Category: Climate chaos

The atmosphere is to the earth as a layer of varnish is to a desktop globe. It is thin, fragile and essential for preserving the items on the surface.150 years of burning fossil fuel have overloaded the atmosphere to the point where the earth is ill. It now has a fever. Read the detailed article, Soothing Gaia’s Fever for an evocative account of that analogy. The items listed here detail progress on coordinating 6.5 billion people in the most critical project undertaken by humanity. 

  • Revealed: climate change impact on the US.

     

    “It is clear that climate change is happening now. The observed climate changes we report are not opinions to be debated. They are facts to be dealt with,” he said.

    The nearly 200-page document is a joint venture between the White House and 13 federal agencies.

    It has been released as the US Congress considers legislation that imposes the first national cap on emissions while also seeking to reduce them.

    Mr Obama’s chief science adviser, John Holdren, says action must be taken.

    “Action needs to include both measures to reduce the emissions of heat-trapping pollution that are driving this problem and measures to adapt to the part of climate change we can’t avoid,” he said.

    The report compiles years of scientific research and updates it with new data, painting a bleaker picture of global warming in the United States than has been done before.

    It reveals that the average temperature in the US has risen 2 degrees Fahrenheit over the past 50 years, and might rise by up to 11 degrees Fahrenheit by the year 2100.

    It warns the number of deaths from heat waves could double in Los Angeles and quadruple in Chicago if emissions are not reduced.

    Sea levels are also expected to rise, with the area near New York City one of the worst hit.

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Jane Lubchenco says humans are to blame.

    “We’re also reporting today with greater confidence than ever before that human activities are the main cause of the changes we see underway,” she said.

    “I really believe this report is a game changer, I think that much of the foot dragging in addressing climate change is a reflection of the perception that climate change is way down the road, it’s in the future.

    “And this report demonstrates, provides the concrete scientific information, that says unequivocally that climate change is happening now.”

    Meanwhile the United Nations is warning of what it calls “megadisasters” in the world’s biggest cities unless more is done to heed the threat of climate change.

    It says tens of millions of people are highly exposed because they live in big cities that would be threatened by rising sea levels or earthquakes.

    And a new report from the Red Cross likens forecasting the impact of global warming to rolling a dice saying: “confronted with global warming, we know the dice is loaded”.

  • Global warming isn’t real-Fielding

    In Climate Change Minister Penny Wong’s corner were Australia’s chief scientist, Penny Sackett, and eminent climate scientist Will Steffen.

    “Global warming quite clearly over the last decade hasn’t been actually occurring,” Senator Fielding said before the meeting.

    “I also believe there is climate change.”

    The Senate is due to vote on emissions trading next week.

    Senator Fielding recently returned from a self-funded trip to the US where he met with scientists who blame global warming on solar activity.

    He took charts into today’s meeting to show that global temperatures had not increased since 1998.

    He conceded temperatures “may be well above the average” but said they had not gone up any higher lately.

    Prof Steffen emerged from the 90-minute meeting to say that global warming was real.

    While 1998 was a particularly hot year, the decade since had remained warmer than average.

    “The climate’s still pretty warm,” the Australian National University academic said.

    “A lot of the arguments I’ve seen put forward … wouldn’t get through a PhD student at ANU.”

    A spokesman for Senator Fielding said the evidence put forward by his team had given Senator Wong food for thought.

    The Senator felt his key questions had not been answered in the meeting, but he was going to spend some time thinking it over.

    Meanwhile, the consumer watchdog has been asked to investigate whether big business is scaremongering about the costs of tackling climate change.

    The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and the Australian Climate Justice Program have lodged a complaint with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).

    The complaint alleges some companies are making “exaggerated” public statements about the costs of emissions trading, in a bid to gain more assistance under the scheme.

    But the companies are toning it down to their shareholders to keep up the share price, complainants say.

    The companies named in the complaint are Rio Tinto, Woodside, Xstrata, Boral, Caltex and BlueScope Steel.

    Boral said it strongly refuted the allegations and said it was true that emissions trading would have significant consequences on its operations.

  • We are fighting for our lives and our dignity

     

    “For thousands of years, we’ve run the Amazon forests,” said Servando Puerta, one of the protest leaders. “This is genocide. They’re killing us for defending our lives, our sovereignty, human dignity.”

    Yesterday, as riot police broke up more demonstrations in Lima and a curfew was imposed on many Peruvian Amazonian towns, President Garcia backed down in the face of condemnation of the massacre. He suspended – but only for three months – the laws that would allow the forest to be exploited. No one doubts the clashes will continue.

