<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Washington Independent &#187; intergovernmental panel on climate change</title>
	<atom:link href="http://washingtonindependent.com/tag/intergovernmental-panel-on-climate-change/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://washingtonindependent.com</link>
	<description>National News in Context</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:20:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>The Best Reason to Ignore &#8216;Climategate&#8217;: The Climate Really Is Changing</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/68808/the-best-reason-to-ignore-climategate-the-climate-really-is-changing</link>
		<comments>http://washingtonindependent.com/68808/the-best-reason-to-ignore-climategate-the-climate-really-is-changing#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:43:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aaron Wiener</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arctic sea ice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climategate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copenhagen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copenhagen diagnosis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[greenhouse gases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intergovernmental panel on climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ipcc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=68808</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yesterday, I picked apart the &#8220;Climategate&#8221; scandal, arguing that climate change skeptics&#8217; position &#8212; that the leaked emails proved the science behind global warming was fraudulent &#8212; didn&#8217;t hold water, simply because the emails just weren&#8217;t that incriminating. Well, there&#8217;s another, far more important reason why their argument is flawed, and that&#8217;s the overwhelming evidence [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yesterday, I <a href="http://washingtonindependent.com/68729/is-climategate-really-the-game-changer-skeptics-say-it-is">picked apart the &#8220;Climategate&#8221; scandal</a>, arguing that climate change skeptics&#8217; position &#8212; that the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/6636563/University-of-East-Anglia-emails-the-most-contentious-quotes.html">leaked emails</a> proved the science behind global warming was fraudulent &#8212; didn&#8217;t hold water, simply because the emails just weren&#8217;t that incriminating. Well, there&#8217;s another, far more important reason why their argument is flawed, and that&#8217;s the overwhelming evidence that global warming is, in fact, slowly (or not so slowly) changing our planet as we know it.</p>
<p>Case in point: a <a href="http://www.copenhagendiagnosis.com/">study released today</a> by 26 leading climatologists, which finds that the climate situation is actually <em>far more dire</em> than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had led us to believe.<span id="more-68808"></span></p>
<p>The new report, dubbed &#8220;The Copenhagen Diagnosis,&#8221; seeks to fill in the gaps since the last IPCC assessment, published in 2007 but drafted earlier. Its authors include 14 members of the IPCC, the world&#8217;s top climate change authority.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.grist.org/article/2009-11-24-copenhagen-diagnosis-offers-a-grim-update-to-the-ipccs-climate-s/">Jonathan Hiskes</a>, who&#8217;s compared the two reports in greater depth than I have, writes:</p>
<blockquote><p>The new diagnosis  finds that arctic sea ice is melting  <em>40 percent faster</em> than the panel estimated just a few years ago. Another startling finding: Satellites have found that the global average for rising sea levels was 3.4 millimeters per year from 1993-2008. The IPCC estimated it would be 1.9 mm for that period—short by 80 percent.</p></blockquote>
<p>Here&#8217;s a <a href="http://www.copenhagendiagnosis.com/executive_summary.html">summary</a> of the new report&#8217;s key findings:</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Surging greenhouse gas emissions:</strong> Global carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels in 2008 were nearly 40% higher than those in 1990. Even if global emission rates are stabilized at present –day levels, just 20 more years of emissions would give a 25% probability that warming exceeds 2oC. Even with zero emissions after 2030. Every year of delayed action increase the chances of exceeding 2oC warming.</p>
<p><strong>Recent global temperatures demonstrate human-based warming:</strong> Over the past 25 years temperatures have increased at a rate of 0.190C per decade, in every good agreement with predictions based on greenhouse gas increases. Even over the past ten years, despite a decrease in solar forcing, the trend continues to be one of warming. Natural, short- term fluctuations are occurring as usual but there have been no significant changes in the underlying warming trend.</p>
