Pentagon Plans for Rapid Climate
Change Event: Fortune Magazine
Dear All
Climate
change effects us all.
Excerpts
from the AMJ article below cast a rosy contemplative almost optimistic glow
over the future as Quote it says-------
The human
species, because of its social organisation and cultural practices, is better
buffered against environmental stressors than many other plant and animal
species.
Are these
people living in Noddy land ??
The
Pentagon has other thoughts
Michael
Protecting the Planet
Climate change and human health: what do we know?
Anthony J McMichael and Rosalie E Woodruff
Quotes-------------------------
Where and when,
therefore, might we see effects on human health? The answer is complex. First,
most health outcomes are multicausal, and inevitably
various non-climate causal factors are also changing over time. Second, climate
change affects local environments differently, according to characteristics of
local geography. Further, the vulnerability of each human population varies as
a function of locality, level of material resources, technological assets and
type of governance. For example, the small
Of course, the
health prospects are not all bad. Some impacts would be beneficial. For
example, milder winters would reduce the seasonal winter-time mortality peak in
temperate countries, and a further increase in temperatures in currently hot
regions might impair mosquito survival. Overall, however, scientists have
consistently predicted that most effects of climate change on health would be
adverse.13
The impacts mostly entail changes in the frequency or severity of familiar
health risks — such as the effects of floods, storms and fires; the mortality
toll of heatwaves; the range and seasonality of infectious diseases; changes in
local agro-ecosystem productivity and its nutritional consequences; the impact
on health of changes in fresh water supplies; and the many repercussions of
economic dislocation and population displacement.====================================
The human species,
because of its social organisation and cultural practices, is better buffered
against environmental stressors than many other plant and animal species.
Hence, Homo sapiens is
likely to be affected less soon and less sensitively than most other species.
Not surprisingly, therefore, there is little empirical evidence to date that
climate change is already affecting human health. However, invoking the
precautionary principle, we can recognise that adverse impacts are both likely
and, in many cases, potentially serious. By thinking more ecologically about
the large-scale influences on population health and disease, we could apply a
more anticipatory approach.3
CLIMATE COLLAPSE
The Pentagon's Weather Nightmare
The climate could change radically, and fast. That would be the mother
of all national security issues.
FORTUNE Magazine,
Global
warming may be bad news for future generations, but let's face it, most of us spend as little time worrying about it as we
did about al Qaeda before 9/11. Like the terrorists,
though, the seemingly remote climate risk may hit home sooner and harder than
we ever imagined. In fact, the prospect has become so real that the Pentagon's
strategic planners are grappling with it.
The
threat that has riveted their attention is this: Global warming, rather than
causing gradual, centuries-spanning change, may be pushing the climate to a
tipping point. Growing evidence suggests the ocean-atmosphere system that
controls the world's climate can lurch from one state to another in less than a
decade -- like a canoe that's gradually tilted until suddenly it flips over.
Scientists don't know how close the system is to a critical threshold. But
abrupt climate change may well occur in the not-too-distant future. If it does,
the need to rapidly adapt may overwhelm many societies --thereby upsetting the
geopolitical balance of power.
Though
triggered by warming, such change would probably cause cooling in the Northern
Hemisphere, leading to longer, harsher winters in much of the
Climate
researchers began getting seriously concerned about it a decade ago, after
studying temperature indicators embedded in ancient layers of Arctic ice. The
data show that a number of dramatic shifts in average temperature took place in
the past with shocking speed -- in some cases, just a few years.
The
case for angst was buttressed by a theory regarded as the most likely
explanation for the abrupt changes. The eastern
But
when the climate warms, according to the theory, fresh water from melting
Arctic glaciers flows into the
Scientists
aren't sure what caused the warming that triggered such collapses in the remote
past. (Clearly it wasn't humans and their factories.) But the data from Arctic
ice and other sources suggest the atmospheric changes that preceded earlier
collapses were dismayingly similar to today's global warming. As the Ice Age
began drawing to a close about 13,000 years ago, for example, temperatures in
Though
Mother Nature caused past abrupt climate changes, the one that may be shaping
up today probably has more to do with us. In 2001 an international panel of
climate experts concluded that there is increasingly strong evidence that most
of the global warming observed over the past 50 years is attributable to human
activities -- mainly the burning of fossil fuels such as oil and coal, which
release heat-trapping carbon dioxide. Indicators of the
warming include shrinking Arctic ice, melting alpine glaciers, and markedly
earlier springs at northerly latitudes. A few years ago such changes
seemed signs of possible trouble for our kids or grandkids. Today they seem
portents of a cataclysm that may not conveniently wait until we're history.
Accordingly,
the spotlight in climate research is shifting from gradual to rapid change. In
2002 the National Academy of Sciences issued a report concluding that human
activities could trigger abrupt change. Last year the World Economic Forum in
Such
jeremiads are beginning to reverberate more widely. Billionaire Gary Comer,
founder of Lands' End, has adopted abrupt climate change as a philanthropic
cause.
