Arrhenius Essay
While writing this book, I escaped to St. Scholastica Priory in Petersham, Massachusetts, for peace, inspiration, and focus. The volleyed chanting of the monks and sisters during the services eased my mind to a gentle place of introspection. Under the angelic voice of Sister Mary Frances, I recalled the moments where I have felt closest to God. Without exception, these moments coalesce in a beautiful spot in nature. One happened, on a run in a cemetery near Hartford, Connecticut, where I attended Trinity College. The sun filtered through the trees?leaves gold due to autumn?s chill. The light infused the cemetery with an ethereality that pulled my heart toward the surface of my skin. The glow I felt in the cemetery that day echoed the golden
…show more content…
light of the trees and sun. My feet floated down the path.
Another distinct moment came when I was a naturalist in Yosemite National Park. John Muir had described luminescent rainbows that appear on Yosemite Falls under full moonlight. Striking off solo, with only celestial light to illuminate the path, I endeavored to find these mythical moonbows. The air on the trail was ponderous and silent. The silver-blue light of the moon glancing off the snow softened my movements and even my breath on the hike. When I finally saw Yosemite Falls, even it seemed tamed by the quiet force of the full moon. The ice spray on the sides of the waterfall often cracks and crashes with a noise that fills the valley, but the cold air preserved the spray softly on the granite wall ? lacy and ethereal.. I did not find any rainbows glittering over the cliffs that night, but I did find an incredible oneness with this divine world of which we are blessed to be a part.
With nature as a divine force and light for goodness in my life, it strikes a special chord in my heart when I see it being destroyed ruthlessly, recklessly, and without consciousness for the long-term ramifications. In my graduate studies at Harvard, the more I learned about the dangers of climate change, the more puzzled I became about why we were not taking deep and drastic actions to cease our pollution. In lecture after lecture, I learned the ways that it would affect every aspect of our existence. For example, the distinguished public health expert Paul Epstein, who left us too early, warned of increasing disease vectors. I think of him now when I see how warmer winters have dramatically increased the deer tick population?and therefore the risk of Lyme?s disease?in my backyard. Paul Kirshen, civil and environmental engineer, told us how ill-prepared Boston?s infrastructure is to absorb the sea-level rise coming our way. Bill Moomaw, IPCC author and Nobel Prize winner, submitted compelling research to show that climate change?induced drought in Syria was a primary factor in the disintegration of that region and the rise of ISIS. Tim Weiskel, social anthropologist and historian, spoke movingly about the legions of climate refugees from island nations that were slowly being swallowed by the sea. Mark Leighton, rainforest ecologist, told us of the massive loss of species due to climate change?including many of my favorite butterfly species. The list goes on and on?climate change could potentially touch every inch of our lives in frightening ways.
I embarked on this project as a remedy to sleepless nights induced by this overwhelming climate change information. I wanted to find a positive way to participate in problem-solving. Not just for my kids (Budd?s grandchildren), but for every citizen of the global community. This is not tomorrow?s problem?in fact, today?s elderly are most at risk in the United States. We are already seeing summers with temperatures so extreme that folks without a robust constitution cannot survive. No generation is safe from its ravages?it is here and now.
Fortunately, the research and conversations that we have had with our heroes have provided an about-face for us. The heroic actions performed by these leaders have led to incredible solutions for a transition away from fossil fuels. The future no longer looks hopeless. In fact, it is entirely hopeful, in large part due to their efforts.
As a baby boomer, I came to understand climate change in a completely different manner than Mariah. In fact, I believe this intergenerational contrast represents?in many ways?the essence of the climate change issue. While I had been a staunch environmentalist for my entire forty-year professional career, I tended to focus more on immediate impacts?water pollution, wetland filling, loss of wildlife habitat, and protection of endangered species. I was, of course, aware of the climate change controversy, but?like many of my generation?I believed that it involved something that might happen long after my time on Earth. It was not until a detailed discussion I had with Mariah after she started her graduate coursework at Harvard in 2009 that my mind was really opened up to the both the immediacy and severity of climate change.
But fifteen years before my personal epiphany on the subject, my life started being dramatically altered by climate change?I just didn?t realize it at the time.
With my family, I moved to Southborough, Massachusetts?twenty-five miles west of Boston?in 1994. Southborough lies on the eastern edge of what is known locally as the Worcester Snow Belt (WSB). According to many people who have lived in east/central Massachusetts for a long time, the WSB is an oblong-shaped, northwest-southeast trending polygon that roughly centers on the seven hills that the city of Worcester?like Rome?is built upon.
Due to a combination of factors, including locally high topographic elevations and locations on the leading northwest edge of nor?easter storm rotations, the WSB receives significantly more snow than the city of Boston. This includes the landmark 1997 April Fools? Day Blizzard?which was an ill-appreciated joke to those of us living there?when the area received an all-time record of thirty-eight inches of snow in twenty-four hours. Depending on which records you review, during the ten years (1994 to 2003) that we lived in Southborough, the WSB received five of the heaviest annual snowfall totals recorded in the more than one hundred years of Massachusetts weather history. Of course, at the time, I didn?t connect these extreme winter weather events with climate change.
What I did know for sure, however, was that I was sick of continuously blowing snow off the driveway, knocking snow and icicles off the eaves of our 1840s farmhouse, and positioning gallon buckets inside the house to collect the water from ceiling leaks for six months?November through April?every year. Plus, since I needed two full hip replacements, I couldn?t keep up with the physical demands of six hours of snow and ice removal drudgery each time we had a major snowfall. Moreover, I could no longer participate in cross-country skiing or any of the other endeavors that make living in ?snow country? enjoyable. While we all really loved Boston?certainly one of the greatest cities in the United States (Symphony Hall, Fenway Park, the Boston Marathon, the Common and Duck Pond, etc.)?it was time for me to think about moving south . . . into some location that actually experiences the season of spring. So, early in 2004, I resigned my job as a professional wildlife biologist and private environmental consultant in the city of Worcester, sold our Southborough home, and packed up and moved, with my wife, Debby, to the warmer climes of North Carolina.
