Читать книгу Just Cool It! - David Suzuki - Страница 10

Chapter 2

CONSEQUENCES AND IMPACTS

MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF scientific evidence, developed over many years by scientists around the world, confirm that human activity is contributing to unusually rapid global warming and that failing to address its causes could be catastrophic for humanity, as well as numerous other species that share this small blue planet. Many indigenous peoples have long known that everything in nature is interconnected, that what we do to one part of a natural system often has unforeseen consequences that cascade throughout the environment. Our survival depends on a complex interaction of air, water, land, and living things, all interconnected and interdependent. Yet we have been recklessly treating the planet and its atmosphere as little more than a source of raw materials and a dumping ground for our waste and emissions.

Part of the problem is that Western thought and science often view things in isolation. Because nature doesn’t always behave the same in a lab, test tube, or computer program as it does in the real world, scientists and engineers have come up with many ideas that didn’t turn out as expected.

The insecticide DDT was considered a panacea for a range of insect pest issues, from controlling disease to helping farmers. But we didn’t understand bioaccumulation and biomagnification then—toxins concentrating up the food chain, risking the health and survival of animals from birds to humans. Chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, seemed so terrific we put them in everything from aerosol cans to refrigerators. Then we learned they damage the ozone layer, which protects us from harmful solar radiation.

The problems caused by DDT and CFCs were relatively easy to resolve, but we’re now facing the most serious and complex unintended consequence ever: climate change, from destroying carbon sinks such as forests and wetlands, and from industrial agricultural practices—but mainly from burning fossil fuels.

Oil, gas, and coal are miraculous substances—energy absorbed from the sun by plants and animals hundreds of millions of years ago, retained after they died, and concentrated as the decaying life became buried deeper in the earth. Burning them to harness and release this energy opened up possibilities unimaginable to our ancestors. We could create machines and technologies to reduce toil, heat and light homes, build modern cities for growing populations, and provide accessible transport for greater mobility and freedom. And because the stuff seemed so plentiful and easy to obtain, we could build roads and vehicles—big cars that used lots of gas—so that enormous profits would fuel prosperous consumer-driven societies.

We knew fairly early that pollution affected human health, but that didn’t seem insurmountable. We just needed to improve fuel efficiency and create better pollution-control standards. That reduced rather than eliminated the problem and only partly addressed an issue that appears to have caught us off guard: the limited availability of these fuels. But the trade-offs seemed worthwhile.

Then, for the past few decades, a catastrophic consequence of our profligate use of fossil fuels loomed. Burning them has released excessive amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, creating a thick heat-trapping blanket. Along with our destruction of natural carbon-storing environments, this has steadily increased global average temperatures, causing climate change.

We’re now faced with ever-increasing extreme weather-related events and phenomena, such as ocean acidification, which affects myriad marine life, from shellfish to corals to plankton. The latter produce oxygen and are at the very foundation of the food chain. The cascading consequences of extracting and burning fossil fuels, as well as destroying carbon sinks, are affecting all facets of the planet—human health, climate, weather patterns and events, other species, oceans, agriculture, and a range of human activity. In turn, these consequences are interacting with other elements of nature and human existence, creating complex feedback loops and further unintended consequences.

The interactions are complex and numerous and we’re still not clear on what some of the further consequences will be, but in this chapter, we’ll examine some of the costs of upsetting the earth’s carbon cycle.

A World of Extreme Weather, Water, and Food

INCREASINGLY FREQUENT AND severe heat waves, heavy rain and snowfall events, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires, and floods—unusual weather and its effects are everywhere, and getting worse as the planet warms. California has been experiencing severe drought since 2011. Temperatures in Spain, Portugal, India, and Pakistan reached record levels in 2015, sparking wildfires and causing thousands of deaths and heat-related ailments. In the same year, heavy rains, flooding, and an unusually high number of tornadoes caused extensive damage and death in Texas, Oklahoma, and parts of Mexico.

The likely causes are complex: a stuck jet stream, El Niño, natural variation, and climate change. Even though it’s difficult to link all events directly to global warming, climate scientists have warned for years that we can expect these kinds of extremes to continue and worsen as the world warms. Some hypothesize that the strange behaviors of 2015’s jet stream and El Niño are related to climate change, with shrinking Arctic sea ice affecting the former.

Hurricane Sandy, which wreaked havoc on Caribbean nations and the U.S. East Coast in October 2012, offered a glimpse into our future.

Does that mean climate change caused Hurricane Sandy? Not necessarily. Experts know that tropical Atlantic storms are normal in fall. This one and its impacts were made unusually harsh by a number of converging factors: high tides, an Arctic weather system moving down from the north, and a high-pressure system off Canada’s East Coast that held the storm in place.

But most climate experts are certain that the intensity of the storm and the massive damage it caused were in part related to changing global climate. Global warming causes sea levels and ocean temperatures to rise, which results in more rainfall and leads to a higher likelihood of flooding in low-lying areas. Scientists also believe 2015’s record Arctic sea-ice melt may have contributed to the high-pressure system that prevented Sandy from moving out to sea. In short, the storm and the unprecedented flooding and damage are exactly what climate scientists have been telling us to expect as global temperatures rise.

