The Global Warming Debate

The Current Conflicts page is a resource for Workable Peace educators and students interested in applying their WP skills to current events. In this section, Workable Peace profiles a current conflict or controversial issue of national or global significance, from the viewpoint of two or more groups involved. For past conflicts that have been highlighted on these pages, please click here.

For the past few years, warming temperatures, extreme weather, and shrinking ice caps have been all over the news. The discussion encompasses scientific publications to popular entertainment, and ranges across the globe. In the United States, a conflict has escalated over whether or not the increasing climate change is human-caused, and what should be done about it.

Table of Contents


Overview

About 150 years ago, the industrial revolution changed human lifestyle forever. Although the new energy sources that began to dominate industry increased efficiency and productivity in manufacturing, travel, and other aspects of life, humans’ use of fossil fuels and other pollutants for power has inspired a debate over climate change that has worked its way into national and international politics.

A greenhouse gas is a chemical compound that traps infrared radiation in the earth’s atmosphere (Energy Information Administration). Because this energy is not reflected back into space, it causes a slow warming of the earth’s climate, also known as the greenhouse effect . It is almost scientifically undisputed that the earth has been experiencing a period of warmer weather, especially in the last decade. Scientists estimate that the temperature of the earth has risen 1.0 to 1.7 degrees Celsius in the past century (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). However, not all scientists agree upon whether the climate change has been caused by greenhouse emissions produced by humans or if it is a natural climate cycle caused by the sun.

Those who attribute the climate change to human activity agree that the excess carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and man-made gases being pumped into the atmosphere by our rampant industrial machinery cause heat to become trapped in the atmosphere. When this occurs, vegetation can no longer absorb carbon dioxide as fast as it is produced. According to researchers, this imbalance is what has led to the increase in greenhouse gas in the atmosphere and is what is causing the climate to heat up. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that the average temperature of the earth could rise between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees Celsius in the next 100 years if nothing is done about the problem (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).

Those who attribute the climate change to natural processes also have scientific evidence to support their claim. According to many studies, it appears clear that the earth is experiencing a natural climate cycle in which higher temperatures characterize the weather. Scientists cite that there have been many fluctuations in the earth’s climate in the past, some even more pronounced than the current warming trend. What alarms many of today’s scientists is that the rate of the current rise in temperature seems to be more rapid than in the past.

Some people also argue that alarmists who trumpet the consequences of human-caused global warming are presenting frightening evidence for financial purposes only, in hopes that their research budgets will be increased. It is difficult to provide a single scientific answer to the question of global warming because so many contradictory studies have been conducted, and humans are far from fully understanding the earth’s climate. The wide differences in opinion have sparked an international debate on how best to deal with our changing climate .

<back to table of contents>

Historical and World Context

The global warming debate has been a prevalent issue since the mid-twentieth century. At about this time, the world saw an increase in climate research and awareness. Studies began turning out results that pointed to human-caused temperature change. In 1960, Charles David Keeling, after researching in Antarctica and Mauna Loa, Hawaii, produced a record of the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere that indicated that the amount was rising steadily. Once publicized, Keeling’s findings came to be regarded as representative of the greenhouse effect.

The 1970s marked an increase in concern over climate change. Environmental awareness rose, and organizations such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration were founded. Furthermore, the world experienced its first oil shortages in 1973 and 1979, alerting the public that cheap energy could not be taken for granted in the modern world. By 1983, global warming was a political issue. Plans for what to do to stop the warming began to develop. In 1988, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established, the first international organization dedicated to global warming on a scientific and political standpoint.

Four IPCC reports following 1990 demonstrated increasingly dire consequences stemming from the global warming trend. In 1990, the IPCC warned of future temperature increases. In 1995, it stated that human-caused global warming was evident and serious warming could occur in the following century. In 2001, it attested that the crisis was “unequivocal” and warned of severe, imminent consequences. Finally, in 2007, the IPCC stated that effects of climate change have already begun to present themselves, and it would be economically prudent to switch to clean energy rather than to deal with the damage global warming will cause. Meanwhile, 1998 and the years following were recorded as some of the warmest years in recent history, and many other fluctuations in the weather convinced most scientists that humans’ role in heating up the planet was indisputable.

In an attempt to unify nations to combat climate change, the Kyoto Treaty, based on the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, was enacted in 2005. The protocol was a global consensus to cut down on greenhouse emissions in order to slow climate change. However, the United States refused to sign the protocol. The United States was also accused of being noncommittal toward international cooperation during the United Nations Framework Conference, also in 2005.

