Is It Too Late?

10. Climate change scientist, activist, and alarmist Guy McPherson claims that human beings could go extinct as early as 2026, that the climate will change faster than we can adapt.

Proponents of Mcphereson’s ideas state that global climate change has passed a point of no return and that the effects are irreversible. However, Mcpherson’s reputation as a credible scientist is questionable as many of his references are faulty or biased. Climate control is a controversial and difficult topic to discuss as many scientific researchers disagree as to when the point of no return is, however, what is clear are the effects that pollution has on the earth and the human population. It is important to discuss this difficult topic to reach a global understanding that the world is in a state of emergency if governments and people don’t get involved. In all the controversy and discussion what is not needed are people who fear-monger through the spreading of radical and incorrect information

Climate Change activist Guy Mcpherson is a scientist and professor of ecology, evolutionary biology, and natural resources at the University of Arizona. Most importantlyMcpherson is an environmental alarmist. According to Mcphereson’s Climate-Change Summary and David Wasdell, “equilibrium temperature increase predicted as a result of the current concentration of atmospheric greenhouse gasses is already over 5°C.” I see no way for humans to survive such a rise in global-average temperature.” Here Mcpherson states that human pollution has already achieved its apex as of 2016 with an increase of total global temperature of 5C saying that we are well above the point of no return. However, According to the international panel of climate change or the IPCC, “The world has already heated up by around 1.2C, on average, since the preindustrial era.” Not only is Mcphereson providing his readers with faulty information from years ago but is a source of misinformation as the global temperature is still not expected to reach an increase of 2C until about 2042 at the worst.

Furthermore, Mcpherson’s radical claims dwell on the idea that vegetarians are not saving the world and are causing an increase in energy consumption. “Seems vegetarianism has its costs, notably a large carbon footprint. In this case, the switch from ‘typical’ to ‘recommended’ comes with a 43% increase in energy use, “primarily due to USDA recommendations for greater Caloric intake of fruits, vegetables, dairy, and fish/seafood, which have relatively high resource use and emissions per Calorie.” Upon following up on his source the article has a paywall withMcpheresons claims being directly from the abstract itself. However, the main point is that the information cited by Mcpherson has nothing to do with vegetarianism at all. It states that an increase will result in changing human consumption to more “recommended foods” although the foods aren’t specified it does state that meats and fish are included therefore eliminating the talk about vegetarianism. The scenario that the data points to is talking about has nothing to do with vegetarianism at all and is therefore incorrect on Mcpherson’s side. He is fear-mongering the people into believing that they are helpless even if they take matters into their own hands and change their diet. Nonetheless, it is evident that vegetarians do have a substantially lower carbon footprint when compared to meat-eaters as according to a case study based on actual food consumption, “Vegan and Vegetarian’ DP had the lowest GWP among the developed countries.” These specific diets are scientifically proven through several case studies to have the lowest Global warming potential or GWP and therefore are an absolute necessity to a safer cleaner future.

Mcpherson claims that climate change is irreversible, however, this goes against several studies and policies that prioritize reversing climate change such as the Paris agreement and TheUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. While most sources will talk about mitigation through new electrical infrastructures such as wind turbines and solar panels, one way that scientists are working on eliminating C02 from the atmosphere is simply through the use and management of nature. According to The National Climate Change Research Program, “Measures that enhance the removal of CO2 from the atmosphere (see Box 29.3) include changing land use and management practices to store carbon in plants, trees, and soils; increasing ocean carbon storage through biological or chemical means; capturing atmospheric CO2 through engineered chemical reactions and storing it in geologic reservoirs; or converting terrestrial biomass into energy while capturing and storing the CO2 “ Through natural C02 reservoirs such as soil, water, and forests proper management of these natural elements will allow for C02 to benefit the environment and continue its natural lifecycle. This, however, must be done after C02 emissions have already declined which would result from governments adopting new electrical infrastructures thanks to the Paris agreement most countries are already on board with this idea of mitigation, and soon we should see that the global temperature does not reach an increase of 2degrees Celsius.

