Jeffrey D. Sachs
Published: Sunday 29 July 2012
“In recent weeks, the United States has entered its worst drought in modern times.”

Our Summer of Climate Truth

Article image

For years, climate scientists have been warning the world that the heavy use of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) threatens the world with human-induced climate change. The rising atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, a byproduct of burning fossil fuels, would warm the planet and change rainfall and storm patterns and raise sea levels. Now those changes are hitting in every direction, even as powerful corporate lobbies and media propagandists like Rupert Murdoch try to deny the truth.

In recent weeks, the United States has entered its worst drought in modern times. The Midwest and the Plains states, the country’s breadbasket, are baking under a massive heat wave, with more than half of the country under a drought emergency and little relief in sight.

Follow Project Syndicate on Facebook or Twitter. For more from Jeffery D. Sachs, click here.

Halfway around the world, Beijing has been hit by the worst rains on record, with floods killing many people. Japan is similarly facing record-breaking torrential rains. Two of Africa's impoverished drylands – the Horn of Africa in the East and the Sahel in the West – have experienced devastating droughts and famines in the past two years: the rains never came, causing many thousands to perish, while millions face life-threatening hunger.

Scientists have given a name to our era, the Anthropocene, a term built on ancient Greek roots to mean “the Human-dominated epoch” – a new period of earth’s history in which humanity has become the cause of global-scale environmental change. Humanity affects not only the earth’s climate, but also ocean chemistry, the land and marine habitats of millions of species, the quality of air and water, and the cycles of water, nitrogen, phosphorus, and other essential components that underpin life on the planet.

For many years, the risk of climate change was widely regarded as something far in the future, a risk perhaps facing our children or their children. That threat would, of course, have been reason enough to act. Yet now we understand better that climate change is also about us, today’s generation.

We have already entered a new and very dangerous era. If you are a young person, climate change and other human-caused environmental hazards will be major factors in your life.

Scientists emphasize the difference between climate and weather. The climate is the overall pattern of temperature and rainfall in a given place. The weather is the temperature and rainfall in that place at a particular time. As the old quip puts it: “Climate is what you expect; weather is what you get.”

When the temperature is especially high, or rains are especially heavy or light, scientists try to assess whether the unusual conditions are the result of long-term climate change or simply reflect expected variability. So, is the current US heat wave (making this the hottest year on record), the intense Beijing flooding, or the severe Sahel drought a case of random bad weather, or merely the result of long-term, human-induced climate change?

For a long time, scientists could not answer such a question precisely. They were unsure whether a particular weather disaster could be attributed to human causes, rather than to natural variation. They could not even be sure that they could detect whether a particular event (such as a heavy rainfall or a drought) was so extreme as to lie outside the normal range.

In recent years, however, a new climate science of “detection and attribution” has made huge advances, both conceptually and empirically. Detection means determining whether an extreme event is part of usual weather fluctuations or a symptom of deeper, long-term change. Attribution means the ability to assign the likely causes of an event to human activity or other factors. The new science of detection and attribution is sharpening our knowledge – and also giving us even more cause for concern.

Several studies in the past year have shown that scientists can indeed detect long-term climate change in the rising frequency of extreme events – such as heat waves, heavy rains, severe droughts, and strong storms. By using cutting-edge climate models, scientists are not only detecting long-term climate change, but also are attributing at least some of the extreme events to human causes.

The past couple of years have brought a shocking number of extreme events all over the planet. In many cases, short-run natural factors rather than human activity played a role. During 2011, for example, La Niña conditions prevailed in the Pacific Ocean. This means that especially warm water was concentrated near Southeast Asia while colder water was concentrated near Peru. This temporary condition caused many short-term changes in rainfall and temperature patterns, leading, for example, to heavy floods in Thailand.

Yet, even after carefully controlling for such natural year-to-year shifts, scientists are also finding that several recent disasters likely reflect human-caused climate change as well. For example, human-caused warming of the Indian Ocean probably played a role in the 2011 severe drought in the Horn of Africa, which triggered famine, conflict, and hunger, affecting millions of impoverished people. The current US mega-drought probably reflects a mix of natural causes, including La Niña, and a massive heat wave intensified by human-caused climate change.

