(From a lecture recording)
Is the CO2 global warming theory correct?
As another basis for promoting nuclear energy, it is often said, "Nuclear power does not emit carbon dioxide, CO2, which is a cause of global warming". However, as described earlier, nuclear power definitely does not save on petroleum. Consequently, one cannot say, "Nuclear power does not emit CO2".
In fact, especially recently, various people are saying, "The CO2 global warming theory is incorrect". If it is true that the CO2 global warming theory is incorrect, it is a major problem. It could become a historical scandal.
If the CO2 global warming theory is truly mistaken, it would mean the energy measures of the various countries are fundamentally incorrect. Further, it would mean the numerous international meetings with the main theme of CO2 reduction are irrelevant. In other words, apart from future shortages and depletion of resources, if it is true that CO2 is not a cause of global warming, then global warming would not occur even if we use petroleum fuels such as oil, coal, or natural gas as much as we desire.
To be honest, in fact, several decades ago, I also learned about the opinion, "The CO2 warming theory is incorrect", and the thought had crossed my mind, "Perhaps, it is true".
Even so, throughout the world after all, since it has been said, "CO2 is causing global warming", until now, I had thought that the CO2 warming theory was probably correct.
Recently, several books have been published saying, "The CO2 warming theory is incorrect". Therefore, I read these books, gathered information on the Internet, and considered the matter anew.
The result is that I learned there are a few facts that cannot be overlooked regarding this matter. What I will write now is only a summary of the points that are the easiest to understand for us from those facts. For details, I hope you will read relevant books.
How did the theory of CO2 warming spread?
Until the first half of the 1980s, the established theory of the academic society was, "The earth is cooling". However, in 1988, Dr. James E. Hansen, a researcher at NASA in the U.S., gave the following testimony at a public hearing in the U.S. Senate, and that was effectively the beginning of the "CO2 global warming theory".
Hansen made the following statements. “(2) the global warming is now large enough that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause an effect relationship to the greenhouse effect, and (3) in our computer climate simulations the greenhouse effect is already large enough to begin to effect the probability of extreme events such as summer heat waves.” “So, with 99% confidence we can state that the warming during this time period is a real warming trend.” But, this assertion was considered as simply one hypothesis and not given much attention by scientists and others in the beginning.
France leaped at this hypothesis. At that time, France was promoting nuclear power as a national policy. But, the Three Mile Island nuclear accident, and then the Chernobyl nuclear accident occurred, and nuclear power was severely criticized by the public. As a result, the situation was that it became difficult to continue as is with nuclear power. At that point, the CO2 warming theory was announced.
The government of France and electric power companies united to mount a large-scale campaign and put forth the nation’s efforts to promote strongly nuclear power. They said, "Nuclear power does not emit CO2. (I have repeatedly mentioned that the truth is nuclear power definitely does not save on petroleum, and it cannot be said that CO2 is not emitted, ...). Consequently, the earth will not be warmed. Therefore, nuclear power is the most desirable for protecting the environment of the earth". Why do they want to promote nuclear power? As I described earlier, it is because enormous interests are involved.
This spread to the countries of Europe and the U.S. With Germany centrally, it developed into an international political issue. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) of the United Nations played a central role.
This movement spread throughout the world, and not only in Europe and the U.S. Japan was not an exception. The Environment Agency in Japan of that time had settled to some extent the issue of pollution by various domestic companies, and the budget for the Environment Agency was about to be drastically reduced. Further, it is said that the significance of existence of the Environment Agency was in question.
At that point, the theory of CO2 warming was passed along from the Western countries. I do not know to what extent it is true, but there is a story that a person in the upper levels of the Environment Agency of that time said, "We can do it with this. The Environment Agency can continue from now with this CO2 warming theory". This story sounds likely to have happened.
In any case, it can be inferred that this CO2 warming theory was thought of highly throughout the world based on similar motives. Regarding this situation, a person related to the present Ministry of the Environment said that in the beginning, the CO2 warming theory was just one hypothesis and no more than that, but before anyone realized it, it had become considered as a fact.
Until that time, the theory of the earth cooling had been the established theory. It seems that many people, not only scientists, were puzzled when suddenly, it was said the earth is warming. Even now, I remember that I also had felt something was wrong at that time.
Nevertheless, it is a fact that it was possible to think the following theory was reasonable. "Ever since the Industrial Revolution, we have come to consume large quantities of coal, oil and other petroleum fuels. For that reason, every year, CO2, which has a heat retention effect, has continued to increase, and global warming is advancing as a result".
Along with that explanation, looking at the “graph of recorded changes in CO2 concentration and changes in temperature”, indeed, the temperature appeared to have increased drastically in the latter half of the twentieth century. In addition, the temperature rise appeared to correspond with the increase in CO2 concentration, so many people including scientists came to accept the CO2 warming theory. At present, it has reached the point where the CO2 warming theory has become nearly an established theory.
Inspect the CO2 global warming theory
Recently, in particular, people have emerged who clearly question the CO2 warming theory that was considered an established theory and that many people had completely believed. I also read books and information written by these people. Here, I will only explain a few facts from these books that are easy for anyone to understand.
1. Climate scientist, Dr. C. D. Keeling, measured CO2 concentrations in Hawaii and the Antarctic over 30 years and is one of the people who provided evidence for the CO2 global warming theory. However, he later presented facts to overturn the CO2 global warming theory.
Over many years, he graphed the relationship between temperature changes and CO2 concentration changes. Looking at this overall and roughly, at first sight, it appears that changes in temperature and changes in CO2 concentration correspond well, and appears to support the CO2 warming theory.
However, looking at the graph in detail, one can understand clearly, "temperature changes occur first, and afterwards, the CO2 concentration changes". In fact, I also realized this 4 to 5 years ago and thought something was odd.
In short, speaking from the hard-and-fast rule of this world, "Everything first has a cause and the cause brings about the result", this means, “changes in temperature bring about changes in CO2 concentration”.
In summary, according to Keeling's graph, "First, the temperature rises, and as a result, the CO2 concentration increases." From this, we can say that clearly, “The increase in CO2 concentration did not bring about the rise in temperature”.
"First, the temperature rises, and as a result, the CO2 concentration increases." The following explanation can be made regarding this statement.
By an increase in the amount of incoming sunlight, (for example, by the sun becoming active, or from other causes), first, the temperature increases. As a result, the temperature of seawater increases, and the CO2 in the seawater evaporates. Then, the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere increases.
Indeed, at the present stage, there is no mistake that this is also a hypothesis. However, isn't it strongly persuasive if you temporarily put aside the fixed notion, "the CO2 global warming theory is absolutely correct"?
2. CO2 emissions are increasing each year because industrial activities and daily life activities of humans are increasing each year. Despite this, globally in 1992 and 1993, the atmospheric CO2 concentration did not increase. It is thought the reason is because of the great volcanic eruption of Mt. Pinatuba in the Philippines in 1991. The sunlight was obstructed and the temperature decreased globally. In summary, "the CO2 concentration decreased because of the decrease in temperature".
3. El Nino is a phenomenon in which the ocean surface temperature rises near the equator of the Pacific Ocean. By examining the occurrence of El Nino and changes in CO2 concentration, it has been found that the CO2 concentration increases one year after the occurrence of El Nino. In short, the increase in ocean temperature is the cause of the increase in CO2 concentration.
4. In the 30 years from 1940 to 1970, CO2 emissions from human activities increased sharply. However, during that time, the average temperature of the Earth decreased.
If items 1 through 4 are true, they lead to the conclusion, "the CO2 concentration increases or decreases according to the rises and falls in the temperature". Ｔhe CO2 warming theory cannot explain these facts satisfactorily. Doesn't this mean that the truth is, "temperature is the cause and CO2 concentration is the result", and not "CO2 concentration is the cause and temperature is the effect"?
5. Let us consider this theoretically a bit. The CO2 in the atmosphere is approximately 0.04% at most. Further, the CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing 1 to 1.4 ppm annually. So, the increase is at most, 1.4 ppm. Averaging the past 100 years, the CO2 concentration is increasing 1 ppm per year.
1 ppm is a unit meaning one part in one million. So, taking an annual average, the CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing by only one part in one million. Let me explain this a little more clearly. If the atmosphere is one million parts, of that amount, 0.04%, or 400 parts are CO2. This amount is increasing by only one each year.
To make it clearer, let us take money for an example. The parent has one million yen, and the child only has 400 yen. Then, each year, the child's money increases by only one part of the one million the parent possesses. Nothing can be done with that.
Let us return to CO2. By calculating, if the CO2 is increasing annually by 1 ppm, it would appear that the result would be an increase in the average temperature of the earth of only 0.004℃. From this, it would be very difficult to explain, “CO2 emitted from human activities is the cause of global warming”.
There are central members of the IPCC of the United Nations, and many scholars from around the world share their data. Therefore, the IPCC data was considered to be reliable.
However, in November 2009, the email and communications of central IPPC researchers were disclosed. These hundreds and thousands of emails can be read on the Internet.
This disclosure incident is called Climategate, similar to Watergate. The name includes the meaning that this is a major scandal regarding the climate.
