Much at Stake for Agriculturally Dependent Communities in Climate Change
A strong majority of rural Nebraskans believe the climate is changing as a result of human activities. Most also believe climate change requires immediate action by government, that we need to change our lifestyles to reduce energy consumption, and that we have a personal responsibility to help reduce the impact of climate change.
Those findings are from the 2008 Rural Poll by the University of Nebraska Center for Applied Rural Innovation. They mirror recommendations of a Task Force of farm and ranch leaders convened by the Center to consider climate change in 2002. The Task Force concluded that climate change is occurring, is likely the result of human activity, and poses significant risks to agriculture. They recommended the federal government take steps to address it. (See the Climate Change Task Force Report on our website.)
The Task Force findings and Rural Poll results illustrate the cautious and responsible nature of rural people. We cannot say with 100 percent certainty that climate change is caused by human activity. But it would be reckless to wait to act until we know with absolute certainty and it is too late to do anything.
As we reported in our February newsletter, “an international panel of 2,500 scientists concluded it is ‘unequivocal’ that global warming is occurring, and it is more than 90 percent probable that it is caused by humans. A U.S. Academy of Sciences panel reached a similar conclusion and stated it ‘reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue.’”
Agriculture communities have much at stake in climate change. It leads to more unpredictable weather patterns and extreme weather events, making agriculture even riskier and the rural economy more volatile. It is fitting that rural people inform themselves and take a stand.
We also have a big stake in efforts to moderate climate change. Wind generation of electricity can reduce climate change, while creating good jobs for rural people and income opportunities for farmers and ranchers. If auto companies succeed in developing practical plug-in cars, the opportunities for wind generation grow even greater.
Efforts to address climate change create opportunities for farmers to be paid for capturing and holding more carbon in the soil by increasing organic matter levels. It will increase future demand for ethanol produced in ways that reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Development of alternative energy sources is doubly warranted in light of skyrocketing oil and gas prices. Even if we could find ways to more rapidly exploit the remaining oil supplies, prudence requires that we invest our limited resources in developing new energy sources that free us from dependence on expensive fossil fuels and help us avert the much greater and far-reaching costs of unchecked climate change.
Agree or disagree? Send your comments to Chuck Hassebrook, chuckh@cfra.org or 402.687.2103 x 1018.
Those findings are from the 2008 Rural Poll by the University of Nebraska Center for Applied Rural Innovation. They mirror recommendations of a Task Force of farm and ranch leaders convened by the Center to consider climate change in 2002. The Task Force concluded that climate change is occurring, is likely the result of human activity, and poses significant risks to agriculture. They recommended the federal government take steps to address it. (See the Climate Change Task Force Report on our website.)
The Task Force findings and Rural Poll results illustrate the cautious and responsible nature of rural people. We cannot say with 100 percent certainty that climate change is caused by human activity. But it would be reckless to wait to act until we know with absolute certainty and it is too late to do anything.
As we reported in our February newsletter, “an international panel of 2,500 scientists concluded it is ‘unequivocal’ that global warming is occurring, and it is more than 90 percent probable that it is caused by humans. A U.S. Academy of Sciences panel reached a similar conclusion and stated it ‘reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue.’”
Agriculture communities have much at stake in climate change. It leads to more unpredictable weather patterns and extreme weather events, making agriculture even riskier and the rural economy more volatile. It is fitting that rural people inform themselves and take a stand.
We also have a big stake in efforts to moderate climate change. Wind generation of electricity can reduce climate change, while creating good jobs for rural people and income opportunities for farmers and ranchers. If auto companies succeed in developing practical plug-in cars, the opportunities for wind generation grow even greater.
Efforts to address climate change create opportunities for farmers to be paid for capturing and holding more carbon in the soil by increasing organic matter levels. It will increase future demand for ethanol produced in ways that reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Development of alternative energy sources is doubly warranted in light of skyrocketing oil and gas prices. Even if we could find ways to more rapidly exploit the remaining oil supplies, prudence requires that we invest our limited resources in developing new energy sources that free us from dependence on expensive fossil fuels and help us avert the much greater and far-reaching costs of unchecked climate change.
