Panel Discussion and Audience Q&A #2


>>I THINK WE’RE LIVE.
I THINK OUR MICS ARE ALL LIVE, JUST SO YOU ALL KNOW.
>>OH, YES. OUR MICS ARE ALL LIVE.
ALL RIGHT. SO I TURN IT OVER TO MY
COLLEAGUE. >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
TALKS, DR. ALLEY, DR. LIVERMAN. IF I COULD START WITH JUST SOME
QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT BE IN THE MINDS OF THE AUDIENCE, JUST
CLARIFICATION OF SOME TERMS AND BASIC IDEAS HERE, DR. ALLEY, SO
MUCH OF UNDERSTANDING CARBON DIOXIDE AND THE ATMOSPHERE
REQUIRES SOME UNDERSTANDING OF THE FULL CARBON CYCLE AND THE
OTHER PLACES IN THE EARTH’S SYSTEM WHERE CARBON COULD BE
STORED. IF YOU WOULDN’T MIND TALKING
ABOUT THAT, AND THEN IF DR. LIVERMAN, IF YOU COULD TALK A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE IPCC, WHAT IT IS, AND WHAT ITS FUNCTION IS.
>>SURE. WELL, THANK YOU.
THE FULL CARBON CYCLE, THE IPCC DIAGRAM IS THIS BEAUTIFUL WORLD,
AND THEN IT HAS AROSE GOING EVERY WHICH WAY, AND THERE’S
LITTLE RED NUMBERS AND LITTLE BLACK NUMBERS AND BIG NUMBERS.
BUT BASICALLY THERE’S SOME CO2 IN THE AIR, AND PLANTS TAKE CO2
AND THEY MAKE PLANT. AND THEN ALL OF US TAKE PLANT
AND WE MAKE ANIMAL ARE 0 OR WE WE MAKE POOP OR ELSE MUSHROOMS
OR SOMETHING TAKE PLANT. AND EVENTUALLY WE TAKE OXYGEN
AND PLANT AND WE BURN IT TO GET THE ENERGY.
AND PUT THE CO2 BACK IN THE AIR. AND YOU WILL SEE, IF YOU WATCH
CO2 IN THE AIR, IT GOES DOWN IN THE SPRINGTIME, BECAUSE SO MANY
PLANTS GROW. [ GASP ]
AND YOU WILL OCCASIONALLY MEET THE PERSON WHO SAID WE DON’T
NEED TO WORRY ABOUT HUMAN CO2, BECAUSE LOOK IT GOES DOWN IN THE
SPRING BUT IT COMES UP IN THE FALL BECAUSE THE LEAVES DIE, AND
THEY GET — THEY ROT OR GET EATEN OR THEY GET BURNED OR
SOMETHING. AND SO THERE’S BEEN THIS
BALANCE, YOU GROW PLANTS, YOU BURN PLANTS, YOU GROW PLANTS,
YOU BURN PLANTS. AND LITTLE TINY BITS OF THAT
PLANT HAVE GOTTEN BURIED WITHOUT BEING BURNED, AND THAT WAS
FOSSIL FUELS. AND THOSE FOSSIL FUELS
ACCUMULATED OVER A FEW HUNDRED MILLION YEARS, AND WE’RE BURNING
THEM OVER A FEW HUNDRED YEARS. IN SOME SENSE WE HAVE A LOT OF
OXYGEN BECAUSE WE BURIED THAT CARBON RATHER THAN BURNING IT.
AND SO WHAT REALLY HAPPENS NOW IS THAT WE ARE TAKING THIS
IMMENSE WAREHOUSE OF STORED CARBON FROM ALL OF GEE LODGE IK
HISTORY AND WE ARE — GEO LOGIC HISTORY, BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING
TO GET THE ENERGY. THAT’S LITTLE BITS OF STORED
ENERGY THAT SOME BACTERIA OR SOME FUNGUS OR SOME DINOSAUR
DIDN’T EAT. SO BROADLY, WE HAVE PUT A HUGE
ON THE CARBON CYCLE BY DOING WHAT INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY WHAT
BACTERIA WERE UNABLE TO DO. >>THANK YOU.
>>WELL, IPCC AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PANEL HAVE EXPERIENCE AS
WELL, BUT LET ME JUST TALK ABOUT A FEW THINGS.
FIRST QUESTION I’M ASKED IS HOW DO YOU GET TO BE AN IPCC AUTHOR.
IF YOU ARE IN THE U.S., THERE IS AN EMAIL THAT GOES AROUND TO
REALLY ANYBODY WHO’S HAD MONEY FROM THE NATIONAL SCIENCE
FOUNDATION, OR IS CONNECTED TO WHAT’S CALLED THE U.S. GLOBAL
CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM, AND THEY ASK FOR NOMINATIONS, AND
SELF-NOMINATIONS, EACH TIME A REPORT IS SCHEDULED, AND THEY
SEND YOU THE LIST OF CHAPTERS, AND THEY SAY, IF YOU WOULD LIKE
TO BE — TO NOMINATE OR TO NOMINATE SOMEONE ELSE TO BE AN
AUTHOR, PLEASE SEND IN YOUR CV, AND YOU FILL OUT AN APPLICATION
FORM, LIKE YOU WOULD FOR COLLEGE.
AND YOU TRY TO SAY WHY YOU MIGHT BE A GOOD AUTHOR.
AND IN THE U.S. CASE, THEN, MANY OR MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO DO
SUBMIT, AND IF YOU HAVE HAD ANY EXPERIENCE AT ALL, YOU KNOW THAT
IN ORDER TO — IF YOU GET SELECTED, IT’S GOING TO SORT OF
MEASURE LIFE UP FOR TWO TO FOUR YEARS, BECAUSE IT TAKES — IT’S
ALL VOLUNTARY. YOU DON’T GET PAID TO BE AN IPCC
AUTHOR. YOU GET FUNDED TO GO TO
MEETINGS, BUT SO IT REALLY IS SOMETHING YOU FOR THAT REASON.
THERE IS A SECRETARIAT THAT SITS IN UFRPEUROPE.
THEY SELECT AUTHORS BASED ON EXPERTISE, BUT ALSO BALANCE OF
COUNTRIES, THEY WANT — AND PARTICULARLY THEY HAVE BEEN
TRYING MUCH HARDER TO HAVE MORE AUTHORS FROM THE GLOBAL SOUTH.
BUT ANOTHER ELEMENT IS GENDER BALANCE, AND I KNOW GABRIELE’S
VERY INTERESTED IN THIS, TOO. THE FIRST IPCC REPORT IN 1990
HAD 2% WOMEN AUTHORS, AND I THINK I KNOW ALL FIVE OF THEM.
AND THE LATEST REPORT IS NOW 38% WOMEN AUTHORS.
SO THE GENDER BALANCE IS IMPROVING.
[ APPLAUSE ] BUT THERE’S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
REPRESENTATION AND VOICE. SO WE JUST HAD A GENDER TASK
FORCE FOR THE LAST YEAR FOR IPCC, AND WE DID A SURVEY OF
IPCC AUTHORS MEN AND WOMEN, AND MANY WOMEN SAID IT WAS NICE TO
BE IN THE ROOM, BUT I COULDN’T GET A WORD IN EDGEWAYS.