The evidence is solid and accumulating rapidly. Humanity is putting itself at increasing peril through human-induced climate change. As a global community, we will need to move rapidly and resolutely in the coming quarter-century from an economy based on fossil-fuels to one based on new, cutting-edge, low-carbon energy technologies.

The global public is ready to hear that message and to act upon it. Yet politicians everywhere are timid, especially because oil and coal companies are so politically powerful. Human well-being, even survival, will depend on scientific evidence and technological know-how triumphing over shortsighted greed, political timidity, and the continuing stream of anti-scientific corporate propaganda.



Get Email Alerts from NationofChange

Top Stories

3 comments on "Our Summer of Climate Truth"

dougcarver

July 30, 2012 2:27am

I am genuinely concerned about the environment, and I think there is agreement that humans are contributing to climate change, and hence weather patterns, in at least some degree, even if it is too small to notice as of this day. Even if it is only 25% correct, that is enough of a factor to warrant significant changes in behavior. However, regardless of what behavior we current occupants of the earth change, the real challenge lies in not "how" we impact the planet, but rather "how MUCH and WHY" we impact it. Consider this analogy. IF one person pees in your pool, it really doesn't matter. A little whiz won't kill anyone, and it will evaporate faster than it can significantly impact the quality of the water. The larger the pool, the more people who can pee in it with no significant impact. As icky as it may sound, it is highly unlikely 10 people, even 20 or 100, peeing in the Olympic pool in London all at once, would make much difference. However, if we increase that pool peeing "population" exponentially, as the earth's (net birth/death) population does, and don't increase the pool size, and can't find new clean water to replace the water with more and more pee in it, it will not be a long time (weeks? months? years at best?) before you and I would probably consider it not be "safe" to swim in that pool. So the increase in pool pee-ers results in an increase rate of consumption and/or impact, on the pool. What I am getting at is, the methods of combating the increasing rate of consumption either by managing the resources "better" (reducing consumption and increasing production per capita) , will only slow the depletion of and impact on, resources. Substitution, eg wind for oil, will only slow the impact of fossil fuel consumption. The point, the REAL problem is the population is growing faster than the earth can replenish its resources and/or technology can increase efficient use of resources or replace one resource with another. The earth is finite. Unless population decreases, the earth will "run out" of the "stuff" we need from it. It may be decades, generations, centuries before we just plain run out of resources before we can substitute or replace them. Unless we can increase the size and make up of the earth (and not adversely), we will consume and/or alter it beyond its ability to sustain a quality of human life we would all, regardless of party or religion or nationality, want to have for ourselves, family, and friends. Time to turn off the baby machine(s), not just in the US, but everywhere. It is not enough for the US to reach neutral population growth. It is a global issue. It is the cause of starvation, much disease, and certainly plenty of violence by the way. There are many reasons to do so. This is the most obvious and least discussed.

Ronni85

July 29, 2012 10:36am

I agree. BUT, HOW do we get it through our elected official's pocketbooks that this is even more important than their money? More important than the fossil fuel industry's greed?
It is time for our weak-kneed politicians to stand up to the fossil fuel industry - if they want their subsidies continued, they MUST INVEST ALL OF IT, AND MUCH, MUCH MORE, IN RENEWABLE ENERGY. Make themselves useful instead of just plain greedy!

woetopoe

July 29, 2012 10:16am

Many millions, perhaps billions, will have to die before the major consumers of fossil fuels relinquish their use and turn to alternative energy sources. The damage done to the planet in the interim may be irreversible at that stage. Mankind, in terms of the length of survival for a species, is going to have a rather short "shelf life." It all seems more than a bit ironic that we are comprised of and surrounded by atoms, the power released in splitting merely one, enough to annihilate a large city and its inhabitants and our planet spinning in "dark matter" which may hold illimitable reserves of energy. Like a man drowning surrounded by a thousand life preservers. Perhaps fate always deemed it so.