Undoubtedly, climate change is a highly controversial concept and debated at one time and cannot be ignored or overlooked.
Is it caused by man or is it caused by natural factors?
In the monograph both currents will be detailed in the most objective way possible so that the reader can understand what each one is about and, also, be conditioned to feel represented by the thought of one of the two positions.
Being aware of what is happening with high levels of pollution is essential and each of us must take action on it. Seek to reduce pollution to return planet Earth to a more sustainable territory and so that future generations can, in fact, survive. The idea that with the contribution of a “small grain of sand” from each one of us can generate great results and changes, and, therefore, abandon the position of waiting whenever others make the change for U.S.
The planet needs us.
Introduction
What is "climate change", or for some "global warming"? Specifically, it is the result of industrial, polluting and chemical processes. It is based on the release of greenhouse gases (CO2) into the atmosphere, the product of burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas. It is extremely important to highlight the existence of a second current of thought that attributes said cause to mere natural terrestrial processes, that is, leaving the justification of responsibility for human action aside.
Throughout the development of the work, each of the two aspects will be deepened explaining their differences, their history, who supports them, the theoretical support they have and their opinions about the opposite trend since the approach to the subject is in a turbulent area, of discord. The respective hypotheses are irreconcilable, they are contrary and some of them, in a way, even controversial. They have been generators of great international treaties and great debates as well, leading to a global gap in thinking. At the end, a brief conclusion will be made and the main consequences of this event will be mentioned.
How to name this process? First, we present the definition of "climate change" that refers to a lasting and also significant change in global climate patterns. In this concept, the reasons lie in natural issues such as the energy of the sun, volcanic eruptions, biotic processes, or human activity. And when we focus on this last reason, we approach our second definition called "global warming." This refers to the increase in the terrestrial temperature that, it is believed, has as its main responsibility the intervention of man. Previously, it was introduced to the two main currents of thought. One of them, who attributes responsibility to natural factors, logically underestimates or even denies the existence of global warming.They are the main promoters of abandoning this term and of hosting the concept of Climate Change instead. The warming may sound very strong to them, but it is an undeniable reality and I doubt that the mere act of coining a different term manages to persuade or alleviate the reality of the matter, if that is its true purpose.
Climate change as a result of human activity
We will start by developing our first current, whose explanation for this phenomenon lies in the well-known greenhouse effect, releasing polluting CO2 into the atmosphere as explained in the introduction. The respective thinkers and scientists who support this theory do not deny the reality that there is a certain degree of change in climate over time that is the product of natural issues and processes, but they see the current situation as more drastic than that. The Summary for Policymakers of the 5th report of the IPCC (Intergovern-mental Panel on Climate Change) published in October 2013 states: “The warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes have not had precedents in tens of thousands of years. The atmosphere and oceans have warmed up,the amounts of ice and snow have decreased, the sea level has increased, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased. So… What era did the pronunciation of this problem go back to? When did the global temperature begin to rise sharply? What factors was this due to? When was concern and public interest in this problem born?
Beginnings.
The greatest "turning point", or "before and after" that marked the pronouncement of climate change is seen after the industrial revolution in the eighteenth century. CO 2 concentrationsand methane were increased by 36% and 148% respectively since 1750, levels significantly higher than previously recorded throughout history. The number of inhabitants on earth was increasing and their needs to consume also increased dramatically. Therefore, this population growth came hand in hand with the exploitation of large fields of land and the emergence of technological innovations that will culminate in the installation of new industries. This, which means facilitating work for workers and reducing costs for employers, implies the need for fossil fuels (gas, coal and oil) for the energy required in each machinery. But this is a double-edged sword since, unfortunately, it does not only produce benefits.The burning of these fuels will generate large amounts of "invisible gases" that will reach the atmosphere (it is stipulated that they are responsible for some ¾ parts of the greenhouse gases), which has become denser and implies warmer air. Therefore, the deterioration of the ozone layer responsible for filtering a large part of the ultraviolet rays from the sun arises from the production of energy for the machinery, its "smoke" and its waste, from the overexploitation of the soil, the maintenance of animals for consumption and the great clearing of forests, among other explanations.the deterioration of the ozone layer in charge of filtering a large part of the ultraviolet rays from the sun arises from the production of energy for the machinery, its "smoke" and its waste, from the overexploitation of the soil, the maintenance of animals for consumption and the great clearing of forests, among other explanations.the deterioration of the ozone layer in charge of filtering a large part of the ultraviolet rays from the sun arises from the production of energy for the machinery, its "smoke" and its waste, from the overexploitation of the soil, the maintenance of animals for consumption and the great clearing of forests, among other explanations.
