全球变暖争议
地球暖化争议是指全球变暖事件在道德、社会及政治等多个方面的争议,对于“在近几十年,人为造成的全球暖化存在,并正在发生”是事实的这点,在学术界当中是没有争议的[2]。,超过97%的气候科学家认为“全球暖化存在,且人类活动极有可能是导致近半个世纪的全球暖化现象的主要原因”,[3]。近年大众对地球暖化的重视程度明显提升[4]。人们对地球暖化原因的各项科学解释高度关注,同时引起了政治与经济上的辩论。虽然贫穷地区,特别是非洲的排放量很微小,但却面对著全球变暖所带来的极大风险[5]。同时,美国不满发展中国家能够免除京都协议书的约束,并且以这个为拒绝签署协议书的理由[6]。在西方社会中,相比美国,欧洲有很多人接纳了人类对气候的影响及努力对抗变暖[7][8]。
化石燃料组织及公司譬如由菲利普·库尼及某些智库-竞争企业协会和卡托研究所所代表的美国石油学会及艾克森美孚利用一些运动来淡化全球变暖的风险。[9][10][11][12]环保团体及公众人物则举行运动来强调当中的风险。最近,一些化石燃料公司已经减少了淡化运动[13],甚至呼吁制定避免全球变暖的政策。[14]
这个议题促发了关于限制工业的温室气体排放对经济活动的影响的辩论。在美国,对科学证据及报告作政治操控也成了重要的议题。[15][16]其他国家则更会讨论为了减排而采取另外一些更洁净能源时所需要的成本。[17]
其他争论焦点则在于一些新兴工业国家如印度及中国在控制排放的力度应该有多大。2007年,中国的二氧化碳排放量已经超越美国,中国辩称因为中国人均排放量是美国的三分之一(2010年),所以在减排上没有很大责任。美国辩称如果他们必要承担减排成本,中国也要。[18][19]印度也快将成为工业排放的大国之一,将会与中国一样面对同样的问题。[20]
参看
编辑参考资料
编辑- ^ 2009 Ends Warmest Decade on Record (页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆). NASA Earth Observatory Image of the Day, 22 January 2010.
- ^ THE RESULTS ARE IN ON GLOBAL WARMING. [2020-09-08]. (原始内容存档于2021-03-04).
- ^ 存档副本. [2018-04-16]. (原始内容存档于2019-05-26).
- ^ Weart, Spencer, The Public and Climate Change, Weart, Spencer (编), The Discovery of Global Warming, American Institute of Physics, 2006 [2007-04-14], (原始内容存档于2012-04-08)
- ^ Revkin, Andrew. Poor Nations to Bear Brunt as World Warms. The New York Times. 2007-04-01 [2007-05-02]. (原始内容存档于2007-11-03).
- ^ Brahic, Catherine. China's emissions may surpass the US in 2007. New Scientist. 2006-04-25 [2007-05-02]. (原始内容存档于2008-04-26).
- ^ Crampton, Thomas. More in Europe worry about climate than in U.S., poll shows. International Herald Tribune. 2007-01-04 [2007-04-14]. (原始内容存档于2007-01-06).
- ^ Summary of Findings. Little Consensus on Global Warming. Partisanship Drives Opinion. Pew Research Center. 2006-07-12 [2007-04-14]. (原始内容存档于2007-03-02).
- ^ Begley, Sharon. The Truth About Denial. Newsweek. [2007-08-08]. (原始内容存档于2007-08-18).
- ^ Adams, David. Royal Society tells Exxon: stop funding climate change denial. The Guardian. 2006-09-20 [2007-08-09]. (原始内容存档于2013-01-29).
- ^ Exxon cuts ties to global warming skeptics. MSNBC. 2007-01-12 [2007-05-02]. (原始内容存档于2007-06-18).
- ^ Sandell, Clayton. Report: Big Money Confusing Public on Global Warming. ABC. 2007-01-03 [2007-04-27]. (原始内容存档于2013-02-16).
- ^ Greenpeace: Exxon still funding climate skeptics. USA Today. 2007-05-18 [2007-07-09]. (原始内容存档于2007-06-30).
- ^ Global Warming Resolutions at U.S. Oil Companies Bring Policy Commitments from Leaders, and Record High Votes at Laggards (新闻稿). Ceres. April 28, 2004 [2007-07-27]. (原始内容存档于2005-12-30).
- ^ Holzer, Jessica. Global warming becomes hot topic on Capitol Hill. The Hill. 2007-01-18 [2007-05-02]. (原始内容存档于2007-10-11).
- ^ Zabarenko, Deborah. U.S. rejects 'high cost' global warming scenarios. Reuters. 2007-05-04 [2007-05-04].
- ^ EU agrees on carbon dioxide cuts. BCC. 2007-03-09 [2007-05-04]. (原始内容存档于2007-05-23).
- ^ Chinese object to climate draft. BBC. 2007-01-05 [2014-11-17]. (原始内容存档于2011-08-12) (英语).
- ^ Steven Mufson. In Battle for U.S. Carbon Caps, Eyes and Efforts Focus on China. Washington Post. 2007-06-06 [2014-11-17]. (原始内容存档于2012-11-14) (英语).
- ^ Somni Sengupta. India's glaciers give grim message on warming. New York Times via oregonlive.com. 2007-07-17 [2020-10-04]. (原始内容存档于2016-06-02) (英语).
外部链接
编辑- ResearchChannel — The American Public's Views of Global Climate Change. A video of a lecture given by Jon A. Krosnick, social scientist, Stanford University. Produced by the National Science Foundation, 25 October 2007
- Spirit that Freed South Africa Must Now Rescue the Planet(页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆) by Desmond Tutu
- American Petroleum Institute (A.K.A. Energy Citizens)(页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆). Mother Jones article about astroturfing by petroleum industry trade group American Petroleum Institute
- Skeptical Science: Examining Global Warming Skepticism(页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆)
- Climate Change Deniers vs The Consensus(页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆)
- It's Global Warming, Stupid(页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆) Bloomberg BusinessWeek, 2 November 2012
- Global Warming and other Fictions LifeIvy Magazine, 15 April 2013
- Global warming - Who pressed the pause button?(页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆), The Economist, 8 March 2014