To paraphrase the late, great radio newsman Paul Harvey, ?and now for the rest of the story?: I?m currently living even further south, in the city of Tallahassee, Florida, where I?m pursuing a completely different lifestyle?coordinating agricultural food safety audits, teaching courses at Florida State University (FSU), writing newspaper columns for the Tallahassee Democrat, and authoring books.
It has been more than ten years since I fled the vagaries of winter in the WSB and?thanks to Mariah?I now fully understand that climate change is to blame for my leaving. Very simply put (we?ll get into a lot more detail on this later in the book), as the weather warms throughout the world, more moisture?evaporating from both the land and the oceans?is trapped in the atmosphere. The more moisture that is trapped in the atmosphere, the greater the occurrence of extreme weather events throughout the world.
Since storms primarily happen when warm, moisture-laden air masses meet cold, dry air masses, this explains how climate change produces more numerous?and often with heavier snow accumulations?snowstorms and blizzards. So my experience with living through five of east/central Massachusetts?s snowiest winters was not just some anomaly, fluke, or normal cyclical occurrence. No, if I had understood the science of climate change at the time, I would have fully anticipated?and actually expected?that this would occur.
I next had the authenticity of climate change driven home clearly to me during a 2014 fall ecology course I was teaching on the subject at FSU. Professor William Landing?a guest speaker from FSU?s Department of Oceanography?presented some results from his summer of work aboard an Antarctic research vessel. He showed us that ice cores drilled from deep within the Antarctic ice sheet contained bubbles of carbon dioxide (CO2) gas that were at least 800,000 years old.[endnoteRef:1] Interestingly, the CO2 readings taken from these ancient glacial ice cores were less than the 2014 CO2 measurements that scientists from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography were collecting from Mauna Loa?a volcanic peak on the big Island of Hawaii.[endnoteRef:2]
So not only were the levels of CO2 in our atmosphere the highest recorded in more than 800,000 years, they were also in excess of the 350 parts per million (ppm) ?cautionary threshold? put forth by Dr. James Hansen and other climate scientists in 2008.[endnoteRef:3] In fact, CO2 measurements on Mauna Loa in the spring of 2014 exceeded the ?extreme danger? climate change threshold of 400 ppm from which some scientists have said that recovery is not possible.[endnoteRef:4] Then, in the fall of 2015, CO2 measurements taken at Mauna Loa stayed above the 400 ppm level for an entire month, leading some climate scientists?like Ralph Keeling, Peter Gleick, and Michael Mann?to speculate that we may not see readings below 400 ppm again for quite some time?if ever.[endnoteRef:5] [3: . James Hansen et al., ?Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?? Open Atmospheric Science Journal, October 15, 2008, arxiv.org/abs/0804.1126 (accessed February 28, 2016).] [4: . Brian Kahn, ?CO2 on Path to Cross 400 ppm Threshold for a Month.? Climate Central, March 18, 2014, www.climatecentral.org/news/co2-on-path-to-cross-400-ppm-threshold-for-a-month-17189 (accessed February 28, 2016).Adam Vaughn, ?Global Carbon Dioxide Levels Break 400 ppm Milestone.?? Guardian, May 6, 2015. ] [5: . Thompson and Kahn, ?What Passing a Key CO2 Means.?]
This information made me realize that if we don?t take decisive action soon we are facing the imminent possibility of fomenting the dire consequences associated with a 2.0?C (3.6?F) global increase in air temperature. Such things as (1) the flooding loss of entire Pacific island nations and heavily populated coastal cities, (2) the relocation of millions, if not billions, of people, (3) the acidification and loss of most of our coral reefs, (4) the inundation of more than half of the world?s coastal wetland systems?including the bulk of our tidal salt marsh oceanic nursery habitats, (5) the salt water contamination of hundreds of municipal groundwater supplies, (6) megadroughts that last for more than thirty years, and (7) political revolutions and the formation of new terrorist groups, are all now imminent possibilities. As best-selling author and climate change activist, Naomi Klein so aptly titled her most recent book, This Changes Everything?the suite of 2014 and 2015 Mauna Loa CO2 measurements exceeding 400 ppm should definitely put us all in a this-changes-everything mode of thinking![endnoteRef:6] In fact, the overall debate has now shifted from ?Is climate change really occurring and how fast is it happening? to ?Okay, climate change is definitely happening right now so what can we do about it?? That?s where this book comes in.
In part one, we begin by reviewing the history of the climate change crisis. We tell you how scientists first identified the phenomenon in the 1800s. Then we move through the proof that it is actually happening and conclude with when and where ongoing impacts are currently occurring.
Next, in part two and part three, we take a look back at the history of the US environmental movement. But we don?t just talk about the environmental elements as stand-alone events. Instead, we weave a story that covers everything from the first settlement by Native American tribes and colonization by ?dominion over nature? European settlers through Manifest Destiny and westward expansion, the Industrial Age, the rebellious sixties, and the heyday of regulatory policy.
As you?ll read, the evolution of the United States from a pioneering, scrapping, win-at-all-costs collection of colonies to one of the world?s most powerful nations and leaders in natural resource protection is a phenomenon unto itself. How did we make this remarkable transition? Who were the people most responsible for keeping us heading in the right direction each step of the way? How did they achieve their goals? In answering these questions, we also provide insights into the strategies that worked best for our past environmental heroes and discuss how their methods can be applied to dealing with our current climate change crisis.
Then, in part four, we describe our current climate change heroes, telling you exactly who they are, what they have done, and how and why they think the ongoing climate change crisis can best be stopped in its tracks. In this section, we include a broad range of opinions from an array of distinguished scientists, authors, activists, grassroots organizers, politicians, businesspeople, and celebrities.
Finally, in part five, Mariah and I tell you how and why we think a gigantic push by humanity will result in worldwide solutions for all future generations to live comfortably and sustainably with climate change. We?re convinced that?by working together for the same goal?we can get this done. After all, this is the United States. We are the people who corrected the abominations of slavery, gave all people equal rights under our Constitution, endured the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl, defeated the scourge of the Nazis, put men on the moon, and obliterated Osama Bin Laden?s Al Qaeda network.
