Why the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize is good for science

Slate’s Stephen Faris looks more closely at whether there are links between climate change and conflict , “Indications of changes in the earth’s future climate must be treated with the utmost seriousness,” said Ole Danbolt Mjøs, the Nobel Prize committee chairman. “There may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states.”

The New York Times looks at the different styles and substance between the two award winners , with the IPCC issuing reports and former Vice President Al Gore, delivers brimstone-laden warnings of an unfolding “planetary emergency.” says correspondent Andrew C. Revkin.

“It’s every scientist’s dream to win a Nobel Prize, so this is great for myself and the hundreds that worked on their reports over the years. It is perhaps a little deflating though - that one man and his PowerPoint show has as much influence as the decades of dedicated work by so many scientists,” says Piers Forster, of the University of Leeds School of Earth and Environment.

More than 2,500 researchers from more than 130 nations provide input into the IPCC reports. The IPCC was set up in 1988 to assess the issue of climate change. “This must be the most maligned institution on earth, in that it’s a very conservative scientific panel which chooses only the science which is rock-solid, and yet it’s often portrayed as an insane radical organization trying to overthrow civilization as we know it,” says environmentalist George Monbiot speaking to DemocracyNow’s Amy Goodman , “And it’s fought a long, hard battle for the science to be heard, and that battle is now being rewarded.”

In fact, as a New York Times editorial points out , “What the citation didn’t mention but needs to be said is that it shouldn’t have to be left to a private citizen âmdash; even one so well known as Mr. Gore âmdash; or a panel of scientists to raise that alarm or prove what is now clearly an undeniable link or champion solutions to a problem that endangers the entire planet.”

“That should be, and must be the job of governments. And governments âmdash; above all the Bush administration âmdash; have failed miserably...”

In February, the IPCC issued a report increasing the likelihood that human activity is the cause of a global-warming trend in recent decades at 90%, up from 66% in 2001.

“The Nobel committee’s recognition affirms that policymakers need to listen to the best available science and act upon it to avoid dangerous climate change,” says Peter Frumhoff, a lead author of the IPCC’s fourth assessment report on mitigation.

“The IPCC’s exceptionally sober appraisal of the threat posed by global warming makes clear how serious this issue is,” says Frumhoff, who is science and policy director at the Union of Concerned Scientists . “The Nobel peace prize committee is giving climate change the attention that it deserves and Congress and the administration should do the same.”

In attempt to combat climate change the European Union imposed greenhouse-gas caps in 2005 and is considering toughening them. Because of the large Republican minority in the Senate, Congress is not expected to pass any cap emission legislation until 2009. According to the Wall Street Journal , “While President Bush campaigned in 2000 on a pledge to seek limits on greenhouse gases, he dropped that after his election. President Clinton signed the Kyoto treaty for the U.S., but President Bush withdrew from participation.”

Instead “the administration is negotiating with major developing nations -- India, China and Indonesia -- about joining a successor treaty to Kyoto, whose caps expire in 2012. Also, prodded by the Supreme Court, the Environmental Protection Agency is weighing regulations to curb carbon-dioxide emissions.”

However, many corporations, including the Detroit automakers and energy utilities companies are joining the U.S. Climate Action Partnership which calls for a mandatory federal emissions limit in order to have some say on the final legislation that passes the hill, and avoid the situation of U.S. states such as California introducing their own legislation.

Asked Friday if the Nobel award will pressure the administration to adopt more of a more pro-active approach similar to the former Vice President’s campaign, White House spokesman Tony Fratto replied: “No.”

Related News Stories
Green Peace: Did Al Gore deserve a Nobel Prize for his work on global warming , Slate
2 Winners, and 2 Approaches to Spreading the Word on Climate , New York Times
What Gore’s Nobel Prize Means for Political Climate , Wall Street Journal
Al Gore, UN Climate Change Panel Share Nobel Peace Prize , Democracy Now!
A Prize for Mr. Gore and Science , New York Times Editorial

Related Physics Today News Pick
UN Climate Change Panel share Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore (updated)