Lynne Stevens
“Pack your stuff folks, we are moving North,” said the Asian tiger mosquito to the Kissing bug (Triatoma), two blood-sucking, disease-toting insects who are migrating and extending their residence to North Carolina.
A warmer climate in the Smokies is disrupting forests and water ecosystems, that are already stressed with invasive carp and borer insects – which kill certain species of trees.
There is a wide body of peer-reviewed and scientific data compiled over decades of research and atmospheric measurements of greenhouse gas emissions. The evidence is so overwhelming that our future will inevitably involve mitigating an ever-warming planet and the climate events that come with it.
No such body of evidence exists supporting the non-existence of human-caused climate change. Skeptics of climate change no longer dispute the evidence, which dwarfs minor, rarely peer-reviewed papers questioning climate science. Peer review is a rigorous process, ensuring a scholastic paper meets high standards imposed by experts in the field.
Skeptics mostly question policy decisions, economics or promoted questionable financial impacts. These arguments have not translated into accepted scientific argument, but are often the subject of debate. Disagreements center on how realistic will impacts be and lowering cost expectations of damage.
Western North Carolina already knows the continuing expensive recovery from a major storm. Both sides of the state have become vulnerable and real estate insurance bills reflect claims.
In 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency issued a finding that greenhouse gasses – including methane and carbon – posed a threat to public welfare (The Endangerment Finding). This was a landmark and served as a legal basis for the EPA to control these gasses and create standards to regulate pollution from cars, smokestack industries and power plants.
The Clean Air Act brought about more-efficient, cleaner-burning cars that used less gas and big reductions in air-polluted industrial areas of cities where people lived. Cities used to be epicenters for childhood asthma and respiratory issues and it was thought that future generations would be less prone to environmental harm (ABC, NBC News).
In order to visit my grandmother twice a month, we had to go through Baltimore, Md. I remember my eyes stinging and all the black smoke belching from smokestacks. The picture is very different now.
Despite all the scientific evidence to the contrary, the “Endangerment Finding” was repealed this month – claiming over reach of federal authority and a detriment to the economy. Health issues and the costs of extreme weather events are not mentioned. The lawsuits are just beginning to take shape.
At one time, America cared a lot about its future generations and their well being. Actual evidence is overwhelming that climate change will worsen if unabated.
This leads me to ask: do we care about our grandchildren, their grandchildren and their great-grand children? What do we say to them as attaining a quality of life becomes more difficult in the reality of climate disruption.
A final question: is overturning decades of decarbonization an act of unkindness to future generations?
Lynne Stevens writes a bi-weekly column for The Graham Star. She can be reached via email, geminga@mailfence.com.