Extreme weather events, including heat waves and drought, are no longer just model-based predictions. NASA scientist James Hansen, who sounded the alarm about climate change in 1988, wrote in the Washington Post in 2012, “Our analysis shows that it is no longer enough to say that global warming will increase the likelihood of extreme weather and to repeat the caveat that no individual weather event can be directly linked to climate change. To the contrary, our analysis shows that, for the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change.”¹

A number of studies indicate a clear connection between increasing extreme weather and climate change.² One, by climatologists at the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado, looked at rising global atmospheric and sea surface temperatures, which have increased water vapor in the atmosphere by about 5 percent since the 1950s. According to the 2015 paper, published in Nature Climate Change, “This has fuelled larger storms, and in the case of hurricanes and typhoons, ones that ride atop oceans that are 19 centimetres higher than they were in the early 1900s. That sea-level rise increases the height of waves and tidal surges as storms make landfall.”

Because of the way the planet and its systems balance energy, extreme precipitation in some areas is increasing more quickly than overall rainfall. Rain is caused by water vapor cooling enough to condense into liquid when the atmosphere cools. But with more greenhouse gases warming the atmosphere, water vapor can build up, leading to heavy rain and snow events that are increasing in frequency and severity. With more moisture and energy in the atmosphere, and warmer oceans, the world can also expect more intense hurricanes. Besides flooding, extreme precipitation can cause crop damage and loss, soil erosion, water contamination, and more. Because water vapor is often held for longer by a warmer atmosphere, and released in extreme events over smaller areas, other areas often get less overall precipitation than before, leading to droughts in some places.

A Stanford University study found “accumulation of heat in the atmosphere can account for much of the increase in extreme high temperatures, as well as an average decrease in cold extremes, across parts of North America, Europe and Asia” but also concluded the influence of human activity on atmospheric circulation, another factor in climate change, is not well understood.³

What scientists do know is that moist air rises as it is heated near the equator. Once it is high enough to cool, the moisture falls as tropical rain. The dry air then moves north and south, normally dropping at the subtropics. With a warmer planet, it travels farther, causing drying conditions farther north and south. This could help explain ongoing drought conditions in California and other parts of the U.S. Southwest. A 2016 paper published in Nature Climate Change examined the effects of atmospheric circulation and increased water vapor on storms and flooding in England during winter 2013–14.⁴ The researchers used model simulations and found that the historic precipitation and flooding were caused not just by increased moisture in the air but also by increases in the number of January days with westerly flow.

The damage that climate change is causing, which will get worse if we fail to act, goes beyond the hundreds of thousands of lives, homes, and businesses lost; ecosystems destroyed; species driven to extinction; infrastructure smashed; scarce or polluted food and water in many areas; and people inconvenienced. It will even devastate the one thing that many corporate and government leaders put above all else: that human creation we call the economy—the very excuse many of our leaders use to block environmental protection and climate action.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported, “Between 2011 and 2013, the United States experienced 32 weather events that each caused at least one billion dollars in damages.” According to Hansen, the Texas drought in 2011 alone caused $5 billion in damage. Repairing the damage from Hurricane Sandy in the U.S. is expected to cost at least $50 billion. And as former World Bank economist Nicholas Stern has pointed out, slowing climate change will cost us, but doing nothing will cost far more.

Earth is clearly experiencing more frequent extreme weather than in the past, and we can expect it to get worse as we burn more coal, oil, and gas, and pump more carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. This can have profound and costly impacts on everything from agriculture to infrastructure, not to mention human health and life.

Increasing extreme weather threatens global water supplies and food security. We’ve already seen prolonged droughts affecting food supplies in what were once productive food-growing areas, such as California, parts of Africa, and elsewhere in the world. Flooding also destroys crops and degrades and erodes soil, and changing weather patterns—altered growing seasons, less predictable conditions, and shifting climate zones—are making food production a challenge. Melting glaciers and changes to the earth’s hydrologic cycles will affect the availability of water for drinking and growing food. As the world has come to depend more and more on globalized food delivery, climate change will also put pressure on the ability to rationalize these systems. Transporting food over long distances will become increasingly difficult, unless we can find ways to ship products without burning large amounts of some of the most polluting fossil fuels. That means shifting to more local food production, but that is threatened by the difficulty many areas are experiencing, and will experience even more as the world continues to warm, to produce food for local populations. Increasing degradation and loss of productive soils because of industrial agriculture practices and climate change add to the problem.

As water and food security are compromised, disease can start to spread. Climate change isn’t just a matter of more unpredictable weather or increased storms, precipitation, and heat waves; it threatens the basic elements we need to survive and be healthy.

What Can We Learn From Arctic Ice?

THE ARCTIC MAY seem like a distant place, just as the most extreme consequences of our wasteful use of fossil fuels may appear to be in some distant future. Both are closer than most of us realize.

The Arctic is a focal point for some of the most profound impacts of climate change. As we saw in Chapter 1, much of our understanding of global warming comes from studies of the Arctic, where changing conditions can trigger feedback cycles that affect the entire planet. One of the world’s top ice experts, Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University, calls the Arctic situation a “global disaster,” suggesting ice is disappearing faster than predicted and could be entirely gone in the near future.⁵ “The main cause is simply global warming: as the climate has warmed there has been less ice growth during the winter and more ice melt during the summer,” he told the Guardian.⁶

Over the past thirty years, permanent Arctic sea ice has shrunk to half its previous area and thickness.⁷ As it diminishes, global warming accelerates. This is caused by a number of factors, including release of the potent greenhouse gas methane trapped under nearby permafrost, and because ice reflects the sun’s energy, whereas oceans absorb it.

