Conversations in Science with Dan Rather and Chris Field: Climate Change • iBiology

00:00:04;10 RATHER: Based on your professional scientific investigations
00:00:07;13 over a long period of time,
00:00:09;13 when it comes to climate change, what is the real story?
00:00:13;20 FIELD: Climate change is probably the defining challenge
00:00:17;01 of the 21st century.
00:00:18;27 You know, until recently it was
00:00:22;05 reasonable to assume that Earth was so big and complicated
00:00:25;15 that human actions probably couldn't change it.
00:00:28;14 But now, there's so many people,
00:00:30;15 we have so much technology,
00:00:32;20 that it's clear that we're changing the planet in fundamental ways,
00:00:35;21 a wide range of ways,
00:00:38;04 of which changing the climate is only one.
00:00:40;15 But there's no question that humans
00:00:43;07 have changed the composition of the atmosphere.
00:00:45;02 We've increased the concentration of the main heat-trapping gas,
00:00:48;00 carbon dioxide,
00:00:49;27 by more than 40% over the last hundred years.
00:00:53;11 The expectation is that those changes
00:00:56;17 will continue on a very rapid pace
00:00:59;09 unless we decrease emissions of these heat-trapping gases.
00:01:02;19 And there's no question, scientifically,
00:01:05;20 that an increase in the carbon dioxide concentration of the atmosphere
00:01:09;04 causes climate change.
00:01:11;07 We now have a very high level of confidence
00:01:14;00 that the warming we've seen over the last 50 years or so
00:01:17;17 has been predominantly caused by these greenhouse gases
00:01:21;19 that have been emitted as a result of human activities.
00:01:24;06 RATHER: Automobiles, factories...
00:01:26;05 FIELD: Basically, the sources of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere from human activities
00:01:31;09 are combustion of fossil fuel -- coal, petroleum, and natural gas --
00:01:35;22 as an energy source;
00:01:37;17 clearing of forests, which contributes around 10% of the CO2 to the atmosphere;
00:01:42;21 all of the processes that release methane or natural gas,
00:01:47;02 and that includes not only petroleum exploration
00:01:51;22 and leaks from the natural gas system,
00:01:53;11 but it also includes many agricultural processes,
00:01:55;25 including cattle rearing, sheep rearing,
00:01:59;27 and it also is produced in wetlands, especially rice paddies.
00:02:04;27 And then an additional source of important greenhouse gases
00:02:08;21 is a very powerful greenhouse gas called nitrous oxide,
00:02:11;28 which is mainly a waste product from fertilizer application.
00:02:15;27 So, application of too much fertilizer
00:02:18;18 releases his powerful heat-trapping gas to the atmosphere.
00:02:21;05 Looking forward,
00:02:24;00 what we see is that we have a range of different possible futures.
00:02:28;18 If we think about a future of
00:02:32;07 continued high emissions of greenhouse gases,
00:02:34;03 continued emphasis on these fossil energy sources,
00:02:38;00 we'll probably end the 21st century
00:02:41;21 at a temperature level that somewhere between 6 and 10 Fahrenheit
00:02:45;25 warmer than pre-industrial.
00:02:47;28 And that's a huge amount of temperature difference,
00:02:50;08 and it's a temperature difference where we would see
00:02:53;13 massive effects of the high temperatures and heat waves.
00:02:57;19 We would see large effects on the redistribution of precipitation,
00:03:00;12 a large amount of sea level rise,
00:03:04;16 and a large change in where different kinds of human activities
00:03:10;08 could occur.
00:03:11;25 There would be impacts on agriculture,
00:03:13;21 impacts on ecosystems,
00:03:15;12 and impacts on economic activities.
00:03:17;20 On the other hand, we could also have a future
00:03:21;02 where we do ambitious efforts
00:03:24;10 to decrease the amount of greenhouse gases
00:03:26;20 that are released to the atmosphere.
00:03:28;14 With ambitious efforts,
00:03:30;02 we might end the 21st century at a level of warming
00:03:32;26 that's maybe 3 to 5 degrees higher than pre-industrial conditions.
00:03:36;16 And that would be an amount of warming
00:03:39;10 that was, in some ways,
00:03:41;26 comparable to the amount of warming we saw from 1900 to now.
00:03:44;26 From now to the end of the century, that much again.
00:03:48;01 And there would be important consequences of that,
00:03:50;14 especially in places where people or activities
00:03:52;19 are particularly vulnerable.
00:03:56;01 But that's mostly a level of climate impact
00:03:58;16 that could be managed with careful investments
00:04:02;01 in adaptation and making sure that people and societies and ecosystems
00:04:06;08 are as well prepared as possible.
00:04:08;14 RATHER: Now let's talk about what we don't know.
00:04:10;18 What are the most important things that we do not know about climate change?
00:04:13;25 FIELD: So, there are lots of nuances
00:04:16;05 that we don't know about the pathway
00:04:20;02 on which the future climate will unfold.
00:04:22;22 As an example, we know that many areas in the polar regions
00:04:29;06 that have permanently frozen soils are beginning to thaw.
00:04:33;05 Many of those permanently frozen soils
00:04:35;19 have large amounts of organic matter.
00:04:38;08 The specialists in this area often describe it as
00:04:41;06 similar to frozen broccoli,
00:04:42;24 and when you take the broccoli out of the freezer,
00:04:44;19 it thaws and decomposes rapidly.
00:04:46;27 That organic matter is made of carbohydrates
00:04:51;22 that, when they decompose, release CO2 to the atmosphere,
00:04:54;24 and sometimes they release methane to the atmosphere,
00:04:57;11 depending on the conditions under which they decompose.
00:05:00;10 So, we do not know
00:05:03;17 how rapidly thawing of permafrost
00:05:06;14 is going to result in a vicious cycle feedback