SOMETIMES BECAUSE THEY DIDN’T SPEAK — THEY WEREN’T FLUENT IN
ENGLISH, OR THEY FELT OTHER MICROAGGRESSION.
SO SOME WORK TO BE DONE THERE. BUT ANYWAY, THE BUREAU SELECTS
THE AUTHORS, YOU GET THIS LETTER, YOU HAVE BEEN SELECTED
AS EITHER A CHAPTER, THE LEAD FOR THE CHAPTER OR A LEAD
AUTHOR, AND YOU GET SENT THE SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS.
FIRST MEETING YOU GET TOGETHER, YOU DECIDE WHAT’S GOING TO BE IN
YOUR CHAPTER, YOU ASSIGN RESPONSIBILITY, YOU’VE GOT TO
READ HUNDREDS OF PAPERS, BECAUSE AN IPCC REPORT IS NOT YOUR
LATEST OPINION. IT’S ALL OF THE WORK THAT’S BEEN
DONE SINCE THE LAST REPORT. SO IT IS BASICALLY LIKE A BIG
LIT REVIEW. I GOT MY STUDENTS TO HELP ME
BECAUSE IT WAS SO OVERWHELMING. AND THEN YOU MEET OVER THE
COURSE OF A FEW YEARS. THERE IS, HOWEVER, YOU ARE
WRITING AWAY, YOU HAVE TO GO BASICALLY THROUGH THREE ROUNDS
OF REVIEW. AT LEAST FOR THE 1.5 REPORT.
THE FIRST IS A SCIENTIFIC REVIEW, WHEN ANY SCIENTIST ON
THE PLANET, OR ANYBODY WHO THINKS THEY ARE A SCIENTIST, CAN
SIGN UP TO COMMENT ON THE DRAFT CHAPTERS, AND PEOPLE SUBMIT
COMMENTS OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, AND THEN THEY ARE ALL SENT TO
THE AUTHORS. THERE’S A SECOND ROUND OF REVIEW
THAT’S THE GOVERNMENT REVIEW, WHEN IT’S SENT TO ALL THE
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AROUND THE WORLD.
AND THEY ALL SUBMIT COMMENTS. AND THEN, SO FOR THE 1.5 REPORT,
WE HAD 42,000 COMMENTS FOR RESPOND TO.
YOU HAVE TO RESPOND TO EVERY SINGLE ONE.
YOU CAN — THE FUNNIEST ONES ARE THE ONES YOU GET FROM SCIENTISTS
SAYING “BUT YOU DIDN’T CITE MY PAPER.”
AND THEN YOU HAVE TO CITE IT OR SAY WE DIDN’T HAVE ENOUGH SPACE,
THANK YOU. YES, IT WAS A WONDERFUL PAPER,
BUT WE CAN’T TALK ABOUT IT. [ LAUGHTER ]
BUT THAT’S A LOT OF WORK. AND THEN THE FINAL REVIEW IS
WHERE YOU WRITE A BIG REPORT, AND THEN THERE’S A SUMMARY FOR
POLICYMAKERS THAT IS THE SORT OF CONDENSED VERSION OF THE REPORT,
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. THAT ONE YOU GO TO A PLENARY
WITH GOVERNMENT DELEGATES, AND IT IS LIKE A CLIMATE NEGOTIATION
ALMOST. 20 PAGES OR SO, AND THEY PUT
EVERY LINE THAT YOU’VE WRITTEN UPON THE SCREEN, AND ANY COUNTRY
CAN DISAGREE, AND ASK YOU TO DEFEND WHAT YOU SAID.
THE BEST DEFENSE IS “THIS IS WHAT THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE
SAYS,” BUT THERE ARE COUNTRIES THAT TRY TO STOP THE WHOLE
PROCESS. SO FOR THE 1.5 REPORT IN KOREA,
IT WASN’T THE U.S. THAT CAUSED US DIFFICULTIES, THEY WERE
CONSTRUCTIVE, BUT DON’T TELL THEIR BOSSES, AND THE COUNT ARE
YOU RI THAT WAS DIFFICULT WAS SAUDI ARABIA, THEY QUESTIONED
EVERY SINGLE SENTENCE. YOU NEGOTIATE OVER THE COURSE OF
THE WEEK. THEY JUST FINISHED THE SM RI FOR
POLICYMAKERS — SUMMARY FOR THE ICE REPORT AND FOR THE LAST LIKE
48, 72 HOURS YOU DON’T GET ANY SLEEP BECAUSE YOU ALWAYS RUN OUT
OF TIME. IT’S 24/7 NEGOTIATIONS, AND BY
THE TIME IT ACTUALLY GETS APPROVED, EVERYBODY IS SORT OF
BURSTS INTO TEARS, THEY ARE SO EXHAUSTED, DELEGATES AND
SCIENTISTS. AT LEAST THAT WAS MY EXPERIENCE.
I WAS BAWLING MY EYES OUT. I DON’T KNOW IF OTHER PEOPLE —
I MAKE IT SOUND LIKE FUN. [ LAUGHTER ]
BUT IT’S REALLY HARD WORK. AND THERE ARE SOME OTHER
FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS WITH IPCC THAT MAYBE OTHER PEOPLE CAN TALK
ABOUT. BUT IT’S ALSO AMAZING HOW MUCH
WEIGHT IT DOES CARRY. WE WERE — I WAS PERSONALLY
SHOCKED AT HOW MUCH INTEREST THERE WAS IN THE 1.5 REPORT, AND
HOW MUCH IMPACT IT’S HAD. I’M STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND
WHY WE HAD SUCH AN IMPACT. THAT WAS LONG.
SORRY. >>WHAT OTHER EXPERIENCE —
>>I THINK IT HAD A LOT OF IMPACT BECAUSE IT WAS A GREAT
REPORT. WE WERE POLLING PEOPLE TO REACT
TO THIS IT SAY SOMETHING. AND I SAID I THINK IT IS GOING
TO BE BORING, BECAUSE 1 1/2 IS GOING TO BE BETTER THAN 2, WE
KNOW THAT. BUT THEN WHAT CAME OUT WAS
IMPRESSIVE. IT WAS REALLY ATTACKING THE
PROBLEM FROM EVERY ANGLE, LOOKING AT PATH WAYS.
THERE WAS SO MUCH QUESTIONS THAT I THOUGHT WOULD BE HARD TO
ANSWER. SO IT WAS A REAL BIG MILESTONE.
FOR ME, ONE OF THE MOST FASCINATING THINGS ABOUT IPCC
ARE THE PLENARIES, EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE DIFFICULT, SO IT IS A
ROOM THIS SIZE, MAYBE –>>JUST LIKE THIS.
>>WITH DELEGATIONS FROM ALL COUNTRIES THAT PARTICIPATE, OVER
100 USUALLY, AND MANY COME WITH SEVERAL MEMBERS, AND SO EVERY
SINGLE SENTENCE THAT IS IN THE SUMMARY FOR POLICYMAKERS IS
DISCUSSED, AND ADOPTED. SO THE SUMMARY POUR POLICYMAKERS
— FOR POLICYMAKERS HAS BEEN ADOPTED BY ALL THE COUNTRIES
THAT ARE INVOLVED, INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES.
