The Debate On Climate Change

By Michael Hardy

Climate change skeptics around the world were thrilled by the recent revelation of a mistake in the 2007 report of the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the report that earned its authors, together with Al Gore, a Nobel Peace Prize. The report had included the alarming claim that due to rising global temperatures most of the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035:

“Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate,” the report stated.

The prediction captured the attention of Asia, because two billion people depend on meltwater from the glacier for fresh water. Money poured into climate change research in a frantic bid to stave off the impending catastrophe.  Earlier this month, however, IPCC scientists were forced to admit that their prediction was off by hundreds of years. The Himalayan glaciers were not in danger of melting any time soon. The claim was based on an eight-year-old news story in New Scientist, a popular science magazine.

The New Scientist story was itself based on a 1999 telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a scientist at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi. Hasnain later admitted that he had merely speculated about the glaciers, and that his remark had not been based on any research. On January 21, the IPCC apologised for their “poorly substantiated” prediction. In an exclusive interview with The Sunday Leader, Sri Lankan scientist Mohan Munasinghe, one of the authors of the 2007 IPCC report, claimed that the mistake about the Himalayan glaciers was an aberration in an otherwise well-researched report.

“There are individual bits of evidence that have been criticised, but if you look at the report it’s got literally thousands of pages, so it’s always easy to find one or two pages where things are misstated,” Munasinghe said. “Taken overall, it’s a convincing document.”

Error  in the report

The revelation of the error in the 2007 report is only the latest in a string of embarrassments for climate change researchers. In 2009, hackers broke into computers at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, and then published thousands of e-mails and other documents relating to the scientists’ research. The e-mails revealed that researchers had conspired to suppress data that appeared to contradict the consensus view on climate change.

Then, in December, the much-anticipated climate change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark failed to produce a major new agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

Only a last-minute intervention by American President Barack Obama was able to produce a weak, controversial document called the Copenhagen Accord, which fell far short of what global warning experts had hoped to achieve.

“There is no substance to the agreement,” said Munasinghe, the director of the Munasinghe Institute for Development. “There are vague promises by countries, there is no time line, the aggregate targets that are implied in the accord are well below what science requires.”

Amount of carbon dioxide

For most of human history, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was around 275 parts per million (ppm). During industrialisation in the 19th century, when European countries began burning fossil fuels like coal in large quantities, the level began to rise. The first time scientists were able to accurately measure the level, in 1950, carbon had reached 350 ppm, and today the amount is 385 and growing by over 2 ppm per year.

Although America and Europe are primarily responsible for global warming, scientists say that the consequences of climate change will disproportionately fall on the world’s less developed countries, including Sri Lanka. Munasinghe said that Sri Lanka will suffer four major effects from rising temperatures: (1) scarce water resources in the country’s dry zone, (2) imperiled agriculture in the dry zone, (3) extreme weather conditions in the country’s coastal zones, and (4) an increased risk of intestinal and infectious diseases. If the signatories of the Copenhagen Accord follow through on their $100 billion pledge, Sri Lanka will be eligible to apply for money to remedy these problems.

“Whether Sri Lanka gets some of the money depends on how aggressively we apply for it,” Munasinghe said. “When the fund is set up there will be a mechanism for applying for money, like any other development project.”

Munasinghe blames the skepticism about global warming on a “concerted effort to discredit the IPCC.” Like most scientists, he is convinced of the reality and seriousness of climate change.

“The preponderance of evidence suggests that global warming is happening and that it is caused by humans.”