Friday, November 16, 2012

The Global Climate Regime: Deciphering Its Meaning at Global and Regional Levels


Foundations
Reactions to climate change are happening at many different levels across many different fields of experience.  In order to traverse the various layers of GHG mitigation efforts I will compare the relative success of the global climate change regime (the UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, the COP meetings) against gains made by the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and the Chicago Climate Exchange.  This will help determine the state of climate change mitigation policy-making.  Second, I will take the results of a survey of climate change academics I performed during my internship with Youth Climate Report and use those results to determine the state of interaction between climate science and policy.
            My internship this past summer, May-August 2012, was with Youth Climate Report, a film project based out of Toronto.  The project was partnered with the UNEP to create movies that were purely interviews between students and climate/sustainability scientists.  The movies were then screened at high profile UNEP conferences such as Rio+20 and COP 17 in Durban.  My job was to contact research programs and convince them to partner with us.  As a result I was able to speak with a lot of scientists and academics who work on climate change.

Monday, October 22, 2012

Changing Surroundings: Geo-engineering Our Way Out of Climate Change


Introduction
As climate change becomes inevitable, the public, government, and scientific community will begin to consider the idea of altering the climate in order to prevent further change.  These processes and projects are known as geo-engineering.  They center on the principle that if we can not muster the social will or technological ingenuity to prevent a changing climate we will have to reengineer nature to prevent climate change’s worst extremes, or reverse the process.  There are many different ideas on the table, all of which should be viewed skeptically given the complexity of our ecological systems and the scale of change altering the Earth’s climate implies.  Currently, there are tests being proposed and postponed in the UK that would use an enormous hose to inject sulfates into the stratosphere, cooling the planet.  Such projects bring with them a host of international governance issues.  All geo-engineering projects propose actions with global implications and their effects will traverse national boundaries.  Some projects may indirectly harm other nations; which raises the question of who will be held responsible when that happens.  What institutions, if any, will have authority over geo-engineering?  Will there be an international decision making and approval process or will nations act unilaterally?  Without these questions answered the prospects for a successful project are slim, or conversely, the chances of an ill-conceived project are greater. 
As a result of the complexity of Earth’s climate systems geo-engineering is a risky and controversial subject; however it can easily be viewed as a last second fix.  Thus it is incredibly important to understand the issues at stake.  To do this I will be discussing multiple proposed geo-engineering fixes to climate change and their possible ecological, political, and legal impacts.  Outside of that I will be reviewing the aforementioned sulfur injection project, the SPICE project, and the governance and approval mechanisms that are currently being used to regulate it.  Geo-engineering is a dangerous path which humanity seems headed for.  Adequate safeguards against reckless project implementation are not in place.  As a result, international regimes need to be formed to ensure that anything implemented does not create a cycle of projects of ever increasing scale.

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Refugees and the Environment: Ensuring Rights in an Uncertain World



A Case Study in Kenya
Introduction
Kenya has been dealing with refugees arriving in large numbers from Somalia (and other regions in the Horn of Africa) for about two decades.  This influx proved too much for Kenya from the beginning.  Refugees have lost many of the rights they were once accorded in Kenya, in the process being confined to overcrowded camps.  They are harassed by the Kenyan authorities and discriminated against by the populace.  As a result of their low social standing and the practically hopeless situation in the camps, some refugees are now turning towards terrorism and arms trafficking.  The refugee complex at Dadaab, the largest refugee complex in the world, has become a hub for these activities.  Currently the government is doing nothing to improve the camp's conditions.  As a result, the situation can only get worse.  Situations like this are going to increase around the world as climate change progresses; instances of conflict as a result of forced migration will become more common.  In order to alleviate such tensions I recommend there be concrete pathways to citizenship created and implemented.  By allowing refugees a path towards citizenship they, as a group, can work towards garnering more rights for themselves and becoming legitimate members of their host society, lessening the chance of violent conflict due to their inhumane treatment.
To argue my proposal I will be using the last 20 years of Kenyan history as a case study.  I am going to review Kenyan refugee policy prior to the arrival of the Somali refugees of the early ‘90s, the turning over of refugee affairs to UNHCR, the poor conditions of the Dadaab refugee camps, conditions for Kenyans in neighboring areas and cities, the consequences of the current drought and famine in Somalia for refugees, the population’s reaction to refugees, possible solutions to the refugee problem, and what this could mean for refugees of environmental disasters in general.  Tying this theme into climate change will be a priority for the final section of the paper.  Currently, what provisions there are for the protection of displaced persons do not take into consideration the special circumstances climate change will pose.  The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the subsequent 1967 Protocol only refer to people fleeing from political discrimination or violence (UNGA, 1951; UNGA, 1956).  As a result, new standards have to be created for environmental refugees; standards that can be applicable for the entire world.  I say new because extending the previous rights from the 1951 Convention will not be enough.  With the recent failure to reach binding emissions cuts in the Durban Accord rising average global temperatures will cause increased climate stresses.  Refugees of climate disasters are more likely to be permanently displaced, especially if there is a permanent climate shift.  As a result, more long-term solutions than repatriation will have to be sought.  Permanence of displacement will have to be acknowledged and dealt with.

