Tuesday, February 10, 2015

Heather Mattsongrosso -- Blog 1: Climate Change

By Heather Mattsongrosso

Climate change, in theory is a scary concept.  The increase of CO2 levels, as well as other harmful gases, rapidly causing disruptive impacts on our earth is a terrifying thought.  However, many people like myself have viewed the climate change/ global warming concept as a hoax, believing that radical environmentalists have made it all up.  Although I do recycle and I choose paper over plastic when given the option, I have been raised in a world where you shouldn't believe everything that you read, because radicals want you to adopt their personal ideologies as your own. Unfortunately, many people have been brought up this same way. Now, I say that this is unfortunate because after just skimming the very surface of the climate change concept, I have begun to realize that these "crazy environmentalists," who I have been taught to tread lightly around, may not be so crazy after all.

In the article "How to Talk about Climate Change So People Will Listen," Charles C. Mann talks about an almost apocalyptic type phenomenon that he and many environmentalists believe is in the Earth's distant future.  Now, when most people hear "distant future" they tend to disregard it, simply because it does not impact their lives at this very moment. Mann makes it very clear that people disregard the climate change concept. They do this because Earth's present population will not experience it's most detrimental impacts. Maybe our future generations will, or maybe they wont. Mann stresses, "Americans don't even save for their own retirement! How can we worry about such distant hypothetical beings?"  Now that statement alone is what generates fear within those who do not believe that the majority will make strides towards attempting to slow down the climate change.  We are in the midst of experiencing gradual changes to our environment due to climate change, but if the majority does not put in the effort to prevent these changes, the worst of the worst will come sooner than later.  

For years, since the Industrial Revolution we have been using fossil fuels to aid to our modern lifestyles, which makes our lives as humans easier. This feasible lifestyle however has dangerous affects on the planet that we live on.  In the article "Global Warming's Terrifying New Math,"  Bill McKibben tells us how meteorologists reported that Spring of 2012 was the warmest ever for our nation, being the largest temperature departure from average of any season recorded.  Sadly, McKibben states "we remain in denial about the peril that human civilization is in." We are living in this state of denial for many reasons, but conceptually climate change is an ideal that some have, and with other people's ideals comes those who distrust or disbelieve them.  Without knowing some of the affects that the climate change has already had on our planet, people will not be able to fully understand how serious the concept truly is.  McKibben lists off a few of the damaging affects it has made so far: "A third of summer sea ice in the Arctic is gone, the oceans are 30 percent more acidic, and since warm air holds more water vapor than cold, the atmosphere over the oceans is at a shocking five percent wetter, loading the dice for devastating floods."  Now, without having a complete understanding of the Earth's ecosystem, anyone would still be able to latch onto the fact that the damage made so far is only the beginning of an "unfathomable disaster."  

So what can we do? The obvious bit is for people to decrease their carbon footprint, but that is just a small step towards trying to alleviate the affects of global warming.  One thing that I found interesting and may be of help to our planet is the concept of "geo-engineering," which Mann touched upon in his article.  The performable process would involve spraying the stratosphere with sulfuric acid that would bounce sunlight back into space, which would help to reduce Earth's temperature.  This is assumed to be true using evidence dating back to 1991, from a vocalic eruption that took place in the Philippines.  The eruption made airborne sulfuric acid, which helped lower the Earth's average temperature that year by one degree (Mann).  Unfortunately, this seemingly affective process, that would help fight the Earth's climate change, would be associated with negative side-effects such as toxic rain that could potentially kill thousands of people.  Harvard professor David Keith however believes that the process of geo-engineering and the annual spraying of sulfuric acid could be less deadly that an unimpeded climate change.

Even though we should all make an effort to decrease our carbon emissions and to fight against the climate change, there are unfortunately some changes that are "irreversible."  In an article written by Chelsea Harvey from Business Insider: "These are the Impacts of Climate Change We Will Never Be Able to Fix," a few irreversible effects are listed that Harvey claims will "stick around forever."  One of these effects is the amount of carbon dioxide that is polluting our air.  Although forestation will reduce the amount of carbon dioxide, it will not completely get rid of it.  Harvey states, "Scientists have estimated that up to 80% of carbon dioxide that goes into air is absorbed back out within a few centuries…But the other 20% could stick around in the atmosphere for millennia."  Now of course 80 percent is a significant deduction, but it is disheartening to know that there is no possible way to achieve an Earth that is free of carbon polluted air.  For myself, knowing that the "fresh air" that I believe to be pure is actually polluted with C02 is disparaging, but what is worse is that Earth's global temperatures can never truly be reduced.  This has been and will continue to be the cause of rising sea levels due to ice-melts.  Harvey states, "The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, which both contain massive amounts of ice, are two spots scientists are especially worried about because of their potential to cause large amounts of sea-level rise."  As a native Long Islander, sea-level rises are a scary thought, especially after living through Hurricane Sandy and experiencing the affects it had and is still having on our community.  Films such as "Earth 2100" would have been seen as completely ridiculous to me if I had watched it before Sandy had hit.  Now however, the concept of literally losing cities like Manhattan, due to sea-level rising isn't to far fetched.  


To stand up against the Earth's climate change , many groups have been formed in order to bring people of the same ideologies together and fight for a healthier planet.  The Campaign Against Climate Change (CACC) a UK based organization has made huge leaps in order to unify people and campaign huge global issues such as fracking and supporting renewable energy.  You can learn more and join the campaign at http://www.campaigncc.org/.  

2 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Climate changing in theory is a scary concept, and the high level of CO2 levels at the moment is a living notion of this statement. Geo–engineering, the discovery, development, and use of earth, is an interesting concept since it could help reduce our carbon foot print, but that field still has a long way to go. Since we live in a capitalist nation, unless it can be made for profit most people would have a hard time to adapt to any new development in geo–engineering.
    I like the style of your blog as you present the problems of climate change and later then introduce possible solution. As example you when mentioned the high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere you later mentioned the concept of “geo-engineering” with spraying the stratosphere with sulfuric acid. If you are interested here is a whole field of using stratospheric sulfate aerosols as a way of geo–engineering.
    One thing that might be improved is to focus more on one topic a little more. One example of this is when you mentioned the “The Campaign Against Climate Change” (CACC), but then you stopped suddenly. Overall I like the blog post and the mention of stratospheric aerosols with could have a potential, but they do have their cons and pros (if you click on that think you can see how the use of these aerosols can have just as many negatives as positives). I also like how you introduce the topic by talking about your own personal position and how it has changed your view on climate change.

    ReplyDelete