IF SOME PEOPLE NOW SAY WE DON’T THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY A
PROBLEM, OR WE DON’T THINK IT IS CAUSED BY HUMANS OR SOMETHING,
ITS ACTUALLY BEEN ACCEPTED TO HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY HUMANS.
SO I FIND THAT A BIT INTERESTED, ON ONE HAND IT CAN BE ADOPTED
AND ON THE OTHER HAND THE POLITICIANS GO AROUND AND CHANGE
THEIR MIND ABOUT IT. (LAUGHS) BUT THE NEGOTIATIONS
ABOUT ADOPTING SENTENCES ARE INTERESTING.
AS A SCIENTIST, I WAS ANXIOUS ABOUT IT.
I WAS WONDERING HOW MUCH IT WOULD TWIST THE SCIENCE OR
SOMETHING, BUT ACTUALLY, IN MOST CASES, THE SUGGESTIONS WERE GOOD
ONES. THEY OFTEN WERE MORE CLEAR, SO
WE WERE TALKING TOO TECHNICALLY SHALL AND PEOPLE, THE DELEGATES
ASKED US TO CLARIFY THIS. SO IT OFTEN IMPROVED CLARITY,
LAPPING WARMING. SOME — LANGUAGE.
SOME GOOD QUESTIONS WERE ASKED. SOME COUNTRIES, THE COUNTRIES
THAT ARE VERY INTERESTED IN MAKING IT SOUND — MAKING
CLIMATE CHANGE SOUND LIKE NOT SUCH A BIG PROBLEM ARE BALANCED
BY COUNTRIES THAT HAVE AN INTEREST IN MAKING IT SOUND LIKE
A BIG PROBLEM. IF YOU HAVE ONE COUNTRY, IT WAS
ALREADY NAMED AS ONE THAT GENERALLY SAYS YOU CAN’T BE SURE
ABOUT THAT, POSSIBLY, THEN YOU HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER
COUNTRIES SAYING, NO, WE ACTUALLY THINK, IF ANYTHING, YOU
ARE BEING TOO CONSERVATIVE HERE. SOY IT IS A PROCESS REALLY
FASCINATING. I AM STILL FASCINATED AND
MYSTIFIED THAT IT WORKS, TO ARRIVE AT A REPORT IT END.
>>SO A COUNTRY WILL PUT UP THEIR FLAG.
>>OH, THAT’S WHAT YOU ARE DOING.
>>YES. A COUNTRY THAT HAS SOMETHING TO
SAY WILL PUT IT UP, AND THEY WOULD SAY, WELL, OUR COUNTRY
RESPECTFULLY BELIEVES THAT THAT “AND” SHOULD BE AN “OR.”
OR THE WORD SHOULD BE ABOVE AVERAGE, OR OUTSTANDING SHOULD
BE “LARGE.” AND EVERY WORD IS SMITHED.
SOMETIMES IT IS FOR CLARITY, OFTENTIMES FOR CLARITY.
THERE ARE VERY GOOD WRITERS INVOLVED.
SOMETIMES IT IS TO BURY THE LEAD, AS A JOURNALIST WOULD SAY.
>>OR WEAKEN THE REPORT.>> OR WEAKEN THE REPORT.
IT IS A FASCINATING NEGOTIATION. AND SOMETIMES, SOME OF THE MORE
INTERESTING THINGS DO, BY THE TIME THEY HAVE BEEN WORDSMITHED,
COME OUT AS LESS INTERESTING. AND THERE’S ACTUALLY BEEN A FAIR
AMOUNT OF RECENT SCHOLARSHIP, MICHAEL OPPENHEIMER HAS BEEN
BEHIND A LOT OF THIS, THAT SOCIAL SCIENTISTS LOOKING AT
WHAT THE IPCC DOES, AND BY AND LARGE, IT IS REALLY GOOD.
IT DOES I WAS JOB, IT GETS THE ANSWERS OUT — DOES ITS JOB,
CONSISTENT WITH THE UNDERLYING LITERATURE.
BUT THERE IS A BUILT-IN TENDENCY TO UNDERSTATE THE LARGEST
DAMAGES. AND IT IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE,
I’M SURE WE WILL SEE MORE SOCIAL SCIENCE ON THIS, BUT WHAT THEY
FOUND IS THAT THERE IS SOME TENDENCY OF THIS WHOLE PROCESS
TO TAKE THE SORT OF WE COULD HAVE A DISASTER AND MAKE IT LOOK
MANAGEABLE. MANAGEABLE.
>>YOU HAVE TOO MUCH TO SAY ABOUT THE IPCC.
[ LAUGHTER ] QUESTIONS FROM OTHER PANELISTS
FOR DR. ALLEY AND DR. LIVERMAN, OR COMMENTS ON WHAT THEY SAID?
>>YEAH. WELL, WITH IPCC, VERY BRIEFLY, I
KNOW IT IS HARD FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLE TO BE PART OF THE LARGER
PLENARY FOR SURE, AND I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THREE MEETINGS
WHERE WE DO OUR BEST TO GET OUR VOICES HEARD THROUGH SIDE
EFFECTS. BUT NOT EVERYBODY ATTENDS THEM,
THEY ARE SMALLER, AND ALTHOUGH PEOPLE BECAME MUCH MORE
INTERESTED IN THE LATER TIMES, ITS TOUGH TO GET ANY KIND OF
STRONG LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT DEALS WITH HUMAN RIGHTS OF
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AROUND THE WORLD, AND AS YOU KNOW, IF YOU
ARE WORKING ON THE GROUND IN THAT AREA, YOU KNOW THAT ONE
YEAR WE TAKE A FEW STEPS FORWARD, AND IT’S IN THERE, THE
LANGUAGE IS IN THERE, THE FOLLOWING YEAR IT’S TAKEN OUT.
SO, YOU KNOW, THERE’S ALWAYS THIS CUMBERSOME PROCESS OF
TRYING TO KEEP THE KIND OF STRONG LANGUAGE THAT IS REQUIRED
TO DEAL WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLE’S ISSUES AND HUMAN RIGHTS OF
PEOPLE. SO THAT’S BEEN THE EXPERIENCE
THAT WE’VE HAD, BECAUSE IN OTHER U.N. NEGOTIATIONS, IT WAS EASIER
TO GET ON THE FLOOR AND TO SPEAK.
BUT IT’S ONLY THE HEADS OF DELL THAT ARE ALLOWED TO SPEAK AT
THESE KINDS OF EVENTS, AT THE COP MEETING, SO THAT’S ONE.
BUT I WANT TO ASK DR. ALLEY, IF YOU COULD, I KNOW THAT A LOT OF
YOUR WORK WAS IN GREENLAND. I DON’T KNOW IF YOU ARE UP TO
SPEED ON THE CURRENT, SOME OF THE CURRENT THINGS THAT ARE
HAPPENING THERE. THE WORLD RARELY KNOWS, AND HAS
HEARD OF THE TWO TSUNAMIS THAT HAVE HAPPENED THERE IN RECENT
YEARS NOW, THAT HAVE TAKEN LIVES OF PEOPLE.
