Speaking for many scientists and engineers who have looked carefully and independently at the science of climate, we have a message to any candidate for public office: There is no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to ‘decarbonize’ the world’s economy. Even if one accepts the inflated climate forecasts of the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], aggressive greenhouse-gas control policies are not justified economically.
1 Consider the different sources of these articles. The first is a report from a scientific organisation and the second is an opinion piece from a financial newspaper. How do they differ?
2 What evidence does each source offer to support its argument? a. Source 1 – Global climate is changing now. b. Source 2 – There is no need to reduce our production of carbon dioxide.
3 The following note was added to The Wall Street Journal article: ‘Editor’s note: The following has been signed by the 16 scientists listed at the end of the article.’ Why do you think this note was added?
4 Why does so much of our current energy generation produce carbon dioxide?
5 Research the Kyoto Protocol. Prepare a short summary for your classmates that includes the following points:
a. A brief history of the protocol. Why was it required? What countries signed up? What targets did member countries originally set? Did Ireland sign up?
b. Identify the strategies in the protocol to lower greenhouse gas emissions.
c. The current status of the protocol. Are countries meeting their targets? What are some of the big issues surrounding the protocol?
d. What other plans have been put in place since the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
6 Complete the following sentence. ‘If I could make just one change to stop global warming it would be…’
