Sdi 2010 Midterms Impacts Updates
Warming Leads to War – Resources
Download 0.56 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- AT: Warming Inevitable
- AT: Copenhagen Dead
Warming Leads to War – ResourcesResource shortage leads to war Dyer 9 Gwynne, MA in Military History and PhD in Middle Eastern History former @ Senior Lecturer in War Studies at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, Climate Wars The United States is a harder case to call. It will probably suffer huge losses to its food production on the high plains west of the Mississippi River, where the rainfall will be diminishing at the same time as the giant Ogallala aquifer that provides irri gation water for the entire region is finally pumped dry. The Central Valley of California, which accounts for one-quarter of the food grown for human consumption in the United States, will face grave difficulties if the rivers that are fed by the snow pack on the mountains become seasonal (winter only): at two degrees Celsius hotter, much of the snow that now falls on the mountains in winter will fall as rain instead and run off imme diately, leaving the rivers largely dry in summer. Nevertheless, the United States may still have enough good agricultural land in the "Old Northwest" and within a few hundred kilometres of the sea along the eastern seaboard, the Gulf coast, and in the Pacific Northwest to feed its own population, which is forecast to be four hundred million by 2050. It is unlikely, however, that even the U.S. will still be in the food-exporting business once global heating reaches two degrees Celsius. Except for quite limited surpluses in Russia and Canada, nobody will be exporting food. If you cannot pro duce enough at home, then your people will just have to starve. This is not just a formula for famine; it is also a formula for war. All around the world, countries facing mass starvation will be just a bit closer to the equator than countries that can still feed their people, and some of the countries on the losing side will be sufficiently developed to make their unhappiness with this outcome felt. (People always raid before they starve.) To make matters worse, it will not escape notice that the countries that suffer least from the changing climate are, in most cases, the ones that industrialized first, and that are responsible for most of the emissions that have set this lethal process in motion. AT: Warming InevitableWarming is not inevitable Dyer 9 Gwynne, MA in Military History and PhD in Middle Eastern History former @ Senior Lecturer in War Studies at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, Climate Wars There is no need to despair. The slow-feedback effects take a long time to work their way through the climate system, and if we could manage to get the carbon dioxide concentration back down to a safe level before they have run their course, they might be stopped in their tracks. As Hansen et al. put it in their paper: A point of no return can be avoided, even if the tipping level [which puts us on course for an ice-free world] is temporarily exceeded. Ocean and ice-sheet inertia permit overshoot, provided the [concentration of carbon dioxide] is returned below the tipping level before initiating irre versible dynamic change .... However, if overshoot is in place for centuries, the thermal perturbation will so pen etrate the ocean that recovery without dramatic effects, such as ice-sheet disintegration, becomes unlikely. The real, long-term target is 350 parts per million or lower, if we want the Holocene to last into the indefinite future, but for the remainder of this book I am going to revert to the 450 parts per million ceiling that has become common currency among most of those who are involved in climate change issues. If we manage to stop the rise in the carbon dioxide concentration at or not far beyond that figure, then we must immediately begin the equally urgent and arduous task of getting it back down to a much lower level that is safe for the long term, but one step at a time will have to suffice. I suspect that few now alive will see the day when we seriously start work on bringing the concen tration back down to 350, so let us focus here on how to stop it rising past 450. Warming is not inevitable, but the margin for error is small Dyer 9 Gwynne, MA in Military History and PhD in Middle Eastern History former @ Senior Lecturer in War Studies at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, Climate Wars Clearly, we have very little margin left to play with, and if global emissions are not radically reduced within about twenty years, then we will have little chance of stopping short of 550 parts per million carbon dioxide equivalent. Fifty or sixty or even eighty percent cuts in emissions by 2050, which is the target that has won the hearts of most contemporary politicians who take climate change seriously, gets us to 550 parts per million at about the same time. Average global temperature might still only rise to two degrees Celsius warmer by 2030, or even less if the feedbacks are slow to kick in, because there is a very long lag between the arrival of a given amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the consequent change in the planet's average surface temperature. But once the carbon dioxide is in the air, it stays there on average for about two centuries, so the final out come has become almost inevitable. A concentration of 550 parts per million carbon dioxide equivalent in the atmosphere takes us to a world that is between three and four degrees Celsius hotter by the end of the century, not counting any feed back effects. But, by three degrees Celsius hotter, the major feedbacks surely will have begun to operate, and our goose will be well and truly cooked.
