Source: Bloomberg Businessweek
URL: http://www.businessweek.com/videos/2012-11-01/barrett-climate-change-is-real-cause-of-sandy
Date: 01/11/2012
Event: "It's Global Warming, Stupid"
Credit: Bloomberg Businessweek
People:
Adam Johnson: Bloomberg Businessweek out with a controversial cover - "It's Global Warming, Stupid". Its latest volley makes the case global warming played a definitive role in Sandy's destructive force. And the team at Bloomberg Businessweek didn't stop there - editor Josh Tyrangiel out with this tweet as soon as the cover came out. He said, quote: "Our cover story this week may generate controversy, but only among the stupid". Well, for more we are joined by the man who actually wrote the story. He is Paul Barrett, and Paul, I have to say: very timely. We find out from the Mayor that he is endorsing Barack Obama in part because of his view on climate change. You wrote this. Why was this story so obvious to you, when you started writing it a couple of weeks ago?
Paul Barrett: Well, the truth is, I didn't start writing it a couple of weeks ago. We started in the midst of the storm. Josh -
Adam Johnson: You turned it around that fast.
Paul Barrett: Yes indeed, sometimes we do that. Josh Tyrangiel, my boss, who you just mentioned, called me up at home - I was stuck in Brooklyn, because there was no way to get into Manhattan - and said "It's time to just, you know, state the obvious. Sit down and give me a piece in 24 hours on climate change". And so I sat at the dining room table, and did just that. So - we weren't anticipating this. We were startled by Sandy and felt that it was time that we needed to just make a plain statement.
Alix Steel: Basically, this title - it seems like it's very aggressive, in terms of, like: "You've gotta listen to these facts. There is climate change". What kind of opposition, or maybe negativity, did you run into, in your reporting?
Paul Barrett: Well, you know, it's easy to just go out, and have, kind of, a fistfight over this. "The climate's warming". "No, it's not". "It's because of human activity". "No, it's not". My preference, and what I did with this piece, is to go to scientists who are within the very, very broad consensus, at this point, that the atmosphere is heating up, there's more moisture in the atmosphere, the oceans are heating up, and the question is: why is that happening? And what does it mean? And what it means is that not that any particular storm is caused by these phenomena but that storms in general - severe weather in general - is going to be more, more pronounced. And I think we're seeing that, the statistics show that in recent decades. And we can either pay attention to that or we can look away from it. The point of this article is that it is time to pay attention.
Adam Johnson: Well, what jumped out at me, and of course Bloomberg is all about the numbers, and you had one very critical number, and that was the number of billion-dollar plus storms in the past 15 years is double what it was the previous 15 years. Is that what, sort of, tipped you off, that there was something going on here?
Paul Barrett: Well, it's not just that. I mean, you can look in lots of places for telling statistics. I mean, one of the centrepieces of our story is a report that came out October 17th from Munich Re, the huge German reinsurance company. These are not guys who, you know, gather statistics to serve any political end. They're in it for profits, and they're seeing, you know extreme weather events increasing in frequency and severity, over time. And, you know, we relied a lot on their numbers as well.
Alix Steel: It's interesting - I'd just draw everyone's attention to a recent Gallup poll on U.S. voters and issues that were ranked. And climate change was nowhere on the list. The first was the economy in general, then you had unemployment, then you had the Fed budget deficit. The Fed budget deficit was number 3 to voters, and climate change was nowhere. So, John, if you want to get in here, what's your take on this? How much does it really matter to the everyday citizen?
John Stoltzfus: Well, what I wanted to ask Paul - when you looked at it, we had Katrina, afterwards we had the tsunami, if I recall, then we had the tidal wave in Japan, that caused all the distortions in the supply chain network, and a nuclear accident on top of it. How come those things didn't - what makes Sandy different, that you think Sandy will bring global warming back into prominence, not just for a while but really make it last?
Alix Steel: And make it on the Gallup poll.
Paul Barrett: Yeah. Well, I'm not sure that it will. I mean, the point of the article is that it ought to. You know, I think if Mitt Romney is elected President, it'll be off the political table for another four years. I just think that's a fact, whether you like Romney or not, he's made that very clear.
Adam Johnson: Why?
Paul Barrett: Why? Because the political interests that support him - it is not in their interests to focus on -
Adam Johnson: Big business, coal jobs, oil drilling, et cetera...
Paul Barrett: That's right.
Adam Johnson: Fossil fuels.
Paul Barrett: And also there's ideology attached to this. Note that when he was Governor of Massachusetts, Romney was very concerned about the environment and about climate. But in order to get the Republican nomination, he's moved very far to the right. And in his acceptance speech at the Republican convention, he belittled President Obama for even talking about the rising oceans and the health of the planet. Well, if you live in southern Manhattan, or you live in my neighbourhood, the rising oceans came down our streets. This is not something that is just in people's imaginations, this is real.
Adam Johnson: Well, let me ask you this. It's easy to connect the dots intellectually, and say "Well, we're burning more fuel, we must be heating the planet". Fair enough. But there have been times, over the past thousand years, ten thousand years, et cetera, when the global climate has heated up or cooled down. So, is it possible that what's happening now is simply part of something that happens every number of aeons?
Paul Barrett: You know, it's possible if 99 out of 100 PhD climatologists are wrong. I'll, personally - if you have 99 to 1, I go with the 99.
Adam Johnson: Based upon your research, how many...? Is that the actual ratio?
Paul Barrett: No, it's higher than that.
Alix Steel: So why isn't this 100% an issue on people's radar, and why aren't there 100% believers, if you have that kind of conviction, when you're talking with those PhDs?
Paul Barrett: Well, I think the problem is that this is a very, very diffuse problem. It doesn't affect anyone on a day-to-day basis. And some people, it doesn't affect them at all.
Adam Johnson: It's slow, and it doesn't just happen overnight.
Paul Barrett: Exactly. It's a very traditional issue in economics, you know, the problem of the commons, where no one person's actions is [sic] going to shift, and people individually have to sacrifice for a greater good that's very hard to see. That's the nature of this problem.
Alix Steel: Right, John, dip in.
John Stoltzfus: I also think it's economics. I think we all got caught up in the last few years with the financial crisis, the situations in Europe, developments in China, the U.S. fiscal issues. And I would have to think that what needs to be recognised is that beyond economics comes the reality of global warming -
Paul Barrett: Absolutely.
John Stoltzfus: - but it's an educational issue, and where's the failure there, we've got to ask ourselves.
Paul Barrett: And it's not cost-free. This is going to be a very, very expensive shifting around of priorities. I mean, one of the ways you can address this is to make the burning of carbon - the burning of coal or oil - more expensive, so that alternatives to that become economically more appealing. Well, that's going to cost certain people something, unlike our - the nature of our politics generally, now, where people pretend there's no cost to doing things. There will be a cost to addressing this. The question is whether we're willing to pay the cost.
John Stoltzfus: I think that's probably what it is, it's just about costs, and when people are willing to pay up for it. And probably won't, until they feel the heat enough, and maybe a storm like this will do it.
Paul Barrett: It may take another crisis or two.
Adam Johnson: All right, that is the cover of Bloomberg Businessweek. You're looking at the man who wrote it - Paul Barrett. There it is - "It's Global Warming, Stupid". This is out there on show, so take a peek at it - certainly turning a lot of heads, and incredibly apropos, given what we learned today about Mayor Bloomberg endorsing President Obama, in part because of his stance on the global warming issue. Paul Barrett, thanks for joining us.