In summary, we believe the time for action is now. We must heed the clarion call of our new climate change heroes who?by working in tribute to the accomplishments of our past environmental heroes?can come forward and save us all from the pending ravages of climate change.
One Earth?There Is No Planet B!
?Budd Titlow
PART ONE
CLIMATE CHANGE
Now Humanity?s Greatest Environmental Challenge
Chapter 1
What Exactly Is Climate Change?
Climate change is just what the name implies?the climate on Earth is changing based on the fact that the average global temperature is steadily increasing. While there are some natural phenomena involved in this process, the primary culprit driving up the worldwide temperature is the emission of Greenhouse Gases (GHG)?primarily CO2?that is associated with human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels. The problem is that our climate is changing at an accelerated rate?as currently verified by almost 100 percent of the world?s climate scientists?something that has never before happened on Earth. How do we know this?
Let?s begin by clearing up two common misconceptions. First, it?s certainly true that Earth?s climate has been changing over hundreds of millennia. In fact, climate scientists generally recognize at least five distinct ?ice ages? in Earth?s history. And, in between these ice ages, gradual?very long term?and natural?not human influenced?warming and cooling trends have occurred. But these gradual and natural changes are not what we are talking about here.
The climate change we?re currently experiencing on Earth is not gradual?at least not in geologic terms. In fact, when compared to the epochs between the ice ages, our present climate change crisis is just a fleeting moment in time?the veritable beat of a gnat?s eyelash. Plus our climate change crisis is very much human influenced, being caused by the billions of metric tons of GHG?most notably CO2 emissions?that we are spewing forth into our atmosphere every year.
Here?s how it works: The sunlight that enters our Earth?s atmosphere is largely visible light, meaning that we can see it. We all know the buoyant feeling we get from being outside and seeing brilliant warm rays of sunlight streaming down on Earth?s surface. The energy in visible light passes down through our atmosphere without being absorbed by atmospheric gases.
But the light that is reflected back up into our atmosphere from Earth?s surface is changed from visible light energy into infrared light energy. And a certain percentage of this reflected infrared light energy is?always has been?absorbed by gas molecules in our atmosphere. In fact, this atmospheric heat absorption is what makes it possible for us to live on Earth. If our atmosphere did not absorb some heat energy from infrared light, Earth would be a huge snowball, and life would not be present or even possible.[endnoteRef:7] [7: . Tania Lombrozo, ?Global Warming Explained, in About a Minute,? NPR, December 16, 2013, http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2013/12/15/251437395/global-warming-explained-in-about-a-minute (accessed February 12, 2016).Chapter 2: What Is the History of Climate Change?]
Now, here?s the rub. Up until the start of the Industrial Revolution?which we?ll discuss in detail in part two?Earth?s temperature had been rising very gradually, fitting the pattern of cyclical warming trends that had occurred every few epochs?between ice ages, if you will. But as soon as we started burning fossil fuels?wood, coal, and oil?to run our newfangled steam engines and other machines, we started artificially increasing the amount of CO2 and other GHG in our atmosphere.
Throughout the 1800s, the burgeoning use of fossil fuels to power our ever-improving and expanding mechanical technology had a pronounced dual effect. The spread of machines was rapidly transforming our society from largely rural agrarian to urban industrial. Factory work provided many Americans with dependable, fixed incomes?something they had never had before?and more comfortable lives, while also creating our first wave of incredibly wealthy corporate entrepreneurs. But with this dramatic upturn in our still-young nation?s economic production and individual riches came the dark side of the environmental equation. With every passing year, the clouds of pollution and atmospheric gases unleashed by our flourishing technology caused the graph of global air temperature rise to become steeper and steeper.
Now, today, we have arrived at the point where the CO2 contamination of our atmosphere has exceeded the alarming level of more than 400 parts per million (ppm). So, in order to continue life as we know it, we must figure out how to stop this now-dramatic increase in global temperatures and keep them from rising an additional 1.5?C (2.7?F) (from 2016 levels). Comment by Sheila Stewart: Who determined that this was the alarmist level? DONE
The other commonly held?but very wrong?belief is that climate change (global warming) can?t really be occurring because we are still having cold weather?like descending ?polar vortexes? and record-setting blizzards. Here?s the simple way to understand that this just can?t be the case: First, it?s a scientific fact that warm air holds more water vapor than cold air. Next, the warming global air temperatures are causing the world?s glaciers and ice sheets to melt at unprecedented rates?also a scientifically documented fact. Finally, this melting ice over land causes ocean and sea levels throughout the world to warm and rise.
So?based on the standard water cycle that we all studied in school?it makes sense that more and more water vapor evaporates into our atmosphere each year from the surfaces of our warming oceans and seas. In other words, the amount of water condensed into clouds in our skies is constantly increasing as our Earth warms. Comment by Sheila Stewart: Readers will recognize ?water cycle? as the thing they studied in school, while some may think ?hydrologic cycle? is something different. Comment by Budd Titlow: Yes, ?water cycle? works well here
Now think about the conditions that must be present to create a storm of any type. Simply put, stormy weather typically occurs when a front of cold, dry air collides with a front of warm, wet air. When this happens, the strength of the resulting precipitation is dependent on the total amount of moisture trapped in the air. If this happens in the spring, summer, or fall, the colliding fronts could produce extreme weather events like tornados and cyclones. (Also, higher sea levels will exacerbate damage caused by storm surges associated with Atlantic hurricanes, Pacific typhoons, and other oceanic storms.) But when moisture-laden fronts come together in the winter, record-setting snowfalls and even blizzards can and do occur. It makes practical sense: the greater the amount of moisture trapped in our atmosphere, the greater likelihood of an extreme weather event?no matter what time of year it is.
The key point to emphasize here is that the severity of all weather events?including snowstorms?is being exacerbated by climate change. So the often-heard denial argument that Earth can?t really be warming because we still have cold, snowy winters, really doesn?t?excuse the pun?hold any water. In fact, snowier winters should actually be expected to occur while climate change is happening.
Across the globe, the warming atmosphere is also making droughts worse where they are already occurring and creating severe droughts where none have occurred in the past. Again, think about it: if the air temperature is increasing on a daily, monthly, and annual basis?which it is well-documented to be doing on all three levels?then the surface of Earth has to be consistently drying out more and more.
