c.Figallo

Archive for March, 2008

Not that I’m surprised, but a study by a University of Missouri professor reveals that, “the U.S. public prefers to act locally and nationally on environmental issues and that may be why appeals to global warming are not more successful.”

Well, of course, people will be more invested and familiar with the place where they live and spend the vast majority of their time. What happens there is sure to affect them while what happens around the world or even across the county line may not affect them at all, no matter how great the impact.

This kind of thinking is not necessarily going to affect the global changes that need to happen to radically reduce greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, but from the practical point of view, the local is where there’s the most traction. It’s where the rubber meets the road.

“The survey’s core result is that people care about their communities and express the desire to see government action taken toward local and national issues,” said David Konisky, a policy research scholar with the Institute of Public Policy. “People are hesitant to support efforts concerning global issues even though they believe that environmental quality is poorer at the global level than at the local and national level. This is surprising given the media attention that global warming has recently received and reflects the division of opinion about the severity of climate change.”

Takers of the survey were not, however, all that concerned about climate change. Their three issues of greatest concern were local water quality, local pollution of rivers and lakes, and reducing local air pollution. I’d call these “classic” environmental concerns – the ones that first attracted the “think globally, act locally” activism in the Sixties. They remain important and shouldn’t be discounted. But it’s not a happy situation that global warming came in eighth place as a concern.

Political philosophy was also found to be a strong factor in how people responded to the survey. Given the advancing of climate change indicators, we may not have any choice as to whether government, at some point, must take stronger action.

“The survey reinforced the stark differences in people’s environmental attitudes, depending on their political leanings,” Konisky said. “Democrats and political liberals clearly express more desire for governmental action to address environmental problems. Republicans and ideological conservatives are much less enthusiastic about further government intervention.”

Local populations that go through extreme weather impacts learn what should have been done, and thus what should be done to prevent similar impacts from taking such a toll again. After the impact – in this case, of the extreme and extended drought in mid-state North Carolina – both citizens and government leaders make commitments to reform.

Citizens become more vocal about their expectations of government – that it will think ahead, plan and lead them in a smart direction. Government, in turn, expects citizens to follow the practices it recommends without having to enforce those practices. There is plenty of history to indicate that both sides fall down in their responsibilities. So how – in the face of climate change – can both citizens and government take one another seriously and stick to commitments? The article cited below only indicates the mindsets as two regions look back on a very dry couple of years.

An unscientific opinion poll of the readers of Triangle Business Journal (located in North Carolina’s Research Triangle area) showed plenty of public disapproval of the planning that allowed the recent drought to result in such serious water shortages.

Of the 447 people who responded, 43 percent said the response was “poor.” Another 31 percent went even further, saying the response was “very poor.”

In comments left with poll responses, people wondered where were the “forward-looking leadership” and “emergency action plans?” Most of the respondents were business people who appreciate the need for continued growth and development, but found themselves conflicted by the real limitations on water supply and a recognition that the recent drought may be a harbinger of more such conditions.

A long dry spell in the recent past was cited by one respondent, who pointed out that the lesson should have been learned then. Northern Georgia suffered severe drought conditions in the years 1998-2002, which resulted in studies being done of watershed management, and a Drought Management Plan in March 2003. Clearly, none of this prevented a near miss on Atlanta running out of water.

Hopefully, the threat of prolonged climate change – new climate – will motivate governments to do a better job of planning and implementation of mitigating measures, while citizens will comply with government-recommended conservation and preparation measures. Hopefully, there will more of an ongoing public dialogue happening between citizens and government as the stakes get higher.

H20 Conserve tells you all you need to know to understand why you should be actively conserving water – even if you’re not experiencing a drought – and how to calculate your water wastage. Educational resources are provided along with a teacher’s guide. There’s a glossary and a collection of information pages that will tell you even more about the role water plays in every aspect of our lives. Definitely worth a visit.

Climate change will vary in its degree and impact from location to location, so the scientific models that cover the whole planet don’t tell us very much about the regions where we live and plan our futures. Ireland’s government commissioned its weather service and the University College of Dublin to come up with a model just for its island nation, and then report on what it found.

That report – called by this article in the Business Post, “the first of its type” – was expected to forecast “reasonably significant changes” in the Irish climate by mid-century. Reading the specifics, as quoted below, I’d go along with the “significant” part. Not so sure about the “reasonably” qualifier, though.

The north and west, the reports finds, are likely to become wetter. The climate change models show that average temperatures are likely to increase by 1 to 1.4 degrees by mid-century and by as much as 33.5 degrees by the end of the century. The models tend to move towards greater uncertainty later in the century, as it is unclear how effective efforts to combat climate change will be.

While variations in average temperatures may seem insignificant, small changes can have huge effects on climate. Two degrees of global warming, it has been estimated, would give Finland a climate similar to that enjoyed by the south of France today. The south of France, meanwhile, would end up with a climate like North Africa’s.

Changes in climate are gradual, but they can cause significant differences within a relatively short period of time. For instance, the study finds that Ireland’s winters are no longer as cold as they were half a century ago – there has been an increase in temperature of about half a degree in the last 50 years.

Winter rainfall is expected to increase. The climate modelling predicts that, in the period 2020-2060, winters will be 5-10 per cent wetter than at present. By the end of the century, the increase in rainfall could be as much as 25 per cent above current levels.

Correspondingly, by mid-century, summer rainfall is predicted to decrease by 5-10 per cent, while by 2100, the decrease is expected to be 10-18 per cent.

Average wind speeds are expected to show small increases in the winter months, and slight decreases in the summer months initially, while, by the end of the century a general decline in wind speeds is expected.

Rising sea temperatures will lead to more intense weather systems, though many of these are expected to be at their worst to the north of Ireland. This country will see fewer but stronger storms, the report predicts.

Storm surges and waves at sea will get bigger, particularly on the west coast. An increase in storm surges of over one metre in height and a parallel increase in the height of waves is predicted.

The closer you get to the poles, the greater the deviation of temperature from its historic averages. So, Alaska leads all other states in the degree of impact from current climate changes. For them, the writing on the wall is much plainer than for the Lower 48 and Hawaii.

Alaska’s Climate Impact Assessment Committee issued its report on March 17 and a balanced report it was, recognizing the upside of a warmer Alaska along with the downside. Benefiting the state would be increases in tourism, research and commercial shipping. (Not to be negative, but if the tourism and research are increasing because the environment is changing so fast, those benefits may be not only fleeting, but ironic in the extreme.)

On the other hand, global warming continues to threaten dozens of rural communities on or near the coastline, with accentuated erosion problems. The impact of climate change will also be felt in commercial, sport and subsistence fisheries, and sport and subsistence hunting, as well as in the way the insurance industry deals with Alaska, the report said.

The Committee remanded its recommendations to the governor’s new “sub-cabinet for climate change,” and,

recommended that the Legislature consider a coordinated process for village relocation efforts, a review of capital planning statutes to determine if they meet the needs of potential future impacts, and support of federal efforts on mapping, tide stations, U.S. Coast Guard presence and permafrost thaw.

So Alaska, it seems, will be the first state to begin relocation planning to deal with current and expected climate change impacts. Beside loss of permafrost and migrating coastlines due to the softening of terrain, the committee also forecasts changes in migratory patterns of wildlife that will affect indigenous lifestyles around the Arctic Circle and changes in boreal forests that are increasingly threatened by insect infestations due to warmer winters.

And, of course, the insurance industry has recognized the need for changing its policies in light of Alaska’s altered climate.

The insurance industry also will be reviewing insurance regulations, potentially making significant changes that will be necessary as a result of global warming, according to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, the report noted.

Joshua Busby is an assistant professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. He wrote an essay for the Washington Post based on a special report he wrote for the Council on Foreign Relations. The main point of the essay was that “homeland security will require readiness against climate change.” This is not simply to prevent the occurence of many coastal Hurricane Katrina-like disasters, but also because the devastating effects of climate change in many poor countries will lead to the kind of unrest that will require costly military intervention by the U.S. and its allies.

…scientists tell us that poor countries in the developing world, particularly in Africa and Asia, are the most vulnerable. They are likely to be hit hardest by climate change, potentially putting hundreds of thousands of people on the move from climate change-related storms, floods and droughts. In such circumstances, outside militaries may be called on to prevent humanitarian tragedies and broader disorder.

Busby is strongly advocating the position that we should be taking protective and preventative action now, rather than waiting until the impacts are upon us.

As Hurricane Katrina showed, investments in risk reduction are likely to be much cheaper than disaster response. I support substantial investment in risk reduction: coastal defenses, building codes, emergency response plans, and evacuation strategies, among other measures. I also recommend enhanced vulnerability assessments to know where the risks are.

People who resist taking preventative action tend to point to the possibility that such actions will cost money and may be unnecessary, but more arguments are being made lately for designing “no regrets” measures that will provide benefits whether or not they turn out to have prevented damage. Here are Busby’s main concrete recommendations:

Internationally, developing countries need tens of billions, yet the U.S. government has done very little to support this agenda. I recommend several activities to help developing countries prepare for climate change, including $100 million (over several years) for military-to-military environmental security workshops. I recommend another $100 million per year to support an African Risk Reduction Pool, a common fund from which Defense, State, and other agencies would draw from to support security in Africa. These expenditures would be part of a broader international risk reduction effort that I argue should be on par with the president’s five-year, $15 billion emergency plan for AIDS relief.

Adaptation alone, he maintains, will not solve this looming problem. We must reduce greenhouse gas emissions significantly around the planet, which will require much smarter diplomacy than we’ve been practicing lately.

Predicted by the NOAA via the National Weather Service a week ahead of the first floods, anyway. No, it’s not the kind of long range forecasting we could use for adaptation planning, but it’s enough in advance for citizens to prepare by evacuating, sandbagging, or whatever damage mitigation actions would be appropriate.

Much of the flooding in the northern states was caused by a combination of torrential rains and snow being melted by that rain. The risks due to this snow factor were recognized weeks before the February 20 warning by the Weather Service. Here’s how the Environmental News Service described the situation on March 20:

Above-normal flood potential is evident in much of the Mississippi River basin, the Ohio River basin, the lower Missouri River basin, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, most of New York, all of New England, and portions of the West, including Colorado and Idaho.

Heavy winter snow combined with recent rain indicates parts of Wisconsin and Illinois should see minor to moderate flooding, with as much as a 20 to 30 percent chance of major flooding on some rivers in southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois.

Current snow depth in some areas of upstate New York and New England is more than a foot greater than usual for this time of the year, which increases the potential for flooding in the Connecticut River Valley.

Locations in the mountains of Colorado and Idaho have 150 to 200 percent of average water contained in snowpack leading to a higher than normal flood potential.

Snowfall has been normal or above normal across most of the West this winter, however, preexisting dryness in many areas will prevent most flooding in this region, according to the National Weather Service. Runoff from snow pack is expected to improve stream flows compared to last year for the West.

During that week more than 250 communities in a dozen states were experiencing flood conditions.

This is Post #1 in what will be a continuing commentary on people using technology to make important changes in the world. Not necessarily the bleeding edge or the app du jour or where the big investments are going. More like who’s making the most difference using social apps or mashups of different apps.

I’m big on blogs. To me, they’ve become the “anchor app” for everything else – social net platforms, wiki, twitter, IM/SMS. They anchor around a point of view, a personality or a topic while most other applications serve as peripheral communications channels.

At this time, I’m finding the smartest, most concise information in blogs. They allow good and intelligent individuals and small teams to get the exposure they deserve. At the same time, they are also the soapboxes for the most inane and insane voices on the Web. You make your choices…

If you’ve had occasion to visit your local government web site looking for guidance on climate change issues (not likely), you may have come away unimpressed. Here in Marin County, we’ve got one of the more sophisticated sites that I’ve visited (and I got to visit hundreds of them in my work at Trilogy). But none of them hold a candle to King County, Washington’s site.

Here, you find not just the government essentials, wrapped up in a pleasant design. You have what amounts to a combination community newsletter, streaming video channel, RPIN (Regional Public Information Network) alert link, and – within its Natural Resources and Parks Department, a collection of information, reports and opportunities dedicated to conservation, mitigation and adaptation.

Then you get to the internal web site of County Executive Ron Sims and his initiatives, which include Global Warming, and Environmental Protection. These two initiatives alone - if they were the only things King County was doing besides “the essentials,” would put it ahead of all but two or three counties in the U.S. in terms of advance planning for climate change.

I’ve spoken with Elizabeth Willmott, the Global Warming Coordinator for the initiative. She referred me to Peg Reagan, Executive Director of Conservation Leaders Network.

I talked to Peg.  As someone who is always trying to get the attention of county commissioners (or whatever their local titles may be), she informed me that they are predominantly understaffed and overcommitted. I’m not surprised, but the contrast between what King County is able to accomplish and what the vast majority of counties seem able to accomplish is dramatic.

Nothing quite gives me a sense of place like the bird’s eye view and a map. That’s one of the things I love about living next to a 2500-foot “mountain.” I can hike or drive to the summit and see the big picture of where I live.

The Web has revolutionized mapping, and planning for climate change impacts gets a huge benefit from having access to the new mapping capabilities. Check out this participatory view of Marin County provided by Wikimapia. Yep, you can add stuff – define a place, describe it, add photos to it.

Here’s another example of a participatory local map with a special application for marking locations of interest. It’s called Oakland Crimespotting. Imagine such a map with the locations indicating significant places relevant to climate change impact planning instead of crimes committed.