Man-made climate change, often referred to as anthropogenic climate change, is the result of human activities that have significantly altered the Earth's atmosphere and climate system. This phenomenon is supported by overwhelming scientific consensus and a vast body of evidence from multiple disciplines, including atmospheric science, oceanography, and ecology. Here are the key reasons why man-made climate change is considered real:

1. Increased Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The primary driver of anthropogenic climate change is the increased concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs), particularly carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane (CH₄), and nitrous oxide (N₂O), in the atmosphere. Since the Industrial Revolution, human activities such as burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas), deforestation, and agricultural practices have significantly increased the levels of these gases (IPCC, 2021). CO₂ levels, for example, have risen from approximately 280 ppm (parts per million) in pre-industrial times to over 400 ppm as of recent measurements (Le Quéré et al., 2018).

2. Correlation with Fossil Fuel Use: The rise in atmospheric GHGs closely correlates with the increase in fossil fuel consumption since the 19th century. Fossil fuel combustion releases large quantities of CO₂ and other pollutants, which trap heat in the Earth's atmosphere. This has been substantiated by studies showing that specific isotopic ratios of carbon in the atmosphere show a clear shift towards the ratios characteristic of fossil fuels, providing strong evidence of their contribution. (Lipp et al., 2009).

3. Global Temperature Rise: The Earth's average surface temperature has risen by about 1.2°C since the late 19th century, a trend that aligns with the increase in GHG concentrations (NASA, 2023). The warming of the planet is consistent with predictions made by climate models that incorporate both natural and human influences. While natural factors (such as volcanic eruptions and solar variability) also influence climate, the observed warming can only be fully explained by considering human-induced GHG emissions (IPCC, 2021).

4. Ocean Warming and Acidification: The world's oceans have absorbed much of the excess heat from global warming, leading to rising sea surface temperatures and ocean acidification. Ocean acidification, caused by increased CO₂ absorption, has been linked to the decline of marine life, including coral reefs (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007). These changes are consistent with the patterns expected from anthropogenic CO₂ emissions.

5. Melting Ice and Rising Sea Levels: Observations show that glaciers and polar ice caps are melting at an accelerated rate, contributing to rising sea levels (Church et al., 2013). The melting of Arctic sea ice and the Greenland ice sheet, along with thermal expansion of seawater, are major factors driving the rise in global sea levels. These trends are aligned with climate models that predict the impacts of warming driven by human activities.

6. Scientific Consensus: The overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree that climate change is happening and that human activities are a major contributing factor. Reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), based on the review of thousands of peer-reviewed studies, consistently find that human activities are the dominant cause of observed global warming (IPCC, 2021). Multiple independent lines of evidence, including the study of ice cores, tree rings, and climate models, reinforce the conclusion that human activities have a significant impact on global temperatures.

7. Observed Changes in Weather Patterns: Along with rising temperatures, there is an observed increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, including heatwaves, hurricanes, droughts, and heavy rainfall. These changes are consistent with predictions of climate models that show how human-induced warming influences weather patterns (Coumou & Rahmstorf, 2012).

 

References:

• Church, J. A., et al. (2013). Sea level change. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.  https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/
• Coumou, D., & Rahmstorf, S. (2012). A decade of weather extremes. Nature Climate Change, 2(7), 491–496.  https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate1452
• Hoegh-Guldberg, O., et al. (2007). Coral reefs under rapid climate change and ocean acidification. Science, 318(5857), 1737-1742.  https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1152509
• IPCC. (2021). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.  https://www.unep.org/resources/report/climate-change-2021-physical-science-basis-working-group-i-contribution-sixth
• Lipp, J. A., et al. (2009). Attribution of recent atmospheric CO2 increases to fossil fuel combustion. Nature Geoscience, 2(5), 253–256.  https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide
• Le Quéré, C., et al. (2018). Global carbon budget 2018. Earth System Science Data, 10, 2141–2194.  https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/10/2141/2018/
• NASA. (2023). Global Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet. NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.  https://climate.nasa.gov/  /

 

 

 

In conclusion, man-made climate change is real and driven by human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. This conclusion is supported by decades of scientific research, data, and analysis from various disciplines. The impacts of climate change are already being observed globally, and the scientific community agrees on the urgent need for mitigation and adaptation strategies to address the challenges posed by this phenomenon.