Because of albedo feedback (which refers to the ability of a surface to reflect solar energy), ice-covered regions like the Arctic are affected to a greater degree than other areas by even small changes in global temperatures. Researchers say the Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet. Fresh Arctic snow and ice can reflect as much as 80 percent of the sun’s energy back to space, and melting ice in summer can reflect 50 percent. According to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, ocean water only has an albedo of 10 percent.⁸ Even small amounts of warming cause ice and snow to melt, reducing the surface area that reflects solar energy. As more dark ocean and land surfaces are exposed, more energy is absorbed, which causes further warming, and further melting, and so on. These feedback loops in the Arctic are complicated, because the Arctic receives little or no sunlight during winter, but up to twenty-four hours of sunlight during summer. But warming during spring, summer, and fall causes spring melt to arrive earlier and fall freezing to start later, meaning the period during which solar radiation can be absorbed rather than reflected lasts longer. And because the oceans absorb more heat during summer, they release the heat during fall and into winter, causing the atmosphere to warm even more. Because the atmosphere over the Arctic is quite stable, the heat stays near the earth’s surface, leading to amplification of warming in the area.

The increase in warming rates in the Artic regions sets off another feedback loop, as CO₂ and methane, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than CO₂, are released from oceans, permafrost, and soils that are no longer frozen. This causes more warming and more melting, and so on.

According to the IPCC, Arctic warming and feedback loops will “contribute to major physical, ecological, sociological, and economic changes,” including altered drainage, landscapes, species composition, marine ecosystems, and human communities.⁹ Melting Arctic ice and subsequent warming will also cause sea levels to rise, and more rapid warming at lower latitudes as oceanic heat transfers are slowed.

With all we know about climate change and what’s happening in the Arctic, you’d think world leaders would be marshaling resources to at least slow it down. Instead, industry and governments are eyeing new opportunities to mine Arctic fossil fuels. Factoring in threats to the numerous species of Arctic creatures—including fish, seabirds, marine mammals such as whales and seals, and polar bears—makes such an approach even more incomprehensible.

Royal Dutch Shell spent more than US$4.5 billion on operations and lease purchases in preparation for Arctic drilling.¹⁰ But its record shows how risky this is. First, a spill containment dome failed a routine safety test and was crushed by underwater pressure. Later, a drilling rig, which was being towed to Seattle so that Shell could avoid paying some Alaskan taxes, broke free during a storm and ran aground on an island in the Gulf of Alaska. The disastrous BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 showed how dangerous ocean drilling can be, even in relatively calm waters, and how bogus the claims of the industry are that it can contain or even clean up a spill.

Problems with exploration in the Arctic aren’t new. In October 1970, a blowout at a natural gas well on King Christian Island in the Arctic Ocean created a massive flame as up to 200 million cubic feet of gas a day spewed for more than three months. It was the second blowout in the Arctic since drilling began the year before. Around the same time, the drilling consortium Panarctic Oils Ltd. was slapped with a huge fine for dumping junk steel, waste oil, and other garbage into the Arctic Ocean. The drilling companies found a novel solution to the latter problem: they convinced the Canadian government of the day to issue ocean-dumping permits, making the practice legal and common until 1993, when Inuit challenged one of the permits.

Of course, the worst danger is that increased exploitation of fossil fuel resources in the Arctic will exacerbate global warming. Responding to climate change and vanishing Arctic ice by gearing up to drill for the stuff at the root of the problem is insane. Unfortunately, many fossil fuel companies and governments are engaged in a mad rush to get as much oil and gas out of the ground—no matter how difficult—while there’s still a market. The ever-increasing devastation of climate change means we will eventually have to leave much of the fossil fuels where they are—or at the very least, substantially slow the pace of extraction and use the resource more wisely—if we want to survive and be healthy as a species.

As Arctic ice melts, countries like Australia burn, and droughts, floods, and extreme weather increase throughout the world, it’s past time to get serious about events in the Arctic and what they mean for global warming.

Antarctica Tells Another Story

DOWN AT THE other pole, the effects of climate change are somewhat more complicated and less well understood. Warming is occurring at a slower pace than in the north, and some ice sheets appear to be shrinking while others may be growing. Geographical conditions explain some of the differences between global warming’s effects on the two poles. The Arctic is an ocean surrounded by land, but Antarctica is a land mass surrounded by ocean. Because of that, sea ice is not as thick in Antarctica, and it moves more freely. Most of the sea ice that forms during Antarctica’s winter melts in summer, whereas the Arctic retains more winter ice. Wind patterns and water currents also act differently between the two poles.¹¹

A study in the Journal of Glaciology, led by Jay Zwally, chief cryospheric scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, found that glacier mass in Antarctica’s western region is declining while increased snowfall in the eastern interior has led to a “net gain of about 100 billion tons of ice per year,” but other researchers have questioned those findings, which don’t dispute global warming.¹²

“I don’t think Zwally’s estimates really matter so much in the grand scheme because adding a little snow to Antarctica in no way offsets the complete disintegration of the West Antarctic ice sheet in the near future,” University of Alaska Fairbanks glaciology professor Erin Pettit said.¹³

As for the slower pace of warming in Antarctica, researchers from the University of Washington and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology say it’s probably because gale-force westerly winds push surface water north, which pulls “deep, centuries-old water to the surface.”¹⁴

And parts of Antarctica are warming rapidly. The U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center explains that although most of Antarctica has yet to see dramatic warming, “the Antarctic Peninsula, which juts out into warmer waters north of Antarctica, has warmed 2.5 degrees Celsius (4.5 degrees Fahrenheit) since 1950.”¹⁵ However, parts of Antarctica are so cold that even if they heat by the same amount as the peninsula, it won’t be enough to melt ice.

