This Ballotpedia article is in need of updates. Please email us if you would like to suggest a revision. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
|
 |
Opposing views of climate change theory include scientific challenges to the theory that human activity is responsible for changes in the climate. Scientists and the members of the general public who are skeptical about the theory of human-caused climate change have varied viewpoints along a spectrum. Some reject the idea that human-caused climate change exists; others have argued that human-made climate change is occurring but that the extent to which climate is changing and the precise impact of human activity is uncertain. Another group has argued that policies aimed at addressing human-caused climate change are misguided or counter-productive.
Topics involved in the debate over the theory of human-caused climate change include the nature of global warming, such as its positive, negative, and/or neutral effects, the extent to which human activity is responsible for global warming or changes in the climate, the scientific models used to predict future global warming, the pace at which global warming may be occurring, and the debate over the policies related to global warming and climate change.
Contents
- 1 Background
- 1.1 Definitions
- 1.2 Potential link between CO2 and global warming
- 1.3 Other scientific views on climate change theory
- 2 Topics
- 2.1 Climate models
- 2.2 Potential pause in warming
- 3 Policy topics
- 3.1 Clean Power Plan
- 3.2 Other policies
- 4 Criticism
- 4.1 Climate models
- 5 Recent news
- 6 See also
- 7 Footnotes
Background
Definitions
Climate can be described as the average weather around the globe or a statistical description of global weather over a period of months, years, or decades. Climate measurements include temperature, precipitation, wind patterns, storm patterns, and other meteorological phenomena throughout the globe. Climate is naturally variable regardless of human activity. Scientific discussions have focused on the extent to which human activity can affect the climate.[1][2]
Climate change refers to a significant change in the above statistical measures, such as changes in surface and ocean temperature, precipitation, storm and wind patterns, and other phenomena over a period of decades, centuries, or millennia. In the public debate, the term climate change may be used interchangeably with the theory that human activity contributes to and/or is responsible for global warming and subsequent changes in the climate since the Industrial Revolution.[3]
Global warming refers to rising global average surface temperatures. The theory of human-caused climate change states that global warming can occur when concentrations of greenhouse gases (heat-trapping gases) such as carbon dioxide, water vapor, and methane rise and thus keep more heat in the atmosphere than can escape into space and/or be absorbed on Earth. More heat in the atmosphere, less absorption of carbon dioxide and similar gases on Earth, and solar activity may contribute to an increase in global average surface temperatures. According to the theory of human-caused climate change, human activity, particularly the use of oil, coal, and natural gas, is the main contributor of global warming, which could contribute to long-term changes in the climate and global weather patterns.[4]
Potential link between CO2 and global warming
One component of the theory of human-caused climate change is that carbon dioxide (CO2) and other heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere, such as water vapor and methane, can contribute to the warming of the Earth's surface. In addition, this theory states that human activity, particularly the use of coal, oil, and natural gas, have contributed to higher concentrations of CO2 and similar gases in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution of the mid- to late-19th century. Moreover, the theory states that higher concentrations of these gases in the atmosphere will lead to global warming (increases in global average surface temperatures). According to the theory, rising global temperatures can increase the frequency of extreme weather events or conditions, such as storms, hurricanes, flooding, drought, extreme cold, and more acidic oceans.
Other scientific views on climate change theory
Some scientists have argued that the theory of human-caused climate change involves scientific uncertainties about the nature of global warming and its causes. Some of these scientists, such as Judith Curry, former professor of earth and atmospheric science at the Georgia Institute of Technology, have argued that observed climate data does not show accelerating temperatures or an increased frequency of extreme weather.[5]
Other scientists have argued that observed global temperatures have risen less than what has been projected by climate models, such as the models used by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). These scientists, such as Roy Spencer, a former scientist of climate studies at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), have argued that several observed temperature data, such as surface data and satellite data sets, do not show the accelerated warming that has been projected by the IPCC's models. Other scientists have argued that climate models represent an incomplete approximation of global climate and may exclude various factors that can affect global climate.[6]
Some scientists have argued that if human-caused global warming is occurring, more cost-effective policies exist to address the potential impacts of warming rather than government regulations requiring reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. Freeman Dyson, a former professor of physics at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton University, has argued that while global warming may be caused by human activity, policies should focus on making renewable energy, which emits less carbon dioxide, more affordable. Bjorn Lomborg, a visiting professor at Copenhagen Business School, has argued that policies such as the Clean Power Plan and the Paris Climate Agreement will do little to reduce global temperatures and that policies should focus on lowering the costs of renewable energy sources so more individuals and businesses choose them over coal, oil, and natural gas.[7][8][9]
Topics
The following sections contain information about the topics discussed by scientific critics of the theory of human-caused climate change.