When the soil becomes too dry to support crop growth?and irrigation water is no longer available?the crops fail and the ground no longer has any protective plant cover to protect the topsoil. The topsoil then dries up and either washes away during intense rainstorms or blows away during windstorms. Afterward, the ground surface is left barren and is no longer capable of supporting crops of any type.
On the flip side of the coin?since sea level is rising?flooding is becoming more prevalent and severe in low-lying areas of the world. Land in the southern tip of Florida, Louisiana?s Mississippi River Delta, and Vietnam?s Mekong Delta is being severely eroded by encroaching surf. Plus the southern lowlands of Bangladesh?which are the outlets for three of the world?s major river systems?and many Pacific archipelagos?like the Marshall Islands and the Maldives?are all fast disappearing beneath rising tides. We?ll describe the specific flooding effects of sea level rise plus many other severe environmental effects of climate change in greater detail later in this section.
Chapter 2
What Is the History of Climate Change?
The early history (1820 to 1970) of climate change is reasonably well known. We can begin with a fellow named Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier, a French physicist who, in the 1820s, began to wonder how a planet of Earth?s size could maintain its warmth at the vast distance of 94 million miles away from the sun?s energy source.
The more he thought about it, the more Fourier realized that some other process beyond just straight solar radiation had to be at play in keeping Earth?s temperature so steady. He then postulated that gases in Earth?s atmosphere were trapping and holding the sun?s radiation after it reflected off Earth?s surface. While he had no mechanism to test his hypothesis, Fourier envisioned this as a similar process to using a greenhouse to hold in sunlight for facilitating plant growth. In so doing, he was the first scientist to describe Greenhouse Gases (GHG) and ?the Greenhouse Effect.?[endnoteRef:8] [8: . James R. Fleming, ?Joseph Fourier, the ?Greenhouse Effect,? and the Quest for a Universal Theory of Terrestrial Temperatures,? Endeavour 23, no. 2 (1999): 72?75.]
Next, in the 1860s, Irish physicist and Alpine climbing pioneer John Tyndall noted in the geologic records of his day that much of northern Europe was?at one time?covered by ice sheets. Wondering how Earth?s climate could change so dramatically that the ice sheets melted, Tyndall devised a series of experiments showing that water vapor and carbon dioxide (CO2)?despite the fact that they were both just trace gases?had excellent heat-trapping capabilities. Comment by Sheila Stewart: How did he know? Comment by Budd Titlow: Inserted ?in the geologic records of his day?
As a result of this work, Tyndall supported Fourier?s metaphoric image of atmospheric gases forming an ?insulating blanket of warmth around the Earth.? So, while Fourier and Tyndall both provided an inside understanding of what was going on to keep the Earth?s atmosphere warm, neither of them mentioned any thoughts about human activities having any part in this global process. Comment by Sheila Stewart: What is this a quote from? Add a note citing the source. See above comment. Comment by Budd Titlow: The History of Climate Science, https://www.skepticalscience.com/print.php?n=1473
Fast forward now to the year 1896, when Swedish physicist/chemist and Nobel Prize winner Svante Arrhenius used estimates of coal burning to determine that human-driven activities involving fossil fuels were affecting Earth?s atmosphere by making it warmer. His research showed that Earth?s average temperature was about 15?C (59?F), primarily because of the capacities of water vapor and CO2 to absorb infrared radiation from the sun. Arrhenius also used his calculations to surmise that doubling the CO2 level in Earth?s atmosphere would raise the planet?s temperature by 5.0?C to 6.0?C (9.0?F to 10.8?F).[endnoteRef:9] Aha?so now we had it . . . the cat was finally out of the bag and the civilized world was about to know that human lifestyles were creating a potential future disaster for our planet. [9: . Spencer Weart, The Discovery of Global Warming: Revised and Expanded Edition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008).]
But not so fast there, friends.
Many scientists believed that Arrhenius?s calculations were too simple and that he had failed to include many factors?such as the potential ability of Earth?s vast bodies of saltwater to soak up huge volumes (as much as five-sixths) of the CO2 that was being generated. This led to the assumption that absorption by the oceans would significantly reduce the GHG concentrations in the atmosphere. In turn, this would then prevent any measurable increases in the planet?s annual average temperatures?at least for the next few thousand years or so!
After cold water was thrown on Arrhenius?s findings, the historic trail of the greenhouse effect hypothesis went cold for a few decades, until 1931, when American physicist Edward O. Hulburt picked up the ball and started running with it again. Hulburt revisited Arrhenius?s work, again testing what doubling the CO2 concentration would do to the temperature of Earth?s atmosphere. His calculations came up with a predicted increase of around 4?C (7.2?F) of global warming.
In the process, Hulburt discovered that the interception of reflected energy in infrared radiation was of key importance.[endnoteRef:10] Hulburt?s results received minimal attention from other scientists who were studying the climate. The prevailing thought continued to be that Earth?s climate system used some sort of natural balancing process to maintain itself. [10: . Ibid.
]
The year 1938 brought the first measurements indicating that global warming was actually occurring. Using data showing that CO2 concentrations had risen over the previous century, Guy Callendar, a British engineer, showed that global air temperatures had also risen over the same period. His correlation of increasing CO2 levels with rising atmospheric temperatures was labeled the Callendar Effect and was?for the most part?summarily dismissed by meteorologists and the general public. For the most part, scientists continued to believe that the immense volumes of our oceans and seas would absorb all the extra CO2, eliminating the potential for any significant short-term global warming.[endnoteRef:11] [11: . Ibid. ]
Several events significant to the history of climate change next occurred in the 1950s. First, in 1955, climate researcher Gilbert Plass performed detailed modeling analyses?using a newfangled device called ?the computer??to show that doubling CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere would indeed increase global temperatures by 3.0?C to 4.0?C (5.4?F to 7.2?F).[endnoteRef:12] Contrary to the conventional wisdom at the time, Plass argued that the effect of water vapor absorption did not mask the CO2 effect.[endnoteRef:13] [12: . Ibid. ] [13: . Gilbert N. Plass, Gilbert N. July 2015, http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/155263/ (accessed August 4, 2015). ]
Plass also postulated that the oceans would be able to sequester only a small amount of the anthropogenic (human-induced) carbon, thus resulting in an increase in atmospheric CO2. He calculated that consumption of all of the Earth?s f
light of the trees and sun. My feet floated down the path.
