Trump government report minimizes climate change and impact of emissions; Experts criticize

Forest Fire in California advances fast and strength evacuations near Malibu A report from the US Department of Energy states that future climate change projections are exaggerated and minimizes the role of emissions in the planet’s warming. The position is criticized by experts who signal the position as “an agenda to promote fossil fuels.” ➡️ Context: Last week, the Trump government mobilized to revoke a 2009 statement that determined that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger health and public well-being. This would help to revoke various climate regulations and national policy on emissions and environment. After the movement, the government has now published the document entitled “A Critical Analysis of the Impacts of Greenhouse Gas emissions on the United States.” The analysis was prepared by a group of five scientists known for having skeptical positions regarding scientific consensus on global warming. Among them, names like Judith Curry and Steven Koonin, often cited by negleys. The document was commissioned by Energy Secretary Christopher Wright – fossil industry enthusiast – who claims to offer an “alternative view” to the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The text minimizes the role of greenhouse gases in global warming and suggests that climatic models overestimate the future impacts of emissions. “Many will be surprised by the conclusions, which differ at important points of the dominant narrative. This shows how far the public debate has moved away from science,” says Secretary Wright in the preface to the document. Burning fossil fuels is a major cause of global warming. Disclosure – Pixabay. What the 130 -page report says, the report argues that: Carbon dioxide (CO₂) should not be considered a pollutant as it promotes plant growth and improves agricultural productivity (the so -called global Greening). Climate models would be “exaggeratedly sensitive” to CO₂ and “inadequate” to predict the climate future. Most extreme climate events in the US – such as hurricanes, heat waves and floods – would not have a trend of increase linked to human emissions. The increase in sea level would be within the historical average and would be influenced mainly by local factors, such as soil subsidence. The impact of US policies on the global climate would be “undetectable” and mitigation measures could cause more economic damage than benefits. In addition, the report harshly criticizes the use of the RCP8.5 scenario – considered extreme – as a “base” for impact projections on climate policies. Scientists known for challenging consensus all five reports of the report have already been at the Controversies Center on Climate Change. Judith Curry, for example, is often cited in republican hearings in Congress for minimizing the risks of global warming. Steven Koonin, former scientific counselor of the Obama Energy Department, wrote a book criticizing climate “alarmism”. John Christy and Roy Spencer, both from the University of Alabama, are known for contesting satellite -based heating data. Reactions and criticism experts in climate and academic institutions reacted with concern to the content and the way of disseminating the report. The fear is that the document is used as a political tool to discredit climate actions and weaken environmental regulations. Researcher Carlos Nobre, a reference in climate change, states that the document distorts scientific data. An example: The text cites that the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere raises photosynthesis – a process that transforms this gas into oxygen – suggesting that this would be something positive. However, it does not explain that, in order to have more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, it is necessary to have pollution or deforestation (which, in Brazil, for example, is responsible for most emissions). This aggravates pollution, environmental degradation and other factors that harm human life. “It is difficult to believe that a country like the United States, with thousands of very high -level climate scientists, could produce a type of scientific untruth like this,” he explains. Nobre also draws attention to the negationist attitude adopted by the country, amid global effort to reduce emissions, one of the most polluting nations in the world. “It’s very worrying to see the country that is the second largest emitter on the planet goes in a direction of lack of scientific truth like this.” A new chapter of official climate negationism since returning to the US presidency, Trump has resumed antiacyclical guidelines, deregulating sectors of the fossil industry, restoring pipelines and removing investments in clean energy. The report is the first “scientific” piece of the new term, reinforcing the rhetoric that environmental policies represent a threat to American economic growth. At the same time, the authors of the report insist that their goal is to promote “honest scientific debate” and correct what they see as exaggerations in the predominant climate narrative. For climate experts cited in this report, however, it is a strategy with technical appearance, but clear political motivation-weaken the scientific basis of climate actions in the name of short-term economic interests. As soon as he took over, Trump has been adopting measures against the weather. In his first act, he removed the country from the Paris Agreement. A treaty signed in 2015 in which countries around the world made a commitment to maintain global warming of the planet well below 2 ° C until the end of the century and seek efforts to limit this increase to 1.5 ° C. A few months later, the head of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lee Zeldin, announced the revocation of 31 environmental regulations, including crucial rules on climate change, coal plant pollution and electric vehicles. In addition, weather scientists were fired. ➡️ In NOAA, for example, almost 10% of the workforce has been fired, which gives about a thousand employees. The agency brings together some of the best climate scientists in the world and is responsible for weather forecasting, hurricane monitoring, tornados and tsunamis in the country, as well as providing data that help monitor climate change and its impacts on the world. To get a sense of impact, officials said in international press interviews that the reduction directly affects the country’s ability to prepare for extreme events, especially after a record season of hurricanes last year.

Source link