http://www.euractiv.com/en/climate-change/climate-change-road-copenhagen/article-180706 Beyond Copenhagen: Towards a comprehensive deal in 2010 After two years of preparatory work, only one thing seems certain: Copenhagen will not mark the end of the process, but is rather expected to set out a legal framework for more detailed negotiations to continue during the course of 2010 (EurActiv 18/11/09). Optimists say such delays are nothing new in international negotiations and are not necessarily a recipe for failure. Indeed, it was not until four years after an agreement had been reached on the Kyoto Protocol that details were finalised to allow ratification, they point out. Negotiators are hoping to work more quickly this time, leaving the legal details to 2010. Crucially, Copenhagen should set out a clear action plan and a timetable for moving to a legally-binding agreement, EU leaders have stated (EurActiv 30/10/09). UN climate chief Yvo de Boer has outlined the elements required to make Copenhagen a success in terms of concrete figures and measures on mitigation and funding. Specifically, developed countries must agree binding targets for significant emission cuts by 2020, while developing countries must outline measures to halt their emissions growth below a business-as-usual scenario, de Boer said. In addition, rich countries will have to provide long-term financial assistance to poorer ones and set up a €10 billion climate fund to help them adapt to the immediate impacts of climate change, he added. Finally, the negotiators must agree to establish a governance structure that will deliver these goals, de Boer said. Delegates so far have made progress on technical details, including how to measure deforestation and the principles of putting up an international fund to help poor and vulnerable countries to cope with the impacts of global warming (rising seas, floods, droughts, storms and wildfires). However, key issues such as long-term goals for slashing emissions and avoiding dangerous climate change impacts, as well as the introduction of a technology-transfer mechanism to allow developing countries to move towards low-carbon economies, need to be hammered out. President Obama in balancing act The US administration has a decisive role to play in global negotiations. President Barack Obama has promised to set ambitious targets. However, trapped between international pressure to curb greenhouse gas emissions and a US Senate that is not prepared to act, the White House is coy about President Obama's plans. Last month, the White House pledged to cut emissions by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, a drop of about 3% below 1990 levels. This pledge relied on the adoption of a meaure by a Senate committee calling for 20% cuts by 2020, but that is expected to be weakened as the legislation moves through other Senate committees. In June 2009, the House passed a bill aimed at CO2 emission reductions of 17% below 2005 levels by 2020 and sharper cuts in the following decades, using a cap-and-trade system. But Obama has another ace up his sleeve. At the end of March 2009, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) gave the White House a report alleging that pollution tied to climate change could endanger human life. This discovery could give the government the authority to regulate CO2 emissions under the Clean Air Act, according to a US Supreme Court ruling dating from 2007. In the short term, the report's findings set the EPA on a collision course with US carmakers, coal-fired power plants and other businesses that rely on fossil fuels, which fear complex and costly rules. Obama is under political pressure from both parties to scale back his priorities, despite his insistence that the country had no alternative if it wanted to succeed. "Sometimes you have to fail before you can succeed," Obama has repeatedly said. "And often it takes not just the commitment of an innovator, but the commitment of a country to innovate," he added. AT: Cap and Trade This Year No Cap and Trade these year-Democratic insiders agree CNN 4-23 http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/04/23/climate-change-legislation-unlikely-this-year-say-sources/?fbid=BmfLEv81dXg Despite a new bipartisan push on climate change, legislation on the issue is unlikely to make it to the Senate floor this year, two Senate Democratic sources tell CNN. That would be a blow to three senior senators set to unveil a much anticipated bipartisan measure dealing with climate change Monday morning. The main reason sources say the prospects for the legislation are dim is because Senate Democratic leaders have decided to try to put immigration reform first on the agenda, and after that there likely won't be an appetite for another politically divisive issue before November's election – especially with a Supreme Court nomination ahead and a desire to stay focused on the politically potent issue of jobs. The Democratic sources said the feeling in the Senate Democratic leadership is that immigration has more of a political upside for Democrats for several reasons. Democrats know that Latinos who voted for President Obama and other Democrats in 2008 are furious that Democrats have not yet kept the promise to advance comprehensive immigration reform. Immigration is especially critical politically for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, who is down in the polls for his re-election bid in a state where a quarter of the population is Hispanic. On Monday, Sen. John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Connecticut, and Senator Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, are slated to release legislation that would, among other things, set a goal of a 17 percent reduction in carbon emissions in the next 10 years. A Kerry spokeswoman downplayed any talk of not moving on the issue before November. "There are always people who think it's impossible to tackle big challenges in an election year, but Senators Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman have been working overtime to produce an approach that can succeed," said Kerry spokeswoman Whitney Smith. "The majority leader reiterated yesterday to them that he is committed to make this the year bi-partisan, comprehensive climate and energy reform passes the Senate and Senator Kerry knows the leader is tough and determined enough to make it happen." Cap and Trade won’t hit the Senate floor-Dems scared of midterms backlash Rob Port 4-23 “Democrats Decide That Passing Cap And Trade Before The Midterm Elections Maybe Wouldn’t Be A Good Idea”, Political Correspondent; http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/democrats-decide-that-passing-cap-and-trade-before-the-midterm-elections-maybe-wouldnt-be-a-good-idea/ The “climate bill” won’t be hitting the Senate floor this year, say unnamed Democrat sources. The main reason sources say the prospects for the legislation are dim is because Senate Democratic leaders have decided to try to put immigration reform first on the agenda, and after that there likely won’t be an appetite for another politically divisive issue before November’s election – especially with a Supreme Court nomination ahead and a desire to stay focused on the politically potent issue of jobs. The idea that Democrats do have an appetite for an immigration bill, in lieu of cap and trade, seems pretty laughable to me. I think Obama is going to continue pushing to slam more of his agenda through while his party holds on to the majorities in Congress, and rank-and-file congressional Democrats are going to duck those efforts. Because they actually want to get re-elected in the fall. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 0.56 Mb. Share with your friends:
|