<p><strong>Acceleration of melting of ice-sheets, glaciers and ice-caps:</strong> A wide array of satellite and ice measurements now demonstrate beyond doubt that both the Greenland and Antarctic ice-sheets are losing mass at an increasing rate. Melting of glaciers and ice-caps in other parts of the world has also accelerated since 1990.</p>
<p><strong>Rapid Arctic sea-ice decline:</strong> Summer-time melting of Arctic sea-ice has accelerated far beyond the expectations of climate models. This area of sea-ice melt during 2007-2009 was about 40% greater than the average prediction from IPCC AR4 climate models.</p>
<p><strong>Current sea-level rise underestimates:</strong> Satellites show great global average sea-level rise (3.4 mm/yr over the past 15 years) to be 80% above past IPCC predictions. This acceleration in sea-level rise is consistent with a doubling in contribution from melting of glaciers, ice caps and the Greenland and West-Antarctic ice-sheets.</p>
<p><strong>Sea-level prediction revised:</strong> By 2100, global sea-level is likely to rise at least twice as much as projected by Working Group 1 of the IPCC AR4, for unmitigated emissions it may well exceed 1 meter. The upper limit has been estimated as – 2 meters sea-level rise by 2100. Sea-level will continue to rise for centuries after global temperature have been stabilized and several meters of sea level rise must be expected over the next few centuries.</p>
<p><strong>Delay in action risks irreversible damage:</strong> Several vulnerable elements in the climate system (e.g. continental ice-sheets. Amazon rainforest, West African monsoon and others) could be pushed towards abrupt or irreversible change if warming continues in a business-as-usual way throughout this century. The risk of transgressing critical thresholds (“tipping points”) increase strongly with ongoing climate change. Thus waiting for higher levels of scientific certainty could mean that some tipping points will be crossed before they are recognized.</p>
<p><strong>The turning point must come soon:</strong> If global warming is to be limited to a maximum of 2oC above pre-industrial values, global emissions need to peak between 2015 and 2020 and then decline rapidly. To stabilize climate, a decarbonized global society – with near-zero emissions of CO2 and other long-lived greenhouse gases – need to be reached well within this century. More specifically, the average annual per-capita emissions will have to shrink to well under 1 metric ton CO2 by 2050. This is 80-90% below the per-capita emissions in developed nations in 2000.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://washingtonindependent.com/68808/the-best-reason-to-ignore-climategate-the-climate-really-is-changing/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>58</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Economic Crisis Sidelines Global Warming Concerns</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/34049/economic-crisis-sidelines-global-warming-concerns</link>
		<comments>http://washingtonindependent.com/34049/economic-crisis-sidelines-global-warming-concerns#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:26:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aaron Wiener</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Slot 1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Slot 3]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AEI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[al gore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[an inconvenient truth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[barack obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bill clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate progress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic crisis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gallup]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intergovernmental panel on climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ipcc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[james inhofe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[joe romm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[joseph romm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pew research center]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poll]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public opinion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=34049</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Despite the administration's focus on environmental issues, polls show that fewer Americans are worried about global warming than in recent years. Experts say the struggling economy is responsible.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="attachment_34050" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 471px"><a href="http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/istock_000002085427small.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-34050" title="istock_000002085427small" src="http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/istock_000002085427small.jpg" alt="iStockphoto" width="461" height="307" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">iStockphoto</p></div>
