The big heat: how capitalism is cooking the earth
[Workers Power Britain, May 2000]
March 2000 was the fourth warmest March since accurate records began in 1880. The global mean (land and ocean combined) temperature for 1999 was the fifth warmest on record, despite ocean currents being cooled by the cold phase of El Niño (La Niña). Global land temperatures where second only to 1998.
The two warmest years on record were 1998 and 1997, while the top six warmest years have all been in the 1990s. Overall there has been a rise of 0.5oC in mean global temperature since 1880. Recent research has suggested that the 1990s was the warmest decade since at least 1400.
Scientific research suggests that this “warming” of the world’s environment is being caused primarily by the greenhouse effect. So what is the greenhouse effect? It is an entirely natural phenomena. Without it the global mean temperature would be about -18oC, and the earth unable to support life.
Warmth from the sun heats the surface of the Earth, which in turn radiates energy back out to space. Some of this outgoing radiation, which is nearly all in the infrared region of the spectrum, is trapped in the atmosphere by so called greenhouse gases. The most important natural greenhouse gasses are water vapour and carbon dioxide.
The trapped radiation warms the troposphere (the lower part of the atmosphere), which then radiates energy in all directions. Some escapes into space, but some finds it way back to the earth’s surface, making it hotter than it would otherwise be.
Current concern relates not to the greenhouse effect itself, but human induced changes to the concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The most important of these gases is carbon dioxide. Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide remained steady for several thousand years at 280 parts per million by volume (ppmv). Any changes that took places closely matched changes in global temperature.
From about the middle of the 18th century levels of CO2 began to rise as technological developments during the industrial revolution enabled the use of fossil fuels. Deforestation also causes the level of carbon dioxide to rise through the burning of forests and the removal of their ability to absorb CO2 through photosynthesis. Concentrations currently stand at 360 ppmv and are increasing by 1.5 ppmv annually.
Predictions by the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) suggest that concentrations will double to 700 ppmv by 2100 if nothing is done to reduce emissions. This prediction is based on a doubling of population and moderate economic growth - known as the “business as usual scenario”.
Less than half the CO2 released into the atmosphere actually remains there, the rest is absorbed by vegetation or dissolves in the ocean. As these “sinks” become more and more saturated their ability to take up carbon dioxide is reduced. The movement of carbon dioxide between the land and water and the atmosphere is extremely complicated, making it very difficult to predict how future releases will behave.
There is also near maximum absorption of infrared radiation across much of the spectrum in which carbon dioxide absorbs. This means that a large increase in carbon dioxide will cause only a relatively small increase in the amount of radiation absorbed.
It is estimated that carbon dioxide is responsible for 70 per cent of enhanced global warming. The next most important gas is methane, which accounts for 24 per cent. Like carbon dioxide its atmospheric concentration has been rising since the industrial revolution; methane levels have doubled since 1800.
Although methane constitutes an even smaller proportion of the atmosphere than carbon dioxide it is seven and a half times more effective as a greenhouse gas. The main natural source of methane is from wetland areas. Its human sources include leakage from gas pipelines and oil wells, paddy fields, land fill sites, sewage treatment and enteric fermentation in livestock. Although emissions are not expected to rise as rapidly as carbon dioxide, because methane remains in the atmosphere for longer, its concentration is also expected to double by 2100.
The concentration of nitrous dioxide has also increased through human activities (mainly through the use of fertilisers). It is expected to rise by 70 per cent by 2100. Its long atmospheric lifetime of 120 years will ensure that it accentuates global warming into the next century and beyond.
Increases in methane and nitrous oxide have a greater effect on enhanced global warming than comparative rises in carbon dioxide. This is because they are effective absorbers of infrared radiation in the so-called “atmospheric window”. These are wavelengths that are not absorbed by water vapour and carbon dioxide and would ordinarily escape into space.
New manmade greenhouse gases began to emerge in the 1940s, the CFCs. Although best known for their ozone destroying abilities they are extremely powerful greenhouse gases - about 5-10 thousand times more effective than carbon dioxide.