Another distinct moment came when I was a naturalist in Yosemite National Park. John Muir had described luminescent rainbows that appear on Yosemite Falls under full moonlight. Striking off solo, with only celestial light to illuminate the path, I endeavored to find these mythical moonbows. The air on the trail was ponderous and silent. The silver-blue light of the moon glancing off the snow softened my movements and even my breath on the hike. When I finally saw Yosemite Falls, even it seemed tamed by the quiet force of the full moon. The ice spray on the sides of the waterfall often cracks and crashes with a noise that fills the valley, but the cold air preserved the spray softly on the granite wall ? lacy and ethereal.. I did not find any rainbows glittering over the cliffs that night, but I did find an incredible oneness with this divine world of which we are blessed to be a part.
With nature as a divine force and light for goodness in my life, it strikes a special chord in my heart when I see it being destroyed ruthlessly, recklessly, and without consciousness for the long-term ramifications. In my graduate studies at Harvard, the more I learned about the dangers of climate change, the more puzzled I became about why we were not taking deep and drastic actions to cease our pollution. In lecture after lecture, I learned the ways that it would affect every aspect of our existence. For example, the distinguished public health expert Paul Epstein, who left us too early, warned of increasing disease vectors. I think of him now when I see how warmer winters have dramatically increased the deer tick population?and therefore the risk of Lyme?s disease?in my backyard. Paul Kirshen, civil and environmental engineer, told us how ill-prepared Boston?s infrastructure is to absorb the sea-level rise coming our way. Bill Moomaw, IPCC author and Nobel Prize winner, submitted compelling research to show that climate change?induced drought in Syria was a primary factor in the disintegration of that region and the rise of ISIS. Tim Weiskel, social anthropologist and historian, spoke movingly about the legions of climate refugees from island nations that were slowly being swallowed by the sea. Mark Leighton, rainforest ecologist, told us of the massive loss of species due to climate change?including many of my favorite butterfly species. The list goes on and on?climate change could potentially touch every inch of our lives in frightening ways.
I embarked on this project as a remedy to sleepless nights induced by this overwhelming climate change information. I wanted to find a positive way to participate in problem-solving. Not just for my kids (Budd?s grandchildren), but for every citizen of the global community. This is not tomorrow?s problem?in fact, today?s elderly are most at risk in the United States. We are already seeing summers with temperatures so extreme that folks without a robust constitution cannot survive. No generation is safe from its ravages?it is here and now.
Fortunately, the research and conversations that we have had with our heroes have provided an about-face for us. The heroic actions performed by these leaders have led to incredible solutions for a transition away from fossil fuels. The future no longer looks hopeless. In fact, it is entirely hopeful, in large part due to their efforts.
As a baby boomer, I came to understand climate change in a completely different manner than Mariah. In fact, I believe this intergenerational contrast represents?in many ways?the essence of the climate change issue. While I had been a staunch environmentalist for my entire forty-year professional career, I tended to focus more on immediate impacts?water pollution, wetland filling, loss of wildlife habitat, and protection of endangered species. I was, of course, aware of the climate change controversy, but?like many of my generation?I believed that it involved something that might happen long after my time on Earth. It was not until a detailed discussion I had with Mariah after she started her graduate coursework at Harvard in 2009 that my mind was really opened up to the both the immediacy and severity of climate change.
But fifteen years before my personal epiphany on the subject, my life started being dramatically altered by climate change?I just didn?t realize it at the time.
With my family, I moved to Southborough, Massachusetts?twenty-five miles west of Boston?in 1994. Southborough lies on the eastern edge of what is known locally as the Worcester Snow Belt (WSB). According to many people who have lived in east/central Massachusetts for a long time, the WSB is an oblong-shaped, northwest-southeast trending polygon that roughly centers on the seven hills that the city of Worcester?like Rome?is built upon.
Due to a combination of factors, including locally high topographic elevations and locations on the leading northwest edge of nor?easter storm rotations, the WSB receives significantly more snow than the city of Boston. This includes the landmark 1997 April Fools? Day Blizzard?which was an ill-appreciated joke to those of us living there?when the area received an all-time record of thirty-eight inches of snow in twenty-four hours. Depending on which records you review, during the ten years (1994 to 2003) that we lived in Southborough, the WSB received five of the heaviest annual snowfall totals recorded in the more than one hundred years of Massachusetts weather history. Of course, at the time, I didn?t connect these extreme winter weather events with climate change.
What I did know for sure, however, was that I was sick of continuously blowing snow off the driveway, knocking snow and icicles off the eaves of our 1840s farmhouse, and positioning gallon buckets inside the house to collect the water from ceiling leaks for six months?November through April?every year. Plus, since I needed two full hip replacements, I couldn?t keep up with the physical demands of six hours of snow and ice removal drudgery each time we had a major snowfall. Moreover, I could no longer participate in cross-country skiing or any of the other endeavors that make living in ?snow country? enjoyable. While we all really loved Boston?certainly one of the greatest cities in the United States (Symphony Hall, Fenway Park, the Boston Marathon, the Common and Duck Pond, etc.)?it was time for me to think about moving south . . . into some location that actually experiences the season of spring. So, early in 2004, I resigned my job as a professional wildlife biologist and private environmental consultant in the city of Worcester, sold our Southborough home, and packed up and moved, with my wife, Debby, to the warmer climes of North Carolina.
To paraphrase the late, great radio newsman Paul Harvey, ?and now for the rest of the story?: I?m currently living even further south, in the city of Tallahassee, Florida, where I?m pursuing a completely different lifestyle?coordinating agricultural food safety audits, teaching courses at Florida State University (FSU), writing newspaper columns for the Tallahassee Democrat, and authoring books.
