The power of the sun, of the people and of politics. The climate depends on all 3

In 1856, an amateur scientist named Eunice Foote placed two glass jars in sunlight and measured the rate at which their internal temperatures rose. In one jar she trapped only air and into the other she pumped carbon dioxide gas.

After about 10 minutes, the difference in air temperature between the two jars was 20 degrees Fahrenheit. Once removed from the sunlight, the jar with the carbon dioxide gas, the one that warmed up faster, also took much longer to cool down.

The science wasn't amateur. It was the first known experiment to prove that certain molecules, now called "greenhouse gases" because of their ability to absorb and trap heat from the sun in an enclosed space like a greenhouse, could be the sole cause of sustained air temperature increases.

But it was considered amateur science because Foote was a woman. A few years later, a recognized scientist named John Tyndall conducted a similar experiment (with no nod to her prior work) and was remembered by history for it.

Still, Foote's results were deemed important enough at the time to be published in the American Journal of Science and Arts and presented at that year's meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science by her male colleague, Joseph Henry, though neither the paper nor its presentation were recorded in the conference proceedings.

In the 165 years since, many more scientists have harnessed advanced technologies to conduct much more sophisticated experiments that essentially tell us exactly the same thing. And we have only sort of listened to them, too.

Valley of the rising temperatures:It isn't too late to save Phoenix from climate change

Latest climate report details major concerns

Last Monday, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change tried to tell the world, for the sixth time, that increasing carbon dioxide emissions, largely from burning fossil fuels, are causing the earth's average temperature to rise to a level that will become increasingly uncomfortable, and then unlivable.

The new report from the 270 international scientists that make up the panel's current Working Group II, focused on detailing expected climate impacts, adaptation possibilities and specific vulnerabilities, rather than simply repeating findings that the climate is warming due to human activity.

Some of the anticipated impacts include increased uncertainty in water and food supply resulting from ongoing drought, additional crop failures and declines in viable fisheries and livestock production. Extreme storm events will become more frequent and intense, contributing to economic losses, supply chain disruptions and exacerbated hardships for Indigenous and lower income communities.

The report also found that between 3.3 and 3.6 billion people live in locations that are highly vulnerable to climate change, such as rapidly-warming cities like Phoenix that are already seeing spikes in heat-related deaths. Human suffering from temperature increases in such already-extreme environments where not everyone has access to shade or air conditioned spaces is expected to worsen.

Through 37 pages, the Summary for Policymakers describes the complicated effects of climate change and "global weirding," another term for the erratic results of a rising atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, and how they may not always manifest in expected or linear ways.

"Multiple climate hazards will occur simultaneously, and multiple climatic and non-climatic risks will interact, resulting in compounding overall risk and risks cascading across sectors and regions," the summary's headline statements document reads.

Growing fast: How population growth brings risks, hope to metro areas

What is Arizona doing about climate change?

The solution, though, is as straightforward as collectively agreeing to pump less carbon dioxide into the earth-like glass jar that warmed up way too fast and cooled down way too slow after Foote placed it into the sun.

"It is essential to make rapid, deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to keep the maximum number of adaptation options open," said IPCC Working Group II Co-Chair Debra Roberts in a press conference the day the report was released. "So how do we accelerate and sustain adaptation? Political commitment and follow-through across all levels of government is key."

Some cities in Arizona have climate action plans in place and state universities host a legion of sustainability scientists at the ready. They offer solutions ranging from transforming urban spaces so that they retain less heat and reintegrate natural vegetation to reducing carbon dioxide emissions with a shift to renewable energy technology.

But in January, The Republic's Ryan Randazzo reported that "Three Republican utility regulators have voted down a proposal for 100% carbon-free energy in Arizona that was considered, debated, workshopped and offered for public comment for more than five years."

The Arizona representatives who voted against the proposal, which failed 3-2, cited concerns about cost to taxpayers and a sense that "the utilities are serious and sincere with their commitments to clean energy," and "do not need these state-level energy rules at this time," Randazzo wrote.

This instance was just one example of similar backsliding on energy policy in the state, which as a whole does not even allow greenhouse gas emissions to be tracked.

Green energy backsliding: Arizona regulators kill 100% clean-energy rules

Last week, the panel announced in its press conference that the costs of mitigating climate change now will be up to 20 times cheaper than facing later consequences, and also that utilities are definitely not already doing enough. The report concluded that a transition to more renewable, resilient and reliable energy systems is both highly feasible and one of our most promising adaptation options, if local and national governments could ever organize to pull it off.

Solar is just one of these sources of renewable, resilient and reliable energy. Here is an option, with technology that already exists, to harness the sun's powerful energy in a way that has the power to help reduce how much of that energy is retained as heat by additional emitted carbon dioxide molecules. But in this case, Arizona political powers shaded out that possibility.

Politics plays role in climate change

As the climate report suggests, there is work to be done to balance the warming, energizing power of the sun with the power of political will. The people have power too, as a climate rally held last Friday along Camelback Road in Phoenix aimed to flex. Activists marched from U.S. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema's Phoenix office down the road to Sen. Mark Kelly's local office in support of "bold investments in climate, jobs, and justice".

Sinema and Kelly cosponsored a climate action bill, the Growing Climate Solutions Act, that passed last year in the U.S. Senate and aimed to offer "economic opportunities for Arizona farmers while creating a cleaner environment." But local activists feel that progress on limiting greenhouse gas emissions, which that bill did not emphasize, has been far too slow.

"There has been a lot more talk about climate and a lot less action on climate in the U.S. Senate overall," said Sandy Bahr, the director of the Grand Canyon Chapter of the Sierra Club and an organizer of last week's rally. "That's not to say that Sen. Sinema and Sen. Kelly have done nothing. We're just saying it's not enough, and we need you to be leaders. They are senators from a state that has seen the impacts of climate change significantly."

Climate action happening too slow is not a problem unique to Arizona. But, with Arizona in the bullseye of anticipated vulnerabilities related to urban heat, water scarcity and affected food systems, it may be a place where the impacts of warming in the sun are felt more quickly and acutely if solutions stall.

At the press briefing that preceded the release of its latest report, Rachel Bezner Kerr, a professor of global development at Cornell University and a coordinating lead author of the new chapter on food systems, reiterated the widespread need for action:

"We find that every increased amount of warming will increase the risk of severe injuries. And so the more rapidly we can take strong action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the less severe the impacts will be," she said. "And there are solutions. But right now there are not transformative strategies being taken."

In 1856, after documenting rapid warming in the sunlit jar she had filled with carbon dioxide gas, Eunice Foote wrote that "an atmosphere of that gas would give to our earth a high temperature."

Tuesday was International Women's Day, which falls every year on March 8. This week, then, is perhaps a good time to posthumously recognize Eunice Foote for her contributions to science and predictions about our current greenhouse gas debacle.

The opposite of posthumous is antemortem, meaning before the death of, in this case, the wellbeing of life trapped inside this warming sphere in the sun. That would be a good time to make some changes around here.

Joan Meiners is the Climate News and Storytelling Reporter at The Arizona Republic and azcentral. Before becoming a journalist, she completed a Ph.D. in Ecology. Follow Joan on Twitter at @beecycles or email her at joan.meiners@arizonarepublic.com.

Support local journalism: Subscribe to azcentral.com today.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: The power of the sun, people and politics. The climate depends on all 3