 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||
 |
 |
 |
|||||||
| Copyright © 2012. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 849
Page 849
Appendix U
Prefaces from the Individual Panel Reports
Preface to Synthesis Report
Greenhouse gases and global warming have received increasing
attention in recent years. The identification of the antarctic
ozone hole in 1985 combined with the hot, dry summer of 1988 to
provide the drama that seems to be required for capturing national
media coverage. Emerging scientific results, including findings
about greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide, added to the
interest.
One consequence was congressional action. The HUD-Independent
Agencies Appropriations Act of 1988 (House Report 100-701:26)
called for
[an] NAS study on global climate change. This
study should establish the scientific consensus on the rate and
magnitude of climate change, estimate the projected impacts, and
evaluate policy options for mitigating and responding to such
changes. The need for and utility of improved temperature
monitoring capabilities should also be examined, as resources
permit.
According to subsequent advice received from members of
Congress, the study was to focus on radiatively active trace gases
from human sources, or "greenhouse warming." This report is one of
the products of that study.
The study was conducted under the auspices of the Committee on
Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, a unit of the councils of
the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of
Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The study involved
nearly 50 experts, including scientists as well as individuals with
experience in government, private industry, and public interest
organizations.
The work of the study was conducted by four panels. The
"Synthesis Panel" was charged with developing overall findings and
recommendations. The "Effects Panel" examined what is known about
changing climatic conditions
OCR for page 850
OCR for page 851
OCR for page 852
OCR for page 853
OCR for page 854
Representative terms from entire chapter:
policy implications
Page 850
and related effects. The "Mitigation Panel" looked at options
for reducing or reversing the onset of potential global warming.
The "Adaptation Panel" assessed the impacts of possible climate
change on human and ecologic systems and the policies that could
help people and natural systems adapt to those changes.
This is the report of the Synthesis Panel. The reports of all
four panels will be published by the National Academy Press in a
single volume.
The panels conducted their analyses simultaneously between
September 1989 and January 1991. The chairmen of the Effects,
Mitigation, and Adaptation panels were members of the Synthesis
Panel. Several members of the Synthesis Panel also were members of
other panels. In its deliberations, however, the Synthesis Panel
considered more than just the reports of the other panels. It also
heard from experts with a range of views on the policy relevance of
computer simulation models, widely held to be the best available
tools for projecting climate change, and of economic models used to
assess consequences of policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The study also drew upon the report of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change, an international effort released during the
course of the study. Several members of the various study panels
also contributed to that effort. Finally, the study drew upon other
Academy studies. For example, in its examination of sea level, the
panel used analyses from the following reports: Glaciers, Ice
Sheets, and Sea Level: Effects of a CO2-Induced Climatic Change (National
Academy Press, 1985), Responding to Changes in Sea Level:
Engineering Implications (National Academy Press, 1987), and
Sea-Level Change (National Academy Press, 1990). The report
of the Synthesis Panel is thus much more than a summary of the
assessments performed by the other three panels. It contains
analysis that goes beyond the topics covered by the other
panels.
The report identifies what should be done now to counter
potential greenhouse warming or deal with its likely consequences.
The recommendations of the Synthesis Panel, if followed, should
provide the United States, and the rest of the world, with a
rational basis for responding to this very important concern.
The Honorable Daniel J. Evans, Chairman
Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming—Synthesis Panel
Preface to Effects Report
Greenhouse gases and global warming have received increasing
attention in recent years. The identification of the antarctic
ozone hole in 1985 combined with the hot, dry summer of 1988 in
North America to provide the drama that seems to be required for
capturing national media coverage. Emerging scientific results,
including findings about greenhouse gases other than carbon
dioxide, added to the interest.
Page 851
One consequence was congressional action. The HUD-Independent
Agencies Appropriations Act of 1988 (House Report 100-701:26)
called for
[an] NAS study on global climate change. This
study should establish the scientific consensus on the rate and
magnitude of climate change, estimate the projected impacts, and
evaluate policy options for mitigating and responding to such
changes. The need for and utility of improved temperature
monitoring capabilities should also be examined, as resources
permit.
