Sir, – If Gerry Molloy (April 3rd) put a bit more thought into his dismissal of David Robert Grimes’s assessment of the global climate situation (Opinion, April 1st) then he would realise that, although ice does absorb heat in order to melt, it is taking it from the surrounding atmosphere. The atmosphere is part of the overall cycle which also incorporates land masses and oceans. The fact that the ice is melting indicates that the normal equilibrium has shifted and there is more heat in the system.
This shift in the balance can manifest itself in different ways in local environments such as the unseasonably cold weather we are currently experiencing.
This is the crux of climate change, increased variability in seasonal weather due to a shift in the balance of the various cycles.
The longer-term trends, analysed by peer-reviewed scientists using sound statistical data, and not emotional reactions, indicates that increased heat in the weather cycles is leading to increased variability in global weather systems with extreme consequences, mainly for impoverished populations.
An underlying issue here is economic sustainability, which is a key requirement for any approach to tackle climate change. This idea is at odds with the growth obsession of the current economic orthodoxy and results in the emotional defence of human activity in the face of scientific data by advocates of free market economics.
Would it be asking too much for climate change sceptics to take a rational, logical approach to their contributions? – Yours, etc,
BARRY WALSH,
Linden Avenue,
Beaumont,
Blackrock,
Cork.