In any case, climate change is affecting Antarctica, and that has profound implications. The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported that atmospheric carbon dioxide reached four hundred parts per million in Antarctica on May 23, 2016—the first time it’s passed that threshold in the remote area in 4 million years!

“The far southern hemisphere was the last place on earth where CO₂ had not yet reached this mark,” said Pieter Tans, lead scientist of NOAA’s Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network. “Global CO₂ levels will not return to values below 400 ppm in our lifetimes, and almost certainly for much longer.”¹⁶

Global warming’s impacts on Antarctica are already negatively affecting some penguin populations and could have an impact on sea levels, as ice shelves collapse. Scientists are working to learn more about what is occurring in Antarctica and what the consequences might be, but the main lesson so far is that climate change knows no boundaries and impacts in Antarctica will be felt around the world.

Oceans Take the Brunt of Global Warming

IT’S OFTEN SAID that we know as much about Mars and the moon as we do about oceans. Considering that oceans cover more than 70 percent of the earth, this should be cause for concern. At the very least, we should be doing more to protect oceans from the negative effects of human activities, including climate change, even if we don’t fully understand all that is happening under the seas.

We do know, however, that greenhouse gas emissions have a tremendous impact on oceans. As thermal sciences professor John Abraham wrote, “As humans add more heat-trapping gases to the atmosphere, it causes the Earth to gain energy. Almost all of that energy ends up in the oceans. So, if you want to know how fast the Earth is warming, you have to measure how fast the oceans are heating up.”¹⁷

Oceans and the life they support face numerous threats: pollution, overfishing, massive swirling islands of plastic waste, dead zones caused by nitrogen runoff from agricultural activities and sewage, acidification from excess CO₂, oxygen depletion, and more. No oceans have escaped the consequences of human activity. French scientists who completed a two-and-a-half-year journey covering more than seven thousand miles through the Atlantic, Pacific, Antarctic, and Indian Oceans in 2012 found plastic debris in a remote ocean area that was thought to be pristine.

Researchers on the boat Tara, who were studying the effects of climate change on marine ecosystems and biodiversity, found plastic fragments in the Southern Ocean and Antarctica at levels comparable to the global average. “The fact that we found these plastics is a sign that the reach of human beings is truly planetary in scale,” said Chris Bowler, scientific coordinator of Tara Oceans, in the Guardian in 2012.¹⁸ It also reminds us that we live on a planet where everything is connected.

A 2011 study by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO) found the combined effects of overfishing, fertilizer runoff, pollution, and ocean acidification from carbon dioxide emissions are putting much marine life at immediate risk of extinction.¹⁹ The twenty-seven scientists from eighteen organizations in six countries who participated in the review of scientific research from around the world concluded that the looming extinctions are “unprecedented in human history” and have called for “urgent and unequivocal action to halt further declines in ocean health.” The main factors are what they term the “deadly trio”: climate change, ocean acidification, and lack of oxygen. Overfishing and pollution add to the problems.

Another study by the organization, in 2013, led IPSO scientific director Alex Rogers of Somerville College, Oxford, to conclude, “The health of the ocean is spiraling downwards far more rapidly than we had thought. We are seeing greater change, happening faster, and the effects are more imminent than previously anticipated. The situation should be of the gravest concern to everyone since everyone will be affected by changes in the ability of the ocean to support life on Earth.”²⁰

Ocean currents, upwellings, oxygen levels, acidity, and temperature are changing in ways we haven’t seen before. Assumptions we once held about the seas are no longer valid. Oceans produce more than half the oxygen we breathe and absorb up to a third of carbon dioxide emissions, as well as providing an estimated annual economic value of at least $24 trillion.

Research compiled by the IPCC has described how ingredients in the ocean’s broth are changing dramatically.²¹ Life in the seas is closely linked to factors in the immediate surroundings, such as temperature; acidity, or pH; salinity; oxygen; and nutrient availability. These combine at microscopic levels to create conditions that favor one form of life over another and emerge into complex ecosystems.

Oceans now absorb one-quarter to one-third of the atmosphere’s CO₂. That’s good for the atmosphere but bad for organisms with calcium carbonate shells. While oceans help slow the pace of global warming, they too are absorbing too much carbon dioxide, resulting in disruption of the ocean’s pH balance. This increasing acidity causes calcium carbonate to dissolve, affecting life forms including corals, shellfish, and several species of plankton that rely on calcium for their very structure. Organisms that form the base of the oceanic food change, such as krill and shell-bearing zooplankton called pteropods, are at great risk, which puts all creatures higher up on the food chain, including humans, at risk. These organisms also store enormous amounts of carbon that will be released into the atmosphere as they die off. Even worse, phytoplankton produce much of the oxygen we breathe, and climate change is endangering these organisms. A 2015 study led by University of Leicester applied mathematics professor Sergei Petrovskii found that “an increase in the water temperature of the world’s oceans of around six degrees Celsius—which some scientists predict could occur as soon as 2100—could stop oxygen production by phytoplankton by disrupting the process of photosynthesis.”²²

