Global Warming and Energy Choices
 What to believe?
Whom to believe?
What should US energy policy be?

 Science and Society II --- Spring, 2002



How do we decide what to think when the experts disagree? Is it possible for the "lay person" to have a valid opinion? This is one of the most difficult dilemmas in living a thoughtful, modern life.

Part of the problem is knowing who the experts are so we know where the real disagreement is. How do we determine the "bamboozel factor"? There have been many, many cases where the public was deceived by people who put on the robes of experts, sowing confusion when the actual experts were in total agreement. How can the non-expert tell when this is happening?

An even more difficult problem is how to decide on a personal stand when even authentic experts disagree. Or seem to disagree. There is disagreement among experts on the global warming question, but not always as much as suggested by the popular media. We need to decide how much disagreement there actually is, and also how much agreement there is. Then, the question is: What do we do about the problem, if anything? Indeed, is there a problem?

There will not be many hand-outs in this unit, if any. You will find some of your readings from the media and from the internet. This document will direct you to enough internet sources to more than get you started. Immediately below are some general sources that can be useful throughout the unit. In addition, there will usually be sources listed each day of the unit. If those are too sparse, refer back to the general citations, use a search engine to find additional ones, and/or look in the print media.

You will find the following sources to cover many of the topics of this unit, as well as providing links to yet additional sites.

General sources for global climate change issues
  • Global change master directory is pretty much as the name implies, but no single site has all the links you would want to know about.
  • The Climate Ark as in "Noah's Ark, I suppose, has numerous links.
  • "The New Scientist" is a British science magazine with a good site on global warming.
  • Environmental Protection Agency. They are unlikely to present the "other side," however, i.e., the claim that there is nothing to worry about. For that point of view, check out:

    The Daily Assignment

    At the beginning of each class period hand in a one-page annotated "bibliography" that includes: (1) the URL for an internet source, or the usual citation for print media, and (2) a brief annotation of what information the item contains. The title of an article, e.g., does not necessarily tell you what the article is about, and URL's give even less insight. An example of an annotation is: "This article gives arguments pro and con on the issue of whether we need to act now to avert possible climate change."

    Include as many references as you need to become informed on the issue.

    Grading these hand-ins: It will be easy to get 100% by just doing it! This component will count as 1/4 of an essay.


    Feb 12 The Greenhouse Effect I: the Science

    The greenhouse effect warms the Earth significantly, by 33 C (about 60 F). If there were no greenhouse effect, the average global temperature would be -18 C, or 0 F. It is doubtful that life could have arisen on Earth or that it could survive over much of the Earth if not for this warming. In that sense the greenhouse effect is an unmitigated good. There is no scientific disagreement on this point.

    Today, we will examine the science of the greenhouse effect: i.e., how do greenhouse gases produce warming? What makes a gas a greenhouse gas?

    The Question for the day
    What is the science behind the greenhouse effect? That is, how do the greenhouses gases (water vapor, CO2, methane, etc.) raise the temperature of the Earth from 0° F to 60° F? You want to show your grasp of the science behind the greenhouse effect.

  • If the Earth is in fact becoming warmer, is the solar radiation being absorbed by the Earth balanced by the radiation being emitted by the Earth? Explain.

  • Greenhouse gases are those gases that absorb some of the infrared radiation emitted by the Earth's surface. Why does this mean that the radiation from the Earth comes from high in the atmosphere? Why does this mean less energy is emitted than would be emitted if the radiation came from the surface?

  • How do greenhouse gases warm the Earth's surface more than the Sun alone is able to?

  • What is the difference between the "greenhouse effect" and the "enhanced greenhouse effect"?

  • Why is it colder on clear nights than on cloudy nights? (Saying the "clouds trap the heat" is not a good answer.) Why does the temperature fall more on clear summer nights in the desert than it does in Arkansas? How can frost form on your windshield when the temperature is 36° F? How can frost fail to form on a car in a carport (not garage) while a neaby car in the open, where the temperature is the same, becomes frosted?

  • Why is there much more agreement over the question of whether increasing greenhouse gases will raise the Earth's temperature than the question of how much the temperature will rise?

    • Sources and Readings
  • A good site, a series of lecture notes with links to other lectures and sites. Inside that site, click on the link to "Global Warming" for an excellent discussion in the same lecture series.


    Feb 14 The Greenhouse Effect II: the Controversy

    Many scientists believe that the average global temperature has increased by about 1 degree F this century. How good is the evidence for this claim? If the Earth is warming, is this due to human activities, or is the warming merely a natural increase following the Little Ice Age in the 17th century? Or is it some of both? How certain can we be of anyone's predictions or claims?

    The Question for the day
    Is the observed warming of the past century caused by humans or is it a normal change that would be occurring if humans were doing nothing? We know that climate has changed in the past, from ice ages to warm intertglacial periods. So even if we agree that the Earth's temperature is rising, how do we know whether that rise is due to humans or is natural?

  • How much do scientists predict the temperature will increase if the amount of CO2 becomes double that of pre-industrial times?

  • What are some issues that make it difficult to know whether humans are causing the observed global temperature rise? Come to class prepared to present and explain at least one other complicating factor.

  • Are you persuaded that humans are causing global warming? Do you base your opinion mainly on the consensus of scientists (as you understand it), or on the preponderence of evidence (as you understand it)?

    Sources and Readings
    The National Academy of Science site allows you to seach for articles on various topics. Entering "global warming" in the search box will give a number of articles, including an excellent 1995 article by Wigley, Jones and Raper, "The observed global warming record: What does it tell us?" Although it is six years old, it gives good, reliable information on what we know and what is uncertain. Semi-technical, but mostly within your grasp. It tries to sort out the various factors causing the observed temperature increase over the past century.