Important events.
Still, environmental concerns were a late result of this capitalist development. At first, they took local forms linked to those branches of industries where the effects were strongly visible and shocking. But the reality is that there were more and more catastrophic events that this produced, turning the environmental question into a systemic problem and increasing the opposition movements. Events such as: the Chernobyl disaster (1986), the Bhopal disaster (1984), the Fukushima nuclear accident (2011), the Kuwait oil fires (1991), the Gulf of Mexico spill (2010), the oil spill of the ship Exxon Valdez in Alaska (1989), the disappearance of the Aral Sea, the toxic cloud of Séveso (1976), to name just a few.
Answers that have been given.
These concerns were reflected in different ways. Among them, popular reactions such as the Negawatt manifesto, Right to the Dark. It also generated international State initiatives such as UN - UNEP, G-20 Agenda, Sustainable Finance, COP Paris Agreement, Kyoto Protocol, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Also, global initiatives of the Green Climate Fund (GCF), Climate Bonds Initiative Sustainable Banking Network (SBN), Sustainable Insurance Policy Forum The Green Infrastructure Investment Coalition (GIIC), The Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), The Principles for Sustainable Insurance (PSI), The Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition, The G7 Carbon Market Platform, among others.
Measures to stop it.
Climate change is a global ecological problem that fewer and fewer people doubt. Even one of the spokesmen for eco-skepticism, Bjørn Lomborg, has acknowledged its seriousness and called on governments to act. The measures to stop it and adapt to its consequences are very diverse. In addition to serving against the problem, these initiatives help create a better world.
Everyone, from international to local institutions, and consumers, can contribute to this by applying different actions to their daily lives such as: the use of renewable energy (solar or photovoltaic panels, biofuels for the automobile,…), savings / do not waste energy (go on foot, bicycle or public transport, energy saving light bulbs, type A or higher appliances, regulate heating, turn off disused televisions and computers…), or contribute to the preservation of forests (planting trees, not wasting paper, recycling…).
As for small institutions, their power to reduce this problem should not be underestimated. As the Ministry of the Environment, Rural and Marine Affairs of Spain MARM says, «Autonomous communities and municipalities can contribute up to 40% in meeting the objectives set by the Government to reduce polluting CO2 emissions. »They can do it through projects that increase energy efficiency, manage waste to reduce pollution levels, recycle, use renewable energy, among others.
Concerns about what this entails grow, and so do measures based on the application of new technologies. There is geoengineering that aims to control the climate at will. It does this through different methods, such as making artificial trees or creating clouds with sea salt. Another technological advance used for the same purpose is the CO2 capture and storage system, which serves precisely to capture said gas where it is generated, and then transport it underground.
Although there are experts who do not trust these systems due to their possible negative consequences, making them non-viable or insecure. Instead, they propose to use these large sums of money for other, greener and safer technologies.
View on the skeptical current.
The discrediting of the theory of global warming as a product of human behavior is mainly promoted by large oil companies and other companies, which see their markets threatened in the face of this ecological activism. Taking ecologically sustainable measures would involve them investing more in order not to pollute, not to throw waste into nature and reduce their production levels that pollute the environment, in addition to this "dirtying" their images.
It is a system where the sector benefited from the industrial revolution has the greatest inference. The following map shows how the highest concentration of CO2 emissions is located in the regions of the most industrialized countries (northern hemisphere).
It is common to hear voices comparing denialist scientists of the effects of tobacco - at the time - with those who deny climate change. But these scientists are considered to be paid. A sum of one billion dollars a year is stipulated and is invested in American organizations that are dedicated to combating the correct information on climate change.
Such financing comes from the hands of oil companies and certain governments in order to refuse to sign international treaties that limit the amount of polluting production they can carry out.
Climate change as a natural result
As described at the beginning, in this sector the current that accredits changes in temperature to mere natural factors will be explained. In this case, it is argued that the climate system is highly insensitive to humanity's greenhouse gas emissions and aerosol pollution. It is rather the product of the climate system itself. It is explained through the Pacific Oscillation, which refers to a temperature pattern in the Pacific Ocean. It lasts approximately two decades being in the cold phase and then in the warm phase and it is a completely natural climatic cycle. So, «Chaotic or small fluctuations in the atmospheric and oceanic circulation systems can cause small changes in the global average cloud cover. Climate change happens with or without our help. " (Roy Spencer,Phd climatologist and former member of NASA, 2016).
Alternative explanations.
