Weighing Environmental Risks
David Gutzler, seminar leader
This seminar examined the ways in which society evaluates environmental problems. We used global warming as our principal example of an environmental problem, We covered the fundamental physical science that leads to concern over increasing greenhouse gases and the potential effects of these increases on the climate system. Special attention was paid to aspects of environmental science that are inherently uncertain and bear on political decisions: we discussed probabilistic forecasts, the degree of certainty required for governments to act on a problem, the notion of "winners" and "losers" when environmental problems arise, the question of who should pay for remediation efforts, the different value systems applied to the environment by various parties (urban residents, businesses, agricultural interests, etc.) and the structure of international treaties to deal with global warming and ozone depletion. We also spent some time on several other environmental issues in the news: stratospheric ozone depletion and the new EPA proposal for stricter limits on arsenic in drinking water.
We hoped to accomplish two broad goals. First, global warming itself is a profoundly important and controversial topic. During our seminar a new National Assessment of Global Warming was released to the public, and the potential importance of global warming as a campaign issue in the 2000 presidential election process made this discussion timely. Second, we hoped to use global warming as a general example of how scientists and the public interact, and how today’s middle and high school students need to become familiar with the scientific process so that they can make informed judgments about environmental issues of importance to all citizens in the 21st Century.
For their curriculum units the seminar fellows were encouraged to select any environmental problem or controversy and apply the general concepts discussed by the group. The topics chosen include one unit on global warming, two units related to radioactivity (one on the general topic of radioactivity, and one specifically devoted to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant for disposal of low-level waste), a unit on the possible environmental causes and health effects of asthma, and a unit on global overpopulation. As in every seminar, these curriculum units were designed for a wide variety of middle and high school grade levels and subjects. I was extremely pleased with the group discussions. Fellows brought their own perspectives and experience to bear on the issues, and their units reflect this broad spectrum of views.
Notes on the Reading List:
Collins and Pinch
: These British social scientists have written a provocative treatise on how real-world science is conducted. Their thesis is that cutting-edge scientific experiments often have no clear-cut result that would allow scientists to definitively confirm or reject a hypothesis. Therefore subjectivity and conventional wisdom inevitably play a larger role in science than many scientists are willing to admit. Although global warming is not explicitly mentioned in the book, I think their thesis has some merit and it helps to explain how eminent climate scientists can reach different conclusions about the severity of expected global warming. Collins and Pinch would say that (1) such disagreements are part of the real-world scientific method at work, and (2) the public needs to understand that such disagreements do not necessarily mean that the science is inconclusive or the scientists involved are dishonest. In seminar I will emphasize the Introduction, Conclusion, and Chapter 2.Easterbrook: This volume presents a controversial alternative to the assumptions underlying much current discussion of environmental problems. Easterbrook (a non-scientist) argues that nature is not a fragile entity in danger of human-caused disaster; instead, people tend to overestimate their power to disrupt the 'green fortress' and focus on the wrong problems. From this perspective global warming fears are overblown. You don't need to all 700+ pages; read Parts I and III, outlining Easterbrook's general attitude, then (if you want) skip to the chapters 16 and 17. Compare Easterbrook’s chapter 17 to Houghton's chapter 12.
Houghton: The basic global warming science reference. For a decade Sir John Houghton has been the principal editor of compendia on the status of global warming science for the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Sir John has taken these large volumes and written this smaller summary volume for a general audience. In this book you'll learn the basics of climate science and the current 'consensus' view of how severe and rapid the climate science community generally believes 21st Century climate change will be.
Paulos: This delightful volume is one of several written by a mathematics professor, who relates basic math and statistics principles to stories in every section of a daily newspaper using eminently readable prose. A magnificent math de-mystifier! It’s an easy read and I’ll refer to it for discussion of how scientists convey uncertainty to the public, and how the non-technical public needs to be ‘numerate’ as well as ‘literate’. In particular, Paulos’ description of chaos theory ("Recession Forecast if …") nicely complements points made by Houghton and Easterbrook.
UCAR handouts: The Office of Global Programs of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has prepared short brochures for the public describing
climate change and ozone depletion. The climate change brochure comes with a packet of
instructional goodies. 