According to subsequent advice received from members of
Congress, the study was to focus on radiatively active trace gases
from man-made sources, or the "greenhouse effect." This report is
one of the products of that study.
The study was conducted under the auspices of the Committee on
Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, a unit of the councils of
the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of
Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The study involved
nearly 50 experts, including scientists as well as individuals with
experience in government, private industry, and public interest
organizations.
The work of the study was conducted by four panels. The Effects
Panel examined what is known about changing climatic conditions and
related effects. The Mitigation Panel looked at options for
reducing or reversing the onset of potential global warming. The
Adaptation Panel assessed the impacts of possible climate change on
human and ecologic systems and the policies that could help people
and natural systems adapt to those changes. The Synthesis Panel was
charged with developing overall findings and recommendations.
This is the report of the Effects Panel. The reports of all four
panels will be published by the National Academy Press in a single
volume under the title Policy Implications of Greenhouse
Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and The Science Base.
The panels conducted their analyses simultaneously between
September 1989 and January 1991. The chairmen of the Effects,
Mitigation, and Adaptation panels were members of the Synthesis
Panel.
George F. Carrier, Chairman
Panel on Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming—Effects
Panel
Preface to Mitigation Report
Greenhouse gases and global warming have received increasing
attention in recent years. The identification of the antarctic
ozone hole in 1985 combined with the hot, dry summer of 1988 to
provide the drama that seems to be required for capturing national
media coverage. Emerging scientific results, including findings
about greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide, added to the
interest.
Page 852
One consequence was congressional action. The HUD-Independent
Agencies Appropriations Act of 1988 (House Report 100-701:26)
called for
[an] NAS study on global climate change. This
study should establish thescientific consensus on the rate and
magnitude of climate change, estimate theprojected impacts, and
evaluate policy options for mitigating and respondingto such
changes. The need for and utility of improved temperature
monitoringcapabilities should also be examined, as resources
permit.
According to subsequent advice received from members of
Congress, thestudy was to focus on radiatively active trace gases
from human sources, or"greenhouse warming." This report is one of
the products of that study.
The study was conducted under the auspices of the Committee on
Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, a unit of the councils of
the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of
Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The study involved
nearly 50 experts, including scientists as well as individuals with
experience in government, private industry, and public interest
organizations.
The work of the study was conducted by four panels that did
their work in parallel, but with considerable exchange of
information and some overlap in membership. The Mitigation Panel
looked at options for reducing or reversing the onset of potential
global warming. The Effects Panel examined what is known about
changing climatic conditions and related effects. The Adaptation
Panel assessed the impacts of possible climate change on human and
ecologic systems and the policies that could help people and
natural systems adapt to those changes. The Synthesis Panel
developed overall findings and recommendations.
This is the report of the Mitigation Panel. The report of the
Synthesis Panel is currently available as a separate volume
entitled Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming (National
Academy Press, 1991). In addition, the reports of all four panels
will be published in a single volume (National Academy Press,
forthcoming).
The charge to the Mitigation Panel was to "examine the range of
policy interventions that might be employed to mitigate changes in
the earth's radiation balance, assessing these options in terms of
their expected impacts, costs, and, at least in qualitative terms,
their relative cost-effectiveness." In responding to this charge,
the panel developed a methodology for evaluating the
cost-effectiveness and greenhouse gas mitigation potential for a
wide variety of options. This provided the panel with a priority
ranking of these options. Using this methodology, the panel
determined that 10 to 40 percent of current U.S. greenhouse gas
emissions can be reduced at low cost.
Thomas H. Lee, Chairman
Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming—Mitigation Panel
Page 853
Preface to Adaptation Report
Greenhouse gases and global warming have received increasing
attention in recent years. The identification of the antarctic
ozone hole in 1985 combined with the hot, dry summer of 1988 to
provide the drama that seems to be required for capturing national
media coverage. Emerging scientific results, including findings
about greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide, added to the
interest.