 

 

Addressing man-made climate change requires immediate and sustained action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate its impacts. This includes transitioning to renewable energy sources, improving energy efficiency, protecting and restoring ecosystems, and adopting sustainable practices. Global cooperation is essential, as the effects of climate change are felt worldwide, transcending borders and affecting every aspect of society. Governments, businesses, and individuals must work together to implement policies and solutions that reduce our carbon footprint and protect the planet for future generations. The longer we delay, the more difficult and costly the solutions will become.

 

 

 

Linking back to cars forum, what type of vehicle has vastly improved energy efficiency and available for mass adoption today? battery electric vehicles.

 

But due to risk of misunderstanding on this forum, here are a few declarations:

- This is a thread on climate change, so that this type of discussions would not take over other threads.

- I have zero interest in forcing people to make any changes and I have zero power to do so.

- I do not wish to push any product or services. I do not have any financial interest in this area.

- I have zero interest in your opinion, just as I have not stated my opinions on man-made climate change. Unless you have published peer-reviewed papers on climate change.

- But very welcome your opinions on climate related government policy

- I do not wish to get everyone driving BEV, it is simply not suitable for 100% of people right now. As a reminder, there's 10 years to go for 2035 ZEV-only new vehicle sales and many more years of ICE vehicle on the road after that.

 

 

32 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

- But very welcome your opinions on climate related government policy

I'm interpreting this to mean policies of any Government since this is a global issue.

 

The new Trump led US Government has openly declared that they will withdraw from the Paris Agreement, roll back the Biden climate initiatives and expand fossil fuel exploration (the phrase "drill, baby, drill" has been used frequently).

 

Some of these changes have already been actioned on the very first day of the new administration by Executive Orders.

 

Be interested to hear peoples opinion on this policy and what it means for the global climate 'consensus' now that one of the biggest emitters of GHGs has pulled the plug on climate change actions.

Excellent point, the policy change is indeed a very clear signal where Trump administration stands. 

 

The stance of politician will not change the overwhelming scentific consensus. It will change general public's view of this topic and  policies being used. There is a huge difference between the two. 

Surely a subject for the General Automotive Chat section or some other section maybe.  It is not just about BEV,s is it,? 

1 hour ago, wyx087 said:

The stance of politician will not change the overwhelming scentific consensus. It will change general public's view of this topic and  policies being used.

With the second largest GHG emitting country Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research saying it's a scam I suspect it will be much harder to convince Joe and Julia Public in any country to make their, however small, contribution to reducing GHG emissions.

 

That's the clear and present danger of the new US policy for us all.

1 minute ago, PetrolDave said:

With the second largest GHG emitting country Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research saying it's a scam I suspect it will be much harder to convince Joe and Julia Public in any country to make their, however small, contribution to reducing GHG emissions.

 

That's the clear and present danger of the new US policy for us all.

I don't think a country can say anything. The current government (or administration) of USA are politicising climate change in order to justify their oil policy (nothing new here). 

 

No doubt this govnment stance will affect public perception. But none of it changes the what is really happening in the atmosphere. 

 

I totally agree on your last statement on all aspects. But before other comment's, let's only focus on climate change policies here. 

5 hours ago, wyx087 said:

 

Addressing man-made climate change requires immediate and sustained action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate its impacts.

 

 

Playing devils advocate...

 

Why does it require immediate and sustained action...   to mitigate its impacts?

 

The converse (again playing devils advocate) is that the world could simply adapt to the new climate.

 

Please note that I am asking not because I disagree with you but to extract from you your thoughts as to why we have to act and not simply let the word adapt as it has done over millions and billions of years?.  The world could simply be left to move on and change in whatever way that might be - be that rising sea levels, extinction of species and even humankind - it'll happen eventually anyway on a stellar basis?

Edited 21 January21 Jan by skomaz

1 minute ago, skomaz said:

Why does it require immediate and sustained action...   to mitigate its impacts?

 

The converse (again playing devils advocate) is that the world could simply adapt to the new climate.

Very good question: why not adapt?

• Health and well-being of human race depends on a stable climate. Global inequality and mass migration will vastly increase as climate change affects each location differently. The WHO details how climate change exacerbates health risks, such as heat stress, respiratory issues, and the spread of diseases like malaria.  https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health
• Economic cost of mitigating climate change is said to be far less than long term economic cost of adapting to climate change. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/the-economics-of-climate-change-the-stern-review/
• IPCC better summaries other effects of climate change in 7 executive summary chapters: https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/

 

 

I personally would prefer UK climate to continue. We are seeing ever increasing number of heat waves and ever stronger storms. Whilst it is possible to adapt just as people have adapted to all kind of climate around the world. But unlike people moving to other climates, adapt to changing climate will not be a choice. Consequently, as always, the burden to adapt will most affect the poorest (those who won't frequent a car owners' forum)

 

For example, we are considering air-air heat pump (aka air-con) units. Just waiting for possible changes to the BUS grant. After that, I'd have no problem dealing with heat waves, I have adapted. But we won't stop seeing increase in heat wave deaths: https://taking.care/blogs/resources-advice/the-main-causes-of-uk-heatwave-deaths Not everyone have the capability to adapt.