Climate models
Some scientific critics of the theory of human-made global warming have argued that observed world temperature data differs from the accelerating warming projected by climate models, particularly models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) at the United States. These scientists have argued that observed world temperatures show that warming has abated. Former NASA scientists John Christy and Roy Spencer argued that observed temperature data sets, such as data sets collected by NASA and the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (a federal agency), show less warming than climate models that have projected a larger increase in global average temperature. These scientists have argued that the climate models projecting global temperatures from 1980 and 2015 showed more warming than observed temperatures measured by satellites and weather balloons during the same period. According to these scientists, the difference between model projects and observed temperature data suggests that models have presented an imprecise representation of temperature changes and global climate.[10][11][12]
Potential pause in warming
One focus of the debate over the theory of human-caused climate change is potential pauses in global warming. A pause in global warming can refer to a slower rate of surface temperature warming relative to previous rates of warming at certain points the past. A 2013 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) argued that the rate of surface warming from 1998 to 2013 was slower than the rate of warming calculated since 1951. An August 2014 study published in the Open Journal of Statistics argued that the rate of global warming slowed from 1998 to 2013 based on surface temperature records and global satellite data of the lower atmosphere.[13][14]
Some scientists have argued that some global temperature data sets show that the rate of warming has slowed since 1998. In December 2015, Judith Curry, former professor of atmospheric science at the Georgia Institute of Technology, argued that "the observed rate of warming in the early 21st century was slower than climate model predictions, relative to the rapid rate of warming in the last quarter of the 20th century." Curry further stated that the slower rate of warming since 1998 occurred alongside a rise in human-caused carbon dioxide emissions, arguing that "the growing discrepancy between climate model predictions and the observations has raised serious questions about the climate models that are being used as the basis for national and international energy and climate policies."[15]
Policy topics
Critics of the theory of human-caused climate change hold varied policy views. While some have supported policies aimed at reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, others have not. Some critics have opposed government regulations, such as federal regulations aimed at reducing CO2 and similar emissions from energy use. These critics have argued carbon dioxide regulations would reduce jobs and income without having a substantial impact on global temperatures in the present or in the future.[16]
Clean Power Plan
- See also: Clean Power Plan
Th EPA's regulatory action on carbon dioxide and similar gas emissions is the Clean Power Plan. The Clean Power Plan is an administrative rule issued by the EPA. The EPA argued that the plan is justified by the agency's interpretation of the Clean Air Act and the Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency. The plan's goal is to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from coal- and oil-fired power plants (known as fossil fuel-fired) and natural gas-fired power plants by 32 percent from 2005 levels by the year 2030. The plan would require each state to reduce its emissions to meet a specific target. This emissions target is based on the number of fossil fuel- and natural gas-fired plants in that state.[17][18][19]
Critics of the plan have argued that it would reduce jobs and household income without having a substantial impact on global temperatures. Some critics, including proponents of increased coal production, have called the plan a war on coal, arguing that coal mining operations and employment at coal-fired power plants would be negatively affected by the plan's CO2 reductions. A 2014 study commissioned by energy industry representatives—including the National Mining Association, American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, and others—argued that the Clean Power Plan would raise residential electricity prices by 13 percent and increase residential electricity bills by 8 percent.[20]
Other critics have argued that the plan would have no substantial impact on reducing future global warming and reducing global temperatures. Using the EPA's climate modeling methodology, Patrick J. Michaels and Paul Knappenberger of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute, a libertarian policy organization, argued that the complete elimination of CO2 emissions in the United States would reduce future warming by 0.137 degree Celsius by the year 2100. In addition, Michaels and Knappenberger argued that adopting the Clean Power Plan would reduce a rise in global temperatures by 0.018 degrees Celsius (0.032 degrees Fahrenheit). Michaels and Knappenberger argued, "The number is so small as to be undetectable." [21]
Other policies
Some policymakers have proposed policies aimed at creating market-based incentives for the production of technology that releases less carbon dioxide. Proponents of the policies have argued that creating incentives for renewable energy would lead to more renewable energy production and lower energy costs. Other policies proposed by market-oriented policymakers include the following:[22]
- The federal government should encourage technology inducement prizes in lieu of direct federal spending on renewable energy technology. A technology inducement prize is a competition that awards a cash prize for technological innovation. According to this view, competitive prizes are more likely to produce innovative technology than grants or subsidies.
