PGS Debates Climate Change

Last Friday, PGS pupils debated Climate Change in a panel discussion. Here are speeches from the key contributors:

Flo Wassenberg: 

Firstly, I believe that as residents and influencers of this planet and atmosphere we have a duty to preserve it, and each person should have a conscience to do so. However it is also in our own personal interests to reduce the rate of climate change and global warming, and even reverse the effects, as we and our children will experience the consequences of our actions. If we do not face them today, we will in years to come.

I personally think that one of the largest problems that has come from climate change is the extinction of species: as this is irreversible . And I don't pretend to know everything about it, but the knock on effects could be disastrous to biodiversity, careers and our quality of life. In addition to this , it also makes me very sad that we could permanently alter the world that has been thriving for more than thrice as long as humans.

I find that the redistribution of rainfall is also one of the most worrying effects, as because of this, droughts and flooding have and will become more extreme. Thishas even been proved recently with a food shortage due to drought in Zambia and fires ravaging Australia, that have been so uncontrollable partly due to dry conditions. I would be so angry if billions of years of adaptation,evolving and culture were to be lost due to ignorance and for the fear of economic disruption.

Finally, rising sea levels have major economic, social and environmental impacts. The relocation of houses will cause disruption and a reduction in the working population of a country across all countries. The fact that rising sea levels will effect everyone in the world at some point, causing it to be a problem of great importance. For who gives aid when everyone needs it?

In the future, ideally, if we could reduce our global increase in temperature so it is not rising, we could focus on overfishing, pollution and other problems the world faces without extreme hazards and extreme conditions. However, I hope that we will be able to do it as a planet, not split up into privileged or suffering, AC’s or LIDC’s but as a planet.

John Taylor:

Climate change is an issue that needs addressing; however the extent of the impacts is debatable. Climate change activists over exaggerate these impacts and often make false statements which have no scientific backing. For example, Greta Thunberg, the figure-head of climate activism, has recently said that “our house is on fire” and that “we are in the beginning of a mass extinction”. No Greta, we’re not. The IPCC, which is the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said in their 5th Assessment report “There is low confidence in observed global-scale trends in drought” as well as saying “There is low confidence that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and magnitude of fluvial floods on a global scale” and “There is low confidence that long-term changes in tropical cyclone activity are robust”. Therefore, it is impossible to blame events such as Typhon Hagibis, the Doncaster floods or the bushfires in Australia on climate change. The science does not support it.

The argument is undeniable but the methods are ridiculous. The debate as to whether or not climate change exists is over. I believe that Extinction Rebellion is a middle class, hypocritical, left-wing movement and they are harming their own cause. The weeks of disruption caused across London annoyed businesses, prevented people getting to hospital, dragged in thousands of police officers and quite simply achieved nothing. We no longer need awareness of the issue, we need realistic goals and methods to move forward – something that Extinction Rebellion has failed to do. The only goal they have set is to be carbon neutral by 2025. Unrealistic and ridiculous. The Extinction Rebellion spokesperson said herself that they are not here to provide solutions and that their philosophy is to disrupt. The anger and frustration of Londoners was demonstrated by the violence that erupted when two members of Extinction Rebellion were dragged off the top of a tube train late last year. It is clear that the movement is losing support. With over 1600 arrests I don’t know how they can call them ‘peaceful protests’ when the definition of peaceful is ‘freedom from disturbance’. While thousands of them had a rave across London, police resources were stretched and wasted, instead of tackling knife and drug crime across the capital they were dragging old ladies off the road. It was the working class populations who were yet again most severely affected.  People were unable to get to work and unable to put food on the table for their children. In such a divided world, this should be the one issue that people can come together to tackle, however Extinction Rebellion are just making these divisions even greater.

They consistently use apocalyptic and alarmist language which does nothing but scare young people, leading to a severe increase in the rise of eco-anxiety. It is simply fear mongering. The Extinction Rebellion coordinator said that billions will be dying within a few years. This is yet another outrageous comment with absolutely no scientific support. In an age where mental health is such an issue, should we really be accepting comments like this which scare young people? The speech made by Greta Thunberg at the UN conference in September, not only made many people cringe, but it also made people think twice about supporting her. She has said that we must stop economic growth and that we must aim for real zero, not just net zero. How does she expect to get support when she sets goals that are so ridiculous that they are laughable?

My main issue is the hypocrisy of the movement. They are willing to put London to a complete standstill and yet they are not willing to give up their phones, iPads, laptops or cars to reduce their own carbon footprint. A prime example of this was a group of people who attended the movement were seen waiting in a cue at McDonalds – a company renowned for its processed meat and high carbon footprint. Furthermore, the Portsmouth Extinction Rebellion group took two coach loads of people up to London when there is a perfectly good train service running on electricity. So before you scream and shout at the government and stop people getting to work you must practice what you preach.

