This is an article that I’ve been thinking about for a while, but have been somewhat reluctant to actually write. This is partly because maybe I’m wrong, partly because it is clearly going to be a bit too simplistic, and partly because I don’t want to suggest that issues other than climate change are not important; I think they are. However, I do think there is an argument as to why climate change is a problem that is fundamentally different to many of the other issues we face.
words by Ken Rice
Climate Change as a Low Priority
You often see claims that people don’t regard climate change as a particularly important issue, or that there are other issues that are more pressing at the moment. Global poverty, inequality, healthcare, education, crime, to name but a few. It’s certainly not unreasonable that many people regard these types of issues as more important than climate change; something that they may regard as not (yet) impacting them, or something that will only start to clearly manifest itself in the future.
As a society we always have to make decisions about our priorities. Not everyone will agree, and in many cases we may well change our minds as to what problems we should focus on. Whatever we choose to do, some will benefit more than others and, in some cases, some people may suffer unnecessarily. However, in most cases, even if we delay addressing some issue, we can still do things in the future that will improve the situation. The changing climate is something for which this is not true, and is why I think it is an issue that is quite distinct from many of the other issues we may wish to address.
Climate change is essentially irreversible on human timescales; whatever changes are induced by our emission of CO2 into the atmosphere will persist for centuries, if not millenia. So, the longer we take to address climate change, the bigger the change that we are committing ourselves to, and the more likely it becomes that climate change will severely negatively impact ourselves and natural ecosystems.
This Needs to Change
It is, however, always possible to stop climate change from getting worse. This would require getting the net emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to ~zero. However, since we can’t do this instantly, we are essentially committed to increasingly severe climate change, until we manage to do so. The main inertia is our own, rather than any inertia in the climate system itself.
What I’m getting at is that, unlike many other issues we face, delaying action on climate change has very long-term implications. The more we delay, the greater the change to which we’re committing ourselves, and the more likely it becomes that this change will be severely negative. This is not, however, to suggest that we should focus on climate above all else; there clearly are other important issues that we should be addressing. However, the implications of delaying addressing climate change are potentially serious and I think we should bear this in mind.
Additionally, climate change may well exacerbate many of the other issues that we regard as important. Therefore, it’s not a simple either or situation. Not only does delaying acting on climate change have long-term implications, addressing it now could have a positive impact on many of the other issues that we regard as important.
Into The Future
This is clearly a complex issue, and I’m not suggesting otherwise, but I do think that we should be careful of thinking that climate change is simply one of many issues that we need to address and that we can simply deal with it at some point in the future, when it’s more convenient to do so. What we might be dealing with then could be vastly different to what we would be dealing with today, and if we do delay action, we may well have locked in severely negative changes that will persist for many generations.
Something I’ve ignored is the possibility that we could address climate change through some kind of geo-engineering, such as solar radiation management, or through negative emission technologies. This is, of course, a possibility. However, geo-engineering carries its own risks and negative emission technologies are as yet undeveloped. We could hope that we manage to develop reliable technologies for artificially drawing down atmospheric CO2, but there’s no guarantee that this will be possible, or that it will be easier than trying to find ways of generating energy that doesn’t also involve emitting CO2 into the atmosphere.
There are plenty of excellent online resources about climate science and climate change, but a good place to start is Skeptical Science (https://skepticalscience.com).