Regulations can harm if science is misunderstood

Flynn Daunt
Science & Technology Editor
Over the last few years, everyone has been in a panic over the changing climate and decrease in air quality; everyone wants change as quick as possible. As well-intentioned as those people are in wanting change, however, they must first understand the complicated systems on our planet.
Understanding before regulating is something that Jack McConnell, a professor of earth and atmospheric science at York University and an expert in atmospheric modeling stresses.

“You have to have a better understanding before you make regulations because they can actually make things worse,” says McConnell.
McConnell’s work looks at many aspects of the complicated atmospheric systems on earth; his job is to provide accurate projections of how our atmosphere, climate, air quality and weather will look in the future.
There are two main aspects of his work, according to McConnell: understanding the issues; and understanding how this will affect the planet. He refers to these two dimensions of his work as diagnosis and prognosis. His research, used by organizations like the Environmental Protection Agency in the United States, has had an impact on environmental regulations.
Having worked to model the atmospheres of Mars and Uranus, McConnell knows just how little we actually know about the atmospheric systems on earth and even pollutants. For instance, McConnell is looking at the ozone, and why a harmful surface-based ozone exists. “It’s not emitted by a car, and it’s not emitted by a factory,” says McConnell.
He also looks at it on a global scale. “If we produce ozone in Ontario, how much of that will end up in Europe.”
With all the inconclusive data and projections yet to be made, McConnell points out that governments itching to make environmental regulations shouldn’t be too hasty. He points at the case of Atlanta, Georgia 20 years ago, which regulated carbon dioxide produced by cars but did practically nothing to help emissions.
“What actually happened in Atlanta is there’s a lot of forests, which themselves produce a lot of organic compounds, so trying to regulate car stuff didn’t have any effect,” explains McConnell. “They spend billions of dollars modifying car engines and nothing happened.”
McConnell also says in terms of climate we’re unfortunately already screwed. “You screw up how much carbon dioxide you’re putting in there, you’re screwing things up for the next 50 years, and there’s nothing you can do about it.”
He suggests regulators should concentrate on not only figuring out how to mitigate CO2 emissions but also prepare for the fact that our climate and weather will change and there’s not much we can do about it now.
“My view of the climate system is that the next 30 to 40 years is basically dictated by what we’ve done in the last 100, there’s nothing we can do about it,” says McConnell.
Doing things like using wind turbines or cutting back on car pollution won’t help us until 30 years from now, says McConnell.
What we should be doing is preparing for a different climate, he says. Ontario may have increased rainfall, he offers an example, which would overflow rivers and lakes, damaging buildings and eroding our sewer system.
His projections and models would help not only regulation emissions but also help prepare for these events.
McConnell looks at the recent earthquakes in both Haiti and Japan in terms of level of adaptation and preparedness in both countries.
“Think of the number of people killed in Haiti compared to number of people killed in Japan with a worse earthquake.”
He mentions that Japan had adapted to the constant threat of earthquakes and thus saved the lives of countless people whereas Haiti was less prepared.
McConnell isn’t saying we’re doomed in any respect and even stops himself from saying things will get “worse.” All he’s saying is that regulators need to look at the data and understand we’re still learning about all the complicated systems that make up the atmosphere of our planet.