We’re witnessing the effects of ocean acidification on shellfish along the West Coast of North America. In 2014, a Vancouver Island scallop farm closed after losing 10 million scallops, probably because of climate change and increasing acidity.²³ The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has also linked oyster die-offs along the Pacific coast to climate change.²⁴

As the IPSO points out, oceans play a key role in regulating the earth’s climate and are subject to rising levels as global warming increases. Oceans absorb much of the heat caused by excess greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, better methods to measure sea surface temperatures led scientists at the NOAA to conclude in 2015 that oceans were warmer from 1998 to 2014 than previously thought and that a much-touted slowing or hiatus in warming didn’t actually occur.²⁵ The 2013 IPSO study found that many negative changes to the oceans are occurring much faster than anticipated and continue to accelerate, either meeting or exceeding worst-case scenarios predicted by the IPCC and others. Arctic, Greenland, and Antarctic ice sheets are declining faster than expected, causing sea levels to rise more rapidly. This, in turn, is leading to “changes in the distribution and abundance of marine species; changes in primary production; changes in the distribution of harmful algal blooms; increases in health hazards in the oceans; loss of large, long-lived fish species causing the simplification and destabilisation of food webs in marine ecosystems,” as well as increases in climate feedback loops.²⁶ The report concludes, “The longer the delay in reducing emissions the higher the annual reduction rate will have to be and the greater the financial cost. Delays will mean increased environmental damage with greater socioeconomic impacts and costs of mitigation and adaptation measures.”

The many other human-caused stressors on the oceans—including overfishing, pollution, agricultural runoff, and sewage—compromise the resilience of oceans in the face of climate change.

Oceans, land, and atmosphere are intricately connected to climate systems and changes. Wind and currents move warmer water toward the poles and cooler water toward the equator. Heat energy is transferred between the sun, atmosphere, land, and oceans through radiation, convection, and conduction. As levels of greenhouse gases such as CO₂, water vapor, methane, and ozone increase, warming occurs, with the oceans absorbing much of the warming. This affects ocean currents, and because warmer water expands and global warming causes glaciers and sea ice to melt, sea levels rise. Warmer oceans also alter climate patterns, increasing the frequency and severity of events like tropical storms. As the U.S. EPA points out, “Interactions between the oceans and atmosphere occur slowly over many months to years, and so does the movement of water within the oceans, including the mixing of deep and shallow waters. Thus, trends can persist for decades, centuries, or longer. For this reason, even if greenhouse gas emissions were stabilized tomorrow, it would take many more years—decades to centuries—for the oceans to adjust to changes in the atmosphere and the climate that have already occurred.”²⁷ According to the EPA, global average sea levels have increased by about six-tenths of an inch per decade since 1880, but the rate has increased in recent years to an inch per decade. Sea level increases vary by region, and the EPA reports that increases have been as high as eight inches between 1960 and 2014 along parts of the U.S. mid-Atlantic and Gulf coasts.

Even relatively small increases in sea level can cause shoreline erosion and changing coastal habitats, wetland destruction, contamination of agricultural areas and aquifers, and damage to human infrastructure. If climate change isn’t curtailed, many highly populated areas will eventually be underwater. Because the oceans have already absorbed so much heat, scientists predict that sea level increases will displace 20 percent of the world’s human population over the coming decades, even if global average temperature increases are kept below two degrees Celsius, from areas including Rio de Janeiro, New York City, Vancouver, London, Shanghai, and many others. Many low-lying islands will be completely submerged. Some studies predict sea levels could rise between 2.5 and 6.5 feet by 2100, or as much as 23 feet if the Greenland ice sheet were to melt.²⁸

Increasing storm surges, rapid spread of invasive species and ocean-related diseases, and collapsing polar ice shelves are also consequences of warming oceans. And scientists believe that warming oceans could change global ocean currents that help regulate the world’s temperature.

Although our knowledge of oceans and their role in global climate systems is continually improving, we still have a lot to learn. But we know enough to see that we have to start treating them differently if we are to survive and remain healthy. After all, we can’t move to Mars or the moon.

Climate Crisis Spells Trouble for Human Health

WHAT IF WE could reduce worldwide deaths from disease, starvation, and disaster while improving the health of people everywhere? According to the World Health Organization (WHO), we can.²⁹ “Previously unrecognized health benefits could be realized from fast action to reduce climate change and its consequences,” said a news release about the WHO’s first global conference on health and climate in Geneva in summer 2014, adding, “changes in energy and transport policies could save millions of lives annually from diseases caused by high levels of air pollution.” Encouraging people to use public transit, bicycle, and walk instead of driving would cut traffic injuries and vehicle emissions and promote better health through increased physical activity.

Studies show that heart attacks and respiratory illness because of heat waves, altered transmission of infectious diseases, and malnutrition from crop failures can all be linked to a warming planet. And economic and political upheaval brought on by climate change can damage public health infrastructure, making it difficult for people to cope with the inevitable rise in sickness. Research has also shown that warming ocean waters are increasing the incidence of waterborne illnesses, including those caused by toxic bacteria in shellfish.

Climate change affects the very basics that humans need to stay healthy and alive: clean air, safe water, productive and uncontaminated soils for growing food, and adequate shelter. According to the WHO, climate impacts on these basic needs will lead to 250,000 additional deaths a year, “from malnutrition, malaria, diarrhoea and heat stress” between 2030 and 2050. Weather-related natural disasters have more than tripled since the 1960s, resulting in more than 60,000 deaths a year, mostly in developing nations.³⁰ The young, elderly, and poor are at especially great risk.