Perverse Incentives in the Clean Development Mechanism: How Corporations and States can Circumvent Carbon Market Regulations

            On December 11, 1997 the Kyoto Protocol was initially adopted and on February 16, 2005 it entered into force.  The point of the Kyoto Protocol was to create an international regime that would multilaterally reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  Overall, the Protocol was a platform from which emissions reductions were supposed to happen.  In order to assist developing countries in continuing industrialization and modernization, and ease the burden of emissions reductions on developed countries, mechanisms were added to the Kyoto Protocol.  The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) have allowed countries to continue emitting if they reduce future emissions through development projects that support tertiary sustainable development.  In some cases however, this has not reduced total emissions but created a situation where any company which emits GHGs under the jurisdiction of the Kyoto Protocol can rely on offsets to continue emitting GHGs on the same level or even increase emissions.  This situation is known as a perverse incentive, where the incentive to fund the sustainable development project comes from increased profits or rewards which work against or undermine the purpose of the CDM, Kyoto Protocol, and (in this case) climate change mitigation in general. Recently it has come to light that various European corporations and Western banks have been taking advantage of a perverse incentive within the CDM via HFC-23 destruction.  This has produced larger than normal emissions reductions for European corporations and substantial profits for HCFC-22 producers and their financiers.  As a result stricter regulations, credit allotment methodology, and oversight are needed to ensure such practices do not continue.  The integrity of the European Union Emissions Trading System, the Clean Development Mechanism, and the Kyoto Protocol rely on this.

Saturday, October 20, 2012

Environmental Security and GHG Mitigation



Adaptation is not a solution: Loss of security and international order in a world not focused on greenhouse gas mitigation

Abstract
With the advent of the anthropocene, climate change is the central problem humans face with GHG mitigation being the overarching solution.  However, policymakers tend to push mitigation efforts aside while allowing adaptation efforts to take precedence.  This is especially common in the developed nations, especially the United States, where it is believed a changing climate could be beneficial to agriculture and trade.  This disregards the possibility for tipping points and dangerous climate change which would overstress the international system creating perilous security situations that no country can escape from.  Central to this problem is the current definition of environmental security, which is contested, and the seriousness with which the idea is taken.  Defining environmental security accurately is important because how people conceptualize a problem is based on the way it is thought of and the contexts in which it is used.  Some say that since environmental security is not a direct threat to the sovereignty of the state it does not deserve precedence over the economy or territorial disputes as a cause of conflict.  Adaptation is not a solution, however, argues that the synergy created by the different simultaneous problems climate change will bring necessitates it precedence over other security concerns.  Agricultural problems, increased frequency of natural disasters, health problems from new and spreading diseases, and the subsequent economic stress will create expanding compound problems that will stress the relationships between various nations and the IOs that have been created within the last half century.  Without defining environmental security as its own discipline the synergistic effects of the problems of climate change will not have the weight necessary to make an impact on the field in a timely manner.  As a result of the seriousness of climate change, nations need to move away from a focus on adaptation, despite its increasingly apparent need now, and begin to take GHG mitigation seriously.

The Chicago Climate Exchange

This is the second installment of a paper I am currently writing.  More material will follow soon.  The paper is a comparison of the effectiveness of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and Chicago Climate Exchange to the Kyoto Protocol, the effectiveness of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to the Major Economies Forum, and an analysis of a small survey I performed of climate scientists and sustainability professionals.


