Kristin Shrader-Frechette
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199794638
- eISBN:
- 9780199919277
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199794638.003.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
Chapter 1 begins by stressing the severity of climate change (CC) and showing how, contrary to popular belief, atomic energy is not a viable solution to ...
More
Chapter 1 begins by stressing the severity of climate change (CC) and showing how, contrary to popular belief, atomic energy is not a viable solution to CC. Many scientists and most market proponents agree that renewable energy and energy efficiencies are better options. The chapter also shows that government subsidies for oil and nuclear power are the result of flawed science, poor ethics, short-term thinking, and special-interest influence. The chapter has 7 sections, the first of which surveys four major components of the energy crisis. These are oil addiction, non-CC-related deaths from fossil-fuel pollution, nuclear-weapons proliferation, and catastrophic CC. The second section summarizes some of the powerful evidence for global CC. The third section uses historical, ahistorical, Rawlsian, and utilitarian ethical principles to show how developed nations, especially the US, are most responsible for human-caused CC. The fourth section shows why climate-change skeptics, such as “deniers” who doubt CC is real, and “delayers” who say that it should not yet be addressed, have no valid objections. Instead, they all err scientifically and ethically. The fifth section illustrates that all modern scientific methods—and scientific consensus since at least 1995—confirm the reality of global CC. Essentially all expert-scientific analyses published in refereed, scientific-professional journals confirm the reality of global CC. The sixth section of the chapter shows how fossil-fuel special interests have contributed to the continued CC debate largely by paying non-experts to deny or challenge CC. The seventh section of the chapter provides an outline of each chapter in the book, noting that this book makes use of both scientific and ethical analyses to show why nuclear proponents’ arguments err, why CC deniers are wrong, and how scientific-methodological understanding can advance sound energy policy—including conservation, renewable energy, and energy efficiencies.Less
Chapter 1 begins by stressing the severity of climate change (CC) and showing how, contrary to popular belief, atomic energy is not a viable solution to CC. Many scientists and most market proponents agree that renewable energy and energy efficiencies are better options. The chapter also shows that government subsidies for oil and nuclear power are the result of flawed science, poor ethics, short-term thinking, and special-interest influence. The chapter has 7 sections, the first of which surveys four major components of the energy crisis. These are oil addiction, non-CC-related deaths from fossil-fuel pollution, nuclear-weapons proliferation, and catastrophic CC. The second section summarizes some of the powerful evidence for global CC. The third section uses historical, ahistorical, Rawlsian, and utilitarian ethical principles to show how developed nations, especially the US, are most responsible for human-caused CC. The fourth section shows why climate-change skeptics, such as “deniers” who doubt CC is real, and “delayers” who say that it should not yet be addressed, have no valid objections. Instead, they all err scientifically and ethically. The fifth section illustrates that all modern scientific methods—and scientific consensus since at least 1995—confirm the reality of global CC. Essentially all expert-scientific analyses published in refereed, scientific-professional journals confirm the reality of global CC. The sixth section of the chapter shows how fossil-fuel special interests have contributed to the continued CC debate largely by paying non-experts to deny or challenge CC. The seventh section of the chapter provides an outline of each chapter in the book, noting that this book makes use of both scientific and ethical analyses to show why nuclear proponents’ arguments err, why CC deniers are wrong, and how scientific-methodological understanding can advance sound energy policy—including conservation, renewable energy, and energy efficiencies.
James Lawrence Powell
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- November 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780231157193
- eISBN:
- 9780231527842
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Columbia University Press
- DOI:
- 10.7312/columbia/9780231157193.003.0007
- Subject:
- Political Science, Environmental Politics
A November 2009 poll by the Pew Foundation showed that two-thirds of Americans mistakenly believe that scientists disagree about global warming. One possible reason for this is that an industry of ...
