The Debate on Climate Change

Climate change is a phenomenon that is being debated around the world for a period spanning decades now. The discussion is not if there is climate change but what is causing it. Environmentalist on nature and documentary shows constantly warn that the earth is heating up by way of the green house effect of trapped carbon dioxide pollutants. People who champion the cause of cleaner skies also say the carbon gases affect the oceans, coastlines around the world, and glaciers on the earths poles (Greenpeace, n.d.). Corporations have a different view and state the warming of the planet is natural and has happened throughout earth's history (Khandekar, Murty & Chitababu, 2005). Both factions views will be examined in this paper to understand objections of each side and how those views are being absorbed by the public.

The Case for Global Heating

Greenpeace activists say climate change is a priority issue that has the potential of destroying gains made over the years by environmentalist. Disruptions to ecosystems will likely harm everything from minke whales to coral reefs to polar bears (Greenpeace, n.d.). The concept that the earth's atmosphere acts somewhat like the glass of a greenhouse, letting through the sunlight (shortwave light rays) while retaining a portion of the long wave radiation emanating from the earth's surface was first introduced by the French mathematician Joseph Fourier (Khandekar, Murty, & Chitababu, 2005). That was in 1827 over 180 years ago. Some years later other experiments were done to document what the effects of the greenhouse gasses may have on the earth's atmosphere.

The first estimates of how changes in the global concentration of carbonic acid a primary greenhouse gas, now more commonly referred to as carbon dioxide might affect mean global surface temperature were made by a Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius more than one hundred years ago (Khandekar, Murty, & Chitababu, 2005).

Arrhenius in 1896 demonstrated that an increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide by a factor of two would lead to a heating of the earth's temperature by 5 to 6 degrees Celsius.. Arrhenius work was followed by the studies of American geologist Chamberlin in 1899 whose work was focused on the role of carbon dioxide in the formation of glacial periods in geological times (Khandekar, Murty, & Chitababu, 2005). Environmentalist point out that these experiments bore scientific information that has been around for at least one hundred years that carbon dioxide gasses do have an effect on the earth's atmosphere which in turn is the reason for abnormal weather patterns over the decades. They also point to subsequent scientific data because those experiments that support their argument that the earth is warming (Greenpeace, n.d.).

The Case against Global Heating

Despite arguments presented by the environmental activist opponents say the scientific information is not accurate as far as causes of global warming. These opposition forces more generally viewed as big business interests have arguments for not spending money to find alternative sources of energy when definitive proof that fossil fuels are the only source of carbon dioxide greenhouse effects have not been proven. Over the years the most enduring reasoning to avoid doing anything about climate change has been that more test and experiments are needed. The opposing factions say there are numerous related other issues which make the simple warming/CO2 link questionable, and consequently the warming/extreme weather link becomes tenuous at best (Khandekar, Murty, & Chitababu, 2005). Opponents against the fossil fuel global heating argument say urbanization and land use change can be just as much factors in the global warming effects. The classical studies of Mitchell in 1961 and Oke in 1973 suggest that an urban heat island effect could be significant even for towns with a population of a few thousand people. For large cities, the urban heat island effect has been shown to be as high as 10 degree Celsius temperature difference between the city center and a remote suburban location in studies by Oke, and others.

Public Opinion

Americans generally agree that the earth is getting warmer, but there is less consensus about the cause of global warming or what should be done about it. Roughly 4-in-10 (41%) believe human activity such as burning fossil fuels is causing global warming, but just as many say either that warming has been caused by natural patterns in the earth's environment by 21%, or that there is no solid evidence of global warming by 20%(People-press.org, 2006). These poll results reflect that even though the debate and evidence for and against global warming by environmentalist and the corporate world have raged on for decades the public is at a stalemate as to what or who is the cause. The continued pro scientific data and con data have put the public in a position of not knowing exactly what data is accurate.

Presidential Action

President Obama and Democrats have pushed for a green job industry through a stimulus bill initiative putting them squarely in the fossil fuel global warming category of believers. The President has repeatedly refused to allow new oil drilling and is in favor of higher mileage standards for vehicles in the coming years. He just recently ended a popular cash for clunker car program which allowed owners of gas guzzling vehicles to get a discount of $4,500 toward the purchase of a more fuel efficient vehicle (msnbc,n.d.)

Conclusion

Although there is still no complete census pro or con for climate change and its causes there has been some change in how government officials regulate carbon gasses into the atmosphere. New initiatives to cut emission gasses are floating around in various congressional committees (msnbc, n.d.). If a full effort on a global scale will emerge to combat global warming is still yet to be determined.