00:05:09;12 that pumps more heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere.
00:05:14;08 We do not know how great the risk is
00:05:18;13 that decreases in rainfall in the world's tropical forests
00:05:22;23 will convert those forests from basically [not flammable]
00:05:27;23 -- no forest fires ever --
00:05:29;12 to highly flammable, so that we lose those forests,
00:05:32;18 and all the carbon in them, which is hundreds of billions of tons,
00:05:35;21 is released to the atmosphere as heat-trapping gases.
00:05:39;04 We don't know how rapidly
00:05:41;20 the major ice sheets might be destabilized.
00:05:47;05 If you look at all the ice that's sitting on Greenland,
00:05:49;17 and that's an amount of ice,
00:05:51;15 if it were all melted and put in the oceans,
00:05:53;13 that would amount to between 20 and 25 feet of sea level...
00:05:57;10 a vast amount...
00:06:00;22 the calculations indicate that warming somewhere between 2 and probably 7 degrees
00:06:05;22 we're committed to irreversible loss of that ice sheet.
00:06:08;24 But we don't know if it's closer to the 2 degrees
00:06:10;18 or closer to the 7 degrees,
00:06:12;20 in the context of where we've already seen
00:06:15;21 more than 1 degree of warming.
00:06:17;12 So, you can think about it as a tipping point or a trigger
00:06:20;27 that is out there that we're in the crosshairs of,
00:06:23;05 but we don't know exactly where it is.
00:06:25;05 RATHER: There are some people who look at this issue and say,
00:06:27;22 "Listen, we're too far gone, we're doomed."
00:06:30;02 There are others who say,
00:06:32;01 "Listen, it's vastly overstated,"
00:06:34;06 and are kind of nonchalant about the whole thing.
00:06:36;17 As far as you're concerned,
00:06:38;12 what is the correct level of concern?
00:06:40;16 FIELD: Managing climate change is a challenge in managing risks.
00:06:43;24 We know that some climate changes have already occurred,
00:06:46;19 and we know something about the impacts associated with those.
00:06:50;14 We know many things about the way climate
00:06:54;13 is likely to change with future emissions.
00:06:57;10 But we don't know exactly what the impacts will be.
00:07:00;26 Some things we can project based on historical experience,
00:07:04;03 some things on models,
00:07:05;25 but if you really look at the kinds of factors
00:07:08;22 that disrupt societies,
00:07:10;20 they're usually these kind of unpredictable combinations of things,
00:07:14;12 and they often depend on outcomes
00:07:18;26 that involve many different sectors of society.
00:07:21;28 For example, if there's civil unrest
00:07:24;29 that combines with a drought
00:07:27;17 that combines with a drought someplace else
00:07:30;05 that causes a spike in agricultural processes...
00:07:32;13 you know, complicated, difficult-to-predict outcomes
00:07:35;15 that really need to be managed in the context
00:07:39;06 of understanding the risks.
00:07:41;08 And it's important to recognize that
00:07:44;13 we don't know exactly what the impacts of climate change will be,
00:07:48;01 but what we do know is that
00:07:50;19 the risk of those impacts goes down dramatically
00:07:53;09 as the amount of climate change goes down.
00:07:55;08 And so, instead of taking a perspective that says,
00:07:58;27 "Okay, we can with precision say the optimal amount of climate change is, you know, 3.1 degrees," what we can really say is that we can provide,
00:08:11;16 as a global community,
00:08:13;16 a much higher level of protection
00:08:17;07 and a much more open path to a vibrant future
00:08:19;22 if we limit the risks from climate change
00:08:22;20 by limiting the amount of warming that occurs.
00:08:25;23 RATHER: Well, there's a lot of skepticism about this.
00:08:28;21 Where do you come out on that?
00:08:30;01 You must hear people from time to time say,
00:08:31;27 "Listen, professor, I... I hear what you're saying, and it's very impressive,
00:08:35;11 but I gotta tell you, I think in the great sweep of history
00:08:41;04 that this climate change danger is being vastly overestimated," for example.
00:08:45;25 FIELD: One of the things that I see is
00:08:49;25 people being skeptical about climate change
00:08:51;29 and about the need to take steps towards solutions,
00:08:55;10 for a number of different reasons.
00:08:57;01 Some people just feel that the Earth is so big
00:08:59;29 that humans could never possibly change it.
00:09:02;17 Sometimes that comes from a religious or philosophical perspective.
00:09:07;21 Sometimes the skepticism comes from concern that, well,
00:09:12;17 if we have to spend money solving this problem,
00:09:15;08 maybe it'll decrease economic growth,
00:09:17;12 maybe it'll leave more people in poverty,
00:09:19;21 maybe it'll foreclose on economic opportunities.
00:09:22;05 But the people who make that argument
00:09:24;26 often aren't looking at the big picture.
00:09:27;24 They're not looking at, what are the opportunities for economic growth
00:09:30;28 in a world that has more climate extremes?
00:09:33;13 Or that has extreme events that disrupt economies and societies.
00:09:39;03 The other thing that's important is that
00:09:43;09 solving the climate problem
00:09:46;02 doesn't have to be a massive redirection of resources.
00:09:49;29 We need to spend huge amounts of money
00:09:53;01 on energy infrastructure over the next 50 years, regardless.
00:09:57;08 And the real risk of taking a skeptical approach,
00:10:00;00 and saying, "Well, Let's wait until we know
00:10:02;29 exactly what the problem looks like,"
00:10:05;08 is then we're in an environment
00:10:07;20 where we need to transition so quickly
00:10:09;28 that we can't do it efficiently.
00:10:11;15 It costs way more to wait and act suddenly
00:10:15;10 than to act incrementally, thoughtfully, and wisely,
00:10:19;24 starting now.
