You are on page 1of 3

Wolfgang Feist , physicist, univ.-prof.

at Innsbruck university, building physics, not a climatologist

Here is some information to make up your own mind (2nd edition July 2010)

1) Climate change is real. Please have a look at this:

melting arctic ice cap http://j.mp/arctic_sea_ice

Now: is that dangerous? The ice is swimming, it doesn’t rise the sea level much. But that is
not the important point her. Important is, that this is the evidence: The ice is a long term
thermometer: It proves, temperatures are going up. At least in the Arctic. (Video: NASA)

2) Now: Is it just the Arctic? No, please study this: Melting of glaciers; you even do not have
to be a scientist to understand this retreat_of_glaciers all around the globe (Wikipedia). Go
out there and make your own sceptical analysis. Now - is that dangerous? Well, I admit, this
is dangerous – at least for those, depending on the water – like those near Himalaya or in
Patagonia. You do not care about those? Ok, I can not help you in this case. But again, that
is not the most important issue here: Having evidence from all around the globe glaciers are
on the retreat proves that the globe is warming – these glaciers are long term thermometers.

3) Now: CO2 is not the reason? Well, there are some simple physical facts:

Video showing the heat radiation absorbed by CO2 ( http://j.mp/CO2_infrared/ )

Carbon dioxide absorbs infrared (heat) radiation. Heat radiation is the radiation energy flow
emitted by warm surfaces (like the Earths surface); more is emitted the higher the
temperature gets. In building physics we use infrared radiation (IR) sensors (and IR-
cameras) to analyse surface temperatures. (If you want to know more about IR-radiation, this
is a good link).

The absorbed radiation energy in the atmosphere is re-emitted – in all directions; part of it
back to the Earth’s surface. Keeping the surface warmer – and the radiation emitted by earth
lower. Here is a somewhat longer version: greenhouse effect explained. Yes, this is a natural
effect and has been always working on Earth keeping us warmer than without the CO2. But:
The more CO2, the stronger the effect. And we (the humans) definitely rise the contend of
CO2 in earth’s atmosphere.

4) But may be, this is not dangerous at all? Have a look at the atmosphere of Venus:
http://j.mp/venus_CO2. You can see a runaway greenhouse-effect there. Caused by CO2.

5) It is only a few degrees and temperatures have been higher millions of years ago? Yes,
that is true, but ocean levels have been some tens of meters higher during that time! This is
not dangerous for life on Earth as a whole – but may it be that this is dangerous for human
civilisation? A rise in sea level of several meters in just a couple of decades?

6) How do we know that this is man-made?


a) We already know that extra CO2 and other greenhouse gases are the reason.
b) Where is the extra CO2 coming from?
- the quantity of extra CO2 is consistent with the burning of fossil fuels
- the relation C14/C12 in the atmosphere is changing – and that is consistent
with the extra CO2 coming from fossil sources rather than from any other
source.

6) To have an impression what is waiting for us: impacts_of climate change. That's a
website on astronomy - far from being "warmist", just scientific. In a short abstract:

2020—Flash floods will very likely increase in Europe. While less rainfall could reduce agriculture
yields by up to 50 percent in other parts of the world.

2030—Warming temperatures will cause temperate glaciers on equatorial mountains in Africa to


disappear.

2040—The Arctic Sea could be ice-free in the summer, and winter ice depth may shrink drastically.
However – could be faster (next 10 yrs) or slower (2105).

2050—Small alpine glaciers will very likely disappear completely, and large glaciers will shrink by 30 to
70 percent.

2070—As glaciers disappear and areas affected by drought increase, electricity production in
hydropower stations will decrease. Hardest hit will be Europe

2080—While some parts of the world dry out, others will be inundated. Up to 100 million people could
experience coastal flooding each year. (sea level rise)

2085—The risk of dengue fever from climate change is estimated to increase to 3.5 billion people.

2100—A combination of global warming and other factors will push many ecosystems to the limit.

To make that clear: This will most probable not lead to extinction of life on earth –
yes, were have been events more worse than these some 10th of Millions years ago.
But: This will be a tremendous threat to civilisation as we know it. And, if we do not
act know to mitigate the warming, the development in a lot of parts in the world will
just be worse than the worst prophecies in the bible. Now: This is not an accident, it
is a man made development. And from which perspective you look on it, as a
Christian, as a Muslim, as a Buddhist or a Hindu – whatever the believe is, you share
– in none of these faiths it looks like humans should be allowed to create such a
devastating threat. Neither any person coming from humanistic-scientific based
ethics can give sanction to this development. Let us remember Carl Sagan and help
keeping humanity on a decent path.
So, we are in this all together. We will have to find paths avoiding the worst kinds of
developments. It begins with analysing the facts, the reasons, the causal chains. To
see the problem is the first step towards solutions.

There is a chance, that we can solve this together – it was created by us, and there is
still time to change the road we’re on (This is cited from the IEA world energy outlook
– the emission of greenhouse gases is correlated with the large amount of fossil fuel
humans are using; that is the reason, why the International Energy Agency IEA
comes in).

It ends with concrete measures to reduce carbon burning. Such measures will have
advantages with respect to many other issues, too. There are lot’s of these measures
which will not hurt: Increasing Efficiency, using renewable Energy, stopping to waste
resources.

Here is a link to hope: There are solutions, we only have to work on it.

If you like to help us doing the work we do since a couple of decades or if you want to
be part of this development, consider to be a member of the International Passive
House Association. Passive House is a synonym for “energy efficiency” within the
building sector. This has a huge part on the contemporary energy use and therefore
on the CO2-emissions. Passive House is not a brand name, but a construction
concept, it has been published and it can be applied by anyone. It had already stood
the test of practice – it even increases comfort in the buildings.

More information from iPHA:

You might also like