It has been more than ten years since I fled the vagaries of winter in the WSB and?thanks to Mariah?I now fully understand that climate change is to blame for my leaving. Very simply put (we?ll get into a lot more detail on this later in the book), as the weather warms throughout the world, more moisture?evaporating from both the land and the oceans?is trapped in the atmosphere. The more moisture that is trapped in the atmosphere, the greater the occurrence of extreme weather events throughout the world.
Since storms primarily happen when warm, moisture-laden air masses meet cold, dry air masses, this explains how climate change produces more numerous?and often with heavier snow accumulations?snowstorms and blizzards. So my experience with living through five of east/central Massachusetts?s snowiest winters was not just some anomaly, fluke, or normal cyclical occurrence. No, if I had understood the science of climate change at the time, I would have fully anticipated?and actually expected?that this would occur.
I next had the authenticity of climate change driven home clearly to me during a 2014 fall ecology course I was teaching on the subject at FSU. Professor William Landing?a guest speaker from FSU?s Department of Oceanography?presented some results from his summer of work aboard an Antarctic research vessel. He showed us that ice cores drilled from deep within the Antarctic ice sheet contained bubbles of carbon dioxide (CO2) gas that were at least 800,000 years old.[endnoteRef:1] Interestingly, the CO2 readings taken from these ancient glacial ice cores were less than the 2014 CO2 measurements that scientists from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography were collecting from Mauna Loa?a volcanic peak on the big Island of Hawaii.[endnoteRef:2]
So not only were the levels of CO2 in our atmosphere the highest recorded in more than 800,000 years, they were also in excess of the 350 parts per million (ppm) ?cautionary threshold? put forth by Dr. James Hansen and other climate scientists in 2008.[endnoteRef:3] In fact, CO2 measurements on Mauna Loa in the spring of 2014 exceeded the ?extreme danger? climate change threshold of 400 ppm from which some scientists have said that recovery is not possible.[endnoteRef:4] Then, in the fall of 2015, CO2 measurements taken at Mauna Loa stayed above the 400 ppm level for an entire month, leading some climate scientists?like Ralph Keeling, Peter Gleick, and Michael Mann?to speculate that we may not see readings below 400 ppm again for quite some time?if ever.[endnoteRef:5] [3: . James Hansen et al., ?Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?? Open Atmospheric Science Journal, October 15, 2008, arxiv.org/abs/0804.1126 (accessed February 28, 2016).] [4: . Brian Kahn, ?CO2 on Path to Cross 400 ppm Threshold for a Month.? Climate Central, March 18, 2014, www.climatecentral.org/news/co2-on-path-to-cross-400-ppm-threshold-for-a-month-17189 (accessed February 28, 2016).Adam Vaughn, ?Global Carbon Dioxide Levels Break 400 ppm Milestone.?? Guardian, May 6, 2015. ] [5: . Thompson and Kahn, ?What Passing a Key CO2 Means.?]
This information made me realize that if we don?t take decisive action soon we are facing the imminent possibility of fomenting the dire consequences associated with a 2.0?C (3.6?F) global increase in air temperature. Such things as (1) the flooding loss of entire Pacific island nations and heavily populated coastal cities, (2) the relocation of millions, if not billions, of people, (3) the acidification and loss of most of our coral reefs, (4) the inundation of more than half of the world?s coastal wetland systems?including the bulk of our tidal salt marsh oceanic nursery habitats, (5) the salt water contamination of hundreds of municipal groundwater supplies, (6) megadroughts that last for more than thirty years, and (7) political revolutions and the formation of new terrorist groups, are all now imminent possibilities. As best-selling author and climate change activist, Naomi Klein so aptly titled her most recent book, This Changes Everything?the suite of 2014 and 2015 Mauna Loa CO2 measurements exceeding 400 ppm should definitely put us all in a this-changes-everything mode of thinking![endnoteRef:6] In fact, the overall debate has now shifted from ?Is climate change really occurring and how fast is it happening? to ?Okay, climate change is definitely happening right now so what can we do about it?? That?s where this book comes in.
In part one, we begin by reviewing the history of the climate change crisis. We tell you how scientists first identified the phenomenon in the 1800s. Then we move through the proof that it is actually happening and conclude with when and where ongoing impacts are currently occurring.
Next, in part two and part three, we take a look back at the history of the US environmental movement. But we don?t just talk about the environmental elements as stand-alone events. Instead, we weave a story that covers everything from the first settlement by Native American tribes and colonization by ?dominion over nature? European settlers through Manifest Destiny and westward expansion, the Industrial Age, the rebellious sixties, and the heyday of regulatory policy.
As you?ll read, the evolution of the United States from a pioneering, scrapping, win-at-all-costs collection of colonies to one of the world?s most powerful nations and leaders in natural resource protection is a phenomenon unto itself. How did we make this remarkable transition? Who were the people most responsible for keeping us heading in the right direction each step of the way? How did they achieve their goals? In answering these questions, we also provide insights into the strategies that worked best for our past environmental heroes and discuss how their methods can be applied to dealing with our current climate change crisis.
Then, in part four, we describe our current climate change heroes, telling you exactly who they are, what they have done, and how and why they think the ongoing climate change crisis can best be stopped in its tracks. In this section, we include a broad range of opinions from an array of distinguished scientists, authors, activists, grassroots organizers, politicians, businesspeople, and celebrities.
Finally, in part five, Mariah and I tell you how and why we think a gigantic push by humanity will result in worldwide solutions for all future generations to live comfortably and sustainably with climate change. We?re convinced that?by working together for the same goal?we can get this done. After all, this is the United States. We are the people who corrected the abominations of slavery, gave all people equal rights under our Constitution, endured the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl, defeated the scourge of the Nazis, put men on the moon, and obliterated Osama Bin Laden?s Al Qaeda network.
In summary, we believe the time for action is now. We must heed the clarion call of our new climate change heroes who?by working in tribute to the accomplishments of our past environmental heroes?can come forward and save us all from the pending ravages of climate change.
One Earth?There Is No Planet B!
?Budd Titlow
PART ONE
CLIMATE CHANGE
Now Humanity?s Greatest Environmental Challenge
Chapter 1
What Exactly Is Climate Change?