Agree or disagree? Send your comments to Chuck Hassebrook, chuckh@cfra.org or 402.687.2103 x 1018.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
We cannot say with
Why do you say this? What do you think it might be caused by instead
and what scientific work can you point to to back up these other possible
causes? If you can even find such "science" I suggest looking to see who
is paying their bills.
Good Point
I read right over that line in the article, but you are right.
It is just like Joe Biden said in the VP debate. Sarah Palin said climate change was real, but claimed "we couldn't say for sure what was causing it." Biden knocked her down with his reply, "if we can't say for certain what is causing climate change, then how will we know what to do to stop it."
I agree it is reckless to wait even as long as we already have to act, but just like Biden asked Palin, how do you know your proposed solutions are the right ones if you think we don't know yet what is causing the problem?
Don't get me wrong, I think climate change is very real and I think it is human-caused. I just think you have a non-sequitur going on here by claiming on one hand that we don't know for certain what the cause is and claiming on the other that you know what to do to fix it.
Dumb Point
I'm glad you guys aren't my auto mechanic. I guess if we don't know for certain why the car doesn't seem to be running quite right we start changing parts and hope it starts running better before we run out of money. Biden looked dumb saying that to Palin. Duh, that's the point. If you don't know for certain whats causing it then maybe we ought to find out before we cause hardship on people and communities.
And there are other possibilities if you care to look for them. Sun cycles can cause weather changes. The long range effects of a gravitational field of a large unknown body in space could cause the earth to heat up as it passed by off in the distance. There are other possibilities. Before I am ready to jump on the climate change bandwagon someone needs to explain where all the SUVs were all the other times in earth's past that the climate changed radically. They must have gotten buried in the cataclysms they brought on themselves long ages ago. The earth has had previous experiences with climate change. We need to find out why.
A lot of the hype about climate change is coming from those that have a lot to gain by pushing it. Most people are not very smart but most people are clever and resourceful. If you understand that you'll understand a lot of things that come out of our government.
Not so Dumb Point
It's not dumb to insist something be done about global warming immediately, regardless of what's causing it. Remember the dust bowl storms? They didn't just affect the Midwest, they affected the entire country. We were warned that the agriculatural practices we were using at the time we going to cause the storms, but we ignored them, and paid a very high price. Those storms ushered in the depression. You cannot practice poor agricultural methods (such as mega-farming) and continuously dump vile and poisonous gases, solids and other wastes, chemicals and drugs into the environment (including our waters, the earth and the air) on a constant basis and at a high volume and expect nothing to happen. Talk about Duh.
Also, the reason for the "can't say 100% that is it caused by man" is most probably because nothing is 100%. In other words, there may be other contributing factors, but we would easily weather those (pun intended) if it were not for the toxins that man is constantly spewing out.
Climate Change
The problem stems from the language of the article. In all scientific discourse, the use of language that gives total certainty simply doesn't happen. What should have been said is that the evidence clearly demonstrates that human activity is significantly contributing to climate change and global warming.
Second there is a difference between weather and climate cycles which can vary in length and which occur at intervals, and global warming. No one disputes that climate has varied in the past and that there will be intervals of cooling, warming, droughts, and floods. What "all" refereed research has confirmed over the past decade is that unprecedented levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gases from human sources has a specific influence on these cycles (they mostly amplify them) and on the overall mean temperature.
In general, for politicians to ignore this phenomenon and make political hay out of reinforcing misinformation is troubling and sad. Ignoring climate change and following the status quo will mean that weather will become increasingly erratic and expensive. In short, the economic liability for inaction may make the current financial crisis look like a "raindrop" in the bucket.
Of all sectors, farmers and rural residents, should be at the forefront of leadership to champion stewardship of the planet, and resilience for agriculture in the face of global warming.
Climate Change -author responds
The first writer asked why I wrote that we cannot be 100 percent certain that climate change is caused by human activity. My answer is - I wrote that because it is true and it needs to be acknowledged to have an honest debate on this issue. The leading scientists say we are 90 percent certain. If we are 90 percent certain that continuing a certain course of action will lead to calamity, that should be more than enough evidence to cause us to take reasonable steps to avert it. Yet often in the public discourse, any uncertainty over the cause of climate change is used as a reason to do nothing. That is a mistake, because if we wait until we are 100 percent certain that climate change is caused by humans, it will be too late to do anything to prevent calamity.
Post new comment