A new climate study just published in Science has led to some curiously framed media coverage. This research, led by NASA's Drew Shindell, built upon an earlier report by the UN Environment Program and the World Meteorological Organization (also led by Shindell).
An Associated Press story under the headline, "Scientists say cut soot, methane to curb warming," received wide coverage. Here the AP's Seth Borenstein reported: "An international team of scientists says it's figured out how to slow global warming in the short run and prevent millions of deaths from dirty air: Stop focusing so much on carbon dioxide [CO2]. They say the key is to reduce emissions of two powerful and fast-acting causes of global warming - methane and soot."
Subsequent to the attention-grabbing headline and opening statement, the AP clarifies [perhaps we CAN work on multiple pollutants at the same time?], "Scientists say [CO2] from fossil fuels like coal and oil is a bigger overall cause of global warming, but reducing methane and soot offers quicker fixes."
The AP frame which seems to encourage a "shift in focus away from CO2" is out of step with Shindell's comments in a NASA Q&A, "Over the long-term, [CO2] increases are the primary driver of climate change. In order to mitigate climate change, there is no way we can ignore or overlook [CO2]."
This AP article is, however, an improvement over their 12/23/03 story, "Scientists blame soot for global warming," based on an earlier NASA study (my analysis of this older story frame was included in "Climate of Scepticism").
Shindell, et al. (2012) Science: Vol. 335 no. 6065 pp. 183-189
NASA Press Release (1/12/12)
NASA Q&A with Drew Shindell (2/20/11)
Associated Press story (1/12/12)
John Tierney of the New York Times also seems to wish for such a shift. In "Climate proposal puts practicality ahead of sacrifice (1/16/12)," Tierney went further than Borenstein in actually denigrating, and misleading about, groups working to reduce CO2 emissions, "Mainstream environmental groups haven’t put them [methane and soot] on the agenda. One reason is the lack of glamour...."
The Union of Concerned Scientists is just one such organization that has promoted reduction of methane, see "Global Warming and Pasture-Raised Beef Production in the US"