AND I WONDERED IF YOU KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT, WHAT’S
HAPPENED. ONE OF THEM WITH THE MOUNTAIN
THAT SLID INTO THE OCEAN, AND AS WE KNOW, INUIT LIVE ON THE
COAST, WE’RE COASTAL PEOPLE, BECAUSE WE ARE MARINE MAMMAL
HUNTERS, AND IT KILLED SEVERAL PEOPLE.
WE HARDLY HEARD ABOUT THAT A FEW YEARS AGO.
AND JUST LAST WEEK THERE WAS ANOTHER, FROM A CALVING OF A
GLACIER, I BELIEVE IT WAS, BUT, AGAIN, TOOK THE LIVES OF A FEW
PEOPLE. BUT WE NEVER HEAR THESE STORIES
OF GREENLAND UNTIL YOUR PRESIDENT WANTS TO BUY IT.
[ LAUGHTER ] YOU KNOW? [ APPLAUSE ]
BUT GREENLAND AS YOU KNOW IS HUGE IN TERMS OF THE LAND SHEET,
THE ICE SHEET BEING ON LAND AND WHAT THAT’S GOING TO DO WITH SEA
LEVEL RISE. SO DO YOU SEE — I THINK YOU
MENTIONED THAT IN ONE OF YOUR — YOU KNOW, HOW — IS IT GOING TO
TAKE A HUGE CHUNK OF GREENLAND FOR A HUGE DISASTER IN THIS
WORLD, OR DO YOU SEE THAT COMING.
>>SO SEVERAL POINTS THERE. YOUR POINTS ABOUT GAINING
INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE IN THE ACTIONS OF THE IPCC, MAYBE DIANA
WANTS TO ADD TO THIS. THE LOCAL ISSUES, WHEN ICE IS
MELTING, WHETHER IT BE IN THE ANDES, WHETHER IT BE AROUND
GREENLAND, WHETHER IT BE IN THE HIMALAYAS, THERE ARE LOCAL
DANGERS. AND THESE ARE USUALLY PUT IN THE
LOCAL CATEGORY. SO THEY DON’T GET AS MUCH
COVERAGE AS YOU MIGHT THINK. THE HILLSIDE IS HELD TOGETHER
WITH PARM A FROST, THE ICE IN THE PERMAFROST THAWS, THE
HILLSIDE FALLS OFF. THIS HAS HAPPENED IN ALASKA,
HAPPENED IN GREENLAND. IF YOU ARE IN THE WAY, IT IS A
BAD THING. BIG ICEBERGS FALLING OFF THE
FRONT. IN THE ANDES, JEFF IS HERE, HE
IS AN EXPERT ON THIS, THE GLACIER RETREATS, AND THE
GLACIER END UP IN A PILE OF ROCKS WE CALL MORAINE, THE
GLACIER RETREATS, NOW YOU HAVE A DAM, WHICH IS THE MORAINE, WITH
A LAKE BEHIND IT. AND NO ONE WOULD EVER MAKE A DAM
FOR A LAKE OUT OF LOOSE ROCKS. AND SO USUALLY IT FILLS WITH
SEDIMENT BEFORE IT COLLAPSES AND FLOODS THE VALLEY DOWN BELOW,
BUT SOMETIMES IT COLLAPSES BEFORE IT FILLS WITH SEDIMENT
AND THEN IT FLOODS THE VALLEY BELOW AND PEOPLE DIE.
SO THE SORT OF LOCAL ISSUES OF BIG CHANGES ALMOST ALWAYS, WHEN
YOU HAVE A BIG CHANGE IN THE CLIMATE, YOU WILL HAVE BIG
CHANGES IN SEDIMENT, BIG CHANGES IN HILL SLIDES, AND PEOPLE ARE
IN THE WAY. SO THIS IS ONE OF THOSE MANY
ISSUES THAT COME UP. WE ARE CAUTIOUSLY OPT MISSION
PARTICULAR THAT GREENLAND — OPTIMISTIC THAT GREENLAND WILL
KEEP THESE MOSTLY LOCAL, AND IT WILL BE A VERY BIG THING FOR
PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE, BUT THERE WON’T BE ENOUGH FALL-OFF OF
GREENLAND TO — GREENLAND, FALLING OFF OF GREENLAND WILL BE
SLOW ENOUGH THAT WE WILL SEE THE SEA LEVEL RISE COMING.
WE ARE A LITTLE WORRIED ABOUT PIECES OF ANTARCTICA THAT MIGHT
BREAKFAST — BREAK FASTER. >>JUST A COMMON ON INDIGENOUS
VOICES FOR INTERGOVERNMENTAL CLIMATE CHANGE.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE INVOLVED IN CHAPTERS, BUT ONE OF
THE INTERESTING THINGS IS WHEN WE DID THE SURVEY OF IPCC
AUTHORS AND WHERE THE TASK FORCE WAS DISCUSSING THE SURVEY
DESIGN, I WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT INDIGENOUS, NOT
JUST GENDER, BUT OUR INTERSECTIONAL ISSUES, AND
MEMBERS OF THE TASK FORCE FROM A LOT OF COUNTRIES SAID THAT’S NOT
AN APPROPRIATE QUESTION IN OUR COUNTRY, AND IT IS BECAUSE IN
MANY COUNTRIES, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE EITHER SEE THEMSELVES AS
COMPLETELY INDIGENOUS, OR THE SORT OF WAY PEOPLE TALK ABOUT
IT, AND I FOUGHT TO HAVE A QUESTION, BECAUSE I WANTED TO
KNOW WHETHER PEOPLE WOULD SAY I’M SPEAKING FOR INDIGENOUS
PEOPLE, AND WE COULDN’T GET THE QUESTION ON THE SURVEY.
BUT I DO KNOW THAT IN CERTAIN CHAPTERS, EVEN IF INDIGENOUS
VOICES ARE NOT SELECTED AS LEAD AUTHORS, THE NEXT, AT
LEAST, IMPACT AND VULNERABILITY AND ADAPTATION REPORT FROM THE IPCC REQUIRED A LOT OF
CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS WHO ARE FROM INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES OR
IDENTIFY AS INCH DIMMING NEWS. BUT — INDIGENOUS.
IF YOU THINK IPCC DOES A BAD JOB WITH WOMEN, THEY DO AN EAR EVEN
WORSE JOB WITH INDIGENOUS VOICES.
>>BECAUSE WE WERE QUITE SUCCESSFUL WITH THE ARCTIC
CLIMATE ASSESSMENT. WE HAD LEAD AUTHORS, WE HAD
PARTNERSHIPS, WE HAD ALL OF THAT.
WHICH WAS PIONEERING WORK. IT CAN BE DONE.
>>THANK YOU. ANOTHER QUESTION?
>>LET ME SAY THAT IT WAS BOTH YOUR PRESENTATIONS WERE SO
INTERESTING, AND SO INFORMATIVE, BUT I HAD A QUESTION FOR YOU,
PROFESSOR ALLEY, ONE READS DIFFERENT THINGS ABOUT THE
IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON SEISMIC ACTIVITY.
