There was not a great deal new in the report on climate change released Tuesday by the White House. This is not surprising since the report, "Global Climate Change Impact in the United States," drew on a large body of available scientific information, and a set of previously released assessment reports from government agencies released by the US Global Change Research Program.
What is unique is that the report was presented on a White House stage (well, next door at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building), to ensure maximum press coverage -- in sharp contrast to the way many of the previous reports were quietly slipped out the back door by the Bush administration. (Early in its tenure, the Bush administration's climate reports were also vetted by a former oil industry lobbyist with no scientific training who, according to a House panel, systematically weakened the governmen's conclusions on global warming).
On January 16, 2009, the Bush administration released four major Synthesis and Assessment reports from three agencies. One of the reports, from the US Geological Survey, said that temperature change in the Arctic was happening at a greater rate than other places in the Northern Hemisphere. As a result, "glacier and ice-sheet melting, sea-ice retreat, coastal erosion, and sea level rise can be expected to continue."
A report from the Environmental Protection Agency assessed the effects of sea-level rise related to global warming on eight coastal states from New York to North Carolina. It concluded that most coastal wetlands in the Mid-Atlantic states would be lost if sea level rose one meter during the 21st century.
What's significant about the January 16 release date is that it was a Friday -- four days before the Bush administration left office and the eve of a three-day holiday weekend -- a desolate news cycle where government officials try to bury stories they don't want to get wide coverage.
Not so the Obama administration, which unlike the Bush administration supports mandatory efforts to address the consequences of climate change detailed in the report. Where the Bush administration was somewhat equivocal if not skeptical about the causes and consequences of global warming, the Obama administration is not.
"Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal," the report said. "The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from the burning of fossil fuels, with important contributions from the clearing of forests, agricultural practices and other activities."
The report echoed the conclusions in previous reports from government agencies, international organizations, scientific bodies and university researchers. The widespread climate-related impacts that are occurring and can be expected to increase include droughts, severe storms, storm surges, sea-level rise, extreme heat waves, air quality problems, periods of floods and water deficits, and a host of related environmental and health problems.
Interestingly,the report claims to be the first in almost a decade to break out those impacts by US region. Not quite. Last year the Environmental Protection Administration issued a report that detailed the vulnerabilities to climate change in nine regions of the US. The EPA said its assessment was based on impacts identified in the published, peer-reviewed literature and expert opinion.
The Obama administration said its report is "not intended to direct policy makers to take any one approach over another to mitigate climate change or adapt to it. But [the report] emphasizes that the choices we make now will determine the severity of climate change impacts in the future."
However, by breaking out the results in terms of region and economic sector, the report provides "a valuable tool not just for policy makers but for all Americans who will be affected by these trends."
It may also serve as a not-so-subtle reminder for members of Congress currently debating climate legislation that none of their constituents is immune from some impact of climate change. Unless, of course, you're Republican Senator James Inhofe, Oklahoma, (degraded air quality, wildfires, heat waves, drought, and an increase in insect and waterborne diseases), who considers global warming a hoax.
"I would suggest that, given a little time, the world's preeminent scientists will quickly and thoroughly debunk this study," Inhofe said in a statement. And, presumably, seek to debunk the conclusions of the preeminent scientists whose research is the basis of the study.
Leave a comment