Adaptation, the Other Climate Change Policy

The Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force has published its progress report today. It's fairly short and has some pretty strong lines. It opens with "[t]he impacts of climate change already are being felt across the United States and the entire world."

The Task Force is made up of five workgroups - science, agency process, water resource management, insurance, and international assistance. The focus is primarily on the need for a cross-government, cross-society approach in adapting to climate impacts.

The goals of the interagency work include:
- forming recommendations toward a national adaptation strategy
- integrating climate change resilience and adaptive capacity into Federal government operations
- broadening the understanding of vulnerability to climate impacts

The Progress Report highlights the work already being done within a number of agencies. However, there are still significant gaps. The final report, due in October 2010, is expected to address these challenges in much greater detail.

Climate Change and National Security

Here is an interesting interview with Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti, the UK's Special Envoy on Energy and Climate Security, by the National Journal. The UK is exploring the links between climate change and national security. Here's a quote from the interview:

[T]his is an issue that is not going to go away. It's an issue that we need to address, we need to understand more about. We need to develop the capability to monitor and see how this is happening. And we need to take action. And action is a mixture of adaptation to ensure we have the military capabilities in order to deliver the national security, and it is about mitigation and playing our part in the armed forces to reduce the future threat.

The basic premise is the natural link between a shifting climate and the resulting stresses on nations/regions already struggling to cope with existing pressures. Morisetti referenced this in his interview as well.

I would fully support the view that was expressed in the CNA think tank... report in 2007: that it is unlikely that climate change on its is going to start a conflict, but it could be the tipping point or the catalyst of conflict, because you're just heaping more stress on top of people who are already suffering from stress.

The UK isn't alone in its thinking. In addition to CNA, other groups including the Center for New American Security and the Woodrow Wilson Center have done a great deal of work on this front. I highly recommend checking out their reports and analysis.

Also take a look at what the US Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) says about climate change and the National Intelligence Assessment (NIA) which is focused entirely on climate change. The original NIA is classified but you can access an unclassified version here.

Climate Science Fact or Fiction . . . Thursday?

I'm feeling a little under the weather so not sure I'm going to be able to do the usual Fact or Fiction Friday post. So lucky you, I've decided to move it up a day. Don't get too excited, it'll go back to it's regularly scheduled Friday once I kick this cold.

As ever, please review my disclaimer before proceeding.

This is a great time of year for competition given the proximity of March Madness. Let's get stuck in.

Fact or Fiction: There is no scientific consensus on global warming.

Drum roll please . . . . Fiction! Truth is, 97% of climate scientists actively publishing climate papers endorse the consensus position.

Good game, good game.

To find out more, you can go to SkepticalScience and learn all about what's fact and what's fiction.

In case you missed it . . .

. . . there is still a debate on climate and energy legislation going on in the Senate. I know it's hard to make it passed all the other headlines but the New York times has this to offer.

Climate Science Fact or Fiction Friday

Welcome to the second installment of Fact or Fiction Friday. This is an opportunity to set the record straight on some of the regular arguments used by sceptics. See my first Fact or Fiction post for the usual disclaimer.

Get your game faces on because it's about to get ugly.

Fact or Fiction: Earth's climate has changed long before we were pouring CO2 into the atmosphere.

Wait for it. Wait for it. Fact but if the planet accumulates heat, global temperatures will go up. Currently, CO2 is imposing an energy imbalance due to the enhanced greenhouse effect and therefore capturing more heat in the atmosphere.

To find out more, you can go to http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm.

Also wanted to draw your attention to this latest study on the links between human activity and climate change.

Stay tuned for next week's installment of Fact or Fiction Friday. I also hope to put out a piece that explains the science of climate change in greater detail beforehand. You can't wait, can you?

New Report from the Center for American Progress

The Center for American Progress (CAP) released a report yesterday titled Out of the Running. Key message - the US needs to start making long-term investments in clean energy development or risk being shut out of a $2.3 trillion industry. CAP compares the US to what's happening in Germany, Spain, and China. The report finds that these countries are early winners and the US, lacking strong domestic clean energy policies, may be left behind.

For those who are interested, check out this December New Yorker article about China. It supports the CAP report's main message that the US needs to go all in on clean energy R&D, or end up losing the new Great Game.

I have a need . . . a need for speed

In May 1986, arguably one of the greatest movies of all time arrived in theaters across the US. It was a movie that taught generations of young Americans about courage, overcoming adversity, and how to execute a proper flyby in spite of a full pattern. It introduced us to great American heroes like Maverick, Goose, Iceman, and Slider.

But Top Gun was more than just a testosterone filled joyride. It was trying to fix America's gaze on a looming threat on the horizon. What was that threat? The USSR? A rogue state in the Middle East? Or was Maverick trying to warn us about something else?

I think he was, because that's just how he rolled. I argue here that Top Gun, and it's main character Maverick, were trying to warn us about the dangers of global climate change. I've just blown your mind haven't I? I'll pause here to let this sink in.

Think about it. The theme song alone, "Highway to the Danger Zone" by Kenny "Kellogg" Loggins, alludes to the dangers of runaway greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). But the movie delves deeper into the challenges we face.

In the opening scene Maverick goes into a high speed inverted dive with a MiG which, for those of you who are connoisseurs of the movie will recall, Iceman suggests is impossible. He of course represents the vested interests in our economy who hold on to the status quo with every last ounce of strength and suggest a transition to a low carbon energy future is a fantasy. The name itself, "Iceman", identifies a relic of the past.

Maverick challenges that status quo, but not without some loss. Goose's untimely death, which brings a tear to my eye every time I watch the movie, shows us that leaving behind what we know and cherish can be hugely difficult and painful. This reflects the "creative destruction" that will come with a shift to a new energy future. Mav questions himself and his motives after Goose dies. He almost gives up and yet, deep down, he knows that would just be un-American. So what does he do? He answers the call and saves Iceman.

Why would he save a relic? Because Mav knows, in all his mighty wisdom, that a transition to a new energy age doesn't happen overnight. He knows that 20th Century technology will still be needed to make a smooth shift into what needs to become the status quo of the 21st Century - increased use of renewables, nuclear power, and energy efficient products.

After Maverick has saved the day, we witness him throwing Goose's dog tags off the carrier which solidifies his break with the past. Something we all need to do if we hope to make a rapid transition to a low carbon 21st Century economy.