00:10:21;02 You know, the example that's relevant here
00:10:23;29 is the risk of a terrorist attack.
00:10:25;13 You don't know that a terrorist attack is coming.
00:10:27;08 If you took the skeptics' approach,
00:10:29;02 you'd say, "Well, since I don't know that this terrorist attack is coming,
00:10:31;21 I won't do anything."
00:10:33;17 But in fact, we have a lot of information
00:10:36;18 that says precautionary action is well advised.
00:10:40;10 Now, that's risk management,
00:10:42;05 and that's what we need to do in managing the risk of climate change.
00:10:46;11 RATHER: This may be a diversion,
00:10:48;09 but keep in mind I'm a Texan,
00:10:50;19 the son of an oilfield worker who was the son of an oilfield worker,
00:10:53;05 and I worked in the oil fields and pipelines in my youth.
00:10:57;19 I run across people all the time that say,
00:10:59;25 "Dan, you talk to these high-powered professors.
00:11:02;02 You talk to these leading scientists.
00:11:04;09 And they talk about great changes coming.
00:11:07;12 But with modern technology,
00:11:10;15 there's so much oil and gas still to be dug
00:11:14;28 that things are not going to change that much.
00:11:17;19 We're going to be dependent on oil and gas for the foreseeable future
00:11:22;18 no matter what your professor friends tell you, Dan."
00:11:25;05 What am I to say to them?
00:11:27;02 FIELD: Let me say two things.
00:11:28;21 The first is that the Stone Age didn't end
00:11:31;00 because we ran out of stones.
00:11:33;10 And the petroleum age is not going to end
00:11:36;06 because we run out of petroleum.
00:11:37;26 There's a vast amount in the ground.
00:11:40;21 But, you know, if you say,
00:11:44;04 "Oh, things never change that fast in the fossil energy business,"
00:11:48;02 just look at the emergence of horizontal drilling and fracking.
00:11:51;01 The gas industry is just dramatically different than it was
00:11:55;17 only a decade ago.
00:11:57;03 RATHER: True.
00:11:57;24 FIELD: People never thought that you would be able to break up
00:12:00;12 these tight rock formations and extract the gas.
00:12:02;15 I mean, I think that technology
00:12:05;07 has a way of opening some very compelling opportunities,
00:12:09;13 if you just let the creativity of the business sector
00:12:13;18 figure out what can be done,
00:12:15;28 and I would love to see
00:12:19;08 an opportunity for there to be financial investments,
00:12:21;27 financial opportunities,
00:12:24;10 from carbon capture and storage,
00:12:26;06 similar to the kind of financial opportunities
00:12:28;25 that led to the development of the fracking technologies.
00:12:32;10 RATHER: But part of what you said... look, we need to take certain steps...
00:12:37;24 right away, someone is going to say, "Ahh, big spender.
00:12:40;13 You want to spend more money,
00:12:42;11 spend more taxpayer dollars,"
00:12:46;12 on this, some would say, purely hypothetical thing.
00:12:50;24 That's a charge that's going to be put...
00:12:52;13 anybody who says... any politician...
00:12:54;06 that's a difficult sell in today's electoral reality.
00:12:56;21 FIELD: Yeah. You know, the question of where the money comes from
00:13:01;04 has a whole bunch of dimensions.
00:13:03;07 If you look worldwide,
00:13:05;07 we probably spend more than half a trillion dollars a year
00:13:08;29 -- more than 500 billion dollars a year --
00:13:11;11 in subsidies to fossil energy interests.
00:13:15;07 Simply removing those subsidies
00:13:18;23 -- so, this is saving money, not...
00:13:22;07 not spending more, but spending less --
00:13:25;08 would go a long way towards leveling the playing field
00:13:29;09 so that the non-emitting technologies
00:13:32;03 have more of a fighting chance
00:13:34;12 for getting into the market.
00:13:36;15 And what we're really talking about is a repositioning.
00:13:38;21 George Shultz, former Secretary of State,
00:13:41;05 has been an outspoken advocate
00:13:43;17 for what he calls a revenue-neutral carbon tax.
00:13:47;14 That's based on the well-established idea
00:13:49;22 that if you want to see behaviors change,
00:13:51;21 you tax the things you want to see less of
00:13:54;14 and you don't tax the things you want to see more of.
00:13:56;27 If you think about a revenue-neutral carbon tax,
00:13:59;19 you would tax income less,
00:14:01;24 because you want people to be able to
00:14:04;29 aspire to have their income and use it,
00:14:06;26 and you would tax carbon more,
00:14:09;00 because we're trying to transition people
00:14:11;24 away from carbon-intensive energy systems into renewables.
00:14:14;15 That's a perfect example
00:14:18;02 of a way to think about a strong incentive
00:14:21;03 that would not, in fact, increase government spending at all.
00:14:24;25 It would simply reposition
00:14:27;12 where the investments were coming from
00:14:29;18 and where they were going.
00:14:31;13 You know, I think what we need are
00:14:33;26 solutions that bring forward the best ideas
00:14:38;06 and the best applications of technologies and capital
00:14:42;09 that the world can come up.
00:14:44;11 Free markets have been a remarkably successful way to do that.
00:14:48;05 And I would argue that if you step back and say,
00:14:52;15 "What are we really talking about
00:14:56;16 when we're talking about solving the climate problem?,"
00:14:59;08 we're creating what may be the biggest
00:15:04;02 economic opportunities of the second half of the 21st century.
00:15:08;01 It may be a different set of players in the leading companies,
00:15:12;16 just as the leading companies of 2015
00:15:15;06 aren't exactly the same as the leading companies of 1950.
00:15:18;27 But the energy system operates at a dramatic scale.
00:15:23;29 It's going to require dramatic investments
00:15:28;18 and represent dramatic returns
00:15:31;03 to the players who are successful in it.

