Global Warming High on Senate Foreign Relations Agenda

By Juliet Eilperin | Washington Post

Climate change policy will get a boost next year from the fact that some of the most senior members of the Obama administration have focused on the issue during their careers, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) told reporters today.

Kerry, who will chair the Senate Foreign Relations Committee next Congress, said he expected Vice President-elect Joe Biden and Sen. Hillary Clinton — who is expected to be named secretary of state — will both use their new roles to promote a global pact curbing greenhouse gases.

“Both will be exceedingly helpful and important in this effort,” Kerry said during the telephone news conference.

Kerry will lead the Senate delegation headed to Poznan, Poland, next month in order to participate in U.N. climate talks that will lay the groundwork for a final international agreement on greenhouse gases in December 2009. He noted that since the Senate must ratify any climate treaty arising from the 2009 negotiations, “We intend to be a full partner with the administration in defining the parameters of a global agreement.”

Global warming, he said, is “going to be front and center” on the Foreign Relations Committee’s agenda.

“It’s going to be one of the top priorities of the committee,” Kerry said. “I know this playing field and I know this issue.”

Dem infighting risks inaction on labor, global warming bills

Nick Juliano | The Raw Story

Democrats have expanded their majorities in Congress and are inching towards a filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate, but marshaling lock-step unity has never been a strong point for party leaders, raising the prospects that infighting among Democratic factions could slow or derail key legislation.

Politico outlined some of the key areas where Democrats are divided.

Unless Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) can whip their caucuses into unity, numerous fault lines will be revealed: Southern Democrats vs. Northern liberals on labor law; California greens vs. Rust Belt Democrats on global warming; socialized medicine adherents vs. go-slow health care reformers; anti-war liberals vs. cautious centrists on national security. And don’t forget the anti-bailout crowd vs. the powerful Michigan Democrats in both chambers when it comes to money for Detroit.

The disagreements between different Democratic factions became clear as soon as the election ended, when Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) launched his ultimately successful coup to take over the chairmanship of the Energy & Commerce Committee, unseating Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), the longest-serving current member of the House.

Waxman, a friend to environmentalists and progressives, will be well positioned to shepherd through the House dramatic overhauls to US energy and healthcare policy as chairman of the powerful committee. Some Midwestern Democrats saw the ouster of Dingell as a snub to the interests of their manufacturing-heavy and economically depressed states.

The bigger struggle will come in the Senate, where some moderate Democrats oppose dramatic action on global warming and hence may not help the party garner 60 votes.

Republicans, for their part, are ready to sit back and enjoy the Democrats’ struggles.

“When you’re playing with live ammunition and you have to actually live with the consequences of the policy, it’s much, much tougher,” Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-OH) told Politico. “Do Democrats really want to hamstring U.S. manufacturers with new climate change regulations in the current economic climate?”

To be sure, President-elect Barack Obama has indicated that finding pragmatic solutions is among his top priorities. And, the Democrats certainly find themselves better off disagreeing amongst themselves than they were for the last eight years, where most proposals couldn’t get off the ground because of assured vetoes from President Bush.

U.N. panel’s findings on climate change

Reuters

Following are findings of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in a 2007 report. The scientific findings are meant as a guide for government delegates who will meet in Poznan, Poland, from December 1-12:

 

* OBSERVED CHANGES

 

“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level.”

 

* CAUSES OF CHANGE

 

“Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in … greenhouse gas concentrations” from human activities.

 

Annual greenhouse gas emissions from human activities have risen by 70 percent since 1970. Concentrations of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, far exceed the natural range over the last 650,000 years.

 

* PROJECTED CLIMATE CHANGES

 

Temperatures are likely to rise by between 1.1 and 6.4 Celsius (2.0 and 11.5 Fahrenheit) and sea levels by between 18 cm and 59 cm (7 inches and 23 inches) this century.

 

Africa, the Arctic, small islands and Asian mega-deltas are likely to be especially affected by climate change. Sea level rise “would continue for centuries” because of the momentum of warming even if greenhouse gas levels are stabilized.

