Turning up the Heat
A surprising consensus is transforming the complex politics of global warming
Last month, scientists from the University of Colorado-Boulder were startled to discover that Antarctica is losing up to 36 cubic miles of ice annually. Glaciers on Greenland are melting so rapidly that scientists are predicting sea levels will rise 3 feet by 2100, enough to soak cities along the eastern seaboard. The loss of solar-reflective ice means that bare ground is soaking up more heat--and melting more ice. In Canada's Hudson Bay, Ian Sterling, a research scientist with the Canadian Wildlife Service, is seeing ice melt three weeks earlier than when he first arrived on the job 25 years ago. Polar bears, which cross the ice to hunt in deeper waters, are forced ashore early--losing weight and having fewer cubs. The early arrival of spring is also triggering swarms of mosquitoes along the Hudson Bay, interrupting the nesting cycle of birds. The swarms have caused some birds to desert their eggs. Meanwhile, a team of researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology says warmer waters have nearly doubled the number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes in the past 35 years, though some scientists blame the natural storm cycle rather than warmer water.

Not everyone is convinced that man is to blame or that warming will have catastrophic effects. One of the most vocal skeptics, Pat Michaels, a meteorologist and a fellow at the libertarian-minded Cato Institute, has argued that climate models dramatically overstate the effects of man-made greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. He has dismissed global warming as "a beast that feeds on public fears." But a greater number of scientists say global warming is not only real; it's already here. "I used to tell people this will affect your kids," says oceanographer Tim Barnett, "but the problem is now."
Shifting sands. The fact that many scientists believe global warming may be rapidly approaching the point of no return has motivated a cast of unlikely players. In February, 86 evangelical leaders signed on to a major initiative that accepted the reality of human-related global warming and called for federal legislation to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The movement has fallen short of a full endorsement by the National Association of Evangelicals, but the group's chief lobbyist in Washington, the Rev. Richard Cizik, is one of the initiative's biggest boosters. A former skeptic, he was swayed after attending a three-day climate-change conference in 2002. "I had a conversion [that was] characteristic of my conversion to Christ," he says. Cizik cites the biblical call to be good stewards of the Earth, but the crusade is largely driven by the potential human toll from global-warming-induced disasters. The group has begun running ads on CNN and the Fox News Channel. It's even turning up the pressure on one of the religious right's staunchest supporters, Sen. Sam Brownback, by airing television ads in Kansas urging him to take a tougher stand on the issue.
Meanwhile, a growing number of investors are pushing for change from the business community--for reasons of conscience and good old capitalism. A network of climate-focused institutional investors called Ceres, which includes major pension funds, is using its nearly $3 trillion in assets not only to sway businesses to cut emissions but to persuade companies to plan for a future in which the effects of climate change and/or federal restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions could hurt profit margins. That's why Ceres has embraced firms like Cinergy, a coal-fired utility company in Ohio (which is being sold to Duke Energy of Charlotte, N.C.). Cinergy--with some prodding from Ceres investors--has taken the lead in lobbying for mandatory curbs in emissions and supports Domenici's efforts to craft legislation. "It's really a risk-management issue for us," says Kevin Leahy, Cinergy's general manager of environmental economics. "We feel [carbon emissions] will be regulated at some point. We want to be involved in crafting a policy that is workable." Companies are also feeling the pain of operating in a patchwork quilt of state emissions standards that have sprung up in the absence of federal legislation (box, below). For companies in the forefront of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, like DuPont, which has already saved billions by making its plants more energy efficient, mandatory restrictions would give them a competitive edge. Others are seeing new markets and PR opportunities. British Petroleum is trumpeting its cuts in emissions while promoting its slate of alternative energy solutions. And many multinationals are facing emissions restrictions in Europe, where the Kyoto Protocol is already in effect.
advertisement

