theguardian.com
Removal of US National Climate Assessments from Federal Websites
The legally mandated US National Climate Assessments have been removed from federal websites, impacting state and local governments and the public's access to crucial climate change information, despite warnings from scientists about the reports' importance in saving money and lives; the White House says the information will be housed within NASA.
- What are the immediate consequences of removing the US National Climate Assessments from federal websites?
- The legally mandated US National Climate Assessments have been removed from federal websites, hindering access to crucial climate change information for state, local governments, and the public. This removal has drawn criticism from scientists who highlight the reports' importance in informing climate adaptation strategies and saving lives.
- How do the removed national climate assessments differ from international climate reports, and what accounts for their importance?
- The disappearance of these reports, which are peer-reviewed and vetted by the National Academy of Sciences, represents a significant setback in climate action. The reports offer localized, detailed information on climate change impacts, unlike less specific international reports. Their absence leaves decision-makers without critical data for informed actions such as infrastructure improvements and emergency preparedness.
- What are the potential long-term impacts of limiting public access to these localized climate change projections, and what are the ethical implications of this action?
- The long-term consequences of this action include increased vulnerability to climate-related hazards, particularly for minority and Native American communities disproportionately affected. The lack of accessible, localized climate data impedes effective adaptation planning and resource allocation, potentially leading to higher economic costs and loss of life. This could also hinder scientific progress and public trust in government institutions.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing of the article emphasizes the negative consequences of the removal of climate assessments from federal websites. The headline (if there was one, it is not provided in the text) likely highlighted the disappearance of the reports and the resulting lack of access to crucial information. The focus on scientists' concerns and warnings about the dangers of this omission reinforces a narrative of governmental negligence and obstruction of critical climate information. This framing aims to raise public concern and possibly pressure the government to reinstate the assessments.
Language Bias
While the article uses strong language, such as "horrifying big picture," "appalling whole demolition," and "serious tampering with the facts," this language is attributed to the scientists quoted and serves to reflect their opinions and concerns. It would be considered strong language, potentially influencing the reader, but in context appears to report their perspectives accurately rather than to impose a bias directly.
Bias by Omission
The article highlights the omission of legally mandated US national climate assessments from federal websites. This omission prevents state and local governments and the public from accessing crucial information about the impacts of climate change. The article points out that the White House, responsible for the assessments, moved the information to NASA without providing details, and NASA did not respond to information requests. This lack of transparency and accessibility constitutes bias by omission.
Sustainable Development Goals
The removal of legally mandated national climate assessments from federal websites hinders access to crucial climate information for state, local governments, and the public. This impedes effective climate adaptation and mitigation strategies, negatively impacting progress towards climate action goals. The removal is described as "serious tampering with the facts and with people's access to information, and it actually may increase the risk of people being harmed by climate-related impacts." The assessments provide localized, detailed information crucial for planning and resource allocation to address climate change effects, such as raising roads, building seawalls, and relocating critical infrastructure.