Climate of opinion chides nay-sayers

Age
Tuesday 27/11/2007 Page: 10

Renewable energy sources for power are already in use, writes Dr Barrie Pittock.

IT WAS perhaps instructive to have Alan Moran's article alongside mine (Business- Day, 20/11) and Des Moore's predictably critical letter (BusinessDay, 22/11). Basically Moore, a nonscientist, continues to deny the science underlying the concern regarding climate change. This is despite the overwhelming authority of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, whose authors were chosen from people designated as experts by member governments of IPCC, including Australia and the US.

Moore puts forward four arguments, all of which are well known to the authors of the IPCC reports, who are neither fools nor dishonest.

1. The "saturation" effect that as carbon dioxide concentrations increase their incremental effect decreases. This is well known, but is only significant at concentrations well above three times pre-industrial levels. It is negligible at present concentrations, and is, of course, taken into account in climate models.
2. Water vapour concentrations in the atmosphere are increasing. Of course they are. They respond to the global average surface temperature, which is increasing. The added water vapour in fact is one of the main amplifiers of the man-made effect. Increased carbon dioxide
3. Arctic sea ice was even less than now in some previous paleo-climatic periods. Then the Earth was about 2-3 degrees warmer than pre-industrial, and global sea level was several metres higher than now. This was accompanied by higher concentrations of greenhouse gases, and is ominous, since this suggests that warming to date may well lead to further sea level rise.
4. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's remarks re effects in Antarctica. Depending on whether his reported remarks have been taken out of context, it may be a slight exaggeration. The clear evidence is that warming has occurred very rapidly on the more northerly Antarctic Peninsula, with rapid break-up of some floating ice shelves and resultant increases in outflow from outlet glaciers. The fear is that this portends developments in mainland Antarctica. So far it does not show such changes, although satellite data suggests it is losing a small amount of iceleads to warmer water, which increases water vapour, which means more heating and thus even warmer water.
   

Moran's article listed some of the small and inadequate steps being taken now to reduce greenhouse emissions, but failed completely to take account of:

• The co-benefits of substantial action on climate change in terms of reductions in other pollution and provision of regional employment.
• The massive subsidies at present provided to fossil fuelsbased industries, ranging from oil exploration tax write-offs to subsidised electricity for energyintensive industries such as aluminium.
• Moran appealed for nuclear energy as the only "known means" of large reductions in emissions, which is nonsense. Large wind farms and solar energy stations with energy storage are not only feasible for baseline power but are already in use.
  

Moran takes a completely unrealistic view of the huge potential of renewable energy. Finally, Moran refers to the "true believers in environmental catastrophe", as if this somehow invalidates the report of the IPCC.

Dr Barrie Pittock is author of Climate Change: Turning Up the Heat, and former leader, CSIRO climate impact group.