Scientists have recorded worldwide how methane increased significantly in ten years. This gas is also responsible for the greenhouse effect and it is important to say that no significant amounts are produced by man. Furthermore, the fact that gas has spread simultaneously throughout the world denies that the responsibility for this event falls on the most industrialized countries. There is talk of a gas increase of several million tons in the atmosphere, having a much greater effect than carbon dioxide. The explanation lies in the fact that the reflection of sunlight back to the earth is what produces global warming.
Another reason given by this voice is the fact that carbon dioxide emissions generated by human activity constitute less than 0.00022% of the total released by the planet throughout geological history. In addition, higher temperatures have been recorded 800 years before the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. So the average temperature of the planet is completely consistent with the natural tendencies of climatic variations.
Likewise, it is argued that from a paleo-climatological point of view, we are in a period of natural warming. There is talk of a cyclical climatological phenomenon. We have gone through phases of cooling, where the glaciers have acquired greater volume, and phases of warming, like the one we are in now. Therefore, the Pacific Oscillation is essential when looking at the causes of the change in temperature, for these scientists.
Solar variations modify the temperature on Earth through the flow of radiation it emanates. The sun also increases its luminosity through the years (although at a slow pace). Also the Earth's orbit and ocean currents are considered as climate regulating factors, they act as moderators and soften temperatures in certain regions.
View on the anthropic current.
It is argued that all the noise generated around global warming belongs to an agenda that aims to benefit a new type of market - the green market - and thus benefit economically and financially. Global anti-warming opinion leaders have made a million dollar profit by positioning this topic on the international agenda.
It is argued that it is easy to contradict because there is not enough global data that can record long enough periods of time to ensure the existence of natural warming mechanisms. However, there is no concrete scientific evidence to show that global warming is actually produced by emissions of carbon dioxide from human activity.
Other entities, such as Donald Trump, consider that this problem was created by China in order to strip the economic power that the United States has, and make it a non-competitive actor. Or Vladimir Putin, who says that it is an invention product of fear of the most powerful countries like Russia.
What has been seen over the last 15 years regarding the concept of climate change has been highly misrepresented with all the "bombardment" of the media, which has a high power of thought and image formation. For example, scandals of research inaccuracies that have been made, such as that of the University of East Anglia, where certain data was eliminated to favor the fact that climate change had to be only led to man's guilt.
There is also talk of pressure from governments or from environmental groups, who are trying to make global warming look like the worst of all evils, with the intention of benefiting only monetarily.
Conclusions
I think it necessary to relapse into a joint explanation of this event. I will not deny that it is the product of natural phenomena, but I will not deny that it is an accelerated fact by man. And this last reason carries considerable weight since the levels of pollution and deforestation that occur are increasing and, although there are treaties and organizations that seek to reduce these effects, the voices of the denialists counteract the fight that is taking place.
A second comment to add is that the organizations that finance scientists or the media to benefit themselves and their markets exist in both currents of thought and that is an undeniable fact. If objectivity is sought, one cannot consider one of the sides to be purely altruistic, in all the sectors and groups that comprise it. But there is a reality, and that is that pollution is destroying the well-being of life. And in a few years, neither terrorism nor armed violence nor nuclear weapons will matter, because there will be no way to breathe. The increase in temperature and this can have serious consequences if you do not bring a brake, such as:
- The rise of the sea level. Water expands when heated and the oceans absorb more heat than land. Sea levels will also rise due to the melting of glaciers and sea ice. Entire cities will be submerged due to flooding. Places where they normally Raining or snowing a lot could get hot and dry Lakes and rivers could get dry There would be more droughts making it more difficult to grow There would be less water available for agriculture, food production, drinking or showering, or any other water use. Many plants and animal species would become extinct. Hurricanes, tornadoes, and storms caused by temperature changes and water evaporation would occur more regularly.
-
Bibliography
- http://cambioclimaticoglobal.com/ http://www.ekoenergy.org/es/extras/background-information/climate-change/https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calentación_global#Causas_inicial_de_cambios_t.C3.A9r micos_.28 external_forces.29 "The ten worst environmental disasters in the world", Kurt Castro. 2014 "The Industrial Revolution and Climate Change", Hector Crespo. 2008http: //www.consumer.es/web/es/medio_ambiente/urbano/2010/09/09/195650.php «Global Warming is a natural process and has always occurred», Roy Spencer, 2016 «Measures to combat the climate change ”, Alex Fernández Mueza, 2010http: //pijamasurf.com/2009/12/calentación-global-es-natural-100-razones-paraamarmarlo/Detrás de la Razón - Trump, global warming or truth of the dollar Powerpoint of the class
