« Maureen Dowd : A Wolfie in Sheep’s Clothing. | Main | Milburn and Meacher. »
October 01, 2005
Solar Activity and Climate Change.
EU Rota has noted an interesting little story about new calculations on solar variability and its contribution or not to climate change and global warming. It’s the sort of thing that makes all good little sceptics (like myself, of course), hug ourselves with glee.
See, we can say, it’s not just us capitalist bastards who want to drown Bangladesh. Old Sol himself has it in for them as well!
Which is delightful of us to say, of course, but there is something of a second order consideration.
Let’s assume and adopt the rational position, that climate change is happening and that there will be, if it is unchecked and as large as some are predicting, terrible effects.
Who or what is causing it becomes less of an issue. OK, so the sun is responsible for 30% of it. We can’t do anything about that. But we can do something about the 70% that we are responsible for. (It doesn’t really matter how large or small those two numbers are, just that neither is 0% or 100%.)
For, the larger the effect of the sun on climate change, the more we have to limit our own promotion of it...for whether it’s just a natural change or one we have caused, the effects are going to be exactly the same.
So we end up with this slightly odd position. The more the current warming is a natural phenomenon (and assuming that it doesn’t simply reverse itself similarly naturally) the more we have to change our own behaviour to stop adding to it.
Technorati tag climate change.
October 1, 2005 in Climate Change | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d3e53ef00d834252d4353ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Solar Activity and Climate Change.:
» Sun's Changes to Blame for Part of Global Warming from Don Singleton
Another way of looking at it is that clearly 30% is beyond our control. Maybe the remaining 70% is as well. A group of scientists are screaming Global Warming now; it was not that long ago they were screaming Global Winter, and predicting a new Ice A... [Read More]
Tracked on Oct 2, 2005 1:24:58 PM
Comments
Let us hope that in a few years time the new drillings from EPICA, due December this year, the new calibrations on satellite data, the continued studies on the Swiss glaciers (that are not all shrinking after all) and all the other studies currently ongoing bring some insight on what the hell is really happening to our climate, but in the meantime you are absolutely right, we must reduce our own impact. Sadly Rio and Kyoto have shown us that the only countries willing to abide to that policy are the ones with less impact to start with.
Posted by: DCveR | Oct 1, 2005 3:39:29 PM
Tim,
Strange logic. Surely the less our contribution matters, the less impact our solution will have and therefore the less economic importance we should give the matter.
Bankrupting the western nations to fix a 0.001% contribution is ludicrous. Just as doing nothing about a 99.999% contribution is ludicrous. Yet this seems to be exactly what you think we should do in your sentence 'The more the current warming is a natural phenomenon (and assuming that it doesn’t simply reverse itself similarly naturally) the more we have to change our own behaviour to stop adding to it'.
The cost to fix anthropogenic global warming is a constant. The less effect we have for this constant price, the less economically viable the solution.
Posted by: Nik | Oct 1, 2005 10:41:44 PM