 

With Northern Europe it is a much colder climate rather than a warmer with the reduction of the American Gilf stream which had kept Northern Europe warmer than the East coast of Canada.

 

More violent storms as Ireland, Northern England and Scotland are going to see this weekend.

 

Rising sea levels and flooding on Eastern UK, Severn Estuary, Merseyside are looking like thing UK will see.

 

Bangladesh and other Asian river delta areas flooding killing many too.

 

15 hours ago, lol-lol said:

Rising sea levels and flooding on Eastern UK, Severn Estuary, Merseyside are looking like thing UK will see.

Rising sea levels is something that's always puzzled me for 3 reasons:

 

1) a few years ago I stayed in a studio apartment in the old fish warehouse in St Ives that was built in the 19th Century. It is right on the edge of the shingle beach, and the sea is no nearer to it than when it was built about 150 years ago - so no sign of a rising sea level there?

 

2) ground level height data from satellites confirms what my Geography teacher taught me in the early 1970's, which is that due to tectonic plate activity from the mid-Atlantic fault the UK is tilting on a North-South axis with the East coast dropping. So 'rising sea level' on the East coast of the UK is actually falling ground level.

 

3) many of the Pacific archipelagos seeing apparent sea level rise are actually built on coral reefs around a long extinct subsea volcano. Given the softness and erosion of that coral it is possible that again what is happening is ground level falling, but I cannot find any satellite data to confirm or deny this possibility.

 

So I would suggest that more reliable independent data would be useful.

1 hour ago, PetrolDave said:

So I would suggest that more reliable independent data would be useful.

NASA satellite measurement: https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/?intent=121

Uni of Hawaii sea level data from global average measurements: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level

 

 

9 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

Uni of Hawaii sea level data from global average measurements

I always get nervous at the word average as it can mask local effects and lead to unreliable assumptions e.g. if a few locations have large changes then averaging can make it appear that all locations have changes.

I suppose everyone in my country could forego heating and transport to provide a small offset towards what is going on on the border between Russia 'n Ukraine

 

 

 

( Better ask Mac first tho )

45 minutes ago, PetrolDave said:

I always get nervous at the word average as it can mask local effects and lead to unreliable assumptions e.g. if a few locations have large changes then averaging can make it appear that all locations have changes.

Global average will be far less skewed than, for example, measure at your anecdotal sinking locations. Even if there are outliers.

 

Regardless, the evidence from multiple sources are clear that sea level is rising across the world. Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

4 hours ago, PetrolDave said:

a few years ago I stayed in a studio apartment in the old fish warehouse in St Ives that was built in the 19th Century. It is right on the edge of the shingle beach, and the sea is no nearer to it than when it was built about 150 years ago - so no sign of a rising sea level there?

 

1 hour ago, wyx087 said:

Regardless, the evidence from multiple sources are clear that sea level is rising across the world. Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

See my earlier post - certainly at St Ives beach there is little/no evidence of sea level rising in over 150 years.

On 21/01/2025 at 15:32, skomaz said:

he world could simply be left to move on and change in whatever way that might be - be that rising sea levels, extinction of species and even humankind - it'll happen eventually anyway on a stellar basis?

 

You forgot the next ice age which every day we get one day closer to.

 

I think it is forecast for the 12th June 2029.

 

I'll get me coat 🫢

1 hour ago, PetrolDave said:

 

See my earlier post - certainly at St Ives beach there is little/no evidence of sea level rising in over 150 years.

 

Yes West Country and Western England, Wales and West Scotland rising and east coast falling in to the North Sea.

 

At some point Thames Barrier will not be enough.

 

With the Thwaites Doomsday glacier now breaking up sea level will rise quicker than previously thought.

 

3 hours ago, PetrolDave said:

See my earlier post - certainly at St Ives beach there is little/no evidence of sea level rising in over 150 years.

That's one location, you said it in your post "no sign of a rising sea level there". Is it at all representative of a global phenomenon?

