In the past week in both the international and American media there has been further evidence presented to the public of the gravity of climate change issues. In Britain, Sir David King, the government's chief scientist, suggested that it seemed unlikely that the human community could keep global warming under 3C in the next century. In America In a NOVA program, aired on 18 April 2006, there was an extended discussion of the phenomenon known as "global dimming" -- an apparent reduction in the amount of sunlight reaching Earth's surface because of the anthropogenic increase of atmospheric aerosols.

In fact, the global dimming phenomena may well have "masked" the evidence of global warming, and if so, the warming phenomena may already be proceeding at a pace that has so far been understimated. In addition, the NOVA program mentioned the potential releasing of oceanic methane hydrates as a significant contributor to a global "run away" shift in climate.

Although this information has been available for public discussion for over a year in Britain, it is only now beginning to grasp the imagination of the American public. In the context of this information, newly brought to the attention of the American people, questions about "who should do what, and when?" are coming increasingly into focus. If government leaders fail to take the lead on this important issue, what other institutions might undertake meaningful steps to address this issue? What should the role of business, NGOs and government be to address this circumstance?

These are some of the questions that Peter Goldmark will address in this week's class session. Do you think that the newly available information about 'global dimming' and the potential role of methane hydrates alters the relationships between the relative responsibility of businesses, NGOs and government actors in addressing climate issues? Who is supposed to do what?

---