Global warming activists today state that most scientists agree that global warming is a human-caused phenomenon. However, the few scientists who disagree with all of this research are still fighting for their point of view. They continue to present evidence and scientific research that suggest other reasons for the increase in the earth’s temperature.

For timelines of events related to global warming, click on AIP.ORG or PBS.ORG

Click here for numerous essays on the history of climate change.

<back to table of contents>


Framing of the Conflict

There is more than one way to analyze the global warming debate. It can be viewed in terms of scientific evidence, comparing research of those who claim that climate change is a result of man-made greenhouse emissions, and the reports of scientists who claim that natural climate patterns characterize recent warmer weather.

The conflict can also be viewed economically. When looking at global warming from an economic standpoint, one must consider the implications of doing nothing about the current warming trend, or risking shorter-term economic growth to create an energy efficient economy. One’s position in the global economy may strongly influence which scientific views they advocate.

Global climate change can also be analyzed politically, on a national and international level. Because climate change is an international issue, actions taken by individual nations may have short-term economic costs to be borne locally, even if longer-term international benefits include slowing or reversing climate change. This trade-off has been particularly charged in the United States, where the current presidential administration has been reluctant to commit to global agreements to reduce climate change until other nations begin to go green.

Finally, the global warming debate is a moral issue. If, indeed, humans are systematically destroying the planet, it will have enormous implications for future generations of human and animal life. A person’s moral opinion also has a lot to do with their scientific, economic, and political perspectives.

<back to table of contents>


Analysis of the Conflict: Issues to be Resolved

As you read through the viewpoints, think about the following:

A. The key issues that need to be resolved:
  1. In response to evidence of changes in the global climate, should the United States and the world a) focus on continued research and tests to ensure that global warming is a result of human activity, b) accept that greenhouse gases need to be reduced and take appropriate action, or c) ignore evidence of climate change completely and let nature take its course?
  1. How should the short and long-term economic implications of climate change be addressed by the United States? Should actions to reduce emissions be voluntary via tax and other economic incentives, mandated by law for all actors across economic sectors, neither, or both? What should those incentives or mandates consist of?
  1. Which nations should be responsible for leading the fight against global warming? Should nations that have contributed most to greenhouse emissions be obligated to perform the most drastic changes on their economies and lifestyles? What are the responsibilities of nations that have had less impact so far but are poised to have a large impact in the future?
  1. Should there be global organizations and agreements such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol, dedicated to reducing global greenhouse emissions, or should countries decide how to deal with global warming on their own? If these international organizations exist, how much power should they have over individual nations?

B. The key interests, beliefs, identities, and emotions of the writers advocating the various responses:

C. The writers' perspective on the interests, beliefs, identities, and emotions of others who have different points of view, and who may be affected by this conflict.

The Workable Peace Sources Chart provides a tool for this examination. (html or pdf)

<back to table of contents>


Viewpoints on Global Warming

Perspective 1: Global warming is not yet well enough understood to assign a cause or warrant dramatic actions. Even if carbon dioxide levels continue to rise in the coming century, evidence of an increase in global climate may be due to natural climate patterns, rather than the result of human activities. Because our economy is thriving right now, changes to reduce greenhouse emissions are unnecessary, could be useless, and would be too harmful to the economy. It is better to keep the economy stable than to threaten it by trying to fight human-caused global warming, a theory that is not scientifically proven and widely disagreed upon. 

Primary Source Accounts:

 

Perspective 2: Global warming is an urgent international conflict and the entire world must take immediate action to reduce greenhouse emissions and rework the global economy in a fashion that is environmentally friendly. Only through international partnership and the leadership of large, industrial nations such as the United States and China will an economy that is successful and clean be achieved. Cleaning up the environment requires participation from all countries, not just those who contribute the most greenhouse gases. The world must work to reduce emissions from developed countries while deterring developing countries from following a trend that will lead them to become large greenhouse gas emitters. The economic competition that the world thrives on will have to adjust to the new global economy.


Primary Source Accounts:


 Perspective 3: Global warming is a prevalent issue, and the United States, because it accounts for so much of the world’s greenhouse emissions, must take the lead to save the environment from destruction. Developing countries do not pose as much of a threat because their economies and industrial capacity are largely inferior to that of nations like the United States. Furthermore, they do not have the resources to protect themselves in a warming world. Greenhouse gas-emitting countries owe it to the world to aid the environment because their emissions affect the entire planet.

Primary Source Accounts:

<back to table of contents>

Additional Resources

<back to table of contents>

Classroom Activities

<back to table of contents>

Extension Activities

<back to table of contents>

This page was researched and written by Workable Peace Intern Andrea Shapiro, a senior at Needham High School in Massachusetts.