It's official: the earth is getting hotter

Global warming has officially been declared a reality. 1995 was the world's warmest year since records began in 1856.

Two and a half thousand scientists from over 100 countries concluded in December 1995 that humans are responsible for at least part of the rise in global temperatures witnessed in this century. Figures from the British Meteorological Office showed that the period 1991 to 1995 was warmer than any 5-year period to date, the first half of the 1990s being even hotter than the same period of the 1980s, which is the warmest decade on record.

By the year 2100, global temperatures are expected to rise by between 0.8 and 3.5 degrees Celsius. That may not seem like much, but such an increase in temperature would cause a rise in sea levels large enough to put the lives of up to 100 million people at risk. (This number will rise as the global population increases.) Flooding, as well as droughts in other areas, could spark off mass migrations as areas become uninhabitable. Tropical diseases would almost certainly spread northwards, causing "adverse impacts on human health, with significant loss of life".

For the first time in the scientific community, there is total agreement that the activity of humans is at least partly responsible for the problem – specifically the emission of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, which is released by the burning of wood, coal and petroleum products. This is a significant departure from the position of many scientists who previously maintained that warming could be a result of natural climatic changes.

However, not all scientists are convinced that human-influenced warming actually affects the climate. Some maintain that higher temperatures, which increase evaporation and lead to heavier rainfall, might produce more clouds which have a cooling effect. And, oceans might absorb most of the increased heat, leaving little to change the climate.

Reducing harmful emissions is just one area in which the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is decidedly optimistic. For one thing, in the short term it might not prove that difficult. Efficiency improvements alone could cut energy needs by as much as 30% at virtually no extra cost. In the longer term, harmful emissions will be reduced as the world changes over to cheaper, less environmentally damaging energy sources.

So, if it is economically and technically feasible to reduce harmful emissions, why is almost nothing being done? There are two main reasons. The first stems from the uncertainty about how hot the planet is going to get. The current estimate is extremely broad – between 0.8 and 3.5 degrees Celsius by 2100. If the former prediction is accurate, it may be that we can adapt without difficulty. If, on the other hand, the latter is close to reality, a complete rethink of the world's energy supplies is long overdue.

This leads directly to the second problem – the timescale involved. It is difficult to get people to act when predictions may take between 50 and 100 years to materialise. For politicians who face elections every half decade or so, preventive action against a future threat carries heavy political risks.

This is by no means the end of the problem. Even if politicians in the developed world were to be galvanised into action, what of the developing world, which is economically dependent on fossil fuels? Should it reduce emissions and suffer the consequences, because of mistakes made by the developed world?

One suggestion is that developing countries be given allowances above the current emission standards. This would enable them to meet their industrial needs and ultimately help them to finance environmentally sound technologies.

(from BBC English)