This Op-Ed originally provided by The Charleston Gazette

July 13, 2008

Mel Tyree

We have one year to save climate

If there is a silver lining to the human-caused climate change crisis, it is a short-burn issue. Life on Earth will continue as it always has if we fail to solve the health-care crisis or repair our aging infrastructure in the coming decades. Not so with climate change.

Recent scientific studies indicate that if humanity doesn't stabilize and rapidly reduce its greenhouse gas emissions within the next seven years, the rate of climate change will be beyond the point of human control. This would ultimately result in the extinction of one-third to one-half of all the planet's plant and animal species before the end of this century and likely jeopardize civilization.

Recently scientists have drawn some lines in the sand which illustrate the short-burn nature of this problem. NASA's chief climatologist, Dr. Jim Hansen, on June 23, 2008, testified before Congress that "The next president and Congress must define a course next year in which the United States exerts leadership commensurate with our responsibility for the present dangerous situation. Otherwise it will become impractical to constrain atmospheric carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas produced in burning fossil fuels, to a level that prevents the climate system from passing tipping points that lead to disastrous climate changes that spiral dynamically out of humanity's control."

Many politicians in the past have complained that scientists often didn't give them specific targets. Well, 2009 is pretty specific.

In 2007, the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change also drew a specific line in the sand. It was the panel's consensus that the world's major polluters must stabilize their greenhouse gas emissions by 2015 or it would not be possible to avoid catastrophic climate change. They also noted that only "urgent" action would do to achieve this goal. That's pretty clear and specific.

Members of the U.S. Senate did take urgent action in June 2008: They killed the Climate Security Act, which would have mandated an 18 to 22 percent reduction in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

Another extremely important line in the sand may be crossed by the summer of 2012. In a nationalgeographic.com interview, NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally noted that at its current melt rate, the entire summer Arctic ice cap could be nearly melted by the summer of 2012. That ice cap serves a very important function as the Northern Hemisphere's radiator. Without it, ocean temperatures would rapidly increase and accelerate the impacts of global warming. Those interested can actually watch the rapid disappearance of the Arctic ice cap at the National Snow and Ice Data Center's Web site.

On June 19, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration published a major study on the impacts of global warming to our weather system. The study concluded the following: "The global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat trapping gases," and "The increase in heavy precipitation events is associated with an increase in water vapor, and the latter has been attributed to human-induced warming." While this is not the first study to make this conclusion, it does substantiate the previous study results with present-day data.

It would appear that our next president and Congress have a monumental decision to make. First, they could continue to filibuster, debate and delay decisive action to address emissions and climate change. That is an easy path given their successful 20-year history of doing just that. We will see if the scientists' predictions occur. In just over six years, the Earth either has crossed a tipping point to a runaway greenhouse world or it hasn't. In the summer of 2013, either we'll have an Arctic ice cap or we won't.

On the other hand, by 2009 the United States could be on the path of an energy revolution equal to the level of effort of the Manhattan Project and the Apollo program combined. Such an energy revolution would eventually lead to U.S. energy independence from foreign oil and massive reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

Yes, this will be a painful, difficult and expensive task costing trillions of dollars. However, denial, delay and false promises have not decreased the annual increase of carbon dioxide emissions from our smokestacks and tailpipes. Yes, carbon dioxide levels have been higher in geologic history, but we also had dinosaurs walking around on a very hot planet.

There is still some time left, but it will require an enormous value shift by the present generation. First, we'll have to stop viewing nature as a commodity to be bought, sold and exploited. We need the planet's ecosystems for our continued survival.

Second, we can't continue to forever increase every country's gross domestic product and standard of living. This concept is obscene considering we now have almost 7 billion people in the world with finite resources to provide for their needs.

Third, like it or not, we need to adopt a global worldview. Fuel, food and water shortages in other countries impact the cost of living in the United States.

Finally, we need to recognize and accept that we are a part of nature and not apart from nature. This concept was obvious before the Industrial Revolution, when the rhythm of life was in balance with the cycles of nature.

Tyree, of Hurricane, is a geologist formerly of the state Department of Environmental Protection and a volunteer for the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition.