The Road to Glasgow - Reading Between the Lines. American Pessimism on Climate Emergency

 

It was just a few days ago when Guardian enviro-scribe, George Monbiot, wrote a stirring piece that, if only the world went on a wartime-type footing, putting the climate crisis as its one priority issue, we could still avert climate catastrophe.

The scenario that Monbiot described was one where world leaders recognized this is an existential threat and united to defend life on Earth against extinction.  An agreement to do whatever was necessary to avert catastrophe, what Churchill spoke of when he said, "Sometimes we must do what is required."

Earlier today, the BBC reported on the leak of some 32,000 documents revealing the effort  by some countries and corporations to undermine this essential consensus without which we have little hope of arresting climate change.

And then came the US intelligence community's National Intelligence Estimate on Climate Change and National Security. If I had to use one word to summarize this 20 page report, it would be "ominous."

The report has Canada in second place for per capita emissions, just slightly behind the United States and more than double China's emissions.  We're also in the top 10 for overall emissions behind China, the US, the EU, India, Russia, Japan, Brazil, Indonesia and Iran.  Given that those countries are so vastly bigger than Canada, 10th place is nothing to brag about.

On the issue of fossil fuels, the American wonks have little confidence  we'll meet the 1.5 C target or even 2 C. As noted by the International Energy Agency and others, there's little will to switch from fossil fuels as rapidly as needed.

To achieve the 1.5˚C goal through shifts in energy, coal use would need to decline, oil use would need to fall immediately rather than plateau in the 2030s, and natural gas consumption would have to peak this decade, according to IEA data and modeling.  

Fossil fuels will be difficult to replace because the large sunk costs of established production systems make them competitively priced, existing distribution networks offer advantages of flexibility and reach, and scaling alternatives to the level necessary to replace them is difficult. Industrial and transportation sectors will struggle to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels because these sectors are the most dependent on the high energy density that fossil fuels provide.

We're still kicking this problem down the road. By the time we do act the problem will be much more vexing.

Most countries are delaying major emissions cuts until closer to their net-zero target year, which means that breakthroughs, commercialization, and incentives related to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies will be critically important for meeting their goals.

China and India. Suspicious Minds.

China and India will play critical roles in determining the trajectory of temperature rise. They are the first and fourth-largest emitters, respectively, and both are growing their total and per capita emissions, whereas the United States and EU—as the second- and third largest—are declining. Both China and India are incorporating more renewable and low-carbon energy sources, but several factors will limit their displacement of coal. They need to modernize their grids, have sunk costs that make it relatively cheaper to use coal compared with other energy sources, want to minimize reliance on fuel imports for national security reasons, and are trying to appease domestic constituencies who rely on the coal industry for jobs.

China accounts for about 30 percent of global emissions and has pledged to peak before 2030, but modest emissions reduction targets in its 14th Five Year Plan (2021–2025) in 2021 put that into question.

India almost certainly will increase its emissions as it develops economically. Indian officials have not committed to a net-zero target date and have instead called on countries with larger economies to reduce emissions.

Squabbling, Heel Dragging and Cooking the Books.

A consensus of the sort so critical to the climate emergency can only be built on trust. At the moment,  trust is pretty hard to find. 

The cooperative breakthrough of the Paris Agreement may be short lived as countries struggle to reduce their emissions and blame others for not doing enough. 

Financial needs will grow as the physical effects intensify; the UN estimates that developing countries will need upwards of $300 billion in annual investment by 2030 just to adapt.  

In addition, countries probably will continue to present favorable data or compare their reductions against a chosen baseline year to their benefit. Russia’s target is baselined to 1990 levels—at the height of the Soviet Union’s economic activity and before Russia’s economic collapse in the 1990s— which allows it to appear ambitious in meeting its goal. Brazil updated its NDC in 2020 by recalculating its 2005 baseline number upwards, allowing it to claim it is still on track to meet its goals.

The Spectre of Climate Wars.

The increasing physical effects of climate change are likely to exacerbate cross-border geopolitical flashpoints as states take steps to secure their interests. The reduction in sea ice already is amplifying strategic competition in the Arctic over access to its natural resources. Elsewhere, as temperatures rise and more extreme effects manifest, there is a growing risk of conflict over water and migration, particularly after 2030, and an increasing chance that countries will unilaterally test and deploy large-scale solar geoengineering—creating a new area of geopolitical disputes.

The Arctic - An Evolving Conundrum.

We assess that Arctic and non-Arctic states almost certainly will increase their competitive activities as the region becomes more accessible because of warming temperatures and reduced ice. Competition will be largely economic but the risk of miscalculation will increase modestly by 2040 as commercial and military activity grows and opportunities are more contested.

Warming ocean temperatures probably will push Bering Sea fish stocks northward into the Arctic Ocean, according to a NOAA study, which could increase commercial and illegal fishing activity in the region and exacerbate regional disputes between Arctic and non-Arctic states over fishing rights.

Military activity is likely to increase as Arctic and non-Arctic states seek to protect their investments, exploit new maritime routes, and gain strategic advantages over rivals. The increased presence of China and other non-Arctic states very likely will amplify concerns among Arctic states as they perceive a challenge to their respective security and economic interests. China, France, India, Japan, South Korea, and the United Kingdom have released Arctic strategies mostly focused on economic opportunities, but some address security issues, which has prompted Russian policymakers to repeatedly state since 2018 that non-Arctic countries do not have a military role in the region. 

Contested economic and military activities will increase the risk of miscalculation, and deescalating tensions is likely to require the adaptation of existing or creation of new forums to address bilateral or multilateral security concerns among Arctic states.

The report lists nations that have or are building icebreakers.  Russia is in first place with more than 55 icebreakers and another 10 planned or under construction. Canada comes in second with 10 active and 9 more planned. Even India has an icebreaker under construction. India?

The Double Whammy - Water Wars and Migration.

Critical rivers such as the Nile and the Mekong are witnessing tensions between upstream nations building dams and downstream nations whose water access is imperiled. Egypt, for example, has already threatened to destroy dams being built by Ethiopia and Sudan.  Egypt, a country that since the time of the Pharaohs has been built on the Nile waters and spring floods, sees its very survival at stake.

Pakistan relies on downstream surface water from heavily glacier-fed rivers originating in India for much of its irrigation, and requires frequent data from India on river discharges in order to provide advanced warning to evacuate villages and prepare for flooding. 

The Mekong River basin already is an area of growing dispute over dam building, largely by China, that threatens the smooth flow of water for agriculture and fishing on which other countries rely heavily, particularly Cambodia and Vietnam. 

In the Middle East and North Africa, about 60 percent of surface water resources are transboundary and all countries share at least one aquifer, according to the World Bank. Several aquifers are also vulnerable to salt water intrusion, even from minor rises in sea levels, increasing the potential for conflict.

The Ultimate Victims - the Third World

Scientific forecasts indicate that intensifying physical effects of climate change out to 2040 and beyond will be most acutely felt in developing countries, which we assess are also the least able to adapt to such changes. These physical effects will increase the potential for instability and possibly internal conflict in these countries, in some cases creating additional demands on US diplomatic, economic, humanitarian, and military resources. Despite geographic and financial resource advantages, the United States and partners face hard and costly challenges that will become more difficult to manage without concerted efforts to reduce emissions and cap warming.

The IC (intelligence community) identified 11 countries and two regions of great concern from the threat of climate change. These countries of concern are highly vulnerable to the physical effects and lack the capacity to adapt, suggesting that building resilience to climate change in these countries would be especially helpful in mitigating future risks to US interests. 

Five of the 11 countries are in South and East Asia— Afghanistan, Burma, India, Pakistan, and North Korea; four countries are in Central America and the Caribbean—Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, and Nicaragua; Colombia and Iraq round out the list.

Not mentioned in the report is that 3 of the "worrisome 11" have nuclear arsenals and sit on China's doorstep.

We assess that the 11 countries especially are likely to face warming temperatures, more extreme weather, and disruption to ocean patterns that will threaten their energy, food, water, and health security.

We judge that the 11 countries especially will lack the financial resources or governance capacity to adapt to climate change effects, heightening the risk of instability-induced migration and displacement flows—including to the US southern border—and increasing their already substantial needs for foreign aid and humanitarian assistance.

The Wild Cards

The report's authors hedge their bets with a few shifts that could alter their assessments either way. These include a major breakthrough on clean energy technology. Another is the onset of one or more tipping points that might trigger a global climate epiphany.

A global climate disaster that mobilizes massive collective action from all countries and populations—such as clear evidence that we are nearing a tipping point in the Earth’s system faster than expected—would alter our assessment that countries are going to argue about who bears more responsibility to act. New observations could indicate the irreversible and significantly faster than expected melting of Greenland and the West and East Antarctic glaciers—which currently are modeled to raise sea levels by upwards of a quarter meter by 2040, and more than one meter by 2100 under a high emissions scenario—could threaten hundreds of millions of people living in coastal communities. Alternatively, new evidence could emerge indicating the near term collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) that risks altering North Atlantic air temperatures in excess of 7˚C; current observations give scientists high confidence that climate change is weakening the AMOC, a critical part of Earth’s climate system that transfers warm water northward and cold water southward.

In other words the authors foresee an asteriod-scale catastrophe that finally awakens the global community to unite even if the horse has already left the barn.

Reading Between the Lines.

If there's one message that comes through the National Intelligence Assessment it's that the essential global consensus isn't apt to emerge anytime soon, much less during the Glasgow summit in November. There's too much distrust, self-dealing. We're far more likely to descend into finger-pointing and other distractions. That's grim news for the world. Without a meeting of minds and a resolve to do whatever it takes to avert the worst the world may divide into two camps - victims and spectators.