Climate change is just what the name implies?the climate on Earth is changing based on the fact that the average global temperature is steadily increasing. While there are some natural phenomena involved in this process, the primary culprit driving up the worldwide temperature is the emission of Greenhouse Gases (GHG)?primarily CO2?that is associated with human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels. The problem is that our climate is changing at an accelerated rate?as currently verified by almost 100 percent of the world?s climate scientists?something that has never before happened on Earth. How do we know this?
Let?s begin by clearing up two common misconceptions. First, it?s certainly true that Earth?s climate has been changing over hundreds of millennia. In fact, climate scientists generally recognize at least five distinct ?ice ages? in Earth?s history. And, in between these ice ages, gradual?very long term?and natural?not human influenced?warming and cooling trends have occurred. But these gradual and natural changes are not what we are talking about here.
The climate change we?re currently experiencing on Earth is not gradual?at least not in geologic terms. In fact, when compared to the epochs between the ice ages, our present climate change crisis is just a fleeting moment in time?the veritable beat of a gnat?s eyelash. Plus our climate change crisis is very much human influenced, being caused by the billions of metric tons of GHG?most notably CO2 emissions?that we are spewing forth into our atmosphere every year.
Here?s how it works: The sunlight that enters our Earth?s atmosphere is largely visible light, meaning that we can see it. We all know the buoyant feeling we get from being outside and seeing brilliant warm rays of sunlight streaming down on Earth?s surface. The energy in visible light passes down through our atmosphere without being absorbed by atmospheric gases.
But the light that is reflected back up into our atmosphere from Earth?s surface is changed from visible light energy into infrared light energy. And a certain percentage of this reflected infrared light energy is?always has been?absorbed by gas molecules in our atmosphere. In fact, this atmospheric heat absorption is what makes it possible for us to live on Earth. If our atmosphere did not absorb some heat energy from infrared light, Earth would be a huge snowball, and life would not be present or even possible.[endnoteRef:7] [7: . Tania Lombrozo, ?Global Warming Explained, in About a Minute,? NPR, December 16, 2013, http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2013/12/15/251437395/global-warming-explained-in-about-a-minute (accessed February 12, 2016).Chapter 2: What Is the History of Climate Change?]
Now, here?s the rub. Up until the start of the Industrial Revolution?which we?ll discuss in detail in part two?Earth?s temperature had been rising very gradually, fitting the pattern of cyclical warming trends that had occurred every few epochs?between ice ages, if you will. But as soon as we started burning fossil fuels?wood, coal, and oil?to run our newfangled steam engines and other machines, we started artificially increasing the amount of CO2 and other GHG in our atmosphere.
Throughout the 1800s, the burgeoning use of fossil fuels to power our ever-improving and expanding mechanical technology had a pronounced dual effect. The spread of machines was rapidly transforming our society from largely rural agrarian to urban industrial. Factory work provided many Americans with dependable, fixed incomes?something they had never had before?and more comfortable lives, while also creating our first wave of incredibly wealthy corporate entrepreneurs. But with this dramatic upturn in our still-young nation?s economic production and individual riches came the dark side of the environmental equation. With every passing year, the clouds of pollution and atmospheric gases unleashed by our flourishing technology caused the graph of global air temperature rise to become steeper and steeper.
Now, today, we have arrived at the point where the CO2 contamination of our atmosphere has exceeded the alarming level of more than 400 parts per million (ppm). So, in order to continue life as we know it, we must figure out how to stop this now-dramatic increase in global temperatures and keep them from rising an additional 1.5?C (2.7?F) (from 2016 levels). Comment by Sheila Stewart: Who determined that this was the alarmist level? DONE
The other commonly held?but very wrong?belief is that climate change (global warming) can?t really be occurring because we are still having cold weather?like descending ?polar vortexes? and record-setting blizzards. Here?s the simple way to understand that this just can?t be the case: First, it?s a scientific fact that warm air holds more water vapor than cold air. Next, the warming global air temperatures are causing the world?s glaciers and ice sheets to melt at unprecedented rates?also a scientifically documented fact. Finally, this melting ice over land causes ocean and sea levels throughout the world to warm and rise.
So?based on the standard water cycle that we all studied in school?it makes sense that more and more water vapor evaporates into our atmosphere each year from the surfaces of our warming oceans and seas. In other words, the amount of water condensed into clouds in our skies is constantly increasing as our Earth warms. Comment by Sheila Stewart: Readers will recognize ?water cycle? as the thing they studied in school, while some may think ?hydrologic cycle? is something different. Comment by Budd Titlow: Yes, ?water cycle? works well here
Now think about the conditions that must be present to create a storm of any type. Simply put, stormy weather typically occurs when a front of cold, dry air collides with a front of warm, wet air. When this happens, the strength of the resulting precipitation is dependent on the total amount of moisture trapped in the air. If this happens in the spring, summer, or fall, the colliding fronts could produce extreme weather events like tornados and cyclones. (Also, higher sea levels will exacerbate damage caused by storm surges associated with Atlantic hurricanes, Pacific typhoons, and other oceanic storms.) But when moisture-laden fronts come together in the winter, record-setting snowfalls and even blizzards can and do occur. It makes practical sense: the greater the amount of moisture trapped in our atmosphere, the greater likelihood of an extreme weather event?no matter what time of year it is.
The key point to emphasize here is that the severity of all weather events?including snowstorms?is being exacerbated by climate change. So the often-heard denial argument that Earth can?t really be warming because we still have cold, snowy winters, really doesn?t?excuse the pun?hold any water. In fact, snowier winters should actually be expected to occur while climate change is happening.
Across the globe, the warming atmosphere is also making droughts worse where they are already occurring and creating severe droughts where none have occurred in the past. Again, think about it: if the air temperature is increasing on a daily, monthly, and annual basis?which it is well-documented to be doing on all three levels?then the surface of Earth has to be consistently drying out more and more.
When the soil becomes too dry to support crop growth?and irrigation water is no longer available?the crops fail and the ground no longer has any protective plant cover to protect the topsoil. The topsoil then dries up and either washes away during intense rainstorms or blows away during windstorms. Afterward, the ground surface is left barren and is no longer capable of supporting crops of any type.