The Chicago Climate Exchange
            In 2003, two Northwestern professors received a grant to develop a carbon market for private industry in the United States.  They partnered with various professionals and corporations and from that the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) was born.  The CCX originally had thirteen participants in 2003: American Electric Power, Baxter International Inc., the City of Chicago, DuPont, Ford Motor Co., International Paper, Manitoba Hydro Corp., MeadWestvaco  Corp., Motorola Inc., STMicroelectrics, Stora Enso North America, Temple-Inland Inc., and Waste Management Inc.  Since that time the total number of participants (in the direct emissions portion) has grown to 84.  “Participants include major corporations, utilities, and financial institutions with activities in all 50 states, 8 Canadian provinces, and 16 countries.” (Chicago Climate Exchange)
            There have been two phases to the Chicago Climate Exchange thus far, before it was sold to InterContinental Exchange and merged with various other cap and trade programs.  I will be focusing on those two phases.  Phase I ran from 2003 to 2006 and Phase II ran from 2007 to 2010.  What separates them are the starting point for the baseline emissions scenarios.  The baseline for Phase I had to be the organizations average annual emissions from 1998-2001, while the Phase II baseline could either be the average annual emissions from 1998-2001 or the single year of 2000.  This gave those entering the CCX at a later date greater leeway in determining their baseline emissions, allowing them an easier path to meeting their emissions reduction targets.  This should not take away from the magnitude of the CCX’s success however.

Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative


Excerpt from my current project.

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative
            The RGGI is a compact, originally formed between 10 New England states, to regulate the greenhouse gas emissions coming from their power sectors.  Since its inception it has lost one member, New Jersey, beginning on January 1st, 2012. (Martin, 2010)  That is as a result of political reasons however, not the success or failure of the initiative to achieve its goals.  The initiative regulates 211 power facilities in nine states currently.  Its current members are comprised of Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. 
            The RGGI operates through an emissions allowance auction system.  Unsold allowances for the current year as well as all previous are auctioned in predetermined amounts quarterly.  Half of the allotment of total future emissions allowances for each year for the next four years can be auctioned.  Initial asking prices are determined “based on the Consumer Price Index, or 80-percent of the current market price of the particular RGGI allowance vintage being auctioned.” (RGGI, 2008)  The first control period lasted for three years from 2009-2011, after which it was decided in 2012 whether unsold allowances from previous years would be carried over into the new market. (RGGI , 2008; RGGI, 2012b)  Each state has its own way of determining the number the allowances it will make available for auction.  Their methods are defined in state statutes and regulations. (RGGI, 2012a)
            The entirety of the RGGI comprises an emissions market totaling 188 million tons of CO2.  This is ~29% of the size of the Chicago Climate Exchange (at an initial ~700 million tons of CO2 for Phase II), making it substantially smaller.  What is more important however, for determining systematic effectiveness at least, is understanding the percentage of total emissions cut.  For the first two 3-year periods the emissions baseline will remain steady and it will also be the compliance requirement.  After 2014, the baseline will decrease by 2.5% every   Each state has its own baseline set within the Memorandum of Understanding and its subsequent amendments, which are as stated: Connecticut, 10,695,036 tons; Delaware, 7,559,787 tons; Maine, 5,948,902 tons; Maryland, 37,503,983 tons; Massachusetts, 26,660,204 tons; New Hampshire, 8,620,460 tons; New Jersey, 22,892,730 tons; New York, 64,310,805; Rhode Island, 2,659,239 tons; Vermont, 1,225,830 tons.
            Not every allowance is sold however.  Some were not offered at auction and some were offered but not sold.  Of those not offered some were sold at a fixed price, transferred from state set-aside accounts, and some remained in set-aside accounts.  Of those in set-aside account a portion were retired.  For each state the portion of allowances remaining each year was different.  The number of allowances retired, and therefore tons of CO2 mitigated, and their percentage of the allowance budget per state is as followed: Connecticut, 6,802,914 tons, 21.2%; Delaware, 6,628,589 tons, 29.2%; Maine, 3,172 tons, 1.8%; Maryland, 6,501,404 tons, 5.8%; Massachusetts, 16,831,266 tons, 21%; New Hampshire, 452 tons,  <.01%; New Jersey, 15,706,238 tons, 22.9%; New York, 43,829,771 tons, 22.7%; Rhode Island, 1,706,721 tons, 21.4%; Vermont, 792,092 tons, 21.5%.  On the whole the RGGI states reduced emissions from their power sectors by an average of 16.76% for the First Control Period, with New Hampshire dragging the average down by two percentage points. (RGGI, 2012b)  On the whole emissions were reduced by 17.5% from their baseline.  This compares favorably with the outcome of the Chicago Climate Exchange’s Phase I.




