Fox's
flick will doubtless be apocalyptically edifying. But what would abrupt climate
change really be like?
Scientists
generally refuse to say much about that, citing a data deficit. But recently,
renowned Department of Defense planner Andrew
Marshall sponsored a groundbreaking effort to come to grips with the question.
A Pentagon legend,
When
scientists' work on abrupt climate change popped onto his radar screen,
The
result is an unclassified report, completed late last year,
that the Pentagon has agreed to share with FORTUNE. It doesn't pretend
to be a forecast. Rather, it sketches a dramatic but plausible scenario to help
planners think about coping strategies. Here is an abridged version:
A
total shutdown of the ocean conveyor might lead to a big chill like the Younger
Dryas, when icebergs appeared as far south as the
coast of
For
planning purposes, it makes sense to focus on a midrange case of abrupt change.
A century of cold, dry, windy weather across the Northern Hemisphere that
suddenly came on 8,200 years ago fits the bill_its
severity fell between that of the Younger Dryas and
the Little Ice Age. The event is thought to have been triggered by a conveyor
collapse after a time of rising temperatures not unlike today's global warming.
Suppose it recurred, beginning in 2010. Here are some of the things that might
happen by 2020:
At
first the changes are easily mistaken for normal weather variation_allowing
skeptics to dismiss them as a "blip" of
little importance and leaving policymakers and the public paralyzed
with uncertainty. But by 2020 there is little doubt that something drastic is
happening. The average temperature has fallen by up to five degrees Fahrenheit in
some regions of
Violent
storms are increasingly common as the conveyor becomes wobbly on its way to
collapse. A particularly severe storm causes the ocean to break through levees
in the
Megadroughts afflict the
Turning
inward, the
As
the decade progresses, pressures to act become irresistible --history shows
that whenever humans have faced a choice between starving or
raiding, they raid. Imagine Eastern European countries, struggling to feed
their populations, invading
Growing
tensions engender novel alliances.
Nuclear
arms proliferation is inevitable. Oil supplies are stretched thin as climate
cooling drives up demand. Many countries seek to shore up their energy supplies
with nuclear energy, accelerating nuclear proliferation.
The
changes relentlessly hammer the world's "carrying capacity" --the
natural resources, social organizations, and economic networks that support the
population. Technological progress and market forces, which have long helped
boost Earth's carrying capacity, can do little to offset the crisis -- it is
too widespread and unfolds too fast.
As
the planet's carrying capacity shrinks, an ancient pattern reemerges:
the eruption of desperate, all-out wars over food, water, and energy supplies.
As Harvard archeologist Steven LeBlanc has noted,
wars over resources were the norm until about three centuries ago. When such
conflicts broke out, 25% of a population's adult males usually died. As abrupt
climate change hits home, warfare may again come to define human life.
Over
the past decade, data have accumulated suggesting that the plausibility of
abrupt climate change is higher than most of the scientific community, and
perhaps all of the political community, are prepared to accept. In light of
such findings, we should be asking when abrupt change will happen, what the
impacts will be, and how we can prepare -- not whether it will really happen.
In fact, the climate record suggests that abrupt change is inevitable at some
point, regardless of human activity. Among other things, we should:
" Speed
research on the forces that can trigger abrupt climate change, how it unfolds,
and how we'll know it's occurring.
" Sponsor
studies on the scenarios that might play out, including ecological, social,
economic, and political fallout on key food-producing regions.
" Identify
"no regrets" strategies to ensure reliable access to food and water
and to ensure our national security.
" Form teams
to prepare responses to possible massive migration, and food and water
shortages.
" Explore ways
to offset abrupt cooling_today it appears easier to
warm than to cool the climate via human activities, so there may be
"geo-engineering" options available to prevent a catastrophic
temperature drop.
In
sum, the risk of abrupt climate change remains uncertain, and it is quite
possibly small. But given its dire consequences, it should be elevated beyond a
scientific debate. Action now matters, because we may be able to reduce its
likelihood of happening, and we can certainly be better prepared if it does. It
is time to recognize it as a national security concern.
The
Pentagon's reaction to this sobering report isn't known -- in keeping with his
reputation for reticence, Andy Marshall declined to be interviewed. But the
fact that he's concerned may signal a sea change in the debate about global
warming. At least some federal thought leaders may be starting to perceive
climate change less as a political annoyance and more as an issue demanding
action.
If
so, the case for acting now to address climate change, long a hard sell in
Washington, may be gaining influential support, if only behind the scenes.
Policymakers may even be emboldened to take steps such as tightening fuel-economy
standards for new passenger vehicles, a measure that would simultaneously lower
emissions of greenhouse gases, reduce America's perilous reliance on OPEC oil,
cut its trade deficit, and put money in consumers' pockets. Oh, yes --and give
the Pentagon's fretful Yoda a little less to worry about.
Yahoo! Groups Links