Climate change is occurring rapidly throughout the world, including here. The overwhelming scientific consensus that this is caused at least predominantly by human activities, primarily the release of carbon dioxide from the burning of coal, oil, and natural gas.
Meanwhile, Senator Rob Portman and Congressmen Steve Chabot and Brad Wenstrup have voted on the Senate floor and the House floor against virtually every science-driven effort to limit climate change. They have done nothing to challenge President Trump’s wholesale dismantling of climate change reduction efforts and his denial that climate change is occurring. I urge you, the reader, and the Cincinnati Enquirer, to join me in asking them to tell us specifically why they reject the scientific consensus or why else they have acted as they have.
The present and future effects of climate change include rising air and water temperatures, higher ocean levels, increased acidity of ocean water, changes in how much rain and snowfall in different places on earth and the severity of storms, the timing of seasons, making regions unsuitable for the plant and animal species, and the migrations of millions of people.
We must act decisively based on our best scientific understanding. Climate science is extremely challenging, a synthesis of atmospheric physics, solar science, thermodynamics, Arctic and Antarctic science, glaciology, volcanology, geology, oceanography, various fields of biology and chemistry, paleoclimatology, and other fields.
The scientists must be experts and not swayed by financial or political interests. Unfortunately, the public’s knowledge has been hijacked by businesses and government officials financially dependent on fossil fuel use. This includes statements by industry-supported people posing as neutral experts. This is nothing new, as in the cases of cigarettes, lead, pesticides, and chlorofluorocarbons.
The most important U.S. information source is the U.S. Global Change Research Program. Thirteen federal agencies and the National Academy of Sciences participate. A final draft report was completed in June 2017. It states that “it is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century “and that “there is no convincing alternative explanation…”
The International Panel on Climate Change was established in 1988 by the United Nations Environment Programme and the World Meteorological Organization. The latest (5th) Assessment Report was issued in 2014. It states that human-caused greenhouse gas emissions and other activities “have been detected throughout the climate system and are extremely likely to have been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.”
Portman, Chabot and Wenstrup have opposed efforts to reduce fossil fuel use and other measures. Of the floor votes analyzed by the nonpartisan League of Conservation Voters through 2016, throughout their years in Congress, Portman has opposed the position consistent with the scientific consensus in 18 of 21 votes, Chabot 42 of 43, and Wenstrup 24 of 24.
I urge you to join in asking them to state, by March 15, specifically why they do not agree with the scientific experts. Vagueness and lawyer-like statements are merely a dodge. If they are relying on the opinions of scientists, they should name them and their affiliations. If they accept the science but believe that there are other compelling reasons to act as they have, they should tell us what they are. Ask them to send you their statement. It is the least that they can do.
Drew Diehl lives in Pleasant Ridge. He can be reached at diehldrews@yahoo.com.