Figure 1                                                                                                                                            Figure 2
RGGI Allowance Allocations Breakdown by Status and State (RGGI, 2012a)


http://goo.gl/YCeEg - Yale Environment 360 article

RGGI Inc. (2008). Design elements regional allowance auctions under the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Retrieved from Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative website: http://www.rggi.org/docs/20080317auction_design.pdf

RGGI Inc. (2010). Relative effects of various factors on RGGI electricity sector CO2 emissions: 2009 compared to 2005. Retrieved from Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative website: http://www.rggi.org/docs/Retrospective_Analysis_Draft_White_Paper.pdf

RGGI Inc. (2011). RGGI compliance report. Retrieved from Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative website: https://rggi-coats.org/eats/rggi/index.cfm?fuseaction=reportsv2.final_compliance_summary_rpt&clearfuseattribs=true

RGGI Inc. (2012). Allowance allocation. Retrieved from http://www.rggi.org/market/co2_auctions/allowance_allocation

RGGI Inc. (2012). First control period CO2 allowance allocation. Retrieved from Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative website: http://www.rggi.org/docs/Allowance-Allocation.pdf

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Temperature and High and Low Pressure Systems for the US

The US is experiencing a terrible drought thus far.  Corn crops throughout the country are dying.  It is a bad situation and may be indicative of the type of weather we will see in the future.  This is due to high pressure systems repeatedly driving into the Great Plains from the Gulf of California.  In an earlier post I had stated that the slowing of the Jet Stream would cause there to be intermittent warm and cold periods, as a result of increased atmospheric blocking patterns.  However, it seems that wave after wave of warm air from high pressure systems is keeping the Jet Stream to the north.  This is bringing at least moderate drought to 64% of US, second only to the Dust Bowl drought of 1934.  While the 50s still hold some records for longest concurrent days of drought and the 30s the most severe drought we are breaking records this year quickly.

Here's what the corn crop is like in Missouri right now.  Keep in mind we do not have drought resistant GMO corn.
http://www.businessinsider.com/missouri-farmer-tim-reinbott-shows-us-how-the-midwest-drought-has-ruined-his-corn-crop-2012-7#

I'm going to keep a daily record of NOAA daily weather maps on this blog post.  I'll be giving the temperature and 500 mb map.  The 500 mb chart will show where the high pressure system is located and it should generally be where the warmest temperatures are.
Here is where you can get the weather maps. http://www.hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/dailywxmap/

8-7-12




Monday, July 2, 2012

Natalia Shakhova Interview 3/4/10

This interview was done a while ago but I think it's beneficial to show it anyways.  Ms. Shakhova says that methane concentrations at the time were the highest they had been in 400,000 years.  Additionally, in a presentation she gave at a symposium on November 30, 2010 she states that methane release from the ESAS measured an additional 3.5 Gt, enough to trigger abrupt climate change.

That means the recent rise in methane release goes beyond what was necessary for abrupt change.  With the wildfires raging in the Western US this seems like we're in a dire situation.  I think I'm going to write a post on the End Permian/Triassic mass extinction soon.  I'm probably going to start researching moisture retention in soil and companion planting for hot environments given the heat wave the US has been experiencing.

Sunday, July 1, 2012

Rio+20 'Future we Want' Part 2

The first part of Section V "Framework for action and follow-up" Point A.104 states the objective for the conference is primarily to "secure renewed political commitment for sustainable development, as well as to address the themes of a green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication and the institutional framework for sustainable development."  This statement sets a benchmark for what the conference is trying to achieve and it doesn't aim very high.  The conference is not meant to enhance concrete commitments that have already been made.  It is to secure renewed political commitment.  Of course this needs to be done within the three days the delegates attend the conference while they are supposed to be using the time to further sustainable development. 

References to Concrete Action
Point 163 commits to taking "action to reduce the incidence and impacts of such pollution on marine ecosystems, including through the effective implementation of relevant conventions adopted in the framework of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and the follow-up of the relevant intiatives such as the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities, as well as the adoption of coordinated strategies to this end.  We further commit to take action to, by 2025, based on collected scientific data, achieve significant reductions in marine debris to prevent harm to the coastal and marine environment."

In Point 255 the Parties "agree to establish an intergovernmental process under the auspices of the General Assembly, with technical support from the United Nations system and in open and broad consultation with relevant international and regional financial institutions and other relevant stakeholders.  The process will assess financing needs, consider the effectiveness, consistency and synergies of existing instruments and frameworks, and evaluate additional initiatives, with a view to preparing a report proposing options on an effective sustainable development financing strategy to facilitate the mobilization of resources and their effective use in achieving sustainable development objectives."  Point 256 further states, "An intergovernmental committee, comprising 30 experts nominated by regional groups, with equitable geographical representation, will implement this process, concluding its work by 2014."

Concrete Actions
There were no further concrete actions taken at the Conference.