One consequence was congressional action. The HUD-Independent
Agencies Appropriations Act of 1988 (House Report 100-701:26)
called for
[an] NAS study on global climate change. This
study should establish thescientific consensus on the rate and
magnitude of climate change, estimate theprojected impacts, and
evaluate policy options for mitigating and respondingto such
changes. The need for and utility of improved temperature
monitoringcapabilities should also be examined, as resources
permit.
According to subsequent advice received from members of
Congress, theNAS study was to focus on radiatively active trace
gases from human sources,or "greenhouse warming." This report is
one of the products of that study.
The study was conducted under the auspices of the Committee on
Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, a unit of the councils of
the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of
Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The study involved
nearly 50 experts, including scientists as well as individuals with
experience in government, private industry, and public interest
organizations.
The work of the study was conducted by four panels. The Effects
Panel examined what is known about changing climatic conditions and
related effects. The Mitigation Panel looked at options for
reducing or reversing the onset of potential global warming. The
Adaptation Panel assessed the impacts of possible climate change on
humanity and nature and the policies that could help people and
nature adapt to those changes. The Synthesis Panel, chaired by
Daniel J. Evans, was charged with weighing effects, mitigation, and
adaptation and reaching comprehensive findings and
recommendations.
This is the report of the Adaptation Panel. The Adaptation Panel
includes experts in terrestrial and marine ecology, agriculture,
forestry, population and migration, health, industry, civil
engineering, geography, economics, technology, and international
relations. The panel began its work by reviewing the literature in
the field of impacts and adaptation, stressing studies of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the work in progress of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The panel
developed background papers in its fields of concern, several of
which have been submitted for publication separately. The panel met
five times over the course of 1 year to develop its collective
views.
Page 854
Comments by reviewers helped the panel, and a notable reviewer
was Roger R. Revelle. One of the many things Dr. Revelle pioneered
was investigation of the impact of climate change. In the National
Academy of Sciences 1983 report Changing Climate, he
reported the impact of climate change on the Colorado River and
subsequently initiated and participated in the study that produced
the report Climate Change and U.S. Water Resources. During
the winter of 1990–1991 his thorough review of the present
manuscript produced many valuable suggestions. The Adaptation Panel
thanks him. As the report was moving to publication, Dr. Revelle
died, at age 82.
It is important to stress that the charge to the panel was to
develop an assessment of impacts and adaptation to climate change
that emphasized consequences and opportunities for the United
States. This decision was taken in light of the IPCC effort and the
many efforts now under way by individual nations elsewhere in the
world to assess their own prospects in light of likely climate
change. This report does not claim to speak on behalf of the points
of view of all nations.
The report also focuses on the direct effects of greenhouse
gases and climate change. It does not attempt to assess all the
numerous environmental changes that will be taking place
simultaneously, including loss of habitat, destruction of the ozone
layer, and marine pollution, to name a few. The panel was not
charged with assessing the entire question of ''environmentally
sustainable development."
The panel immediately recognized that the selection of
mitigation strategies for greenhouse gas emissions would also
affect adaptation. For example, renewable sources of energy such as
solar and wind power that might diminish greenhouse gas emissions
also increase sensitivity to climate. In a few places in this
report, we allude to interactions between mitigation and adaptation
strategies. Although the panel was aware of indirect effects of
adaptation to climate change, such as the vitality of schools in a
farming community or of wildlife in a neighborhood when irrigation
is extended, we naturally concentrated on such direct effects of
adaptations as the success of food production. As societies narrow
the range of strategies they consider seriously, it will be
important to consider these interactions more fully.
The charge to this panel was not primarily to develop a research
agenda about the impacts of climate. For a full discussion of
research directions, see the 1990 National Research Council report
Research Strategies for the U.S. Global Change Research
Program.
The tasks of the Adaptation Panel were, first, to examine what
would happen if climate changed and humanity and nature did not
and, second, to find ways to temper any harm and to enhance any
benefits of a new climate.
Paul E. Waggoner, Chairman
Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming, Adaptation Panel
