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.

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

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.

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.

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.