They were banned in industrialised countries but will continue to be used in the Third World until 2006. They have an atmospheric life span of 75-110 years and will thus continue to enhance the greenhouse effect for some time to come. Although their replacements no longer damage the ozone layer, they are very powerful greenhouse gases and persist in the atmosphere for at least a thousand years.
However not all emissions from human activities contribute to global warming. Particles produced by the burning of fossil fuels (especially coal) absorb radiation from the sun and scatter it back into space.
In certain areas of the Northern Hemisphere, such as Europe and China, where power production is heavily concentrated they actually counteract the impact of the enhanced greenhouse effect. However as these particles typically last only five days and more stringent controls on their production are being introduced to combat acid rain, their impact on global warming is likely to be reduced.
If atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide double, and nothing else changes, global average surface temperatures will increase by 1.2oC. This is not disputed by scientists. However this is not a closed system.
Climate operates as a complex interaction between a number of factors, a change in any one of these will impact upon others leading to further changes. These changes are known as feedbacks and can either be positive, amplifying their causative factor, or negative, nullifying it.
Projections of large temperature rises caused by the human enhanced greenhouse effect are dependent on positive feedbacks enhancing the warming. Predictions of the effect of increased levels of carbon dioxide are made using complex computer models.
Modelling the climate is extremely difficult due to the complex nature of the interactions involved. Even in the short term accurate prediction of the weather can only be made five days in advance. With a complete understanding of the climate it would only be possible to predict weather 20 days in advance due to the fact that climate is a partially chaotic system.
The climate system consists of five components: the atmosphere, ocean, land, ice and biosphere (living things). Within this system are a number of feedbacks. The most important one of these in terms of the greenhouse effect is the water vapour feedback.
Rising temperatures lead to greater evaporation and enable the atmosphere to hold a greater volume of water vapour, which is a greenhouse gas. However extra water vapour would also increase the cloud cover. Some types of cloud shroud the earth reflecting heat back into space, other clouds trap heat at low levels.
Disputes about how water vapour and clouds will influence global warming are at the heart of the debate about the magnitude of human induced global warming. Another feedback is the “ice-albedo” effect. As the world warms the ice caps will melt. Ice is a very effective reflector of solar radiation, whereas water and land absorb far more. So the Earth's surface will trap more heat increasing warming.
The oceans also influence climate through feedbacks. They are the main source of water vapour. They also possess a larger heat capacity than the atmosphere or land taking much longer to warm. The entire heat capacity of the atmosphere is equivalent to less than three metres depth of water.
The oceans therefore exert a dominant control on the rate at which atmospheric changes occur. Finally the circulation of the oceans redistribute heat throughout the climate system. Without the Gulf Stream Britain would have a climate similar to that of Greenland.
Overall the view of most scientists is that feedbacks will amplify warming by 2.5 times. When this is entered into climate prediction models a significant temperature rise is projected. The IPCC predicts a rise of 2oC by 2100 under the “business as usual scenario”, with an uncertainty factor of 1.5 - 3.5oC.
This does not seem very much but when we consider that the change of temperature from the middle of an ice age to the warm interglacial period is only 5-6oC, 2oC represents the equivalent of a third of an ice age. While the transition from an ice age takes place over many thousands of years, this change would take place in little over 100 years.
The impact of such a temperature rise could be devastating. The most mentioned consequence is a rise in sea level, through thermal expansion (as bodies heat up they expand) and glaciers melting. Interestingly the net contribution from polar ice sheets is small due to the increase in precipitation caused by a warmer climate.
A 50 centimetre rise in sea levels is predicted by 2100, which is estimated to increase the annual number of people flooded from 13 million to 94 million. This will particularly effect countries such as Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, countries which can ill afford to build the necessary flood protection infrastructure. Changes in sea level in the next century will be even greater due to the time taken for the oceans to heat up.
Higher temperatures will see increased rates of evaporation especially in summer. Although globally this will be compensated by greater precipitation, some areas especially continental and arid areas will experience falls in rainfall producing shifts in water supply, a resource already under pressure. Substantial decreases would occur in Australia, India, southern Africa, most of South America and Europe.
