Written by Grant Lefelar
Out with one debate, in with another.
In late October, Dr. Ben Carson stopped by UNC-Chapel Hill to promote his think tank’s latest initiative. While Dr. Carson’s speech was a rather benign advertisement on how to best “drain the swamp,” Carson was suddenly interrupted by a motley crew of two or three students yapping about climate change from their seats. Dr. Carson, a well-regarded, retired brain surgeon and former HUD Secretary, would likely be first to admit he is no expert on the globe’s warming. Nonetheless, the students wearing matching shirts with the logo of the Sunrise Movement, an activist group composed of panicky youngsters anxious about their thermometers, shouted down Dr. Carson in a bid to make him speak on climate change. Thankfully, Dr. Carson didn’t budge and students gave up after a minute-and-a-half, resorting to quizzing him during the Q&A session shortly after.
While the Sunrise Movement’s tactics are peaceful, they sure as hell are annoying and a purposeful slap in the face of civic discourse. There are plenty more like them in the wild, as seen in a viral clip from last year where a duo of twenty-something Just Stop Oil members unleashed cans of Heinz’s tomato soup on an original Van Gogh in London. Even worse, the most prominent leader of the uncentralized climate protest movement is a rich Swede who came to prominence by refusing to go to school, and boy does it show.
Climate science is a highly complex topic and one I am no expert on. That’s why, instead of shouting down ex-cabinet secretaries or vandalizing museums over my ecological concerns, I sit my behind down and listen to the experts. In early November, two of those experts came to Chapel Hill.
Sponsored by the Steamboat Institute and moderated by UNC Provost Chris Clemens, Dr. Steven E. Koonin, former Under Secretary for Science in the U.S. Department of Energy, and Roger A. Pielke Jr. of the University of Colorado Boulder, debated whether the world could and should reach net zero carbon emissions. Dr. Koonin, author of climate change book Unsettled, argued against net zero, stating it would require the globe to return to levels of carbon emission not seen since 1750—an “impossible” feat. “If the U.S. and Europe went to net zero, it would not have much effect on the climate,” said Dr. Koonin. To Dr. Koonin, living in a net zero era would see a rise in costs, more mining and energy use, and widespread economic issues. Instead, Dr. Koonin advocated for increased energy use to put “energy starved” and poverty-stricken countries on par with modern standards.
Pielke, author of The Climate Fix, countered Dr. Koonin by advocating for the idea of net zero, rather than speaking on its real-world practicality. Pielke’s support for net zero rests on his analysis that “the global economy has been decarbonizing for the past century” and that net zero is inevitably down the road. Pielke also took notes from history’s previous great scientific debates, stating “people betting on the ‘we can’t do it’ side have routinely been proven to be wrong,” on agriculture, medicine, and energy issues. To Pielke, our greatest friend in the journey towards net zero is the reliability of human ingenuity.
While I sympathize more with Dr. Koonin’s analysis, I applaud both men for coming to debate net zero in a professional and civic manner. I also give props to the audience of a little over 100 students and adults who respectfully attended. There were no interruptions from screeching 19-year-olds. No spit-slingers, bomb-throwers, turd-flingers, or flame-hurlers. Nope, the audience sat and listened like they’re supposed to. Perhaps our campus’ eco-warriors can take some notes.
Full video of the debate and discussion on net zero can be found on the Steamboat Institute’s YouTube page.