The Clean Industrial Revolution

Have you ever been at dinner parties, at the pub or talking with your in-laws and the topic of global scientific conspiracy comes up over climate change? For me, I usually say something like ‘I can assure you there is no debate on the fundamentals of climate change within climate science community - you are hearing these rumblings from non-experts that are political ideologues’.  No matter what you say, sometimes figures and clearer explanations of all the classic denialist arguments like ‘The world is cooling’ or ‘It’s the sun’ or  SMH’s Paul Sheehan ‘It’s the urban heat island effect‘are needed. By the way  Paul, I dont think there are concrete jungles in the ocean and its warming in concert with the land (see figure below) - sorry, no conspiracy here.

Anyway, Skeptical science has launched a new Climate Science iPhone app  which may be useful next time you are sitting down to someone like Sheehan or other commentators who somehow believe thousands of climate scientists are conspiring against the world. 

To start the new year off I was on a climate debate on Sunrise on Monday with a conservative UK political advisor - see the video (and crazy comments) here if you can bear it. For those wanting some sort of insight into where we are in Australia in 2010, this is my summary: evidence and reason is losing the public debate. Debating what we do about climate change in a policy sense is very much needed and debating the science within the realm of science is the exactly what scientific progress is about.  However somehow trying to discredit thousands of working climate scientists on national TV by a UK Lord with no scientific background is just slightly crazy - and there are many coming from the rafters that are given this platform of crazy.  Have a look at the video when Monckton says ‘I’m not an expert’ - I was speechless to be honest given I teach, research and coordinate scientific syntheses on climate science every day of my working life. This is not to say there are no debates in the climate science community - of course there are - but not about the fundamentals of climate change and how humans are contributing to it (Richard Lindzen is known to be the lone contrarian among the hundreds of other atmospheric physicists - although he doesn’t dispute that greenhouse gases will warm the planet by the way) . If you would like to see the latest synthesis of climate science by climate scientists go to ‘The Copenhagen Diagnosis’ which undertook this process in writing its report. Do you think I should get national media play debating whether junk food causes cancer - NO - I’m not an expert in cancer.  We have opinions but opinions do not shape scientific progress.  It seems anyone is free to comment on climate science - I remember a historian being on the front page of ‘The Australian’ last year explaining how the climate science is flawed. This is going to be a big year of this nonsense given the impending Australian election - how backward has the debate become - it’s up to our national leaders to see through this right? Will they?

It is like being in another world when arriving into Copenhagen for the global climate climate summit this week.  On the connecting flight I had from Zurich to Copenhagen on Monday morning, the IATA (international airlines association) issued a pamphlet to every passenger on there goal of reducing emissions by 50% by 2050.  Apparently everyone who flew into Copenhagen on any flight got this pamphlet over the 2 weeks.  Then I read a full-page ad in the IHT from Coca-Cola calling for strong action at the Copenhagen talks - with a campaign called Hopenhagen. Yes Coke wants strong action. Times are changing indeed when reading this before I even get to Copenhagen.

Now being in Copenhagen and having great expectations, I regret coming at all.  The Copenhagen Diagnosis team had a press conference at 11:30am on Tuesday. We thought we’d head out to the conference centre to register.  Heading out there with Matt England, we got to the centre at ~1pm on the Monday.  There was about 100 people in a que out the front which seemed fine - well, that’s what I thought. Although this was supposed to be a que, it actually was a place to stand and go nowhere for hours in freezing conditions with no communication or ability to know if you would ever see people get let in, let alone yourself get in.  This que after a couple of hours turned into a mosh-pit with some people being there for 7 HOURS - then it turned ugly with the police a very restless and cold crowd of delegates shouting, chanting and pushing. At one point the crowd parted like the  Red Sea - and Al Gore slide past on his way out. It was a freezing disaster and I was not prepared for it - after 2 hours in the mosh-pit I went home and hoped tomorrow morning would be better. How wrong was I.

My friend, Michael Molitor and I got out to the conference centre at 7:30am on the Tuesday and the line was already about 200m.  By the time they opened the doors, the line was apparently 3km! We had no chance to get in for our press conference at 11:30am- but we tried desperately, calling everyone from the head press officer of the conference to a friend in the UNFCCC executive. The thing is, the mosh-pit was filled with state government/city officials, ngo’s, press and all types of high-flyers. Saw NYTimes columnist Thomas Friedman in the line and let him know his next column: If the UNFCCC cant organise a conference, then how on earth can we expect them to help negotiate a global new deal on climate change!

Some of our scientists got through (another Stefan Rahmstorf waited 8 hours in the line!) and we were able to have the Copenhagen Diagnosis press conference - which I watched online from my hotel bed! With much hope I am heading home from Copenhagen deflated and frustrated, not at just our experience, but also the horrible impasse between haggling nations trying to do their best to not cut carbon emissions unless others do it!