Important Criticism
Point 247 states, "We also underscore that sustainable development goals should be action oriented,
concise and easy to communicate, limited in number, aspirational, global
in nature and universally applicable to all countries while taking into account
different national realities, capacities and levels of development and respecting
national policies and priorities."  This is an enormous mistake.  If this rule is followed plans for sustainable development can not be action oriented they can only espouse goals for what we would like to see.  Action oriented goals have to be tailored to every region or locality or they are meaningless.  The problems one area may face, drought, will be different from what another area will, increase in disease vectors.  This necessitates individual planning, which if done at the state level will look like an enormous and complicated plan on a level that has never been witnessed.

This is not only necessary it should have already happened.  I think it is nice to believe that climate change can be mitigated by independent actors slowly making concessions and building new infrastructure over time but that is not the case.  It has to be done now.  As the Arctic is warming and releasing methane we are sitting on the precipice of a disaster.  (See my previous post on Arctic Methane as a Driver of Climate.)  Regulation with teeth needs to be put in place to ensure that all actors are cutting emissions, not just those who think it is a good idea.

Conclusion
The purpose of these annual meetings is to further the creation of sustainable development policy and methods for ensuring compliance.  Specific plans should be created at these meetings while the maintenance of them should be carried out throughout the year in technical conferences.  At Rio all work seemed to be put off until later.  No specific plans for how any of the affirmations would be implemented were put forth.  No enforcement mechanisms were discussed.  The process has no urgency behind it.  Even if recommendations are to be sent to the General Assembly for further review an outline of the vision for the plan should be in the outcome documents.

In future posts I'm going to go over the various action plans that were listed in "Future we Want" to decipher what actions are being taken as a result of the UNCSD talks.

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Rio+20 'Future we Want' Part 1

I've been reading Future we Want, Rio+20's outcome document and seeing what I make of it.  There has been a groundswell of protest over its weakness and inability to enforce definite cuts in emissions.  No new binding commitments to sustainable development have been decided.  In the process, progress on sustainable development at the mega-multinational level has reportedly come to a stand still.

Section II lists all the prior agreements states have made that the Conference of Parties would like to reaffirm.  Just to list them off..
  1.  Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
  2. Agenda 21
  3. Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21
  4. Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Johannesburg Plan of Implementation)
  5. Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development of the World Summit on Sustainable Development
  6. Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States (Barabados Programme of Action)
  7. Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States
  8. Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the Decade 2011-2020 (Istanbul Programme of Action)
  9. Almaty Programme of Action: Addressing the Needs of Landlocked Developing Countries within a New Global Framework for a Transit Transport Cooperation for Landlocked and Transit Developing Countries
  10. political declaration on Africa's development needs
  11. New Partnership for Africa's Development
  12. United Nations Millennium Declaration
  13. 2005 World Summit Outcome
  14. Monterrey Consensus of the International Conference on Financing for Development
  15. Doha Declaration on Financing for Development
  16. outcome document of the High-level Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly on the Millennium Development Goals
  17. Programme of action of the International Conference on Population and Development
  18. key actions for the further implementation of the Programme of Action for the International Conference of Population and Development
  19. Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action 
I have no background in any of these agreements.  I'm just listing them for your and my further reference.  From here I want to look at the actual wording of the document to see how many references to concrete action to implement sustainable development are made vs. actual commitments or plans.

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Slowing of the Jet Stream

As climate change happens it is forecast that the Jet Stream will slow down which will form Rossby Waves, leading slowing moving systems of increased or decreased temperature.  This is the a picture of the Jet Stream on June 26, 2012 at 16:41 EST.
As you can see the Jet Stream has been pushed up in this map.  Much of the central United States is within the southern half of the system meaning temperatures are hot.  North of the wave is cold.  The system, in this condition, moves slowly.

Denver has just had 5 days in a row of temperature over 100 degrees Fahrenheit, tying its record.  Numerous other areas in the Midwest have also had intense 100 degree weather.  Fires within the west, particularly Colorado, have been intensifying.

Fresno, on the other hand, is on the north side of the system.  They just had a high of 82 F today tying the record for the coolest final weekend of June.  As I said, Fresno is on the cool north side of the system.  This is what we can expect as climate change continues.

The heat wave is unlikely to subside soon as a new high pressure system is coming up from the Gulf of California.  Here are some maps from 6/30/12 and 7/2/12.  Maps are available from Daily Weather Maps, NOAA.