On the flip side of the coin?since sea level is rising?flooding is becoming more prevalent and severe in low-lying areas of the world. Land in the southern tip of Florida, Louisiana?s Mississippi River Delta, and Vietnam?s Mekong Delta is being severely eroded by encroaching surf. Plus the southern lowlands of Bangladesh?which are the outlets for three of the world?s major river systems?and many Pacific archipelagos?like the Marshall Islands and the Maldives?are all fast disappearing beneath rising tides. We?ll describe the specific flooding effects of sea level rise plus many other severe environmental effects of climate change in greater detail later in this section.
Chapter 2
What Is the History of Climate Change?
The early history (1820 to 1970) of climate change is reasonably well known. We can begin with a fellow named Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier, a French physicist who, in the 1820s, began to wonder how a planet of Earth?s size could maintain its warmth at the vast distance of 94 million miles away from the sun?s energy source.
The more he thought about it, the more Fourier realized that some other process beyond just straight solar radiation had to be at play in keeping Earth?s temperature so steady. He then postulated that gases in Earth?s atmosphere were trapping and holding the sun?s radiation after it reflected off Earth?s surface. While he had no mechanism to test his hypothesis, Fourier envisioned this as a similar process to using a greenhouse to hold in sunlight for facilitating plant growth. In so doing, he was the first scientist to describe Greenhouse Gases (GHG) and ?the Greenhouse Effect.?[endnoteRef:8] [8: . James R. Fleming, ?Joseph Fourier, the ?Greenhouse Effect,? and the Quest for a Universal Theory of Terrestrial Temperatures,? Endeavour 23, no. 2 (1999): 72?75.]
Next, in the 1860s, Irish physicist and Alpine climbing pioneer John Tyndall noted in the geologic records of his day that much of northern Europe was?at one time?covered by ice sheets. Wondering how Earth?s climate could change so dramatically that the ice sheets melted, Tyndall devised a series of experiments showing that water vapor and carbon dioxide (CO2)?despite the fact that they were both just trace gases?had excellent heat-trapping capabilities. Comment by Sheila Stewart: How did he know? Comment by Budd Titlow: Inserted ?in the geologic records of his day?
As a result of this work, Tyndall supported Fourier?s metaphoric image of atmospheric gases forming an ?insulating blanket of warmth around the Earth.? So, while Fourier and Tyndall both provided an inside understanding of what was going on to keep the Earth?s atmosphere warm, neither of them mentioned any thoughts about human activities having any part in this global process. Comment by Sheila Stewart: What is this a quote from? Add a note citing the source. See above comment. Comment by Budd Titlow: The History of Climate Science, https://www.skepticalscience.com/print.php?n=1473
Fast forward now to the year 1896, when Swedish physicist/chemist and Nobel Prize winner Svante Arrhenius used estimates of coal burning to determine that human-driven activities involving fossil fuels were affecting Earth?s atmosphere by making it warmer. His research showed that Earth?s average temperature was about 15?C (59?F), primarily because of the capacities of water vapor and CO2 to absorb infrared radiation from the sun. Arrhenius also used his calculations to surmise that doubling the CO2 level in Earth?s atmosphere would raise the planet?s temperature by 5.0?C to 6.0?C (9.0?F to 10.8?F).[endnoteRef:9] Aha?so now we had it . . . the cat was finally out of the bag and the civilized world was about to know that human lifestyles were creating a potential future disaster for our planet. [9: . Spencer Weart, The Discovery of Global Warming: Revised and Expanded Edition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008).]
But not so fast there, friends.
Many scientists believed that Arrhenius?s calculations were too simple and that he had failed to include many factors?such as the potential ability of Earth?s vast bodies of saltwater to soak up huge volumes (as much as five-sixths) of the CO2 that was being generated. This led to the assumption that absorption by the oceans would significantly reduce the GHG concentrations in the atmosphere. In turn, this would then prevent any measurable increases in the planet?s annual average temperatures?at least for the next few thousand years or so!
After cold water was thrown on Arrhenius?s findings, the historic trail of the greenhouse effect hypothesis went cold for a few decades, until 1931, when American physicist Edward O. Hulburt picked up the ball and started running with it again. Hulburt revisited Arrhenius?s work, again testing what doubling the CO2 concentration would do to the temperature of Earth?s atmosphere. His calculations came up with a predicted increase of around 4?C (7.2?F) of global warming.
In the process, Hulburt discovered that the interception of reflected energy in infrared radiation was of key importance.[endnoteRef:10] Hulburt?s results received minimal attention from other scientists who were studying the climate. The prevailing thought continued to be that Earth?s climate system used some sort of natural balancing process to maintain itself. [10: . Ibid.
]
The year 1938 brought the first measurements indicating that global warming was actually occurring. Using data showing that CO2 concentrations had risen over the previous century, Guy Callendar, a British engineer, showed that global air temperatures had also risen over the same period. His correlation of increasing CO2 levels with rising atmospheric temperatures was labeled the Callendar Effect and was?for the most part?summarily dismissed by meteorologists and the general public. For the most part, scientists continued to believe that the immense volumes of our oceans and seas would absorb all the extra CO2, eliminating the potential for any significant short-term global warming.[endnoteRef:11] [11: . Ibid. ]
Several events significant to the history of climate change next occurred in the 1950s. First, in 1955, climate researcher Gilbert Plass performed detailed modeling analyses?using a newfangled device called ?the computer??to show that doubling CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere would indeed increase global temperatures by 3.0?C to 4.0?C (5.4?F to 7.2?F).[endnoteRef:12] Contrary to the conventional wisdom at the time, Plass argued that the effect of water vapor absorption did not mask the CO2 effect.[endnoteRef:13] [12: . Ibid. ] [13: . Gilbert N. Plass, Gilbert N. July 2015, http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/155263/ (accessed August 4, 2015). ]
Plass also postulated that the oceans would be able to sequester only a small amount of the anthropogenic (human-induced) carbon, thus resulting in an increase in atmospheric CO2. He calculated that consumption of all of the Earth?s f