 

“Warming could lead to some impacts that are abrupt or irreversible.” About 20-30 percent of species will be at increasing risk of extinction if future temperature rises exceed 1.5 to 2.5 Celsius.

 

* FIVE REASONS FOR CONCERN

 

– Risks to unique and threatened systems, such as polar or high mountain ecosystems, coral reefs and small islands.

 

– Risks of extreme weather events, such as floods, droughts and heatwaves.

 

– Distribution of impacts — the poor and the elderly are likely to be hit hardest. And countries near the equator, most of them poor, generally face greater risks such as of desertification or floods.

 

– Overall impacts — there is evidence since 2001 that any benefits of warming would be at lower temperatures than previously forecast and that damages from larger temperature rises would be bigger.

 

– Risks or “large-scale singularities,” such as rising sea levels over centuries; contributions to sea level rise from Antarctica and Greenland could be larger than projected.

Continue reading here.

Africa: Outlines of the Algiers Declaration on Climate Change

The Algiers Declaration on climate change, adopted November 19, 2008 by the Conference of African Ministers of the Environment, will serve as the platform for African countries for future negotiations on climate.

The most effective strategy to address climate change is to integrate management of current climate variability and extremes with adaptation to climate change: a climate risk management and adaptation (CRMA) approach. Such an integrated strategy provides immediate benefits given the increasingly significant impacts of current climate variability and extremes on economic development in Africa. As a cross-cutting issue, CRMA requires a comprehensive approach, combining due diligence in regular Bank operations (at project, country and sector level) with targeted assistance to RMCs. The new CRMA Strategy will guide the Bank’s efforts in these two areas.

Bank Group Climate Risk Management and Adaptation Strategy – Approach Paper: Integrating Climate Change Adaptation Into Bank Group Operations, March 2008

Report: Climate Change Will Be More Severe in 2025

 

Erica McCarthy | Atlantic Council

The National Intelligence Council’s “Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World” report considers likely scenarios for nearly all strategic global issues, including nuclear proliferation, terrorism, and climate change.  Climate change in particular is an issue that we will be faced with on a daily basis two decades from now.

The current climate debate surrounds efforts at mitigation, but what the NIC report rightly focuses on is the anticipated impacts from the change in climate that are likely inevitable despite current efforts at mitigation.  These involve volatile weather and temperature patterns that will affect water, food, and energy supplies – all basic necessities for economic development.  Regarding the impact on water supplies, the report points out:

“[L]ack of access to stable supplies of water is reaching unprecedented proportions in many areas of the world … and is likely to grow worse owing to rapid urbanization and population growth….  Demand for water for agricultural purposes and hydroelectric power generation also will expand.  Use of water for irrigation is far greater than for household consumption.  In developing countries, agriculture currently consumes over 70 percent of the world’s water.”

 

The crucial point that we must take away from this trend is the link between these environmental scenarios and violent conflict.  Climate change will likely worsen the state of already scarce resources.  Many water resources are shared by more than one country, a situation ripe for interstate violence when the resource runs low.  Darfur and Somalia have already seen conflict over competition for arable land, which is likely to become less available with anticipated climate impacts.

Sadly these trends are most prevalent in those countries that lack the social institutions to handle the increasingly stressful scenarios.  This not only leads to unrest and distress within these countries, but also results in their citizens seeking shelter in places better equipped to deal with the changing environment.  “Global Trends 2025” references the estimate of the Stern Review that “by the middle of the century, 200 million people may be permanently displaced ‘climate migrants.’”  Such anticipated migration will undoubtedly lead to security stresses across the globe.

This is, of course, not to say that mitigation efforts should be abandoned.  Clearly the impacts we are likely to see will only be worse without current local, regional, and global attempts at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.  However, as the Stockholm Network’s Carbon Scenarios demonstrate, even the most ambitious plans to mitigate climate change still leave us with a greater than 90 percent chance of increasing temperatures by 3°C on average.  This means that some regions will see even greater temperature increases, and it is those increases that will have the most system-disrupting impacts.  Recognizing this will significantly improve countries’ preparedness for such events and will acclimate the public to the reality that there will be some major tradeoffs in the future regarding the use of energy and resources across the globe.