<p>As the Obama administration moves forward with its green agenda, climate change concerns have been elevated to a top priority. Yet in the midst of the deepening economic crisis, public opinion appears to be moving in the opposite direction.</p>
<div id="attachment_3032" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 160px"><a href="http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/environment.jpg"><img class="size-thumbnail wp-image-3032" title="environment" src="http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/environment-150x150.jpg" alt="Illustration by: Matt Mahurin" width="150" height="150" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Illustration by: Matt Mahurin</p></div>
<p>A <a id="i3ye" title="poll" href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/116590/Increased-Number-Think-Global-Warming-Exaggerated.aspx">Gallup poll</a> released last Wednesday found a six percent drop from last year in the number of people who are worried a &#8220;great deal&#8221; or a &#8220;fair amount&#8221; about global warming, after that number had been increasing for the previous five years. It also showed that after a similar five-year climb, the percentage of respondents who believe that the effects of global warming have already begun had decreased by eight points over the past year. A record-high 16 percent of Americans now believe that global warming will never occur; in more than ten years of polling, no more than 11 percent of respondents had ever expressed this opinion.</p>
<p>The day after the poll was released, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and a leading climate change skeptic, took to the Senate floor and <a id="san1" title="celebrated the results" href="http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.PressReleases&amp;ContentRecord_id=fc8ef880-802a-23ad-436a-fc0e6e1602ac">celebrated the results</a> as a triumph of information. &#8220;You should never underestimate the intelligence of the American people,&#8221; he proclaimed. &#8220;Sadly, that is exactly what the promoters of man-made climate fears have been consistently doing, and the American people have consistently rejected climate alarm.&#8221;</p>
<p>Inhofe attributed the shift in public opinion to new studies from prominent scientists that he said contradicted the prevailing climate change arguments embraced by former Vice President Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. &#8220;A steady stream of peer-reviewed studies, analyses, real world data and inconvenient developments have further refuted the claims of man-made global warming fear activists,&#8221; he said.</p>
<div id="attachment_34069" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/gallup-graphs.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-34069" title="gallup-graphs" src="http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/gallup-graphs.jpg" alt="Gallup polls (click to enlarge)" width="300" height="302" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Gallup (click to enlarge)</p></div>
<p>On the other side of the climate debate, the Center for American Progress&#8217; Joseph Romm, an acting assistant secretary of energy under Bill Clinton and an influential environmental activist, also chalked the changing attitudes up to a change in propaganda, albeit with a different slant.</p>
<p>&#8220;Objectively, in the last two years, the science makes painfully clear that climate risk has grown sharply,&#8221; he wrote on his blog, <a id="unv4" title="Climate Progress" href="http://climateprogress.org/2009/03/12/gallup-poll-exaggeration-global-warming-deniers-media-messaging/">Climate Progress</a>. &#8220;That means if the public has come to the reverse view, it must be due to the messaging and the media and the misinformers.&#8221; While &#8220;the vast majority of scientists are consistently bad at messaging,&#8221; he explained, global warming skeptics have &#8220;never stopped their single-minded disinformation campaign.&#8221;</p>
<p>Yet public opinion experts have a different explanation for the poll results.</p>
<p>Michael Dimock, associate director of the Pew Research Center, argues that the economic downturn has trumped all other concerns. &#8220;In a time of economic crisis, people are less willing to focus on an issue like global warming because they see other, more pressing issues,&#8221; he said.</p>
<p>A similar phenomenon took place after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Dimock explained. &#8220;In January 2002, a few months after 9/11, the public&#8217;s sense of priority on a whole host of important issues just fell through the floor,&#8221; he said. &#8220;They expected the government, almost to the exclusion of other important things, to focus on this issue.&#8221;</p>
<p>Karlyn Bowman, who studies public opinion at the American Enterprise Institute, published a <a id="jf3t" title="comprehensive report" href="http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.14888/pub_detail.asp">comprehensive report</a> in April 2008 that tracked polls on the environment and global warming over the past several decades. Her data showed that in the three years following the 9/11 attacks, fewer people said they were worried about global warming than in any other year in the past decade.</p>