This is costly to the economy as well as to human health and survival. The World Bank estimates that a severe influenza pandemic could cost the world economy $3 trillion. Environment Canada says air pollution alone costs the Canadian economy billions of dollars a year because of increased health care costs, missed workdays, and reduced productivity.

The 2015–16 spread of the Zika virus also gives us a glimpse of what to expect from climate change. Researchers believe the virus, which is transmitted by mosquitoes, could spread farther north as warmer, wetter weather provides ideal conditions for the mosquitoes to breed. The spread in South America is probably linked to wetter and warmer conditions there. Other mosquito-borne illnesses could also spread.

Reducing the threat of global warming and finding ways to adapt to unavoidable change will help people around the world “deal with the impact of heat, extreme weather, infectious disease and food insecurity,” according to the WHO. Climate change affects human health in multiple ways. Increased extreme weather causes flooding and droughts, which influences food production, water, and sanitation. Pathogens that plague humans, livestock, and crops spread more widely. The WHO noted that diseases such as cholera, malaria, and dengue are especially sensitive to weather and climate changes: “Climate change is already causing tens of thousands of deaths every year from shifting patterns of disease, from extreme weather events, such as heat-waves and floods, and from the degradation of water supplies, sanitation, and impacts on agriculture.” And it will get worse if we fail to address the problem.

Global warming and pollution also affect ailments such as asthma and allergies. A warming planet means longer growing seasons and stimulated plant growth in many areas (although it’s causing drought and reduced plant growth in some parts of the world). Research shows the U.S. pollen season lengthened by about sixteen days from 1995 to 2014 and the ragweed season by anywhere from a day to sixteen days, with greater increases moving north. The Public Health Agency of Canada says Canada’s ragweed season was close to a month longer in 2014 than in 1995 because of warming temperatures.

And rising atmospheric CO₂ actually increases pollen production. Tests conducted by U.S. Department of Agriculture weed ecologist Lewis Ziska showed pollen production doubled from five to ten grams per plant when CO₂ in the atmosphere went up from 280 parts per million in 1900 to 370 in 2000,³¹ according to a USA Today article. That could double to twenty grams by 2075 if greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise.

Add to that the extreme weather impacts of climate change that can exacerbate allergy symptoms and other respiratory problems (rain and higher temperatures create more molds and fungi in some places; more dust contributes to allergies and asthma in drought-stricken areas), plus the all-around increases in ground-level ozone, smoke, and pollution, and you’ve got a recipe for mass discomfort, illness, death, and rising health care costs.

We still don’t fully understand the multiple impacts of global warming on allergies or what else may be contributing to the problem. Increased chemical exposure and the hygiene factor—which shows lack of exposure to germs and the outdoors early in life can make people more prone to allergies—may also be involved.

The effects on allergies don’t mean people should stay indoors. Getting outside offers numerous physical and mental health benefits. Research even shows that kids who spend a lot of time outdoors develop fewer allergies. People can also take steps to minimize allergic reactions, such as going outside later in the day, when pollen levels are lower, and reducing allergens inside the home. After all, this isn’t about plants being bad for people. We can’t live without them. It’s more about the natural systems that keep us alive and healthy being thrown out of whack by our reckless behavior.

“The evidence is overwhelming: climate change endangers human health,” said WHO director-general Margaret Chan. “Solutions exist and we need to act decisively to change this trajectory.” Doing all we can to prevent climate change from getting worse will make life easier for all of us. If we want to protect our health, our children and grandchildren’s health, and the natural systems that keep us alive and healthy, we must act.

MENTAL HEALTH IN THE FACE OF CLIMATE DESPAIR

WHILE CLIMATE CHANGE is affecting and will continue to threaten human physical health, it’s also taking a toll on mental health. People understandably feel afraid, grief-stricken, guilt-ridden, and often powerless to change what we are doing to the planet and its life-support systems. According to a 2016 Toronto Star article, “Signs of mental distress related to climate change have appeared in vulnerable populations, from drought-stricken prairie farmers to isolated aboriginal communities and the scientists who crunch climate data.”³²

The article points to a 2012 U.S. National Wildlife Federation report that concluded increasing heat waves, drought, extreme weather, and growing pressure on food and water systems and infrastructure will increase mental and social disorders, including “depressive and anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorders, substance abuse, suicides and widespread outbreaks of violence,” hitting “children, the poor, the elderly and those with existing mental health problems” the hardest.³³

Climate scientists and environmentalists who study global warming are reporting increasing cases of depression, anxiety, stress, and other difficulties, coupled with the problems they bring about, such as marriage breakdown, substance abuse, and even suicide.

Although the article notes that the American Psychological Association is taking the issue seriously, studying and raising awareness about it, most health authorities are unprepared. Environmental lawyer David R. Boyd, who has done work with the David Suzuki Foundation, told the Star that he wrote The Optimistic Environmentalist in part to overcome the stress of examining environmental problems. “For me, writing this was a voyage of recovery,” he said.³⁴

Birds and Other Animals Face Hard Times

OUR INSATIABLE ENERGY appetite puts many animals at risk. A 2015 report in Science magazine concluded that one in six animal and plant species could go extinct over the coming century if we don’t do enough to address climate change, with those in South America, Australia, and New Zealand being hit particularly hard.³⁵ The researchers found that 2.8 percent of species are already at risk of extinction and that the risk would rise to 5.2 percent with a two-degree-Celsius increase in global temperatures. Extinction risks could be exacerbated by human activity, leading to habitat loss or damage, pollution, and alteration of natural systems by climate change. A 2013 study predicted that global warming could eliminate or deplete 82 percent of California’s native freshwater fish species. Other studies have found that climate change will alter migration patterns and timing, affect reproduction, and make some fish smaller.