Until the present, the IPCC had asserted, "During the past 1000 years, with the exception of the latter half of the 20th century, the temperature has never become extremely high". In short, the Earth's temperature has become extremely high since the latter half of the 20th century. That was the basis for the CO2 global warming theory.
According to the IPCC, the temperature was low for the past 1000 years, but suddenly, the Earth's temperature rose after the Industrial Revolution. The reason is because the quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased from human activities since the Industrial Revolution. The temperatures from the past were examined and shown in a graph. Up to a certain point, this kind of graph was also presented in the annual reports.
In fact, from various research results, it was said that the temperature was very high during the Middle Ages. However, the IPCC asserted, "The temperature rose for the first time after the Industrial Revolution. Especially, since the latter half of the 20th century, the temperature has risen sharply". The graphs of the IPCC also showed the same information.
The IPCC had manipulated the data
An enormous quantity of email was disclosed and consequently, it was found that IPCC members had fabricated the temperature data. It is said that in email addressed to research colleagues, there were some that had the following content, "The trick to manipulate the warming period data of the Middle Ages has been completed". In addition, the person who wrote the email admitted to this fact.
So, according to the above information, it is not true, "In the past 1000 years, the temperature rose only in the 20th century", and it became clear that the data was manipulated.
That is not all. In addition, it was found that ocean surface temperatures for the Arctic Sea were also manipulated.
One more thing that became clear is that rather than manipulate, the way of taking the temperature data was very sloppy depending on the country. For example, thermometers were set about one meter away from buildings that received much sunlight. I do not think the temperature is measured in this way in Japan, but apparently, in the U.S. and other places, the measurement methods were rather inaccurate. Besides this, it has become clear that measurements such as ocean surface temperature measurements were fairly sloppy.
There is no point in discussing manipulated data, but in any case, this kind of sloppy data certainly cannot lead to correct conclusions. Therefore, it means that the IPCC report itself is completely unreliable.
Despite this, why was data falsified to deny the fact, "The temperature was high in the Middle Ages"? No doubt, there was a clear intention. In other words, it was probably necessary to make people throughout the world believe, "Increase in atmospheric CO2 is the cause of global warming". This means perhaps there were people or groups that would make a lot of profit, or maintain or gain power by doing so. I do not think anyone would do such a foolish thing if this were not the case, but what is the truth?
Is global warming occurring?
With just the explanation thus far, perhaps it can be said there are points in "the CO2 global warming theory" that are rather questionable. This is based not only the facts presented so far, but it is said there is additional evidence to support these facts. Next, we will question anew, "Is global warming occurring even if CO2 is not the cause"?
Regarding this, among the people who question the CO2 global warming theory, there are three ways of thinking at present.
The first idea is as follows. "The temperature is rising in the northern hemisphere, but in the southern hemisphere, the temperature is decreasing. Furthermore, it cannot be said that the temperature of the Earth overall is increasing. According to the results of measurements taken from satellites in outer space, the atmospheric temperature has not risen. From this kind of information, the Earth is not warming".
The second idea is the following. "Maybe CO2 is not the cause, but in any case, global warming is occurring as a result of human activities of some kind, for example, because of increases in methane and other global warming gases".
The third idea is as follows. "Speaking from the results of many measurements and what people actually feel, it is a fact that in recent years, the temperature of the Earth has increased. However, even if we say the temperature has risen, it is absolutely a result of natural phenomena. Therefore, it must be differentiated from warming resulting from human activities".
I myself feel that compared to the past, the temperature has risen significantly in the winters and summers. It might be taking a short cut, but from this, I have a feeling that the average temperature of the Earth overall is rising. However, to be honest, I strongly doubt the theory that CO2 is the cause.
In other words, at the present stage regarding this issue, perhaps it is not possible to clearly determine, "This is the truth". The Earth's climate is formed from the combination of various factors. Therefore, perhaps it can be said that clear conclusions still have not emerged regarding whether greenhouse gases including CO2 cause global warming. Therefore, at the present stage, it can neither be stated with absolute certainty that the CO2 global warming theory is mistaken nor correct. Perhaps it is too early to reach a conclusion.
In any case, at present, and for our human society from now, the issue of whether the CO2 global warming theory is correct or not is in a sense a major issue comparable to “the Ptolemaic system (the earth is the center of the universe) versus the Copernican system (the earth and other planets move around the sun)”. This is because from now in Japan and throughout the world, whether fundamental policies for energy including the nuclear power issue, and whether all activities of human society run correctly, depend on that result.
Considering the importance of this issue, no matter which is the truth, I think that from now, it is absolutely necessary for us to clearly ascertain the truth by examining the facts thoroughly anew.
(End of Addendum)