<p>Similarly, she argues, the economic crisis has now pushed environmental considerations aside. <span style="background-color: #ffffff;">&#8220;The economy is just swamping all other issues right now,&#8221; she said. &#8220;Nothing else comes close.&#8221;</span></p>
<p>According to Paul Mohai, a professor of environmental policy and public opinion at the University of Michigan, this trend fits into historical patterns. &#8220;It&#8217;s not unusual at all that when there are economic problems in the country, concerns about the environment drop off,&#8221; he said.</p>
<div id="attachment_34073" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 220px"><a href="http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/pew-poll1.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-34073" title="pew-poll1" src="http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/pew-poll1.jpg" alt="Pew Research Center (click to enlarge)" width="210" height="315" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Pew Research Center (click to enlarge)</p></div>
<p>The current economic crisis, of course, is the most severe in decades, and the Gallup poll is not the first to show its effects on public attitudes toward climate change. Every January, Pew conducts a poll to assess people&#8217;s &#8220;top priorities&#8221; for the government to address. <a id="mq38" title="This year" href="http://people-press.org/report/485/economy-top-policy-priority">This year</a>, global warming came out on the very bottom of the list.</p>
<p>&#8220;<span style="background-color: #ffffff;">Out of the 19 things that we ask people to rank as priorities, it&#8217;s number 19,&#8221; said Dimock. Only 30 percent of respondents considered global warming a &#8220;top priority,&#8221; down from 38 percent in 2007 and 35 percent in 2008. Other non-economic concerns likewise tumbled down people&#8217;s list of priorities, including crime, immigration and &#8220;protecting the environment&#8221; generally.</span></p>
<p>While the economy is likely the leading cause of reduced concern about global warming, these experts also posit a number of other possible explanations. Bowman and Mohai argue that Americans tend to feel less worried about a problem when they believe that the government is addressing it.<span style="background-color: #ffffff;"> In this case, confidence in President Obama and the Democratic congressional leadership to tackle global warming has led people to feel less personally worried about the issue. </span><span style="background-color: #ffffff;">&#8220;During Republican administrations, people&#8217;s concerns about the environment go up, and during Democratic administrations they go down,&#8221; said Mohai.</span></p>
<p>Bowman&#8217;s 2008 study backs up this claim. In every poll she recorded since 1971, people have had greater confidence in the Democratic Party to protect the environment. In the latest poll included in her study, a February 2008 Pew poll, 65 percent of respondents expressed greater confidence in Democrats on this issue, compared to just 21 percent for Republicans.</p>
<p>Dimock, on the other hand, points to Al Gore&#8217;s Oscar-winning 2006 documentary &#8220;An Inconvenient Truth&#8221; as a possible complement to the economic causes of the change in public opinion. He hypothesizes that as a highly polarizing figure, Gore may have solidified Democratic support for his environmental agenda while turning off some Republicans and independents. <span style="background-color: #ffffff;">&#8220;Y</span><span style="background-color: #ffffff;">ou can imagine how, with people feeling like Al Gore was lecturing them on global warming, so to speak, they might have some sort of backlash, because it was no longer coming from a neutral source. It was coming from a political source.&#8221;<br />
</span></p>
<p>Nonetheless, Dimock believes that the struggling economy is far and away the primary cause of the shift in public opinion. <span style="background-color: #ffffff;">&#8220;The 800-pound gorilla is this economic crisis,&#8221; he said.</span></p>
<p>Inhofe&#8217;s claim that the change stems from the propagation of new scientific studies that cast doubt on man-made global warming theories garnered little support from these experts. &#8220;If that is indeed happening, I haven’t seen it on the news, and I follow it pretty closely,&#8221; said Mohai.</p>
<p>So what might cause Americans to renew their global warming concerns? In the lingo of Bill Clinton&#8217;s 1992 campaign, it&#8217;s the economy, stupid.<br style="background-color: #ffffff;" /><br style="background-color: #ffffff;" /><span style="background-color: #ffffff;">&#8220;If and when people feel more comfortable about the economy turning around, their focus can turn to other issues,&#8221; said Dimock.</span></p>
<p>Just as President Obama has tied his economic agenda to an environmental one, it appears that Americans&#8217; global warming concerns will rise and fall with their 401(k)s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://washingtonindependent.com/34049/economic-crisis-sidelines-global-warming-concerns/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
