions.
the extreme magnitude of changes on the
surface  oceans,  land masses and atmosphere.Will you be ready?



1 A B C 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91