Birds face some of the highest risks. Reading some energy-related news and blogs, one might conclude wind power is the biggest bird killer. But that’s far from true. Although poorly situated wind farms, especially ones using older turbine technology, do kill birds, it’s an issue that can be addressed to a large extent with proper siting and good technology, as can problems around solar installations where birds have died. Fossil fuels, especially coal, are by far the largest energy-related bird killers. Heavy metals such as mercury and lead from burning coal kill numerous birds—and even change their songs, which can affect their ability to mate and protect territory.³⁶ And climate change is affecting many species’ breeding and migratory patterns.

Renewable energy critics often cite the number of birds killed by wind power installations, but studies show that fossil fuel and nuclear energy are responsible for far more bird deaths—and house cats kill billions of birds a year.

Not only do birds fill us with awe and wonder, but they also provide food and feathers, and keep insects and rodents in check. Their ability to warn us of the drastic ways we’re changing the world’s ecosystems, climate, and water cycles can’t be ignored. By working to ensure more species don’t go the way of the passenger pigeon, we’re also protecting ourselves from the effects of environmental destruction.

Habitat loss is a major threat for birds and other animals, and destroying green spaces where birds and animals live also reduces carbon sinks. According to many scientific studies, between sixteen thousand and seventeen thousand plants and animals are threatened with extinction because of human activity, mostly through habitat loss. This includes 12 percent of all known birds, 23 percent of mammals, and 32 percent of amphibians. Climate change is predicted to sharply increase the risk of species extinction within our own children’s lifetime. According to the IPCC, 20 to 30 percent of plant and animal species assessed will probably be at increased risk of extinction if global average temperatures continue to rise with escalating emissions of carbon pollution.

Animals are especially at risk in the Arctic, where global warming is occurring more rapidly than elsewhere, with more severe consequences. The international community has flagged global warming as a major threat to the survival of polar bears. In 2006, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, or IUCN, listed the polar bear as a “vulnerable” species. In a 2015 update of its Red List of Threatened Species, the IUCN flagged “loss of sea ice habitat due to climate warming as the single most important threat to the long-term survival of the species.”³⁷ Polar bears, which are extremely important to the culture and livelihoods of indigenous people, travel over sea ice to get to their prey. The IUCN update says, “An annual ice-free period of five months or more will cause extended fasting for the species, which is likely to lead to increased reproductive failure and starvation in some areas. According to recent sea ice projections, large regions of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago will be ice-free for more than five months by the late 21st century; and in other parts of the Arctic, the five-month ice-free threshold may be reached by the middle of the 21st century. Warming Arctic temperatures could also reduce habitat and increase the incidence of disease for prey species such as ice seals, placing the polar bear at further risk.”³⁸ The bears also face threats from pollution, resource extraction, oil spills, and other development. As top predators, polar bears help keep northern ecosystems in balance. The IUCN is working with Canada, Norway, Greenland, Russia, and the United States on a Circumpolar Action Plan to help the bears survive.

The IUCN says 35 percent of bird species, 52 percent of amphibians, and 71 percent of reef-building corals are “particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change.”³⁹ Scientists like famed Harvard entomologist E.O. Wilson have described the current wildlife crisis as a silent epidemic, because it receives so little attention from governments. As individuals, we must conserve energy, shift to cleaner sources, and demand that our industrial and political leaders address issues such as pollution and climate change. And we can work to protect wetlands and other bird habitat. We can also join the legions of citizen scientists who are contributing to avian knowledge by posting information to sites such as eBird.org.

Climate Change Exacerbates Conflict and Refugee Crises

CONFLICTS AND REFUGEE crises aren’t new, but 2015 was marked by particularly devastating events. As world leaders and experts prepared to meet in Paris to address the climate crisis, refugees from the horrific conflict in Syria were fleeing for camps in neighboring countries and into Europe, many of them not making it in their shoddy and overcrowded boats.

Just as it’s not always possible to definitively connect one extreme weather event entirely to climate change, it would be wrong to blame the Syrian crisis solely on climate change. But many analysts have noted a connection. Although the country has been beset by conflict over differing political and religious ideologies, as well as resources, many experts note that drought and increasing water scarcity—caused in large part by climate change—forced many people to flee from agricultural areas to cities. Along with an influx of Iraqi war refugees, that caused Syria’s urban population to increase from “8.9 million in 2002, just before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, to 13.8 million in 2010,” according to an article in Scientific American.⁴⁰ The article quotes a 2015 study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA: “The rapidly growing urban peripheries of Syria, marked by illegal settlements, overcrowding, poor infrastructure, unemployment and crime, were neglected by the Assad government and became the heart of the developing unrest.”⁴¹

Poor management and political decisions before and during the crisis have exacerbated the problem, but the climate connection is being seen in many conflict-ridden areas.

As some parts of the world heat up and experience increased drought or flooding, with subsequent damage or devastation to agricultural systems, more refugees will leave increasingly uninhabitable areas, or areas where they can no longer make a living or grow food. As in Syria after the 2007–10 drought, many will make their way to already overburdened cities. Still more will flee to countries where the effects of climate change aren’t as bad or where infrastructure makes it easier to cope with the consequences.