 

In your second reason of same post, you talked about ground level shifting, could the first and second be related?

 

This is why we need average across many many data sources, because data from 1 or 3 locations doesn't tell us enough.

 

 

4 hours ago, lol-lol said:

 

With the Thwaites Doomsday glacier now breaking up sea level will rise quicker than previously thought. 

 

 

Even if the whole Thwaites glacier goes over the next couple of centuries it would only equate to a 65cm sea level rise...

On 21/01/2025 at 15:09, wyx087 said:

Very good question: why not adapt?

• Health and well-being of human race depends on a stable climate. Global inequality and mass migration will vastly increase as climate change affects each location differently. The WHO details how climate change exacerbates health risks, such as heat stress, respiratory issues, and the spread of diseases like malaria.  https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health
• Economic cost of mitigating climate change is said to be far less than long term economic cost of adapting to climate change. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/the-economics-of-climate-change-the-stern-review/
• IPCC better summaries other effects of climate change in 7 executive summary chapters: https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/

 

 

Whilst I see and understand the points you are making...   And again playing devil's advocate all of the changes would just be Darwin Evolution in action...  ??? 

Edited 22 January22 Jan by skomaz

The 'experts' were predicting a different scenario 50 years ago.

4 hours ago, skomaz said:

 

Even if the whole Thwaites glacier goes over the next couple of centuries it would only equate to a 65cm sea level rise...

 

Thwaites is a Bell Weather which is nice as a visible prompt. It contributes about 4% to global sea level rise so the total rises are about twenty times its own contribution to sea rise.  The concern is that it has doubled in pace of melting since about 2000.

  British Antarctic Survey produced this a few months ago. I think we might not see the worst of it but it will be our children and grandchildren.

The higher sea levels will be whipped up by ever more violet storms due to the increased energy levels, due to temperature energy which will overtop sea defences. 

 

 

Edited 23 January23 Jan by lol-lol

10 hours ago, skomaz said:

 

Even if the whole Thwaites glacier goes over the next couple of centuries it would only equate to a 65cm sea level rise...

It is a compound effect. With temperature rise, it comes melting adding water + water thermal expansion.

 

65 cm is quite a lot of sea level increase, when you consider most beach don't have 1 meter height difference from its land edge to the sea edge (sorry, don't know technical term). This means many existing sea defences will require costly upgrades.

 

9 hours ago, skomaz said:

 

Whilst I see and understand the points you are making...   And again playing devil's advocate all of the changes would just be Darwin Evolution in action...  ??? 

Whilst I am all for Darwin evolution in action. I am not sure the rate of change is suitable for evolution. It's not as simple as change = evolution, therefore we don't need to worry about climate change.

 

Looking back 2000 years, how much have different specious changed? Had there been sufficient changes over that relatively long human history?

 

The rate of change over last 100 years far exceeds change over last 2000 years.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/climate-change-2000-years-of-earths-temperatures-in-one-simple-chart-and-copycat-misinformation/

 

 

6 hours ago, lol-lol said:

 

Thwaites is a Bell Weather which is nice as a visible prompt. It contributes about 4% to global sea level rise so the total rises are about twenty times its own contribution to sea rise.  The concern is that it has doubled in pace of melting since about 2000.

  British Antarctic Survey produced this a few months ago. I think we might not see the worst of it but it will be our children and grandchildren.

The higher sea levels will be whipped up by ever more violet storms due to the increased energy levels, due to temperature energy which will overtop sea defences. 

 

 

 

Yes, yes I'm aware of all that...   But...   Some would call it all part of our planetary evolution, if a little accelerated...   On the basis that a couple of volcanic eruptions would appear to have had a similar if not greater effect than man has?

 

So why bother even trying to restrain the sea by raising flood defences except in areas of significance (some areas of London might qualify)?  Just let the 13m (?) total sea rise take whatever.

 

From a humourous point of view I live at the top of a hill next to the Peak District so sea one could argue sea level rises won't affect me, even if weather changes will.

 

Again all playing Devil's Advocate to see just how strong your contra-arguments are 👍

Edited 23 January23 Jan by skomaz

38 minutes ago, skomaz said:

But...   Some would call it all part of our planetary evolution, if a little accelerated...   On the basis that a couple of volcanic eruptions would appear to have had a similar if not greater effect than man has?

There are avoidable disasters and there are unavoidable disasters.

 

It's all about how we (human) manage both so that the cost to continued survival is not too great. As pointed out earlier, mitigation costs less than avoidance.