DO YOU HAVE ANY VIEWS ON THAT?>>RIGHT.
SO CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEISMIC ACTIVITY, THE BIGGEST PLACE THAT
THIS COULD AFFECT IT WOULD BE THE MELTING ICE UNLOADS THE
LAND, THE LAND MOVES, AND IT MAY BREAK.
THERE’S PROBABLY A LITTLE OF THIS.
THE LANDSLIDES AND THE CALVING THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ALSO
MAKES SEISMIC ACTIVITY. THERE IS ALSO A LITTLE BIT,
MELTING ICE TENDS TO STIMULATE VOLCANOS IN PLACES WHERE THERE
IS ACTIVE CULL VANNISM. AS — VULCANISM.
SO THEY GET ERUPTIONS AS THE ICE MELTS.
YOU WORRY ABOUT SOME OF THE BIG PEAKS, VERY LARGE MOUNTAINS THAT
ARE VERY LARGE VOLCANOS THAT ARE LOSING THEIR ICE, THEY ARE BEING
UP LOADED. UNLOADING FAVORS MELT, IT FAVORS
THE MELT COMING OUT, IT FAVORS LANDSLIDES.
>>DON’T WE WANT SOME VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS TO COOL THE CLIMATE?
>>(LAUGHS) NOT IF YOU’RE LIVING NEXT TO IT.
RIGHT SM MY GUT FEELING IS ALL OF THE — COMPARED TO MAKING THE
TROPICS TOO HOT FOR UNPROTECTED HUMANS, BUT IF YOU ARE LIVING
NEXT TO THE VOLCANO, NEXT TO THE HILLSIDE WHEN IT LANDSLIDES ON
YOU, IT REALLY MATTERS.
[ LAUGHTER ] IT IS EASY FROM A GLOBAL
PERSPECTIVE TO DISMISS THE LOCAL, BUT THE LOCAL IS HUGELY
IMPORTANT. AND, AGAIN, MORE OR LESS,
ANYTHING YOU CHANGE REALLY FAST, YOU ARE LIKELY TO HAVE
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, AND THIS WOULD BE ONE.
>>CAN I JUST PICK OUT SOMETHING DIANA WAS TALKING ABOUT, AND ASK
YOU TO ELABORATE A LITTLE. SO YOU VERY NICELY PRESENTED THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLIMATE GOALS AND THE SDG’S AND HOW THE
1.5 REPORT FROM THE IPCC TACKLED THAT.
AND DREW OUT BY SYNERGIES AND TRADEOFFS.
ONE PARTICULAR TRADEOFF I’M INTERESTED IN IS WHAT YOU CALLED
THE JUST TRANSITION FOR ENERGY. AND YOU GAVE THE EXAMPLE FROM
NEVADA, I THINK IT WAS NEVADA, OF COMMUNITIES WHOSE LIVELIHOODS
AND CULTURES HAVE BEEN FRAMED AND BROUGHT UP AROUND, IN THIS
CASE COAL, BUT OTHER FOSSILS. HOW DOES THIS PLAY OUT, AND
WHETHER THE IPCC LOOK AT LARGER SCALE CHALLENGES TO THIS.
SO COUNTRIES WHOSE ECONOMIES AND WHO HAVE NOT JUST GOT SMALL
QUEUES, BUT LARGE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE — WHOSE
LIVELIHOODS ARE LINKED TO THE FOSSIL INDUSTRY.
AND WHETHER IT IS IN INDIA, OR AUSTRALIA OR SOUTH AFRICA, OR
CHINA, IF ONE MOVES AWAY FROM COAL, HOW DOES ONE PUT INTO
PLACE POLICIES AND PROCESSES THAT ARE JUST FOR THOSE PEOPLE
AFFECTED. >>YEAH.
IT WAS A REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTION.
I MEAN, IF WE LOOK AT WHY SAUDI ARABIA WAS OPPOSING THE 1.5
REPORT, IT’S BECAUSE ITS POWER, ITS ECONOMY, AND ITS WORKERS ARE
DEPENDENT VERY MUCH ON FOSSIL FUELS.
SO YOU CAN SEE THEIR POLITICAL POSITION RELATING IT THAT.
AS WELL AS A NUMBER OF OTHER COUNTRIES.
I MEAN, AUSTRALIA, FOR EXAMPLE, THEIR POLITICS ARE RISING AND
FALLING ON COAL VERSUS CLIMATE DEBATE.
BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS I WAS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE PEOPLE
ARGUING, YOU THEY, WE NEED TO TALK MORE ABOUT THIS IN THE
REPORT. WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE LOSERS
ON CLIMATE ACTION, NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO ARE AFFECTED BY
AN ADAPTATION PROJECT, BUT PEOPLE WHO WILL LOSE JOBS
BECAUSE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING HERE.
AND THERE ISN’T A LOT OF LITERATURE, INTERESTINGLY.
SO WE WERE TRYING TO FIND PAPERS ON, YOU KNOW, THE MIDDLE EAST
ECONOMIES, AND ALSO WHERE PEOPLE ARE DOCUMENTING.
THERE ARE COUNTRIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST THAT ARE STARTING TO
MAKE THE TRANSITION. THEY ARE INVESTING MASSIVELY IN
RENEWABLES, NOT JUST AS THE ALTERNATIVE TO FOSSIL FUELS, BUT
ALSO BECAUSE THEY ARE VULNERABLE THEMSELVES.
THEY HAVE VERY LOW-LYING LANDSCAPES.
SO BUT ONE OF THE THINGS YOU ARE CONSTRAINED BY IN IPCC IS THIS
IDEA THAT WE WILL USE THE PEER REVIEWED LITERATURE RATHER THAN
THE MEDIA OR ANECTDOTES. SO I WOULD — I THINK THAT WE
NEED A BIG RESEARCH EFFORT ON THE JUST TRANSITIONS.
AND REALLY LOOKING AT HOW THEY WORK, NOT WRITING ABOUT THEM IN
A SORT OF A UTOPIAN WAY, BUT SO WE CAN ACTUALLY LOOK AT HOW WE
SUBSIDIZE THOSE TRANSITIONS, HOW WE COMPENSATE PEOPLE, HOW WE
RETRAIN PEOPLE, SO THAT WE — AND I MEAN, THAT’S PART OF THE
DEBATE ABOUT THE GREEN NEW DEAL, IS HOW DO WE ACTUALLY MAKE THAT
HAPPEN, AND HOW DO WE MAKE IT — I MEAN, I CAN TELL A POSITIVE
STORY ABOUT A SCHOOL IN TUCSON. BUT HOW DO YOU SCALE THESE UP.
ESPECIALLY WHEN SO MANY PEOPLE IN THE WORLD ARE UNDEREMPLOYED
AND UNEMPLOYED AND UNDERPAID. SO I THINK YOU ASK A REALLY
IMPORTANT QUESTION. >>IS THE ROLE, MAYBE IN
DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS TO THAT, BUT HERE’S A ROLE FOR
HISTORIANS. TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT OTHER
EXAMPLES FROM THE PAST, DIFFERENT PLACES IN THE WORLD
WHERE TRANSITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE AWAY FROM CERTAIN LIVELIHOODS
TOWARDS OTHERS, EITHER BY ACCIDENT OR BY DESIGN.
YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT HAPPENED IN CHINA WITH THE THREE
GORGES DAM. THE REASON FOR THE THREE GORGES
DAM WERE MULTIPLE, BUT HYDRO POWER IS RENEWABLE POWER, YET
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF CHINESE WERE UPROOTED.
OR AGAIN LOOKING AT THE EXAMPLE IN THE U.K., PROBABLY SOME OF
THE MOST VIOLENT CIVIL DISTURBANCES THAT BRINGS AN HAS
HAD IN MY LIFETIME OCCURRED BECAUSE LARGE NUMBERS OF WORKING
CLASS PEOPLE IN MINING COMMUNITIES FACED THE END OF
THEIR INDUSTRY UNDER MARGARET THATCHER IN THE 1980S.
AND IT WASN’T JUST THEIR LIVELIHOOD, IT WAS THEIR WHOLE
WAY OF LIFE. >>THEIR CULTURE.
>>AND THIS WAS, YOU KNOW, FOR OVER 18 MONTHS, THERE WAS
VIOLENCE ON THE STREETS OF BRITAIN.
SO THERE ARE EXAMPLES FROM HISTORY THAT SCHOLARS AND
ACADEMIC COULD BRING TO THE FOREGROUND TO HELP US THINK HOW
DO WE BETTER PUT IN PLACE POLICIES THAT CAN MITIGATE
AGAINST POM SOME OF THESE DISTURB ANCE EFFECTS —
DISTURBANCE EFFECTS.>>I ANY WE MUSTN’T PRETEND THAT
EVERYBODY IS GOING TO WIN. I MEAN, WE HAVE TO SAY YES, SOME
PEOPLE WILL PERCEIVE THEMSELVES AS LOSING, BUT IT’S FOR THE MUCH
GREATER BENEFIT. AND WE’VE ALSO DONE THAT BEFORE.
>>BUT IF I MAY ADD TO WHAT HE WAS SAYING, I MEAN, IT’S
ACTUALLY THE CASE THAT EVEN IN THE LATE 18TH, EARLY 19TH
CENTURY, THE TRANSITION FROM WATER POWER TO STEAM POWER, YOU
HAD THE SAME KIND OF DISTURBANCES, ESPECIALLY IN
ENGLAND. A WHOLE HISTORY OF PEOPLE BEING
TIED UP WITH THOSE TRANSITIONS. SEEMS QUITE LIKELY ITS NOT GOING
TO BE A SMOOTH PROCESS. >>DR. LIVERMAN, HAD GETS TO
DECIDE WHO LOSES? [ LAUGHTER ]
>>WELL … USUALLY IT’S GOING TO BE POLITICIANS, BECAUSE EVERY
POLICY THEY PASS OR DON’T PASS HAS A REDISTRIBUTING EFFECT.
YOU PUT INTO A PLACE AN ENERGY POLICY OR AN EMISSIONS POLICY,
THAT DOESN’T HAVE SOME DISTRIBUTIONAL IMPACTS, BUT
CONSUMERS CAN MAKE CHOICES ABOUT WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES, IF YOU
CHOOSE RENEWABLES, OR YOU CHOOSE TO BE A VEGETARIAN, YOU ARE
MAKING A CONSUMER CHOICE THAT WILL BENEFIT SOME AND NOT
OTHERS. SO MOST OF US ARE NOT THINKING
ABOUT THE EMISSIONS OF EVERY SINGLE CHOICE WE MAKE.
I MEAN, I HAVE HAD MOMENTS IN THE SUPERMARKET WHERE I PANIC
ABOUT BUYING GREEN BEANS FROM CHILE OR SOMETHING, BECAUSE I
THINK ABOUT THE EMISSIONS, BUT HOW MANY OF US ARE MAKING THOSE
EVERY DAY CHOICES ABOUT — BUT THEN I THINK, I MEAN, I
LITERALLY, PROBABLY BECAUSE I READ TOO MUCH ABOUT THIS STUFF,
I THINK, OH, I AM NOT GOING TO BUY THAT VEGETABLE BECAUSE OF
THE EMISSIONS, AND I THINK ABOUT, BUT OH, WHAT ABOUT THE
WORKERS THAT WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS, THE WHOLE FAIR TRADE
THING. [ LAUGHTER ]
>>SO DON’T GO GROCERY SHOPPING WITH DIANA.
[ LAUGHTER ]>>AN AUDIENCE QUESTION FOR DR.
ALLEY. YOU’VE STUDIED THE ICE RECORD OF
PAST CLIMATES, AND ONE OF THE THINGS YOU’VE LEARNED IS THAT
THERE IS BEEN — HAVE BEEN ABRUPT CLIMATE CHANGES.
CAN YOU TALK ABOUT WHEN DO YOU THINK THE FIRST CATASTROPHIC
ABRUPT CHANGE WILL BEGIN TO APPEAR.
>>THAT’S A GREAT QUESTION. WE ARE CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC
THAT THERE WILL NOT BE GIANT METHANE BELCHES.
RIGHT? SO ABRUPT CHANGE IS REAL.
I CHAIRED A COMMITTEE FOR THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES IN
2002 AND WE DID THE PHYSICS OF THIS.
AND THEN JIM WHITE CHAIRED ONE IN 2013, AND WE REVISITED IT.
AND WHAT WE FOUND WAS THAT THERE IS SOME CHANCE THAT THERE WILL
BE PHYSICAL SURPRISES THAT ARE BIG, BUT OTHER THAN WEST
ANTARCTICA COLLAPSES AND GREATLY RAISING SEA LEVEL, WE DIDN’T
FIND A LOT OF EVIDENCE FOR PHYSICAL SYSTEMS HAVING TIPPING
POINTS. THERE ARE TIME SMOOTHERS ON THE
METHANE, AND THERE ARE SAFETY VALVES ON THE METHANE, AND SO
THE ODDS ARE PRETTY GOOD THAT THERE WILL NOT BE GIANT METHANE
BELL CHS. IT WOULD BE A — BELCHES.
IT WOULD BE A SLOW FEEDBACK, IN THE A FAST RUN FOR THE HILLS,
YOU’RE DOOMED EFFECT. WEST ANTARCTICA WAS THE ONE
EXCEPTION. AS WE WENT FROM PHYSICAL SYSTEMS
TO BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS, WE SAID THERE’S PROBABLY MORE TIPPING
POINTS. YOU GET TO IT’S DRY, IT’S HOT,
IT BURNS, AND SOME OTHER ECOSYSTEM COMES BACK.
AND I DON’T WANT TO GO TOO FAR WATCHING BRAZIL RIGHT NOW, BUT,
YOU KNOW, THIS IDEA OF MAYBE YOU BURN SOMETHING AND IT DOESN’T
GROW BACK, AND IT IS A BAD DROUGHT IN A WARMING WORLD IS
REAL. AND THEN WE SORT OF THOUGHT, AND
THIS WAS A BROAD COMMITTEE, THAT HAD BEEN CONVENED, THAT PROBABLY
THE BIGGEST PLACE TO LOOK FOR TIPPING POINTS IS IN HUMAN
SYSTEMS. AND AT WHAT POINT DO WE SAY
WE’RE IN THIS TOGETHER, WE’RE GOING TO PULL TOGETHER AND SOLVE
THE PROBLEM, AND AT WHAT POINT DO WE SAY I HATE YOU AND I AM
GOING TO SHOOT YOU? WE HAVE DONE BOTH OF THOSE IN
HISTORY, AND WE CAN DO BOTH OF THOSE IN THE FUTURE.
WE ARE IN THIS TOGETHER, VERSUS GUNS AND BOMBS.
SO WE WERE SORT OF WORRIED THAT AS YOU GO FROM PHYSICAL TO
BIOLOGICAL TO HUMAN, YOU GET MORE AND MORE POSSIBILITIES OF
PEOPLE GOING ACROSS THE TRANSITION AND CHANGING INTO
SOMETHING REALLY DIFFERENT AND SURPRISING THAT COULD BE REALLY
EXPENSIVE AND REALLY BAD. >>THANK YOU.
QUESTION FOR DR. LIVERMAN. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ESPECIALLY
FOLLOWING FROM DR. GHOSH’S TALK EARLIER TODAY, WHERE HE
CONTRASTED THE MIGRANT DISCOURSE WITH SORT OF WHAT HE CALLED THE
TECHNOCRAT OR SCIENTIFIC DISCOURSE, YOUR WORK WITH THE
IPCC, YOU HAVE BEEN PART OF THE TECHNOCRATIC AND SCIENTIFIC
DISCOURSE, BUT ALSO DONE A LOT OF FIELD WORK WHERE YOU ARE
TALKING TO REGULAR PEOPLE IN THEIR HOMES AND AT THEIR JOBS.
CAN YOU JUST TALK ABOUT THE DISCOURSES THAT YOU MIGHT HEAR.
ARE THEY DIFFERENT, ARE THEY THE SAME, DO THEY WORK AGAINST EACH
OTHER, IS THERE SYNERGY?>>THAT’S AN INTERESTING
QUESTION. WHICH I HAVEN’T THOUGHT ABOUT.
I THINK NOW THE DISCUSSIONS CAN BE VERY SIMILAR.
AND IT’S PARTLY BECAUSE MOST OF MY WORK, THE LAST FEW YEARS IS
FOCUSING ON HOW WE CAN ADAPT TO CLIMATE CHANGE, WHICH IS SORT OF
SAYING THAT I SHIFTED FROM MITIGATION, THINKING WE WOULDN’T
DO IT, THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO LIVE IN A WARMER WORLD,
AND SO A LOT OF WHAT I’M LOOKING AT IS HOW WE CAN LIVE IN A
WARMER WORLD. AND THE DISCUSSIONS AMONG THE
RESEARCHERS AND THE POLICYMAKERS ARE NOT VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE
DISCUSSIONS WITH FARMERS OR MY NEIGHBORS ABOUT WHAT, YOU KNOW,
WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THE RISK OF HEAT WAVES, AND IF I ASK
MY NEIGHBOR, SHE SAID WE NEED COOLING CENTERS AND WE NEED
WARNINGS, WE NEED TO SHIFT THE SCHOOL DAY.
AND THAT’S PRETTY MUCH WHAT YOU WOULD FIND A RESEARCHER OR A
POLICYMAKER TALKING ABOUT. SO WE HAVE SOMEONE WORRIED ABOUT
CLIMATE CHANGE FOR DISADVANTAGED POPULATIONS, AND SHE CONVENED A
GROUP OF US, SOME ACTIVISTS, SOME COMMUNITY FOLKS, SOME
PEOPLE INTEREST THE UNIVERSITY — FROM THE UNIVERSITY, AND I
DON’T THINK THERE WAS ANY SORT OF HIERARCHY OF KNOWLEDGE.
WE WERE ALL JUST TRYING TO COME UP WITH A LIST OF WHAT NEEDS TO
BE DONE, AND WHERE CAN WE GET THE RESOURCES TO HELP PEOPLE.
PROBABLY THE MOST INTERESTING QUESTION THAT CAME UP WAS WHEN I
RAISED THE IDEA OF SURVIVING PEAK TEMPERATURE.
SO HOW DO WE GET THE TUCSON COMMUNITY THROUGH WHAT I THINK
BE WARMER AND THEN HOPEFULLY COOLER.
AND THEN WE HAD A REALLY INTERESTING DISCUSSION ABOUT WHO
SURVIVES PEAK TEMPERATURE AND HOW DO WE HELP PEOPLE.
BUT, SO I WOULD SAY ON ADAPTATION, WE ARE ALL SORT OF
WORRYING AND SAYING ABOUT THE SAME THING, AND EVEN WHEN YOU
TALK TO LOCAL PEOPLE ABOUT, OKAY, WHO IS GOING TO BENEFIT
FROM THIS ADAPTATION, WHO IS GOING TO LOSE, WE ARE ALL SAYING
THE SAME THING, FOR THE MOST PART.
PART. >>AUDIENCE QUESTION FOR DR.
ALLEY. WHY DO THE CLIMATE MODELS TEND
TO UNDERESTIMATE THE CLIMATE CHANGE?
>>WE HAVE A WORLD EXPERT DOWN THE LINE.
MAYBE YOU WOULD LIKE TO TRY ME IN A MOMENT.
I SUSPECT THAT PARTIALLY IT IS BECAUSE WE LIVE WITHIN THE RANGE
OF WHAT WE HAVE SEEN, AND THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS, ESPECIALLY
RELATED TO CLOUDS THAT WE MAY NOT HAVE SEEN AS EXTREME A WORLD
AS WE ARE HEADED TO. SO I HOPE YOU WILL CHIME IN ON
THIS. BUT THERE’S BEEN A LITTLE
RESEARCH RECENTLY THAT IS SUGGESTIVE THAT AS IT GETS
WARMER THAT WE WILL SEE FAIRLY LARGE CHANGES IN CLOUDS.
ONE PIECE IN PARTICULAR FROM CAL TECH, WE RELY ON CLOUDS OVER THE
PACIFIC TO REFLECT THE SUN AND KEEP US COOL.
THEY ARE MAINTAINED IN PART BY RADIATION, WHEN WE GET MORE CO2,
RADIATION TO SPACE DOESN’T WORK WELL, CLOUDS HEAT UP AND
DISAPPEAR, WE SWITCH INTO A WARMER WORLD.
>>THAT’S NOT GOOD.>>SO THERE IS A POSSIBILITY WE
HAVE MISSED SOMETHING ON CLOUD FEEDBACKS.