    Peru is just one of many countries now in open conflict with its indigenous people over natural resources. Barely reported in the international press, there have been major protests around mines, oil, logging and mineral exploitation in Africa, Latin America, Asia and North America. Hydro electric dams, biofuel plantations as well as coal, copper, gold and bauxite mines are all at the centre of major land rights disputes.

    A massive military force continued this week to raid communities opposed to oil companies’ presence on the Niger delta. The delta, which provides 90% of Nigeria’s foreign earnings, has always been volatile, but guns have flooded in and security has deteriorated. In the last month a military taskforce has been sent in and helicopter gunships have shelled villages suspected of harbouring militia. Thousands of people have fled. Activists from the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta have responded by killing 12 soldiers and this week set fire to a Chevron oil facility. Yesterday seven more civilians were shot by the military.

    The escalation of violence came in the week that Shell agreed to pay £9.7m to ethnic Ogoni families – whose homeland is in the delta – who had led a peaceful uprising against it and other oil companies in the 1990s, and who had taken the company to court in New York accusing it of complicity in writer Ken Saro-Wiwa’s execution in 1995.

    Meanwhile in West Papua, Indonesian forces protecting some of the world’s largest mines have been accused of human rights violations. Hundreds of tribesmen have been killed in the last few years in clashes between the army and people with bows and arrows.

    “An aggressive drive is taking place to extract the last remaining resources from indigenous territories,” says Victoria Tauli-Corpus, an indigenous Filipino and chair of the UN permanent forum on indigenous issues. “There is a crisis of human rights. There are more and more arrests, killings and abuses.

    “This is happening in Russia, Canada, the Philippines, Cambodia, Mongolia, Nigeria, the Amazon, all over Latin America, Papua New Guinea and Africa. It is global. We are seeing a human rights emergency. A battle is taking place for natural resources everywhere. Much of the world’s natural capital – oil, gas, timber, minerals – lies on or beneath lands occupied by indigenous people,” says Tauli-Corpus.

    What until quite recently were isolated incidents of indigenous peoples in conflict with states and corporations are now becoming common as government-backed companies move deeper on to lands long ignored as unproductive or wild. As countries and the World Bank increase spending on major infrastructural projects to counter the economic crisis, the conflicts are expected to grow.

    Indigenous groups say that large-scale mining is the most damaging. When new laws opened the Philippines up to international mining 10 years ago, companies flooded in and wreaked havoc in indigenous communities, says MP Clare Short, former UK international development secretary and now chair of the UK-based Working Group on Mining in the Philippines.

    Short visited people affected by mining there in 2007: “I have never seen anything so systematically destructive. The environmental effects are catastrophic as are the effects on people’s livelihoods. They take the tops off mountains, which are holy, they destroy the water sources and make it impossible to farm,” she said.

    In a report published earlier this year, the group said: “Mining generates or exacerbates corruption, fuels armed conflicts, increases militarisation and human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings.”

    The arrival of dams, mining or oil spells cultural death for communities. The Dongria Kondh in Orissa, eastern India, are certain that their way of life will be destroyed when British FTSE 100 company Vedanta shortly starts to legally exploit their sacred Nyamgiri mountain for bauxite, the raw material for aluminium. The huge open cast mine will destroy a vast swath of untouched forest, and will reduce the mountain to an industrial wasteland. More than 60 villages will be affected.

    “If Vedanta mines our mountain, the water will dry up. In the forest there are tigers, bears, monkeys. Where will they go? We have been living here for generations. Why should we leave?” asks Kumbradi, a tribesman. “We live here for Nyamgiri, for its trees and leaves and all that is here.”

    Davi Yanomami, a shaman of the Yanomami, one of the largest but most isolated Brazilian indigenous groups, came to London this week to warn MPs that the Amazonian forests were being destroyed, and to appeal for help to prevent his tribe being wiped out.

    “History is repeating itself”, he told the MPs. “Twenty years ago many thousand gold miners flooded into Yanomami land and one in five of us died from the diseases and violence they brought. We were in danger of being exterminated then, but people in Europe persuaded the Brazilian government to act and they were removed.

    “But now 3,000 more miners and ranchers have come back. More are coming. They are bringing in guns, rafts, machines, and destroying and polluting rivers. People are being killed. They are opening up and expanding old airstrips. They are flooding into Yanomami land. We need your help.

    “Governments must treat us with respect. This creates great suffering. We kill nothing, we live on the land, we never rob nature. Yet governments always want more. We are warning the world that our people will die.”

