PHYS- Chem - Biol - Enviro VCE Conferences Feb 2011

1. PHYS-Chem-Biol-EnviroVCE Conferences Feb 2011 • Parts of this ppt were given by Keith Burrows at the above teacher conferences. • Actual presentations at conference included parts of others as well. • The main purpose of this ppt is to encourage teachers to get involved in spreading the word about the need for urgent action to mitigate CO2 emissions – in their classes AND in the wider community. See slides at end for ways to get involved

2. Keith Burrows Australian Institute of Physics Education Committee (Vic)

3. YES ! In fact they should have a key role: • They understand the science • They are good communicators

4. Would you get on this aeroplane if 1 out of 10 engineers found dangerous cracks in the wings?

5. How about if 9 out of 10 engineers said there were dangerous cracks in the wings and 1 said they didn’t matter?

6. That’s about the proportion of scientists saying climate change is dangerous!

7. That’s about the proportion of scientists saying climate change is dangerous! “This image was digitally altered!” Actually it is more like over 95%

8. Since IPCC 2007: Sea level rise worse than we thought “The bad news is that there is a growing consensus that the IPCC estimates are wildly optimistic.” “They found that ice loss is increasing fast. Greenland is now losing about 300 gigatonnes of ice per year, enough to raise sea level by 0.83 mm. Antarctica is losing about 200 gigatonnes per year, almost all of it from West Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula, raising levels by 0.55 mm.” (0.83 + 0.55 = 1.4 mm/yr, i.e. >1.2 metres by 2100 ) AT CURRENT RATES!

9. “Large parts of the West Antarctic ice sheet are vulnerable to collapse which would add 3 metres to global sea levels”

10. Still later news: East Antarctica is also melting faster than we thought. Figure 14: Observed Antarctic Warming Trend (°C/decade) from 1957-2006 Steig, E. J. et al., Warming of the Antarctic ice-sheet surface since the 1957 International Geophysical Year. Nature 457, (2009)

11. “Paul Blanchon's team at the National Autonomous University of Mexico in Cancun has been studying 121,000-year-old coral reefs in the Yucatan Peninsula, formed during the last interglacial period when sea level peaked at around 6 metres higher than today. His findings suggest that at one point the sea rose 3 metres within 50 to 100 years.”

15. Why Science Teachers? • "I'm frustrated, as are many of my colleagues, that 30 years after the US National Academy of Sciences issued a strong warning on CO2 warming, the full urgency of this problem hasn't dawned on politicians and the general public." • Stefan Rahmstorf, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Germany, at the International Scientific Congress on Climate Change, Copenhagen 10-12 March 2009.

17. This issue of Physics World can be downloaded free from www.physicsworld.com

18. “The small coterie of individuals who deny humanity’s influence on climate will try to use any perceived flaw in the evidence to discredit the entire picture. So how can researchers honestly describe the uncertainty in their work without it being misconstrued?”

19. “Some of the researchers’ online discussion reflected a pervasive climate of suspicion — their sense that any findings they released to the public could and would be distorted by sceptics.?”

20. “The climate-research community would thus do well to use a diverse set of voices, from different backgrounds, when communicating with policy-makers and the public.”

21. Why Science Teachers? Australia's Chief Scientist, Professor Penny Sackett: "I think that we're seeing more and more a confusion between a political debate, … and the discussion of the science. I feel that these two things are being confused and it worries me" ”ABCTV 7.30 Report (Feb 10)

22. Why Science Teachers? "With the uneasy consensus on climate change fostered by Kevin Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull having been dashed, a lot of voters are taking refuge with whatever their side of politics is saying.” ''Because the science is so inaccessible, voters are generally forced into treating the climate change issue ideologically. For a lot of them, they don't feel that they have any choice,'' said Nielsen's research director, John Stirton,

