Senator Boxer’s Statement on New IPCC Climate Report

On Mar 30^th, 2014 U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, released a statement regarding the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Working Group II report that was just released.

Senator Boxer said: "The latest IPCC report adds a tremendous sense of urgency for Congress to wake up and do everything in its power to reduce dangerous carbon pollution. In California, we can just look out the window to see climate change's impacts - from the driest year on record in 2013 to the increased frequency and intensity of wildfires. This new IPCC report identifies the serious threats to human health, vital infrastructure, and the world's economy that will multiply as temperatures warm. It confirms that we must cut carbon pollution now to avoid lasting changes to our planet" (Senator Boxer’s Statement on New IPCC Climate Report, 2014).

Let me focus your attention on three specific statements: The first is where she said “dangerous carbon pollution;” the second, “In California, we can just look out the window to see climate change's impacts - from the driest year on record in 2013 to the increased frequency and intensity of wildfires;” and the third, “This new IPCC report identifies the serious threats to human health, vital infrastructure, and the world's economy that will multiply as temperatures warm” (Senator Boxer’s Statement on New IPCC Climate Report, 2014). Let’s look at each of these statements.

In the first statement Senator Boxer indicates that carbon or CO₂ is a pollutant. There are several problems with this statement. First, even an elementary understanding of science would tell you that all living plants take in CO₂ in order to exist. Basically, all plant life breathes in CO₂ and breathes out Oxygen or O₂ (The Oxygen Cycle). All animal life breathes in the Oxygen produced by plant life and we require this symbiotic relationship; thus, carbon is fundamental to all organic life.

       In fact, work by Vanaja et al. (2010), revealed that higher CO₂ concentrations increased grain yields and total biomass. Specifically, their research found there was “a significant positive increase of harvest index at elevated CO₂ with an increment of 30.7% over ambient values” (Idso, Carter, & Singer, 2011). This echoes their previous research where they stated, “The indication of higher responses for root and leaf at initial growth stages at the higher elevated level of CO₂ (700 ppm), which leads to better root establishment, achieving early photosynthetic efficiency and also better biomass production, and its improved partitioning can be reckoned as a positive aspect of increasing concentrations of CO₂ in atmosphere” (Vanaja, et al., 2007). This means that more that the more CO₂ in our atmosphere, the more plants grow and the more food crops will yield. Furthermore, citing numerous studies, the 2011 report ‘Climate Change Reconsidered’ stated, “In light of Jaramillo et al.’s findings, it is becoming increasingly clear that greater warmth and atmospheric CO₂ concentrations are not ‘twin evils.’ Quite to the contrary, they are just what the Earth‘s ecosystems need in order to make them both more stable and more productive, characteristics essential for sustaining the still - expanding human population of the globe while preserving wildlife habitat” (Idso, Carter, & Singer, 2011).

       In the second statement Senator Boxer indicates that climate change's impacts are drier environmental conditions in California and increased frequency and intensity of wildfires. Neither of these statements hold up to scientific scrutiny nor are they supported by scientific research. For instance, Denniston et al. (2007) indicated in their research that “neither mean annual temperature nor the seasonality of precipitation changed concomitantly with dryness” (Denniston, DuPree, Dorale, Asmerom, Polyak, & Carpenter, 2007). Furthermore, this is highlighted even more strongly by the 2011 report ‘Climate Change Reconsidered’ it states,

Real clarity, however, comes when the turn-of-the-century drought is compared to droughts of the prior millennium. Cook et al. write, “perhaps the most famous example is the ‘Great Drouth’ [sic] of AD 1276–1299 described by A.E. Douglass (1929, 1935). “This 24-year drought was eclipsed by the 38-year drought found by Weakley (1965) to have occurred in Nebraska from AD 1276 to 1313, which Cook et al. say ―may have been a more prolonged northerly extension of the ‘Great Drouth’.” But even these multi-decade droughts pale in comparison with the ―two extraordinary droughts discovered by Stine (1994) in California that lasted more than two centuries before AD 1112 and more than 140 years before AD 1350.” Each of these megadroughts, as Cook et al. describe them, occurred, in their words, “in the so-called Medieval Warm Period.” They add, “all of this happened prior to the strong greenhouse gas warming that began with the Industrial Revolution. (Idso, Carter, & Singer, 2011)

       This report and the research that it cites clearly shows that the dry conditions in California referenced by Senator Boxer are neither unprecedented nor are they caused by ‘Climate Change.’ Furthermore, citing fifteen different studies this report states that not only does wildfire frequency and intensity “not increase linearly with global temperatures” but the research shows that “a number of studies indicated a decrease in boreal fire activity in the last 150 years or so” (Idso, Carter, & Singer, 2011).