Increases are expected in North America, Asia and central eastern Africa. Generally there will be an increase in severe weather events, with storms, flooding and droughts becoming common place. Disasters such as those in Mozambique, India and the Horn of Africa suggest this process has already begun.
In terms of food production, overall global capacity will not be affected due to adaptability to changes in temperature and rainfall. However there will be significant local impacts. Cereal yields are expected to increase at high and mid-latitudes, such as North America, China, Argentina and much of Europe.
However, yields in Africa, the Middle East and in particular India are expected to decrease. Human health would also be affected, with an increase in the range of tropical diseases such as malaria. Cities in mid latitudes would also have to brace themselves for higher temperatures and the health implications this would have, such as heat stress.
Poorer countries close to the equator are likely to be hit much harder than the richer northern countries. Not only can these countries ill afford the adaptations necessary to respond to climate change, they are the countries who contribute the least to emissions of greenhouse gases.
It is not only humans who will be affected. Natural ecosystems will be hit hard because they are unable to adapt to rapid temperature changes. This is especially true of trees that are sensitive to changes as small as 1oC in annual average temperature.
Warming will lead to stress and die-back especially of tropical forests and grassland in northern South America and central southern Africa, significantly reducing the volume of carbon dioxide absorbed through photosynthesis. This will be partially offset by the increased growth expected from greater concentrations of carbon dioxide in northern latitudes.
Governments sit on their hands
In the 1990s the governments of the world, confronted by mounting and compelling evidence, finally began to discuss what action to take to counteract global warming.
In 1992 the IPCC announced that global warming had started. They concluded that emissions of greenhouse gases would have to be drastically reduced to avoid serious consequences. Eight years on much hot air has been expended in countless discussions and arguments but very little has been achieved to provide a solution.
In 1995 the Conference of the Parties of the Climate Convention agreed to stabilise carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000. Only a handful of countries (including Britain) have fulfilled this target.
The next significant meeting of the Parties of the Climate Convention was in Kyoto, Japan in November 1997. Ostensibly this agreed to a cut of around five per cent below 1990 levels in the greenhouse gas emissions of industrialised nations to be achieved between 2008 and 2012. Under the accord the US will lower emissions by seven per cent, Japan by six per cent and the EU countries by eight per cent.
Despite these relatively conservative targets, agreement was only reached at the eleventh hour, and the negotiations repeatedly threatened to break down. The US and Japan refused to cut emissions if no limits were placed on Third World countries, and it was only the prospect of trading pollution rights that enabled the US to agree.
Yes, international capital will even trade in pollution. Scandalously, under the Kyoto Protocol, the right to pollute the global environment has become a commodity. The US is able to avoid cutting its own emissions by buying the right to pollute from other countries that do not pollute up to their limit!
The agreement maintains the production of greenhouse gases in Russia and Ukraine at 1990 levels. However as the economies of these countries have been devastated by the restoration of capitalism, current emissions are 30 per cent below 1990 levels. It is very unlikely that they will ever return to these levels, which will allow rich nations, and the US in particular, to trade emissions thereby enabling them to continue producing greenhouse gases at current levels. It also means that although Kyoto commits countries to a five per cent cut in 1990 emissions, it actually represents only a 0.4 per cent cut at 1995 levels.
Currently 84 nations have signed up to the Kyoto Protocol. However, despite all the get out clauses, only 22 have ratified it, and none of these include the major polluters (US, Japan and EU). The Protocol still hasn’t come into force, and aspects still remain to be finalised.
The latest meeting of Parties of the Climate Convention (COP5) took place in Bonn last November, with Gerhard Schroeder calling for the Protocol to come into force by 2002. The next meeting (COP6) has been set as the definitive deadline for finalising all aspects of the Kyoto Protocol. However it was not even possible to decide a date for this meeting. So three years on from Kyoto, agreement still has not been reached and does not look likely in the near future.
This intransigence by the big imperialist powers and the lack of progress is not surprising. It was the capitalist system that created the problem of global warming in the first place through its drive for profits at any costs. And we should have no illusions in its ability, or willingness, to provide solutions.