  • "Are we seeing global warming?" K.Hasselmann. Science 276, 914-915 (9 May 1997).

  • "Uncertainties in projections of human-caused climate warming," J. D. Mahlman. Science 278, 1416-1417 (21 Nov 97).

  • "Dissent in the Maelstrom: Maverick meteorologist Richard S. Lindzen argues that human-induced global warming isn't a problem. Scientific American (Nov 2001).

  • "Apocalypse Not" is more about Richard Lindzen's iconoclastic views.


    Feb 19 Is there a Future for Fossil Fuels?

    Hubberts's Peak is perhaps the most important single idea in analyzing the future availabilty of petroleum (and other finite resources). M. King Hubbert is a force to be reckoned with, given that he correctly predicted the peak in US oil production years in advance and in spite of nearly universal derision. He predicted that world oil production would peak about now. More recent analyses suggest a peak sometime this decade. After that, it is all downhill. For an even more sobering perspective do a search for an article on "Hubbert's Pimple."

    Al Bartlett, a physics professor at the University of Colorado now retired, has given a famous talk on "The Forgotton Fundamentals of the Energy Crisis" over 1000 times. I (LAC) heard him give the talk for the 1237th time. He explains the consequences of exponential growth in ways that make a permanent impression. Read it.

    Feb 21 Is There a Future for Nuclear Energy?

  • Introduction to Nuclear Power is a Department of Energy article that describes the basics.

  • For a defense of nuclear power and a proposal for safer reactors, read "Next-Generation Nuclear Power," Scientific American 286, 72-81 (Jan 2002).

  • For a thorough-going anti-nuclear perspective by Greenpeace, see "Nuclear Energy: No Solution to Climate Change."


    Feb 26 What are good, green, alternative, energy sources?


    Feb 28 The Role of Conservation


















    Mar 1 - The Tragedy of the Commons: Public interest vs. personal interest

    This is one of the most important articles on environmental/social questions ever written. To paraphrase, whoever does not know about the tragedy of the commons is doomed to repeat it. Hardin wrote the article out of concern about over-population, but the idea applies to many other problems and it helps to understand the dynamics of those problems.

    The Question for the day
    Explain clearly how greenhouse gas production is an example of the TOC. What kinds of actions will be required to avoid the TOC in this case?

    - How does Hardin use the term "tragedy"?
    - Describe the original TOC. Nowadays, how do we avoid the original TOC?
    - Think of two examples of the TOC in present-day society, then:
    Explain why they are TOCs
    Propose solutions to the two problems
    - Why is this article included in a unit on global warming?
    - What does Hardin mean when he says that some problems have "no technical solution"? What does this have to do with tic-tac-toe? Does he reject technical solutions to social problems?
    - What is Hardin's point regarding population? Comment on:
    his idea that "conscience is pathogentic." Do you agree?
    his conclusion that population must be limited by coercion, mutually agreed upon.

    Sources and Readings
    Tragedy of the Commons Garrett Hardin. Science 162 , 1243-1248 (13 Dec 1968).


    Mar 6 - Strategic planning in an uncertain situation: US policy

    The Question for the day
    Should the U.S. spend large sums of money and should we make significant lifestyle changes in order to avert or ameliorate global climate changes? U. S. representatives to the Kyoto Treaty agreed to a reduction of U. S. greenhouse gas emissions to a level 7% below our 1990 level by the year 2012. Since then, it has been tough sledding to move beyond that general agreement to specific actions.

    - What actions can we take on national, local and personal levels to move toward that goal? Rank your recommended actions from highest to lowest priority, using the guideline that easy and/or cheap actions should come first, with expensive, low-benefit actions last.
    - Do you think it is realistic to begin to move away from fossil fuels in this country? If so, to what energy form? Should nuclear energy play any role in this? What about solar energy? Hydroelectric energy?
    - Third-world countries say that they should be able to come up to the emission levels of industrialized countries. If they do, any cut-backs made by the industrialized countries will be totally negated. What is a fair and politically practical policy?
    - What is emission trading, and how does it work? Is it a practical way to address the global emission problem?

    Sources and Readings
  • Consequences is a journal of environmental impact and has numerous articles on global warming issues. Look for the article, " Beyond Kyoto: Toward a Technology Greenhouse Strategy," vol. 5, no. 1. (You will need to click on a couple of links to get the article, but it is there.)
  • "Economic Instruments, International Panel on Climate Change" describes various possibilities for encouraging countries to reduce greenhouse gases.


    Essay Due Mar 8 -- FUDD Apr 5
    Write a paper discussing the global warming issue by addressing the following six questions. The reader should come away having a good understanding of the relevant issues and should feel that you have presented a convincing case for your final recommendations.
  • What are the main causes of the greenhouse effect?
  • Of these, which one has the potential to cause the greatest warming?
  • What negative effects do scientists anticipate from global warming?
  • Of these, which will change our lives in the U.S. the most?
  • What are the most important actions our government could take to slow or stop global warming?
  • What are actions we can take individually to slow or stop global warming?


     The Question for the day
    Decide what the most important global warming issues are and come to class prepared to describe and explain why you think so, based on your readings.

  • What is your current stand on these "most important" issues?
    How confident are you of your position?

  • How would you rate the quality of your readings?

  • Do you think that the global warming brouhaha is more hype than real? Explain.

  • Does the Kuhn unit shed any light on how to deal with the global warming question?

    Sources and Readings
    "Global climate change: Which experts are getting warm?" by Adrienne Brooks discusses the conflicting views one can get from the media's reporting on global warming issues.

    Here are some readings that illustrate the range of disagreement found in the media:
  • "The coming warmup: no time for complacency," by Wallace Broecker, presents a "better not wait" argument.
  • "Scientists don't agree on Global warming." by Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe presents the opposing view.