       In the third statement Senator Boxer states that, “This new IPCC report identifies the serious threats to human health, vital infrastructure, and the world's economy that will multiply as temperatures warm” (Senator Boxer’s Statement on New IPCC Climate Report, 2014). While I will examine the New IPCC Climate Report in more detail in another article, Senator Boxer’s statement is very misleading. First, the report states that “In recent decades, climate change has contributed to levels of ill-health (likely) though the present world-wide burden of ill-health from climate change is relatively small compared with other stressors on health and is not well quantified” (Smith, et al., 2014). As stated in previous reports, the degree of certainty in key findings is expressed as a qualitative level of confidence (from very low to very high) and, when possible, probabilistically with a quantified likelihood (from exceptionally unlikely to virtually certain). In this case, their statement “climate change has contributed to levels of ill-health” only rates the ‘likely’ probability which is far from the certainty implied by Senator Boxer’s Statement. Secondly, they go on to say that “the present world-wide burden of ill-health from climate change is relatively small” and “is not well quantified” (Smith, et al., 2014). Again, this is far from the certainty implied by Senator Boxer’s Statement. Furthermore, that statement that climate change will have profound impacts on infrastructure rates only a ‘medium’ in the qualitative level of confidence in the report (Revi , et al., 2014). And, the report states that “For most economic sectors, the impact of climate change will be small…” (Arent , et al., 2014). The greater impact to the world’s economy will be to implement policies based on reports and research from one side of any debate.

       As I stated in a previous article,

Phil Jones, the director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA), was asked in an interview with the BBC, "Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were identical?" Mr. Jones stated, "…the warming rates for all 4 periods are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other." Furthermore, he was also asked in the same interview, "Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?" Mr. Jones stated, "Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level" (Harrabin, 2010).

      This clearly shows that there has been no statistical warming since 1860 which is contrary to the statements made by Senator Boxer and others; yet, these claims continue to be made. In light of contradictory evidence, one would assume that statements would be updated, but this does not seem to be the case. This would lead one to ask, what is the motivation to continue these statements and push for a sense of urgency?

Bibliography

Arent , D., Tol , R. S., Faust , E., Hella , J. P., Kumar , S., Strzepek , K. M., et al. (2014). 10. Key Economic Sectors and Services. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Denniston, R. F., DuPree, M., Dorale, J. A., Asmerom, Y., Polyak, V. J., & Carpenter, S. J. (2007, July). Episodes of late Holocene aridity recorded by stalagmites from Devil's Icebox Cave, central Missouri, USA. Quaternary Research, Volume 68(Issue 1), p. 45-52.

Harrabin, R. (2010, February 13). Q&A: Professor Phil Jones. Retrieved March 31, 2014, from BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm

Idso, C. D., Carter, R. M., & Singer, S. F. (2011). Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). (C. D. Idso, R. M. Carter, & S. F. Singer, Eds.) Retrieved March 31, 2014, from Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC): http://nipccreport.org/reports/2011/pdf/2011NIPCCinterimreport.pdf

Revi , A., Satterthwaite , D., Aragón-Durand, F., Corfee-Morlot, J., Kiunsi , R. B., Pelling , M., et al. (2014). Chapter 8. Urban Areas. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Senator Boxer’s Statement on New IPCC Climate Report. (2014, March 30). Retrieved April 1, 2014, from U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works: http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Majority.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=d82d136b-b67b-9999-aca9-190cb4585fa4&Region_id=&Issue_id=

Smith, K. R., Woodward , A., Campbell-Lendrum, D., Chadee , D., Honda , Y., Liu , Q., et al. (2014, March 31). Chapter 11. Human Health: Impacts, Adaptation, and Co-Benefits. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The Oxygen Cycle. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2014, from Virginia's Community Colleges: http://water.me.vccs.edu/concepts/oxycycle.html

Vanaja, M., Raghuram Reddy, P., Jyothi Lakshmi, N., Maheswari, M., Vagheera, P., Ratnakumar, P., et al. (2007). Effect of elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations on growth and yield of blackgram (Vigna mungo L. Hepper) – a rainfed pulse crop. Retrieved April 1, 2014, from Agricultural Journals: http://www.agriculturejournals.cz/publicFiles/00056.pdf