Other than mitigation and natural carbon reservoirs there are some new technological concepts that we have experimented with to mitigate pollution. One such technological idea is the use of Carbon Dioxide and Carbon Monoxide as an energy source allowing us to make this nonrenewable resource renewable through several different processes. The idea of this project is called Carbon Capture/Utilization in which carbon dioxide is collected and stored ready to be recycled and used as an alternative to creating all sorts of valuable chemicals, feedstock, and fuels. According to the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, “The Carbon UtilizationProgram’s R&D efforts are focused on the development of technologies along with three of the four use pathways illustrated above and described below: Uptake, Conversion, and mineralization.” The very complex and expensive process of Carbon Utilization was an old concept that remained an unlikely ally in the fight against C02 emissions because of its high cost to build such facilities however, according to the TheNational Carbon Capture Center, “These developers have used their testing experience at the facility to refine and, in many cases, scale up their technologies, and data generated at the site has proved to be reliable and accurate. Through pilot testing of more than 60 technologies, the center has directly participated in the reduction of the projected cost of carbon capture by one-third.”Thanks to the collaboration of several companies, Carbon Utilization costs have been reduced severely allowing for a most cost-effective approach to the science it allows for more countries and companies to open up and reduce the levels of C02 in the atmosphere. Therefore, unlike most other practices that look into preventing C02 from being released, carbon utilization is a direct solution to eliminating C02 from the atmosphere and transforming it into a more useful and safer chemical.

Mcpherson nonetheless proclaims himself to be simply a messenger of important and valuable data. In regards to all the accusations and scandals, Mcpherson should not be considered an accurate source of any sort of scientific data because of his diminished credibility. His claims on the irreversibility of climate change are already showing to be false as the world continues onto the year 2022 we are still living on this planet with only an increase of 1.2 celsius and are not expected to reach the harmful and dreaded 2 degrees celsius increase by 2042 at the worst. This level of radical beliefs is harmful towards any sort of progression as the only result is a buildup of anxiety and fear. Thankfully, Mcpheresons claims are false as our governments begin to sign on new policies and fund important scientific programs designed to reverse and mitigate climate change one can rest easy knowing that we will not go down in history as bystanders of a global catastrophe. Although the work of scientists is still not yet done, we as a collective must put in our two cents in protecting the environment whether that be a change in lifestyle or diet it will bring us one step closer to a safer future for our grandchildren.

Citation Page

Veeramani, Anastasia, Goretty M. Dias, and Sharon I. Kirkpatrick. “Carbon footprint of dietary patterns in Ontario, Canada: A case study based on actual food consumption.” Journal of cleaner production 162 (2017): 1398-1406.

Tom, M.S., Fischbeck, P.S. & Hendrickson, C.T. Energy use, blue water footprint, and greenhouse gas emissions for current food consumption patterns and dietary recommendations in the US. Environ Syst Decis 36, 92–103 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-015-9577-y

Guy McPherson, “Climate-Change Summary.” Nature Bats Last,https://guymcpherson.com/climate-chaos/climate-change-summary-and-update

IPCC, 2021: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group Ito the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb,M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O.Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In Press.

Milman, Oliver, et al. “The Climate Disaster Is Here – This Is What the Future Looks Like.” TheGuardian, Guardian News and Media,https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2021/oct/14/climate-change-happening-now-stats-graphs-maps-cop26

USGCRP, 2018: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National ClimateAssessment, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M.Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program,Washington, DC, USA, 1515 pp. doi: 10.7930/NCA4.2018.

A. Al-Mamoori, A. Krishnamurthy, A. A. Rownaghi, F. Rezaei, Energy Technol. 2017, 5,834.https://doi.org/10.1002/ente.201600747

National Carbon Capture Center, 10 Year Report,https://www.nationalcarboncapturecenter.com/reports/