More
A November 2009 poll by the Pew Foundation showed that two-thirds of Americans mistakenly believe that scientists disagree about global warming. One possible reason for this is that an industry of denial has mounted a successful public relations campaign, employing the same small set of apostate scientists to claim that global warming is false, or at least nothing to worry about, many of whom formerly applied their skills to denying that smoking causes lung cancer. A review the list of “experts” to whom the media turn to “balance” the opinions of mainstream scientists shows that the same handful of names turns up. These names also reappear in books that deny global warming, in the list of speakers at a Heartland Institute Conference, and in the list of “fellows” or “research associates” of the denier organizations. This chapter shines a spotlight on a sample of the scientist-deniers and their claims. These include the grandfather of global warming denial, S. Fred Singer; the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT Richard Lindzen; and senior fellow at the Cato Institute Patrick Michaels.Less
A November 2009 poll by the Pew Foundation showed that two-thirds of Americans mistakenly believe that scientists disagree about global warming. One possible reason for this is that an industry of denial has mounted a successful public relations campaign, employing the same small set of apostate scientists to claim that global warming is false, or at least nothing to worry about, many of whom formerly applied their skills to denying that smoking causes lung cancer. A review the list of “experts” to whom the media turn to “balance” the opinions of mainstream scientists shows that the same handful of names turns up. These names also reappear in books that deny global warming, in the list of speakers at a Heartland Institute Conference, and in the list of “fellows” or “research associates” of the denier organizations. This chapter shines a spotlight on a sample of the scientist-deniers and their claims. These include the grandfather of global warming denial, S. Fred Singer; the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT Richard Lindzen; and senior fellow at the Cato Institute Patrick Michaels.
Lawrence Badash
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- August 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780262012720
- eISBN:
- 9780262258531
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262012720.003.0016
- Subject:
- History, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine
The nuclear winter did not generate excitement among the public, but spurred nuclear analysts and policy experts to contemplate on the issues. Carl Sagan and his fellow nuclear winter proponents ...
More
The nuclear winter did not generate excitement among the public, but spurred nuclear analysts and policy experts to contemplate on the issues. Carl Sagan and his fellow nuclear winter proponents ultimately failed to convince the federal government to study the political consequences of the phenomenon. Nevertheless, it sparked a large and rich outpouring of policy ideas and analyses and gave planners the option to pursue nuclear arms expansion, arms control, or do nothing. This chapter examines some of the policy issues in the debate over nuclear winter. It looks at S. Fred Singer’s views about a threshold for climatic effects as well as strategic and tactical nuclear weapons. It also discusses Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative.Less
The nuclear winter did not generate excitement among the public, but spurred nuclear analysts and policy experts to contemplate on the issues. Carl Sagan and his fellow nuclear winter proponents ultimately failed to convince the federal government to study the political consequences of the phenomenon. Nevertheless, it sparked a large and rich outpouring of policy ideas and analyses and gave planners the option to pursue nuclear arms expansion, arms control, or do nothing. This chapter examines some of the policy issues in the debate over nuclear winter. It looks at S. Fred Singer’s views about a threshold for climatic effects as well as strategic and tactical nuclear weapons. It also discusses Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative.
Orrin H. Pilkey, Linda Pilkey-Jarvis, and Keith C. Pilkey
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- January 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780231168441
- eISBN:
- 9780231541800
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Columbia University Press
- DOI:
- 10.7312/columbia/9780231168441.003.0010
- Subject:
- Environmental Science, Climate
A number of prominent scientists and would-be scientists argue that humans are not responsible for global climate change and sea-level rise. Their goal is to discredit the notion that humans are ...
More
A number of prominent scientists and would-be scientists argue that humans are not responsible for global climate change and sea-level rise. Their goal is to discredit the notion that humans are responsible for sea-level rise and to prevent the expenditure of large amounts of money that will be required to respond to the sea-level rise. Much of the funding support for these individuals comes from the petroleum industry, either directly or indirectly. Their goal is to continue the high rate of useage of CO2 producing petroleum products.Less
A number of prominent scientists and would-be scientists argue that humans are not responsible for global climate change and sea-level rise. Their goal is to discredit the notion that humans are responsible for sea-level rise and to prevent the expenditure of large amounts of money that will be required to respond to the sea-level rise. Much of the funding support for these individuals comes from the petroleum industry, either directly or indirectly. Their goal is to continue the high rate of useage of CO2 producing petroleum products.