Organizations including the International Red Cross, World Bank, and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees report that “environmental refugees” now outnumber political refugees and that the problem will get worse as the effects of climate change create harsh or even unlivable conditions in many parts of the world. And, unlike political refugees, environmental refugees are not protected by international law. Many are fleeing from rural or coastal areas to urban centers in their own countries.⁴²

Scientists say that drought and desertification affect almost 30 percent of Earth’s land surface and threaten the well-being of more than a billion people worldwide. Although the cumulative effects of overgrazing, over-cultivation, deforestation, and poor irrigation are factors in desertification, so too are climate change and extreme weather. The deterioration of dry-land ecosystems has already created desert-like dead zones that can no longer support human life in places such as Sub-Saharan Africa. No region is immune. Close to three-quarters of North America’s dry lands, including parts of the prairies, are vulnerable to drought. Many people have already been displaced from areas around China’s expanding Gobi Desert, northwest Africa’s Sahara Desert, and the Horn of Africa, among other places.

Sea-level rise is also displacing a steadily increasing number of people. In Bangladesh, half a million people were left homeless when rising sea levels started to submerge Bhola Island. According to National Geographic, “Scientists predict Bangladesh will lose 17 percent of its land by 2050 due to flooding caused by climate change. The loss of land could lead to as many as 20 million climate refugees from Bangladesh.”⁴³ Other coastal areas and island nations, including many places in North America and Europe, will also be affected.

Throw political conflict into the mix and the situation becomes even more volatile. Studies by the UN and others have concluded that drought and environmental degradation from climate change, which caused rapid spikes in food prices, probably contributed to the 2010 Arab Spring uprising and the 2007 Darfur conflict. As fossil fuels become increasingly scarce and difficult to obtain, conflict will also be likely to increase in already volatile areas where those resources are located.

All of this is occurring as the world has only reached warming of less than 1 degree Celsius above preindustrial levels. Failing to limit global average temperature increases to 2 degrees, or the 1.5 degrees called for in the Paris Agreement, could have absolutely devastating consequences. According to the World Bank, an increase of 2 degrees would increase extreme heat days from four to sixty-two days in Amman, Jordan; from eight to ninety days in Baghdad, Iraq; and from one to seventy-one days in Damascus, Syria.⁴⁴ In Beirut, Lebanon, and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, “the numbers of hot days are projected to reach 126 and 132 days per year respectively.” Those numbers will rise significantly if world temperatures go above 2 degrees. The increased number of hot days, along with decreasing rainfall, will have serious impacts on water availability and agriculture, with corresponding spikes in food prices. This can only increase conflict and the number of people fleeing for more hospitable territories.

Could Hockey Become an Endangered Sport?

WITH EVER MORE frequent droughts and floods causing food and water problems, rising sea levels pushing up property losses and infrastructure costs, and extreme weather and pollution increasing illness and death, hockey may be the least of our worries when it comes to climate change. But outdoor winter sports are important economically and culturally, and provide ways for people to stay active and healthy during winter.

Unfortunately, hockey could well be a casualty. Research from Montreal’s McGill and Concordia Universities shows global warming is having an effect on outdoor rinks in Canada.⁴⁵ “Many locations across the country have seen significant decreases in the length of the OSS [outdoor skating season], as measured by the number of cold winter days conducive to the creation of rink ice,” states their 2012 study. “This is particularly true across the Prairies, and in Southwest Canada, which showed the largest (and most statistically significant) decreases in the calculated OSS length between 1951 and 2005.”

This echoes a 2009 David Suzuki Foundation report, On Thin Ice: Winter Sports and Climate Change.⁴⁶ The McGill investigation looked at constructed outdoor rinks, whereas the DSF’s focused on frozen rivers, canals, and lakes, but the conclusions are similar. Both predict that, unless we rein in greenhouse gas emissions, outdoor skating in parts of Canada could be history within the next fifty to one hundred years (the McGill study’s authors now say it could happen within twenty to thirty years), and the length of the outdoor skating season will continue to shorten across the country.

Meanwhile, at Ontario’s Wilfrid Laurier University, geographers have launched www.RinkWatch.org, a website where people can record information about backyard or neighborhood rink conditions over the winter. “Our hope is that Canadians from coast to coast will help us track changes in skating conditions, not just this year, but for many years to come,” associate professor Robert McLeman said in a release. “This data will help us determine the impact of climate change on winter in terms of length of season and average temperatures.”⁴⁷

According to the DSF report, one of Canada’s best-loved outdoor skating venues, Ottawa’s Rideau Canal, provides an example of what to expect. The report concludes that, with current emissions trends, the canal’s skating season could shrink from the previous average of 9 weeks to 6.5 weeks by 2020, less than 6 weeks by 2050, and just 1 week by the end of the century.

On Thin Ice noted that many of Canada’s hockey heroes got their start on outdoor rinks. “Without pond hockey, we probably wouldn’t have what has become the modern game of hockey,” the authors state. The DSF study says climate change could have a profound effect on many other winter sports, from skiing and snowboarding to winter mountaineering. But losing winter recreation opportunities, let alone our ability to produce food and keep our homes warm and people healthy, needn’t happen. Taking action to avoid the worst impacts of climate change will ensure that kids and adults alike can continue to skate and score goals and enjoy winter in so many other ways.