"We're Not Scaremongering - This Is Really Happening"

I wrote my substantial paper (law school graduation requirement) on why the U.S. government should aggressively support technological advancement to combat climate change. Short answer: market failures; political viability; paving the way for a carbon tax or cap-and-trade policy. Climate change is one of those things (unlike, say, nuclear power) about which the more you know, the more scared you should be. Here are excerpts from the beginning and the end of my paper (footnotes omitted, links added):

Climate change is a monumental and dire challenge, arguably the greatest collective action problem that humanity has ever faced. Although there is no consensus on exactly what we must do to “achieve... stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system,” it is unambiguous that greenhouse gas emissions must be stabilized in the medium term and then eventually eliminated. The consequences of business as usual range from severe to catastrophic. If nothing is done to address climate change, climate models predict a rise in average global temperature by two to three degrees Celsius within the next half-century or so, some of which is already underway due to the climate system’s inherently delayed responsiveness. Such an increase would gravely impact the quality of life across the globe, particularly in low-lying coastal areas that are vulnerable to rising sea levels and poor regions that lack the resources to adequately adapt to climatic threats.

The following are some of the more salient and likely effects of global warming. Sea levels will rise due to the melting of glaciers and the expanding volume of water as it warms. This will increase the risk of flooding and permanently displace millions of people, as well as accelerate the rate of warming due to the substantially lower albedo of water compared to ice. The water cycle will intensify because the air’s capacity to hold water increases exponentially with temperature. This will exacerbate the rainy and dry seasons, resulting in more floods and droughts, wreaking havoc on crop yields and water supplies. The oceans will acidify as a direct result of rising carbon dioxide levels, which will have drastic effects on marine ecosystems such as coral reefs and already imperiled fish populations. Terrestrial ecosystems will be disturbed as well, causing the extinction of some 15 to 40 percent of all species, from polar bears to undiscovered Amazonian insects. Storms will pose a more serious and less predictable threat: sudden shifts in regional weather patterns, such as the monsoons and El Niño, will become more frequent, and the intensity of tropical cyclones will increase. Permafrost will melt, releasing methane into the atmosphere and forcing people to abandon their homes. Warmer temperatures will extend the range of tropical, vector-borne diseases such as malaria and dengue fever. In warm regions, there will be more cases of heat-related illness and death, and the cold will claim more victims in its domain. In addition to these impacts, there are irreversible and catastrophic risks such as the collapse of one or both ice sheets and the disruption of North Atlantic thermohaline circulation. And these are just the physical consequences. The social and political consequences are also staggering. For countries that can afford to, adaptive responses such as the erection of sea walls and the digging of dikes will divert substantial funds from other productive uses. And when adaptation is impossible or fails, the human costs will be immense. Illness, malnutrition, death, and displacement will take their toll on governments and organizations across the world. Refugees and other desperate people will create conflict and threaten governmental and regional stability. Some governments will respond with repressive measures, risking further escalation.

...

Anthropogenic climate change is upon us, proceeding on a geological scale but in the blink of a geological eye. If the world waits until disaster strikes to marshal its ingenuity, more calamity will inexorably follow. As the world’s largest economy and emitter of greenhouse gases, the United States should be at the vanguard of an international effort to forestall a global tragedy of the commons; instead we are doing tragically little. We can begin to take our place by aggressively supporting the development of the technologies that will be necessary for clean development across the globe. This is a politically realistic approach that will prepare our economy and our mentality for the strict decarbonization that must soon commence. Otherwise, Elizabeth Kolbert’s warning will be a prophecy: “It may seem impossible to imagine that a technologically advanced society could choose, in essence, to destroy itself, but that is what we are now in the process of doing.”