23. Why Science Teachers? • Polls are going the WRONG WAY! CC as 1, 2 or 3: Jan 2010 – 16% Oct 2010 – 11% Jan 2011 – 10%

24. Why Science Teachers? • Climate change is the most significant threat human civilization has ever faced. • In order to appreciate the magnitude of the problem, it must be seen through the lens of science. • A huge public education campaign is needed. • (as distinct from the mis-education campaign prevalent in many parts of the media)

25. Why Us? • “These stark conclusions about the threat posed by global climate change and implications for fossil fuel use are not yet appreciated by essential governing bodies … In our view, there is an acute need for science to inform society about the costs of failure to address global warming, because of a fundamental difference between the threat posed by climate change and most prior global threats.” • The conclusion from: Dangerous human-made interference with climate: a GISS modelE studyJ Hansen et al. Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 7, 2287–2312, 2007 Next slides… 1, 2

26. Why Us? 1) “...acute need for science to inform society...” • We are asking everyone - EVERYONE ON EARTH - to change the way they do things… • …on the basis of a scientific discussion without OBVIOUS evidence. (And some public dispute about it.) • Never before has the actual science been so important in the debate… • People need good reasons to change their behaviour – not just scientists telling them to.

27. Why Us? 2) “...fundamental difference ... most prior global threats” • Unique in human history… • Threat of war could be seen – (even if often ignored until too late). • Once climate change is obvious it will be MUCH TOO LATE... • and the consequences catastrophic. • And again, it is only understandable in scientific terms.

28. Why Us? • Dealing with climate change will require massive adjustments to the way we do things. • Most of these adjustments are based on science, so... • people need to understand at least some basic scientific concepts:

29. Why Us? • basic scientific concepts: • Energy, and its importance in our world • EM radiation & its role in the Earth’s energy balance • Scientific method – notably the idea of ‘uncertainty’

30. Why Us? • Climate scientists are generally: • Too busy doing their science. • Not necessarily good at communicating with the lay public. • Trying to talk to politicians.

31. Why Us? • Science teachers are one of the few groups the only group in the community who are: • Reasonably aware of the climate science. • Numerous enough • Able to communicate it to a general audience • …used to dealing with ‘left field’ questions

32. Why Us? If we don’t do it, who else will?

33. Here’s one group who will ...

34. Here’s one answer: World’s best! ?@#$%^&*

35. Ian Plimer... that noted climate expert...

36. It has sold very well! 80,000+ copies

37. Plimer says “the climate has always changed” – we just have to get used to it. • “If we humans, in a fit of ego, think we can change these normal planetary processes, then we need stronger medication.”

38. How can he, a scientist, say that? • Surely he knows that we have increased the CO2 (greenhouse gas) in the atmosphere by over 35% • and that CO2 absorbs IR radiation • and that there is a strong correlation between the CO2 and the temperature...

39. How can he, a scientist, say that? 2010

40. And that other noted climate expert... “UN is using the global warming scare in order to impose world government”

41. Monckton’s temperature graph

42. Andrew Bolt in the Herald Sun constantly comes up with trivia which he thinks (?) is important. All he needs do is create confusion. The fact that most of what he says is drivel is irrelevant.

43. “Global temperatures last month [Jan 2011] were at the long term average, or just below (thanks to the La Nina)” Herald-Sun 5 Feb 2011

44. But what he didn’t mention: • NOT ‘long term average’ only 1981-2010 (~ +0.4oC long term) • Exceptional La Niña should give exceptional low temp! • This was a dramatic dip from record highs. • This dip well above previous dips. • Clear upward long term trend.

45. AND: • Exceptional La Niña due to exceptionally warm Australian waters December 2010

46. AND:

47. Why US? • Other groups talking about climate change: ‘Activists’ – often not their real agenda.

49. So why science teachers? • There is a huge lack of knowledge out there! • Only with an understanding of the basic science will the community make the right decisions about these extremely important matters: • the link between CO2 emissions and CC • energy and greenhouse emissions • ways to seriously reduce CO2 emissions

50. So why science teachers? • Some progress!