If one reads the Adaptation to Climate Change in the Context of Sustainable Development and Equity section of TAR, Working Group 2 Chapter 18 I believe, there is a portion that states that most stakeholders in north America believe we have the technology available for adaptation (p904).  This has been a mantra of conservatives pushing for less regulation of GHGs.  Things like 'I don't know, I'd like it a little warmer,' in reference to some kind of tropical paradise abound.  The Midwest and Rocky Mountains aren't on the ocean though.  The climate systems with the type of heat we're talking about are not equivocal in the least.  Besides, who would want that kind of heat without the option of jumping into the ocean every once and a while?

This kind of weather, swinging from extreme heat to extreme cold, is the kind of thing that ruins agriculture.  Emissions are bound to increase as people retreat indoors and turn their air conditioning up.  Deaths and illness from heat related health problems will increase producing stress on our healthcare system.  Wildfires will increase in the west as will depletion of aquifers as farmers increase their water usage to ensure their crops don't die.

TAR WG2 Chap 18 states that forestry and agriculture are the 2 areas in which adaptation will be the most successful (p904).  All that has to be put in place are action plans for ensuring the infrastructure is available.  It has been over a decade since 2001, when the report came out, and not enough has been done.

This is a very bad situation.  From what I understand thus far Rio+20 was a bust in terms of ensuring that measurable and binding goals for sustainable development were set.  This ensures that we are headed down the wrong path in mitigating this problem.  Adaptation is a key goal of sustainability.  To not have measurable required regulation in place is to ensure a hasty careless action plan in the future.

I'm going to try to write some more on Rio+20's 'Future we Want' outcome document in the coming days.  I'll also be addressing National Action Plans for Adaptation that were discussed at the UNFCCC conference in Bonn in late May.  I'll be reviewing two case studies on Laos and Malawi.

I've included a Youtube video that does a good job explaining changes in the Jet Stream.  You can find the portion at 8:28.

Temperatures for 6/26/12.
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/show.html

Third Assessment Report Working Group Chapter 18
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg2/pdf/wg2TARchap18.pdf

The photo of the Jet Stream
http://www.intellicast.com/National/Wind/JetStream.aspx

Weird Winter - Mad March - Part 1 video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-1iBHAivmw&list=PLCDEC880116BEF63D&index=61&feature=plpp_video

Daily Weather Maps
http://www.hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/dailywxmap/index_20120702.html

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Deforestation

The first document I'm covering will be "Views on the issues identified in decision 1/CP.16, paragraph 72 and appendix II. Submissions from Parties" from the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice.  The recommendations were supposed to be submitted by February 28th, 2012.  Almost every country had their submissions sent in by the 29th.  The US sent their response in on March 6th.

Decision1/CP.16 paragraph 72 and appendix II covers the creation of a new mechanism to track and limit deforestation. It is called the Joint Mitigation and Adaptation Mechanism for the Integral and Sustainable Adaptation of Forests.

India's position on the decision seems self-serving.  I think it's obvious from India's position on the methodology for how forests should be measured and indigenous peoples included in governance that they are looking to subvert the proposal.  First they state that ToFs (trees out of forest) need to be accounted for in surveying.  This is a decision dedicated to deforestation, not just carbon sequestration, and as a result would have to take into account biological diversity and ecological resilience.  India's suggestions seem an attempt to circumvent both.  They suggest that the means for determining how the trees are accounted for be determined by each individual state, so that it is done according to their needs.  While it is important that each state is able to implement projects in a way that conforms to their national regulations and development needs, counting outside of forests does not contribute to the health of forests.  In addition, India suggested that the researchers assessing the amount of 'forest' should also have their work reviewed by outside experts and independent experts.

Ecosystems decay quicker the more biodiversity, land, or services you cut out of them.  By allowing ToFs to be counted you are creating another forest that is wholly non-existent, especially in a country as large as India.  Ecosystem services would be non-existent and there would be no additional biodiversity.  This would allow for the additional degradation of land and loss of soil to be included as a success in the conservation of forests.  New trees planted that had not matured could be considered forested area without additional ecosystem services being present.  For example, NTFPs (Non-tree Forest Products) would not be nearly as prevalent as they should be given the amount of trees in place.  While this would mean there is an increase in the amount of GHG being sequestered, since young trees absorb more CO2 than older trees, the absence of a genuine forest system should make individual and newly planted trees subject to their own form of accounting.

Allowing India to establish its own methodology could also create additional loopholes.   India does not identify what type of experts would be involved in the review of the forest information that must be analyzed and disseminated.  This leaves a large amount of room for political manipulation.  Political appointees with no scientific background could write the summary and general reports on the data.  These could easily mislead those who know little about the science or bring about the dissemination of false information to decision-making bodies.