    According to Victor Menotti, director of the California-based International Forum on Globalisation, “This is a paradigm war taking place from the arctic to tropical forests. Wherever you find indigenous peoples you will find resource conflicts. It is a battle between the industrial and indigenous world views.”

    There is some hope, says Tauli-Corpus. “Indigenous peoples are now much more aware of their rights. They are challenging the companies and governments at every point.”

    In Ecuador, Chevron may be fined billions of dollars in the next few months if an epic court case goes against them. The company is accused of dumping, in the 1970s and 1980s, more than 19bn gallons of toxic waste and millions of gallons of crude oil into waste pits in the forests, leading to more than 1,400 cancer deaths and devastation of indigenous communities. The pits are said to be still there, mixing chemicals with groundwater and killing fish and wildlife.

    The Ecuadorian courts have set damages at $27bn (£16.5bn). Chevron, which inherited the case when it bought Texaco, does not deny the original spills, but says the damage was cleaned up.

    Back in the Niger delta, Shell was ordered to pay $1.5bn to the Ijaw people in 2006 – though the company has so far escaped paying the fines. After settling with Ogoni families in New York this week, it now faces a second class action suit in New York over alleged human rights abuses, and a further case in Holland brought by Niger Delta villagers working with Dutch groups.

    Meanwhile, Exxon Mobil is being sued by Indonesian indigenous villagers who claim their guards committed human rights violations, and there are dozens of outstanding cases against other companies operating in the Niger Delta.

    “Indigenous groups are using the courts more but there is still collusion at the highest levels in court systems to ignore land rights when they conflict with economic opportunities,” says Larry Birns, director of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs in Washington. “Everything is for sale, including the Indians’ rights. Governments often do not recognise land titles of Indians and the big landowners just take the land.”

    Indigenous leaders want an immediate cessation to mining on their lands. Last month, a conference on mining and indigenous peoples in Manila called on governments to appoint an ombudsman or an international court system to handle indigenous peoples’ complaints.

    “Most indigenous peoples barely have resources to ensure their basic survival, much less to bring their cases to court. Members of the judiciary in many countries are bribed by corporations and are threatened or killed if they rule in favour of indigenous peoples.

    “States have an obligation to provide them with better access to justice and maintain an independent judiciary,” said the declaration.

    But as the complaints grow, so does the chance that peaceful protests will grow into intractable conflicts as they have in Nigeria, West Papua and now Peru. “There is a massive resistance movement growing,” says Clare Short. “But the danger is that as it grows, so does the violence.”

  • Climate action must be a first resort

     

    The latest figures from the IMF are certainly shocking. The global economy is in full recession, predicted to shrink by 1.3% this year (at least until the next downward revision of forecasts). Advanced economies have suffered a massive 3.8% fall in output. And although the developing world isn’t doing quite so badly as the rich countries – it is predicted to achieve sluggish positive growth – a close examination of the numbers reveals that the impact on poor people looks very worrying.

    In per capita terms (ie allowing for population growth), developing country economies are shrinking, after years of progress. Using the World Bank estimate that a loss of 1% of global economic output pushes 20m people into poverty, by the end of 2009, 100 million more people will be living below $1.25 a day than would otherwise be the case. Stop and read that again: below $1.25 a day.

    That certainly fits economists’ definition of a “shock”, and a big one at that. What changes might such a shock trigger? There are already signs of some tectonic shifts. First, the geopolitical – the crisis has crystallised the rise of China. After keeping its head down during three decades of “peaceful rise”, Chinese diplomacy has suddenly become far more assertive, openly blaming the west for the crisis and calling for major reforms of the international financial system. The era of the G2 (US and China) begins here. More broadly, the G8 is now looking increasingly obsolete – real power has shifted to the G20, with far greater recognition of the role of emerging economies such as Brazil and India, as well as China.

    Second, the end of the Great Deregulation. Since finance was let off the leash in the mid 1970s, it has boomed and come to dwarf the real economy. By 2007 the daily flow of capital across borders was 100 times greater than world trade. Backed by the power to make and break economies, the whims and prejudices of financial markets acquired absurd political importance. That has now given way to an era of reregulation and downsizing of the financial sector. Good thing too.

    But other impacts are worrying or absent. At the G20 in London in April, the world wrote a huge cheque to the International Monetary Fund, in return for promises of reform. But it is far from certain that the IMF can transform itself from being an austerity-wielding devotee of the “Friedmanite tourniquet” to being an advocate of the kind of Keynesian ­reflation that is needed in poor countries right now.

