SPONSORED:

Congress just proved there is hope for honest discussion on climate

Congress just proved there is hope for honest discussion on climate
© Getty Images

 

This month the two of us — both climate scientists — testified about climate change and solutions before the science committee in the House of Representatives.

One of us was called to testify by the Democratic majority. One of us was called to testify by the Republican minority. In previous years, two witnesses in our roles would have been at odds, tasked with debating the severity or very existence of human-caused climate change. For a decade, congressional hearings on climate science were contentious and disconnected from physical reality. During a House Science Committee hearing just a year ago, Rep. Mo BrooksMorris (Mo) Jackson Brooks14 Republicans vote against making Juneteenth a federal holiday Mo Brooks accuses Swalwell attorney who served papers on his wife of trespassing Shelby backs ex-aide over Trump-favored candidate in Alabama Senate race MORE of Alabama made headlines by suggesting that observed sea level rise is caused by erosion and rocks falling into the ocean — ignoring the real causes: melting ice and thermal expansion fueled by manmade global warming.

ADVERTISEMENT

But this time, instead of arguing, we agreed. We agreed that rising temperatures are being caused by industrial pollution, deforestation and other human activities. We agreed that the impacts on society are already occurring. And we agreed on the need for immediate action to avoid worse impacts. This shift is nothing short of a sea-change, long overdue. 

And our agreement was (largely) mirrored by the committee. We were thrilled that the vast majority of the committee’s questions focused on climate science, and how to address the impacts of climate change. An enormous amount of credit goes to House Science, Space, and Technology Committee Chairwoman Rep. Eddie Bernice JohnsonEddie Bernice JohnsonCongress and DOT should ensure a data-driven transportation infrastructure A path forward for the future of American science and technology Senate passes long-delayed China bill MORE (D-Texas) and Ranking Member Rep. Frank LucasFrank Dean LucasCongress and DOT should ensure a data-driven transportation infrastructure A path forward for the future of American science and technology House Science panel requests briefing with Energy Dept over Colonial hack MORE (R-Okla.). They set the tone for this civil, smart, and productive hearing. 

Our hearing wasn’t an outlier. Days before, Rep. Greg WaldenGregory (Greg) Paul WaldenLobbying world Give Republicans the climate credit they deserve Fox hires former GOP lawmaker Greg Walden as political consultant MORE (R-Ore.), Rep. Fred UptonFrederick (Fred) Stephen UptonFauci: Emails highlight confusion about Trump administration's mixed messages early in pandemic Why Republican politicians are sticking with Trump Progressives nearly tank House Democrats' Capitol security bill MORE (R-MIich, and Rep. John ShimkusJohn Mondy ShimkusGrowing number of House Republicans warm to proxy voting House Republicans who didn't sign onto the Texas lawsuit Here are the 17 GOP women newly elected to the House this year MORE (R-Ill.) published an op-ed declaring, “Climate change is real, and as Republican Leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, we are focused on solutions.”

Also, the previous week, a House Natural Resources subcommittee hearing addressed how climate change hurts forests, public lands and national parks. According to E&E News, Rep. Jared HuffmanJared William HuffmanSafe and ethical seafood on the menu this Congress Modernizing transportation can help tackle the climate crisis Lawmakers react to guilty verdict in Chauvin murder trial: 'Our work is far from done' MORE (D-Cali.) applauded Republicans for calling a scientist to testify who "firmly reflects the mainstream of the global scientific community." 

It is still an open question as to whether Congress will commit the necessary resources, and put in place policies, to create the low-carbon future that science shows we need to stabilize our climate. If we have turned a corner, we recognize that our journey is not complete. There are a few dogged members of Congress, reflecting a shrinking segment of the public, who claim they understand climate change better than the scientific community.

ADVERTISEMENT

But refreshingly, in our committee hearing, we heard a return to a functional and honest discussion of climate science. We talked about an aggressive shift to low-carbon energy. We talked about the potential of technology to reduce emissions and capture carbon from the atmosphere. We talked about how there is no magic bullet for climate and plenty of room for compromise over how to move forward.

These are the debates and conversations that we should have been holding all along. And, to repurpose a well-known expression, the best time to start having serious conversations about climate change was 30 years ago. The second best time is now.

Jennifer Francis, Ph.D., is a senior scientist at the Woods Hole Research Center.

Joseph Majkut, Ph.D., is director of climate policy at the Niskanen Center.