Bonn Climate Talks

The Bonn talks were held this week.  They were meant to be a lead up to the COP 18 UNFCCC talks in Doha, Qatar this year.  This is the year to finalize any plans for a the second round of Kyoto Protocol cuts, making it very important.  The COP 15 talks were supposed to be the meetings at which we got the ball rolling on establishing new emissions restrictions, however most consider that to have been a failure.  With the COP 17 talks however the developing world, the BRICS in particular, have made concessions that the developed world has asked for consistently.  That may make it easier for the various developed nations to bring back a treaty requiring further reductions to their electorates at home.

In my opinion the Kyoto Protocol was not very successful.  Many say that the absence of the US was the downfall the treaty.  While I agree that without US reductions the success of the treaty is moot, the real disappointing part was the failure of the treaty without the US.  Political pressure could have brought the US into the treaty which would have put them on track with the rest of the world in cleaning up their emissions.  I'll admit that I'm not sure at what level emissions need to be cut to prevent dangerous climate change.  That's not my central problem however.  Excess carbon credits flooded the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme through the CDM creating an artificially high number of credits for European firms to buy.  That then allowed those firms to emit in excess of what they otherwise would have.

All of these credits came from about 17 HFC-23 abatement projects in China and India making these projects very easy to regulate.  However, no regulation was forthcoming once the abuse was pointed out, not for a few years at least.  Once it was acted upon leniency was still granted to the manufacturers.  And the manufacturers knew what they were doing.  I'll explain HFC-23 abatement and its impact on the EU ETS later but this is not an example of negligence on the part of CDM officials.  It is too large of a mistake to be anything other than corruption.

As this week passes I'll be giving my reactions on the various reports I read from the conference.

Friday, May 11, 2012

Arctic Methane as a Driver of Climate Change

Last summer, 2011, there were reports of the ocean bubbling from tankers traveling through the Chukchi Sea north of Russia.  The Chukchi Sea is north of Siberia, a section of the Arctic Ocean, and one of the last places in the Arctic to receive extensive research.  It runs along the coast of northeastern Siberia which is home to the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS).  The ESAS is the shallowest portion of the Arctic Ocean with an average depth of 50m.

In response to the freighter's reports a team from the University of Alaska Fairbanks that had been studying the area for the past decade launched an expedition to the region.  What they found were plumes of methane bubbling from the ocean up to a km across.  These areas had not been explored yet by the team.  Areas close to it however had only had plumes tens of meters across.  Why does this matter?

Methane is one of the more potent greenhouse gases (GHGs) that occur naturally on Earth in large quantities.  Over 20 years methane has 72 times more warming potential than carbon dioxide and 25 times more over 100 years.  Scenarios from the SRES, SREX, and the two latest comprehensive climate change reports from the IPCC, the TAR and AR4, don't include methane emissions outside of anthropogenic sources (agricultural emissions due to livestock and rice and other industry).  As a result, the effects of methane emissions from many natural sources has not been quantified and the effect of such large additions of methane into the atmosphere is unknown.

The ESAS is home to the largest concentration of methane hydrates or clathrates in the world.  Clathrates are solid crystal structures created under pressure near the bottom of the ocean or within the sediment.  Beneath the sediment clathrates extend until the geologic heat from the Earth becomes too much for the solid crystal structure to be maintained.  80% of the world's clathrates are located in the ESAS.  It is estimated that around 1750Gt of methane are stored within the ESAS.

In 2010 Shakhova et. al estimated that it was possible for a 50 Gt release of methane from the clathrates of the ESAS to happen at any time.  50 Gt of methane is enough to double the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, pushing us into the region of dangerous climate change.

In earlier periods, methane release from clathrates played a role in massive extinctions.  In fact, the largest extinction known to date, occurred in conjunction with massive methane releases from clathrates.  The Permian-Triassic extinction killed off 70% of terrestrial vertebrates, 90% of marine life. and is the only know mass extinction of insect life.  During that period carbon supersaturated the oceans turning the ocean from a carbon sink to a carbon source.  Oxygen levels are presumed to have been at such a low proportion that some forms of life could not be supported.  Massive wildfires roamed the continents.

This is an extreme example of the ability methane has of wreaking havoc on our climate system.  There is not nearly as much methane deposited in hydrates as there had been at that time.  It is also believed that the release of the hydrates was caused by the seismic activity of volcanoes located in Siberia.  Both of these point toward changes in climate not being as drastic as the Permian extinction.  Any change caused by the release of large amounts of methane from the ESAS however would be swift and have a large impact on the climate system.