    Most worrying of all, climate change has so far taken a back seat. The G20 largely ignored the issue; progress in the UN talks that culminate in Copenhagen in December is glacial. But we are running out of time. The longer we take in beginning a fundamental (and probably painful) shift to a low-carbon economy, the worse the climate change and pain of transition will become. At the current rate global greenhouse gas emissions will double in 25 years. They need to start falling fast by 2015 at the latest.

    Some argue that we should sort out the economic crisis first, and then turn our attention to the longer-term issues such as climate change, but that is to ignore the role of crises in driving change.

    The creation of the UN, World Bank and IMF – the global order of the second half of the 20th century – was the product of both the Great Depression and the second world war. World leaders meeting at the G8 next month have a real chance to grasp their once-in-a-generation opportunity. But my fear is that the current economic collapse will not be enough to convince us or them of the need for change. Will we need the climate equivalent of a world war before we and our leaders accept the need to shift to a low carbon world? The scale of such a climate shock, its irreversibility, and the impact on the lives of millions of ordinary people make that a very bad last resort.

    Read Duncan Green’s blog here

  • New radar explores stratosphere

    The radar combines 4,096 small antennas, each with its own transmitter, on a single instrument, rather than one giant dish equipped with one powerful transmitter. Rather than physically rotating the radar to point in different directions, the steering is done electronically by slightly phasing each of the antenna elements differently.

    The radar, which can be run remotely via the Internet, can be very quickly adjusted to pinpoint and track velocity, temperature and other changes in the upper atmosphere.

    “All the previous systems would take half an hour to make measurements of a region that we’re interested in,” Donovan told Discovery News. “That’d be like keeping a camera’s exposure open for 30 minutes when you’re trying to take a picture of the finish of a race. All you’d see are streaks.”

    “It has the ability to essentially take three-dimensional pictures of the ionosphere whereas traditional systems can only look in one direction because of steering limitations,” added Michael Nicolls, a research scientist with SRI International in Menlo Park, Calif.

    “This allows us, for example, to see wiggles in the ionosphere, and say ‘Yes, these are atmospheric waves’ and, in addition, figure out where they are coming from, which is very unique,” Nicolls wrote in an email to Discovery News.

    With the new capabilities, scientists hope to be able to trace atmospheric waves to their source, such as a thunderstorm or air slamming into a mountain.

    “By building up this 3-D view showing the waves, we can see where the sources are,” said Craig Heinselman, the principal investigator of the Advanced Modular Incoherent Scatter Radar, or AMISR. “It’s the first time we’ve been able to look, especially at high latitudes, in multiple directions simultaneously.”

    Scientists have identified a few types of waves, some of which rip through the region of the atmosphere known as the mesopause, about 60 to 90 kilometers above the planet, and others in the thermosphere, roughly 200 to 300 kilometers in altitude.

    The waves can be hundreds of kilometers long and travel at half the speed of sound.

    “They are really enormous,” Heinselman said.

    Scientists will soon be expanding their view with a second AMISR system at Resolute Bay in Nunavut, Canada, which is within the polar cap.

    “It is really uncharted territory,” said Nicolls. “Who knows what we will find.”

    Nicolls and other scientists presented results from AMISR Poker Flat research at the American Geophysical Union conference in Toronto last week.

  • Why 700.000 addresses face being washed off map

     

    Sea-level rise conjures up Pacific Islanders and Bangladeshis in dire straits, but few Australians appreciate it will hit some of the most valuable homes in this country. The legal advice coming from the State Government is that beachfront home owners will have to bear the brunt of the risk.

    The best hope of limiting sea-level rise from climate change is to cut global greenhouse emissions, according to the scientific advice. Yet yesterday prospects for an ambitious climate agreement in Copenhagen in December appeared to be dimming.

    As another round of preliminary United Nations talks ended in Bonn, the lofty goal for developed countries to cut emissions between 25 per cent and 40 per cent from 1990 levels by 2020 is looking remote. With Japan and the United States facing tough resistance at home from industry, a target of 15 per cent is now being discussed seriously.

    If that happens, the prospects of getting China and India on board to stop the soaring growth in their emissions will be even more difficult.

    Back home, the Climate Change Minister, Penny Wong, has yet to convince the Opposition and the Greens to support the Government’s emissions trading scheme, which is supposed to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.

    If a less-than-ambitious climate agreement is the result, the evidence of climate scientists is that we will seriously increase the chances that the Greenland ice sheet will melt, bringing with it catastrophic sea-level rise.