- Federal and state governments can issue revised permitting and regulatory processes aimed at increasing private investment in low-carbon technologies.
- The federal government could institute a carbon tax as an incentive to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The tax could be rebated to taxpayers on a per capita basis to avoid applying the tax to low-income citizens. Some critics of this proposal have argued that carbon taxes would reduce employment and income in the same way as the Clean Power Plan's regulations.
Criticism
Proponents of the theory of human-caused climate change have argued that critics of the theory ignore certain evidence supporting the theory.
Climate models
Proponents of the theory of human-caused climate change have argued that climate models have been accurate in reproducing past predictions and in making predictions later confirmed by observed data. John Cook, the Climate Communication Fellow for the Global Change Institute at the University of Queensland, argued that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) 2001 model showing a rise in human-caused CO2 levels from 1850 to 2000 corresponded most accurately to observed surface temperature data compared to models that did not contain a rise in human-caused CO2. Cook argued that the model confirmed that human-caused CO2 was the primary cause of global warming since the model without human-caused CO2 could not explain the observed data.[23][24]
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Climatechangeskepticism. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
Footnotes
- ↑ NASA, "What Are Climate and Climate Change?" October 26, 2011
- ↑ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "Definitions of climate change," accessed March 10, 2016
- ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Climate change glossary," accessed February 1, 2015
- ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Climate Change: Basic Information," accessed January 21, 2015
- ↑ Judith Curry, "Is Extreme Weather Linked to Global Warming?" June 2, 2011
- ↑ Dr. Roy Spencer, "My Global Warming Skepticism, for Dummies," accessed January 2, 2017
- ↑ The New York Times Magazine, "The Civil Heretic," March 25, 2009
- ↑ Lomborg.com, "Paris climate promises will reduce temperatures by just 0.05°C in 2100 (Press release)," accessed March 1, 2017
- ↑ Boston Globe, "Misunderstandings, questionable beliefs mar Paris climate talks," December 3, 2015
- ↑ Climate Etc., "Climate models versus climate reality," December 17, 2015
- ↑ Watts Up with That, "How good is the NASA GISS global temperature dataset?" August 3, 2015
- ↑ Heritage Foundation, "The State of Climate Science: No Justification for Extreme Policies," April 22, 2016
- ↑ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report Fifth Assessment Report - Topic 1: Observed Changes and their Causes," accessed April 7, 2016
- ↑ Open Journal of Statistics, "HAC-Robust Measurement of the Duration of a Trendless Subsample in a Global Climate Time Series," August 1, 2014
- ↑ Heartland Institute, "Statement to the Subcommittee on Space, Science and Competitiveness of the United States Senate by Judith A. Curry," December 8, 2015
- ↑ The Atlantic, "Federal Coercion and the EPA’s Clean Power Plan," May 17, 2015
- ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Overview of the Clean Power Plan," accessed November 3, 2015
- ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Clean Power Plan Toolbox for States," accessed November 3, 2015
- ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Clean Power Plan - Rule Summary," August 3, 2015
- ↑ NERA Economic Consulting, "Potential Energy Impacts of the EPA Proposed Clean Power Plan," October 2014
- ↑ Cato Institute, "0.02°C Temperature Rise Averted: The Vital Number Missing from the EPA’s 'By the Numbers' Fact Sheet," June 11, 2014
- ↑ The Atlantic, "A Conservative's Approach to Combating Climate Change," May 30, 2012
- ↑ Skeptical Science, "How reliable are climate models? - Basic," accessed April 11, 2016
- ↑ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "Climate Change 2001: Working Group I: The Scientific Basis," accessed April 8, 2016