What is most worrisome about this latest development in the ESAS is that the Arctic is already warming quicker than the rest of the world.  Some of this warming is unaccounted for.  It has been acknowledged that there is a feedback mechanism that inherently speeds the loss of Arctic ice as it melts.  As the ice melts and breaks apart it becomes surrounded by water which has a lower albedo (or reflectivity).  Heat energy is more easily trapped by surfaces with low albedo, causing the water surrounding the ice to heat up faster, causing the ice to melt quicker.  This vicious cycle does not account for all increases in warming however.

Recently, NASA performed flyovers of the oceans spanning from one pole to the next.  They flew over the Arctic five times and discovered that methane levels from the Arctic ocean were .5% higher than background levels.  (See my entry from April 24, 2012.)   The higher methane levels were concentrated where there were leads in the ice, meaning the methane was coming from the ocean and not already present in the atmosphere.  This discovery may account for the additional warming we are experiencing in the Arctic.  The source of this methane has not been identified yet.  This leaves us with the question, "What is happening in the Arctic?"

It would seem to me that the increasing levels of methane are indicative of a positive feedback beginning in the Arctic.  The ocean water that is coming in contact with the permafrost on the ESAS is 12-17 degrees Celsius warmer than the ice that had previously covered it.  With the greater release of ESAS methane Arctic waters will become supersaturated with carbon, become warmer more easily, turn the ocean into a source, and aid the release of additional clathrates in Arctic.  GHG emissions must be limited NOW in order to prevent this...

References

Kort, E., Wofsy, S., Daube, B., Diao, M., Elkins, J., Gao, R., et al. (2012). Atmospheric observations of Arctic Ocean methane emissions up to 82 north. Nature Geoscience, 5, 318-321.

"Methane releases from Arctic shelf may be much larger and faster than anticipated." National Science Foundation - US National Science Foundation (NSF). Version 10-036 . N.p., 4 Mar. 2012. Web. 11 May 2012. .

Romm, Joe. "Science stunner: Vast East Siberian Arctic Shelf methane stores destabilizing and venting | ThinkProgress." ThinkProgress. N.p., 4 Mar. 2012. Web. 11 May 2012. .

Shakhova, N.E, V.A Alekseev, and I.P Semiletov. "Predicted methane emission on the East Siberian Shelf." Doklady Earth Sciences 430.2 (2010): 190-193.

Shakhova, N., Semiletov, I., Sergienko, V., Pipko, I., & Dudarev, O. (2012). On carbon transport and fate in the East Siberian Arctic land–shelf–atmosphere system. Environmental Research Letters, 7, 1-13.

Shen, S, J.L Crowley, Y Wang, S.A Bowling, D.H Erwin, P.M Sadler, and C Cao. "Calibrating the end-Permian mass extinction." Science 334 (2011): 1367-1372.

Sunday, April 29, 2012

Mysterious Methane Release from the Arctic Ocean

From 2009 to 2010 NASA has performed five flights over the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas at high and low altitudes.  Methane was measured during these flights and it was found to be .5% higher than background levels.  The origin of this methane seepage is unaccounted for though it is obviously coming from the ocean since the higher levels are concentrated around leads in the ice.  Methane is a very potent greenhouse gas with a global warming potential 72 times greater than carbon dioxide over 25 years and 20 times more potent over 100 years.

More information is available at http://bit.ly/IbbmcK and the original source is  Atmospheric observations of Arctic Ocean methane emissions up to 82° north from Nature Geoscience published online on April 22.

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentrations for 2011

The Scripps Institute of Oceanography, located in Mauna Loa, Hawaii, announced that atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations rose from 388.56 ppm to 391.3 ppm in 2011.  According to the IPCC carbon dioxide levels can not pass 450 ppm in order to maintain a 90% chance of averting dangerous climate change, which means emissions must cease growing by 2015.  Emissions levels in most countries are increasing however with countries in the Organization of Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) countries increasing emissions by 3.4%, and outside nations averaging 7.6%.  (The OECD has 34 member states, wikipedia.org/wiki/OECD.)  Some blame the Chinese for stalled talks on emissions reductions at the recent Conference of Parties (COP) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).  While China had more total emissions than any other emitter the United States (the world’s number 2 emitter of greenhouse gases or GHGs) has the highest emission rates per capita.  The US also has emitted more GHGs over a longer period of time giving it the historical burden for the development of climate change.

You can read more about this at http://bit.ly/IvTrjt.