The threat of global warming

Is the world really getting hotter?

The last decade was the hottest in 140 years. Around the globe, temperatures are said to have climbed about 1.1 degrees in the 20th century. The oceans have warmed more slowly, with the top few thousand feet of water increasing in temperature by one-tenth of a degree. The seemingly small temperature changes have produced fairly dramatic climactic changes. Sea levels have risen 4 to 6 inches. Polar ice caps have begun melting. Rainfall has increased globally. Snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere and ice in the Arctic Ocean have both decreased. Two independent studies released last week came to the same conclusion: The oceans are warming up just as you’d expect them to, given the rate at which we’re pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

So why is there any controversy?

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

Critics of the global-warming theory say weather fluctuations such as these are normal—that the earth naturally cools and warms in cycles. They say there is no evidence that the planet as a whole is getting hotter as the result of so-called greenhouse gases.

What is President Bush’s position?

Bush has rejected the Kyoto climate treaty, the 1997 international accord designed to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases. Bush’s move has prompted protest here and abroad. The criticism intensified last week, after the release of the studies linking greenhouse gases to rising ocean temperatures.

Why didn’t Bush accept the terms of the Kyoto accord?

The Bush administration says the treaty would prove painfully expensive in the midst of a slumping economy, and unfairly hurt the U.S. more than any other country. Many impoverished countries do not have to comply with the accord, even if they do contribute to greenhouse-gas emissions. The accord legally binds countries to curb emissions, but gives them the option to buy credits from other countries to produce more gases. Bush says the U.S. would not only be forced to buy credits to comply with the treaty, but would have to spend billions on new regulations and technology to reduce emissions from automobiles, factories, and other engines of industry. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christie Whitman says the Bush administration will continue its efforts to find an appropriate way to address concerns of global climate change.

What do Bush’s critics say?

They point to his ties to the industries that would be most affected by mandatory reduction in emissions. Bush’s refusal to sign the accords, the critics say, is a reward for the oil and mining companies that contributed to his campaign.

What’s the political fallout of Bush’s decision?

Environmentalists here and abroad are furious. So are political leaders in many of the 84 countries that have already signed. Since America produces more greenhouse gases than any other country—20 percent of the world’s carbon dioxide—many feel it should shoulder the greatest burden. Bush’s father, former president George Bush, signed the Rio treaty in 1992 to reduce gas emissions through voluntary participation, but the country still remains well over the baseline established nine years ago. Countries signed up for the accord are also miffed because Japan and Canada have said they would probably not climb aboard without America’s participation.

What is the theory behind the greenhouse effect?

The sun heats the earth, and the earth reflects energy back into space. Greenhouse gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide trap some of this energy within the atmosphere, heating the air. Since the Industrial Revolution, the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased, according to the EPA. The concentration of carbon dioxide is up 30 percent; nitrous oxide is up 15 percent; and methane has doubled. Humans produce these gases through the combustion of fossil fuels which run cars, heat homes, operate power factories, and mine land.

What do environmentalists say will happen if nothing is done?

If global temperatures keep going up, cold regions would become temperate and temperate ones would become warm. This might not sound bad, but the warmer weather could also trigger smaller crop yields, intense storms, earlier flu seasons, and the submersion of coastal areas as sea levels rise. The changes, advocates of the theory say, would be catastrophic.

If global warming is real, what can be done to reduce the risk?