The desire to maximise profits ensures the uncontrolled expansion of capital, through the promotion of consumption for consumption's sake and the creation of false needs. At the same time wasteful and polluting practices are introduced. Any attempts to make the polluter pay are fought tooth and nail by the big bosses.
The multinationals responsible for much of the pollution are extremely powerful. They have spent millions lobbying governments to ensure their profits are unaffected. An international solution is needed, but countries are too busy fighting for their “national” interests - that is the interests of the local polluting multinationals.
Even if the Kyoto Protocol were enacted, its provisions are woefully inadequate. While emissions of greenhouse gases would be stabilised, their atmospheric concentrations would not be. The volumes of carbon dioxide and other gases would continue to rise requiring even more drastic cuts in the future.
The IPCC estimates that if drastic consequences are to be avoided atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide must be stabilised at around 550 ppmv. Although not preventing significant temperature increases, such measures would delay expected changes by over 100 years, giving greater time for natural ecosystems to adapt and human societies to introduce necessary changes. The anticipated affects would also be mitigated, with less climatic change, and smaller increases in sea levels.
For such a stabilisation to occur large cuts must be made in emissions now. Significant cuts in emission would require a wholesale shift from the use of fossil fuels, massive energy saving programmes, and a clean transport system.
The response to Kyoto has clearly indicated that international capitalism is not prepared to carry out the necessary changes to ensure even minor cuts in emissions. Global capitalism means more global warming. Any fight to stop global warming must take on this rotten system which pollutes for profits.
But such a fight must not ignore the needs of the less developed countries. They require a huge increase in energy usage to ensure that the whole of humanity has access to the tremendous benefits that industrialisation has brought.
This is possible. But only a rational and planned system could provide for expansion, industrialisation and increased access to technology without further damaging the global environment.
Such a system would have to be based on the needs of the many, not just on profits for the few. World production would have to be controlled by the producers themselves, thereby ensuring the expansion of productive forces was carried out in a rational and sustainable way. Such a system would also ensure that jobs would not be destroyed by the shift away from polluting production.
Human induced global warming poses a massive threat to humanity and the planet itself. The system whose polluting practices initiated the threat is patently unable to remove it. Global warming is an international problem which requires as international solution. There is only one such solution - socialism.
What’s to be done?
In order to prevent a rapid deterioration of the biosphere, we need to go way beyond the tremulous targets of Kyoto. We need a major cut, of around 60 per cent, in the emissions of green house gases. This requires immediate action.
We demand of all the governments of the world, a short-term emergency plan to reduce to environmentally manageable levels, the greenhouse emissions from power generation, industrial production and road transport. Concentrations of greenhouse gases must be stabilised as soon as possible.
This means both effective filtering of polluting power sources and the speedy replacement of fossil fuel power generation by more climate-benign and renewable sources of energy: wind and tidal power, solar energy, fuel cells, hydroelectric etc. These sources of energy must be massively expanded during such a plan by state funded public works, and the use of grants and subsidies to householders.
At the same time the polluting industries must be made to pay the true costs of counteracting the damage they cause to the environment. Heavy taxation on such industries and massive fines for breaching new environmental protection laws should be the norm. If they cannot pay then their industries should be nationalised without compensation and placed under the control of the workers.
We need a planned turn from power stations and motor vehicles burning of fossil fuels to combat atmospheric pollution and Acid Rain.
We need massive diversion of resources to help the underdeveloped countries employ, feed and house their people on the basis of the most modern environmentally clean production
We need a free, clean, fast, efficient and safe public transport system. We oppose "green taxes" on cars, petrol, tolls on motorways etc., that unload the costs onto the working class while allowing the rich to pay to pollute. We support phased in restrictions on car use tied to the opening of new or extended public transport systems.
To plan local, national and international programmes to organise and enforce these we need to fight for workers' inspection and control of the polluting industries.
To reverse, not merely slow or halt the threat of global warming, it is necessary to restore the forests of the temperate zones as well as the tropical rain forests to reverse desertification, to refill the emptying lakes to cleanse whole seas and oceans. This can only be done by local, national and international planning. For this to take place requires a different class in power, the working class, and a different system, socialism.
