June 02 2019 Review of Losing Earth: A Recent History by Nathaniel Rich (c) 2019 This was another book I happened across at the public library. I think I was drawn to it in part by how it looks, which is very much like a 1970s book, complete with two-color cover design and vertically stretched fonts. Essentially this book is an expansion on Rich's 2018 New York Times magazine article [0] which actually took up the entire edition and got quite a lot of coverage. Still, my initial thought was "why bother; this doesn't change anything". But, it does: it will likely change how you interpret current events as well as how you may evaluate proposed mitigation to address our rapidly changing climate. Losing Earth chronicles some of the early efforts in the US to understand and address what was then referred to as the Greenhouse Effect, specifically the period spanning 1979-1989. But the author points out that the understanding of this greenhouse effect and the anthropogenic contributions via the burning of fossil fuels creating a positive feedback was already understood by scientists by the 1950s. In fact an early popular TV science show, The Bell Telephone Science Hour featuring a Dr. Baxter, mentioned the possibility of CO2 from automobiles and industry causing the Arctic icecaps to melt and sea levels to rise dramatically in an 1958 episode [1], seemingly inspiring the ever-eclectic Tiny Tim to write a creepy song [2] about it. Back to the book. The short Introduction drops several depressing factoids, like that everything we know about climate change was already known by 1979, that our inaction has us at a 1:20 chance of staying below 2 degrees C, that above 2C we face a long-term disaster; above 3C that disaster comes in the short-term, triggering coastal flooding, mass starvation and a greening arctic. Already the Red Cross reports that the number of climate refugees exceeds those fleeing conflict. Chapter 1 introduces the Jasons, which was apparently a secret association of scientists which provided ad hoc research and advice to various 3 letter government agencies. These were the best in their respective fields and they had the ear of those at the highest levels of government. In 1979 the Department of Energy (DoE) had become concerned enough about the Greenhouse Effect to commission the Jasons to study the issue. The DoE had actually created an Office of CO2 Effects a few years prior; clearly they thought this might be a big deal. Key findings of the Jasons report: a warming of 2-3C would cause - widespread dust-bowl conditions in the Southwest US, Asia and Africa - agricultural outputs to plummet, particularly grain crops - mass reduction in available potable water - melt the West Antarctic ice sheet enough to raise sea levels 16 feet Pretty alarming findings, enough so that Gordon MacDonald, the report's main author, made several presentations to various government agencies to highlight the need for action, namely ceasing coal use. It also spawned a National Academy of Science (NAS) study group to further access risks. The NAS group included James Hansen, then working for NASA studying the climate on other planets, namely Venus. Hansen was tasked with modeling atmospheric CO2 and developed one of the first climate computer models called Mirror Worlds, the results which found their way into a what is known as the NAS Charney report [3] titled "Carbon Dioxide and Climate: a Scientific Assessment". The Charney report contrasted Hansen's Mirror Worlds results with the earlier Jasons report to establish the ratio of atmospheric CO2 levels to expected global warming. They concluded that a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 level would produce 3C of warming, the short-term disaster previously outlined. The private sector was also conducting research. As early as 1955 the American Petroleum Institute (API) was aware of the connection between CO2 and global warming and was researching how much of it might be due to oil and gas use. By the end of the 1970s Exxon was anticipating government regulations restricting CO2 emissions and thus it's core business, to the extent that they began investing in nuclear and solar power, a venture that would turn out to be short lived. To make a long review a bit shorter, it's suffice to say that the more government and industry looked into the matter the more it became obvious that getting serious about cutting CO2 and other greenhouse gases meant pulling the plug on the rapid economic growth that was propelling the American empire (the US was cranking out 30% of all CO2 emissions at the time). Several more studies would be done, all confirming the causes of global warming and risks of failing to take action. The election of Ronald Reagan was the beginning of the stall out on action. Reagan slashed staff at the EPA, boosted coal production, and eliminated renewable energy programs. His vice president George HW Bush seceded him and, while making promises to address the Greenhouse Effect during his campaign, promptly dropped the issue once elected. His chief of Staff, John Sununu, was convinced that the push for CO2 emission restrictions was a socialist takeover of the sciences to stop economic growth and successfully nixed the first international effort to create a binding treaty limiting CO2 emissions. Probably it wasn't all that hard as other countries likely had come to similar conclusions regarding the restrictions on economic growth if oil and gas use were curtailed. Once it became apparent that no government regulations were on the horizon, the API, who's members make up the bulk of GDP in the US, crafted a strategy of fostering doubt about the science of anthropogenic climate change and cautioning against taking any actions that might hurt the economy, a strategy that has culminated in the seemingly complete co-option of the Republican party and convincing a significant percent of citizens that human caused climate change isn't happening. Nathaniel Rich concludes his book with some succinct observations in the Afterword section: - more CO2 has been released since 1989 than the entire period preceding it - Earth is as warm now as before the last ice age when seas were 20' higher - coal is still being burned in huge amounts, mostly by China Earlier in the book the author opines that around 1850 humans appeared to have lost control of technology. 1850 is basically when we started burning fossil fuels at industrial scales, literally fueling the industrial revolution. A 1977 National Research Council report made a similar observation: "It has become apparent that human capacity to perturb inadvertently the global environment has outstripped our ability to anticipate the nature and extent of the impact." In the case of anthropogenic global wierding it's clear that we DID in fact anticipate it early enough to have taken actions to avert much of the pain, we just didn't. Rich feels that the best strategy is to make a moral argument for action, that we should feel an obligation to future generations to not leave them wrecked planet. I agree, assuming it's not already too late. - - References: [0] Losing Earth: The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change - NYT Magazine, 2018 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html [1] The Unchained Goddess / The Bell Telephone Science Hour - Dr Baxter, 1958 https://youtu.be/EbHYcNtcW7g?t=3000 [2] The Icecaps are Melting - Tiny Tim performs 'The Other Side', 1967 https://youtu.be/uAZgTKsdJsc [3] https://www.bnl.gov/envsci/schwartz/charney_report1979.pdf