THERE IS ALSO, IF WE MAKE IT WARM, A LOT OF ICE WILL MELT,
BUT IT TAKES A WHILE. SO THE WARMING IN SHORT TERMS
HAPPENS IN A WORLD IN WHICH SOME ENERGY IS GOING INTO MELTING ICE
AND THE ICE IS STILL MELTING AND REFLECTING THE SUN, ABOUT YOU
EVENTUALLY THAT ICE WILL BE GONE, AND THEN IT WILL GET
WARMER. SO PARTIALLY THERE IS A A
DIFFERENCE IN TIME SCALES THAT THE MODELS ARE LOOKING AT THE
SHORT-TERM CHANGES, BUT THE PALEOCLIMATE RECORD IS CLOOK
LOOKING AT THE LONG-TERM, AND PARTLY WE MAY HAVE MISSED
SOMETHING IN THE CLOUDS THAT WILL AMPLIFY A LITTLE BIT,
BECAUSE WE KEEP SEEING THIS EVIDENCE IN THE WARM CLIMATES OF
LARGE CLIMATE CHANGE. >>FOR THE MORE RECENT PERIOD
THE MODELS SEEM TO BE RELATIVELY WELL ON TRACK TO REPRODUCE THE
HISTORICAL CHANGES, AND THE CHANGES OVER THE LAST MILLENNIUM
OR SO. WHICH, BUT I THINK I AGREE THAT
— >>WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE.
THEY ARE VERY GOOD. >>YES.
THE PALEO CLIMACTIC RECORD SHOWS US CHANGES THAT COULD BE LARGER
OR LONGER TIME SCALES. I THINK WHAT WE ARE REALLY BAD
AT IS THINKING ABOUT RISK IN TERMS OF WHAT WOULD GEL NICELY
WITH THIS, THIS DRUNK DRIVER THAT RICHARD SAID EVENT THAT
MAYBE ARE NOT QUITE AS LIKELY, THEY ARE MAYBE MORE THE EXTREME
OUTCOMES, IF LIKE ALL THE EFFECTS OF THE ATMOSPHERE
CONSPIRE, LIKE THE CLOUDS TO MAKE IT A BIT WORSE THAN WE
EXPECT. THEN A LOT OF THINGS COULD GET A
LOT WORSE VERY QUICKLY, AND SO THIS KIND OF, EVEN NOT SO VERY
LIKELY OUTCOME COULD CARRY SUCH BIG RISKS YOU REALLY SHOULD BE
THINKING ABOUT IT SERIOUSLY, EVEN IF IT IS NOT THE MOST
LIKELY OUTCOME. I THINK SEPARATION BETWEEN WHAT
IS THE MOST LIKELY THING TO HAPPEN AND WHAT IS THE THING
THAT COULD HAPPEN AND COULD BE VERY, VERY DANGEROUS IS HOW TO
DISCUSS ABOUT THIS IS SOMETHING WE FIND VERY DIFFICULT, AND I
THINK HUMANS ARE NOT GOOD IN RISK ANYWAY.
EVERY TIME MY AIRPLANE STARTS JIGGLING I THINK I AM GOING TO
DIE. AND EVERY TIME I GET ON THE
HIGHWAY I THINK I AM PERFECTLY SAFE BECAUSE I AM DRIVING.
I THINK HUMANS ARE TERRIBLE AT THINKING ABOUT RISK.
[ LAUGHTER ]>>THANK YOU.
>>DO WE HAVE TIME?>>ONE MINUTE.
>>JUST ON THE SORT OF MODELS AND RISK AND TIPPING POINTS,
EITHER GABBY OR RICHARD, IN THE WAY YOU UNDERSTAND HOW WE MODEL
THE SYSTEM, WHAT POSSIBILITY DO YOU THINK WE HAVE OF HAVING
EARLY WARNINGS OF PARTICULAR TYPES OF TIPPING POINTS, OR WILL
THEY JUST HAPPEN, AND IF THERE’S AN EARLY WARNING, WHAT ARE WE
ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR?>>RIGHT.
>>WE NEED DAVID KEITH AS WELL. >>SO THE FORMALISTIC PHYSICS
OFTEN SEE CRITICAL SLOWING. THERE’S CERTAIN THINGS IN SOME
SYSTEMS THAT GIVE YOU A HINT THAT IT’S COMING.
SO WE MIGHT HAVE WARNING OF SOME OF THESE.
WHETHER WE ARE ACTIONABLE, WHETHER WE CAN SEE IT COMING, IN
TIME TO CHANGE OUR DECISIONS IN WAYS TO AFFECT THE CLIMATE, IN
WAYS IT AVOID THE TIPPING POINT, THAT PROBABLY REQUIRES MORE
WARNING THAN WE ARE LIKELY TO GET.
SO MY PERSONAL OPINION IS THAT THE SORT OF, WE SEE THAT WE’RE
ABOUT TO HIT SOMETHING REALLY BAD, AND THAT MEANS WE SHOULD
CHANGE OUR INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND OUR ENERGY SYSTEM
IN WAYS THAT SLOW DOWN THE WARMING SO WE DON’T HIT THAT BAD
THING. >>WE’VE ALREADY HIT THE BAD
THING. >>SO MY GUT FEELING IS THAT
THINKING OF THIS AS A RISK MG PROBLEM IS REALLY WISE — RISK
MANAGEMENT PROBLEM IS WISE. WHEN YOU KNOW THE ICEBERG IN
FRONT OF THE TITANIC, IT MAY BE TOO LATE.
>>YES. >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
PRESENTERS AND PANELISTS. [ APPLAUSE ]>>SO I WANT TO OBSERVE THAT
THERE ARE MANY, MANY VERY WONDERFUL QUESTIONS THAT ARE
COMING IN, AND OBVIOUSLY WE ARE SCRATCHING THE VERY SLIGHTEST
SURFACE OF THEM. PLEASE, AS YOU ARE LEAVING, AND
AS YOU ARE WALKING IT A WORKSHOP, TALK WITH THE PERSON
THAT’S LEAVING IF FRONT OF YOU ABOUT ONE OF YOUR QUESTIONS, AND
CARRY THIS DISCUSSION OUT INTO THOSE WORKSHOPS WHICH ARE TAKING
PLACE, CARRY THE DISCUSSION INTO THOSE AT THE TECH HALL AND THE
STUDENT CENTER AND THE NEWEST BUILDING ON CAMPUS, THE NOBEL
HALL. THERE WILL BE A MAP HERE THAT
SHOWS THOSE IN A MOMENT. THERE WE GO, THANK YOU.
AND THEN PLEASE TAKE EVERYTHING WITH YOU WHEN YOU LEAVE RIGHT
NOW, BECAUSE YOU WON’T BE BACK HERE UNTIL TOMORROW MORNING, AND
WE DO COME IN AND CLEAN. A REMINDER THAT THERE ARE TWO
ART OPENINGS AS WELL AS A CEREMONIAL HORSE DRESSING
CEREMONY AFTER THE WORKSHOPS TODAY, AND THEN THIS EVENING,
THERE IS AN EVENT INVOLVING POETRY AND MUSIC WHICH IS NOT A
RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY. IT IS A CONTINUATION OF THE
QUESTIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING HERE.
SO WE WILL RECONVENE HERE TOMORROW MORNING, BUT HAVE A
WONDERFUL TIME AT THESE WORKSHOPS.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *