As this semester has progressed, we have read many scientific publications providing substantial evidence for anthropogenic climate

change. As an engineering student, I am most intrigued by the scientific aspects of each article (not to mention, the lack of progress made by politicians and bureaucrats on the other side, greatly irritates me.) I was further irritated as I read Oreskes' "Beyond The Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change." The article effectively illustrates the climate of climate change discussion. Basically, despite the consensus amongst the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scientists, little is being done to combat the drivers of anthropogenic climate change (Oreskes, 2004). Policy-makers, corporations, and paid media outlets point to scientific uncertainty; although, this is certainly not the case (Oreskes, 2004). As a strong proponent of climate science and alternative energy sources, I am particularly frustrated by this self-perpetuated misinformation and why it is given any regard to begin with. To sharpen my own perspective on climate science, I began to research varying stances on climate science and found an eye-catching article in the Wall Street Journal, titled "How Even Alternative Energy Could Threaten the Planet." I found it very interesting as the subject has not been widely discussed amongst advocates of climate change or in my environmental classes. Clayton's article discusses and reviews a scientific review publish in New Scientist, detailing the latest research into the impact of alternative energy sources (Clayton, 2012). The article first examines the effects of waste heat. The article briefly covers the science behind electronics and introduced a concept I was unfamiliar with. The research demonstrates that a large portion of energy used by electronics, from nuclear power plants to cellphones, goes underutilized by circuity and is emitted as radio waves or light (Ananthaswamy and Page, 2012). This, in effect, is converted to heat when absorbed by other surfaces (Ananthaswamy and Page, 2012). Therefore, all energy used will end up heating the earth one way or another (Clayton, 2012). The article also cites a study conducted by the University of Illinois on the effects of wind turbines on local climate. The study, combined with longterm research from a wind turbine plot in San Gorgonio, California, confirmed the study's results: surface temperatures behind the wind turbines were higher than in front during the night, but as much as 4 C lower by day (Ananthaswamy and Page, 2012). The article lastly examines the effects of solar energy upon its ecosystem. A study founded on the construction of a 1-TW solar power plant in Californias Mojave desert, predicted that the panels would effect the albedo of the earth's surface (Ananthaswamy and Page, 2012). Their data was recorded and concluded that placing so many dark solar panels over light-colored sand will warm the air above by 0.4 C, affecting temperature and wind patterns within a 300-kilometer radius (Ananthaswamy and Page, 2012). While these studies may not demonstrate that alternative energy sources, like wind turbines and solar panels, produce hazardous or threatening effects upon the environment, they will certainly result in disruptions, and consequently, adaptations in their local ecosystems (Clayton, 2012) The article successfully conveys the adverse effects of alternative energy sources; however, it fails to put them into perspective. For instance, we know that hydroelectric dams will likely cause disruptions in local river ecosystems, but does the feedback compare to the longterm effects of rising carbon dioxide concentrations on our oceans? (Mastrandrea and Schneider, 2010) I think not. Many other comparisons can easily be made in respect to each specific energy source. The article's section on electronic's waste heat, indicates that not only our energy sources, but our energy systems need refining as a whole. And in regard to climate science skeptics outlined in Oreskes article, Mastrandrea and Schneider's Climate Change Science Overview sums up the argument on climate change perfectly: Although uncertainty

remains regarding knowledge about climate, the basic processes that cause climate change are scientifically well established, and human activities have been identified with very high confidence as the main driver of most observed climate-induced trends during the last several decades.(Mastrandrea and Schneider, 2010) Ananthaswamy , Anil, and Michael Page. "Power paradox: Clean might not be green forever." New Scientist. 2849. (2012): n. page. Web. 2 Mar. 2012. <http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328491.700-power-paradox-clean-might-not-begreen-forever.html?>. Clayton, Nick. "How Even Alternative Energy Could Threaten the Planet." Wall Street Journal [New York City] 31 Jan 2012, n. pag. Web. 1 Mar. 2012. <http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2012/01/31/howeven-alternative-energy-could-threaten-the-planet.htm>. Mastrandrea and Schneider, Climate Change Science Overview, in Schneider et al (eds), Climate Change Science and Policy, Island Press, 2010. Oreskes, N. (2004). "Beyond The Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change." Science 306(5702): 1686.

QUIZ 7 CHAPTER 4 ECOLOGY