This Talk

Speakers: Chris Field, Daniel Rather

Audience:

General Public
Educators of H. School / Intro Undergrad
Student
Educators of Adv. Undergrad / Grad
Researcher
Educators

Recorded: December 2015

Talk Overview

There are many challenges when it comes to addressing the destructive effects of climate change, and few people are better suited to address these challenges than Chris Field. A world-renowned researcher, Dr. Field understands the nuances and implications of the science. And as a gifted and trusted communicator who has the ear of the world’s diplomats, he can explain the urgency of action to policy makers and the general public. In this wide-ranging and thoughtful interview with Dan Rather, Dr. Field calmly but firmly explains what we know about climate change, what the stakes are, and what can be done about it.

Read Dan Rather’s thoughts about the interview in this Huffington Post article: The Defining Challenge of the 21st Century

Audio only

Speaker Bio

Chris Field

Chris Field

Chris Field is the founding director of the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology at Stanford University and a world-renowned researcher in the field of climate change. Dr. Field’s research emphasizes field and laboratory studies of impacts of climate change, from the molecular to the global scale. He also is a leading voice in the… Continue Reading

Daniel Rather

Dan Rather

Dan Rather has a resume that reads like a history book. He has interviewed every American president since Eisenhower and personally covered almost every important global dateline of the last 60 years, from the Civil Rights Movement to Vietnam, to Watergate to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Rather helped pioneer the very idea that television… Continue Reading