The messages from Extinction Rebellion are always negative and catastrophic. In reality, things are looking positive and there must be hope. Nearly 40% of energy use in the UK comes from renewable resources and since 1990 we have reduced our CO2 emissions by 44%. This is the largest reduction of any developed country. So anyone who says that the government is not doing anything to tackle climate change is blatantly wrong, however this is just the beginning and there is plenty still to be done. So we must be hopeful, stay positive and seek methods to move forward.

Rex Binning:

“ ‘How dare you, I shouldn’t be up here’ The words of our generation’s children when they realise that they’ve been birthed into a perishing planet that cannot be saved.”

“It’s clear by now that there is a problem and that problem is climate change. We’ve all known it to be a problem yet little action has been taken as many fail to recognise the sheer urgency of it, however, the UK has been the first nation to declare a climate emergency.”

“Although there are many natural causes for climate change such as volcanoes and gas release (aerosols), it is clear by now that the increase of global temperatures is largely, almost entirely, a result of human activity.”

“A significant factor is the population size, we’re approaching nearly 8 billion people and expected to have 10 billion by 2050. We can’t expect to be able to produce for that many people. Think about land, animals, food, living space. Especially with 99% of glaciers in retreat, the sea levels are rising and will decrease the land available to live. With an increasing population and decreasing space, the world will become severely overcrowded.”

“It’s perhaps possible to sustain a larger population but not with our current lifestyles. Unfortunately with the amount of meat we produce, cows produce masses of methane each year (70-120kg per cow). With the number of cows we breed for food, this results in over 6.9881x10¹⁰ kilos of methane which is significantly more potent than carbon. Rice too produces large amounts of nitrous oxide, a more potent molecule than carbon. So even when you remove meat from your diet you’re still producing emissions.”

“Many of the foods we eat that aren’t meat are flown in from overseas producing even more carbon. Foods like avocado and many fruits can’t be grown locally. The chain of carbon production goes on and on and it’s because of us. It is  then amplified by our population size.”

“The more people living polluting modern lifestyles, the more food is consumed, the more carbon is produced, the more waste, the more pollution. A way to reduce pollution is to reduce the human population.”

“The population isn’t equally distributed, countries such as China and India have far larger populations. China is the number one producer of carbon emissions. They recently started building even more coal power plants just to sustain enough energy for their population.”

“On the bright side, more people are changing their lifestyles which gives a sense of hope. Many cities are banning diesel cars in city centres such as Bristol. Madrid amongst other European countries has started to place restrictions on cars in cities to reduce air pollution. It is also evident in our recent election that climate change is an issue which the government has to pay attention to. Every party at least tried to put forward an environmental aspect of their manifesto.”

“Moving forward we all need to make changes if the government won’t. Most people are reluctant to change as they feel it will have little impact. If we all change, the climate will improve. We can start by eating less meat and throwing away less. Clothes, gadgets, furniture the list goes on and hopefully, so will life on earth. So please, breed responsibly.”

Ms Burton:

My stance on climate change has changed greatly over the years. When I was at school back in the early naughties, it was taught even by the Geography Department as an unknown and, on the rare occasion that we studied it, it was about how the greenhouse effect worked and whether us mere humans do have the capacity to alter the entire Earth’s climate. The lack of emphasis on climate change at this time, both in places of education and by the media, supported the notion that it was an unknown and up for debate.  

It was at university that I took a much greater interest in climate change having taken a module on it in my second year. Again, the emphasis was on past climate changes with an increasing consideration throughout the module as to whether humans have the capacity to change the entire Earth’s climate. Although, again, it felt up for debate, undoubtedly at this time the idea of anthropogenic climate change was gaining more traction.  

My Sixth Form pupils are unlikely to believe this given the lively discussions we often have in our Geography lessons, but I myself at this time was a climate sceptic. I therefore understand how seductive climate scepticism is as a notion, that there are many explanations for the climate having changed in recent years so that the “business-as-usual” paradigm can be indefinitely sustained. Furthermore, the media as a whole had a sceptical mindset and, like it or not, we are heavily influenced by this wide-reaching and mind-altering force. 

My opinions about climate change 10 years on are now are very different. I strongly disagree with the way that it is often reported by the media and politicians, for example, “bush fires in Australia caused by climate change” as in reality there are many factors involved. However, we cannot ignore the compelling evidence that the climate has changed alongside our greenhouse gas emissions in recent years. The nature of the debate has evolved since I was at school - it is no longer about whether or not humans have altered the climate but about how we should be taking action on this.  

I firmly believe today that action needs to be taken quickly and globally to avoid further and more intense  environmental catastrophes in the future. I do, however, also see climate change as an opportunity to alter not just our emissions output but also our ways of life more generally. Recycling, reducing air pollution, buying locally, reducing meat consumption - all of these strategies that mitigate climate change on a small scale also improve our local areas and our health which is undoubtedly a good thing and this notion is reflected by this cartoon behind me.  

My final thoughts regarding continued action on climate change - Greta and Extinction Rebellion have been great at publicising the need for action but may have potentially turned many of the “fence-sitters” into sceptics, and Boris Johnson is the wrong leader for the country if we want a better environment to live in.