02/08/2016

Climate Change Divide Bursts to Forefront in Presidential Campaign

New York Times - Coral Davenport

Bill Snape, a professor at American University, dressed as a polar bear to raise awareness about climate change during a demonstration in Philadelphia before the Democratic National Convention. Credit Mark Makela for The New York Times 
WASHINGTON — During the 2012 race for president, the issue of climate change was nearly invisible. President Obama and his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, almost never spoke about it, and it did not come up during their debates. There was far more talk of ramping up oil and gas production than cutting emissions.
But this year, as Hillary Clinton thrusts climate change to the heart of her campaign, the issue is taking on a prominence it has never before had in a presidential general election.
In speeches, Mrs. Clinton regularly highlights her plan to combat global warming, and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, praised her at the Democratic National Convention last week for putting it at "the center" of her foreign policy. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, her main rival in the primaries, spoke of the issue forcefully, saying that "this election is about climate change." The party platform calls for a price — essentially a tax — on carbon pollution.
Mrs. Clinton's opponent in the November election, Donald J. Trump, has gone further than any other Republican presidential nominee in opposing climate change policy. He often mocks the established science of human-caused climate change and dismisses it as a hoax. The Republican platform calls climate change policy "the triumph of extremism over common sense."
The divide between the two parties over the issue is the widest it has been in the decades since it emerged as a public policy matter. That is all the more remarkable given that during the 2008 election, the Democratic and Republican positions on climate change were almost identical.
That year, Mr. Obama and the Republican nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona, spoke of the need to address the human causes of global warming, and they proposed a nearly identical policy — a "cap-and-trade" plan, which would have limited carbon dioxide emissions and created a market for trading pollution credits.
"The elevated conversation about climate change in this election is truly historic," said Gene Karpinski, the president of the League of Conservation Voters, who addressed the Democratic convention on Thursday.
"In 2012, no one asked about it and the candidates didn't talk about it," he said. "In 2008, the candidates were in the same place, so no one talked about it. They've never talked about it this much, and the contrast between candidates has never been sharper."
Democratic strategists once sidestepped the issue, seeing any proposal that might raise energy prices as politically risky. But they are now pushing it to the forefront.
At the convention, organizers played a short film by James Cameron, the director of blockbusters like "Titanic," on the dangers of climate change. Another convention video montage put a spotlight on Mrs. Clinton's role at the 2009 climate change summit meeting in Copenhagen. As part of a wide-ranging climate plan, she has set ambitious goals for producing energy from renewable sources, including by installing a half-billion solar panels by 2020.
Democratic Senate candidates in swing states like Pennsylvania and Florida are also embracing the issue. They have been emboldened by polls showing that a growing majority of Americans accept the science of climate change and would support candidates of either party who vowed to address the issue.
A Gallup poll in March found that 65 percent of Americans believed that climate change was caused by human activity, an increase of 10 points from a year earlier. The poll found that 38 percent of Republicans believed the same thing, an increase of four points from a year earlier. The poll also found that 76 percent of Americans ages 18 to 29 accepted that human activity is behind climate change.
Some Republican strategists say they are concerned that Mr. Trump's views on the issue could push younger voters away from the party for the long term, much as they fear that his immigration policies and remarks about women could alienate Hispanics and female voters.
"It's important for Republican candidates to talk about the issue intelligently and not be dismissive of climate change," said Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster. He worked for the presidential campaign of Senator Marco Rubio of Florida and now works for an advocacy group backing Mr. Rubio's Senate re-election campaign.
"The way you talk about climate change sends a signal to millennials about how sensitive you are to the environment," Mr. Ayres said. "Millennials recently passed baby boomers to become the largest generation, so any party that hopes to own the future politically needs to be attractive to millennials."
As they have on other policy issues this year, some Republican candidates are staking out positions different from Mr. Trump's. Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, a state where voters tend to favor environmentally friendly candidates, has endorsed Mr. Trump but has broken with her party to vote to uphold the Obama administration's climate change regulations. Her campaign website says she is "working to combat the effects of climate change."
Still, most Republicans remain strongly opposed to Mr. Obama's climate change policies, specifically a set of Environmental Protection Agency regulations aimed at curbing planet-warming emissions from coal-fired power plants. If enacted, those rules could shut down hundreds of such plants.
Mr. Trump has vowed to rescind Mr. Obama's climate change rules, and he has called for more fossil fuel drilling and fewer environmental regulations. He has said he would "cancel" the accord reached last year in France that commits nearly every nation to taking action to curb climate change.
But party strategists say there is a way for Republicans who may be positioning themselves to run for president in 2020 or 2024, such as Mr. Rubio or the House speaker, Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, to talk about opposing the Obama rules without alienating younger voters.
"It's important for the next generation of Republicans to show that they get it, and that they're not just playing the old orthodoxy," said Kevin Sheridan, a Republican strategist who was Mr. Ryan's communications director when he ran for vice president with Mr. Romney in 2012.
Mr. Sheridan and other Republican strategists said it was unclear how Mr. Trump's dismissive position on climate change would affect the party's future.
"Anything that Trump says where he uses rhetoric that something's a hoax or crooked — no one else in the party gets lumped in with that," said Douglas Heye, a Republican strategist who was deputy communications director for Eric Cantor of Virginia, a former House majority leader. "That's Trump-specific bombastic rhetoric."

Links

World Weather: 2016's Early Record Heat Gives Way To Heavy Rains

The Guardian

The record-breaking heat of the first six months has turned to severe seasonal flooding across Asia in one of the strongest monsoon seasons in many years
Indian villagers salvage logs of wood brought by floodwaters. The Brahmaputra river has burst its banks in many places and has been at danger levels for weeks. Photograph: Anupam Nath/AP
The record-breaking worldwide heat of the first six months of 2016 has turned to abnormally severe seasonal flooding across Asia with hundreds of people dying in China, India, Nepal and Pakistan and millions forced from their homes.
In India, the Brahmaputra river, which is fed by Himalayan snowmelt and monsoon rains, has burst its banks in many places and has been at danger levels for weeks. Hundreds of villages have been flooded in Bihar, Assam, Uttar Pradesh and other northern states.
Some of the heaviest rains in 20 years have forced nearly 1.2 million people to move to camps in Assam. Floods have submerged around 70% of the Kaziringa national park, home to the rare one-horned rhino which was visited by Prince William earlier this year.
"The situation is still very bad. We are taking measures to help people in every possible way," the Indian forest minister, Pramila Rani Brahma, told Reuters.
In the state of Bihar, 26 people have died, nearly 2.75 million people have been displaced or affected, and 330,000ha of land inundated. Many major rivers are still flowing at or above danger levels.
In China, the summer monsoon which started in June after a series of heatwaves is said to have caused $22bn of damage so far. State officials say it has killed more than 500 people, destroyed more than 145,000 homes and inundated 21,000 sq miles of farmland.
Around 500,000 people were last week still displaced in the hardest-hit central Chinese provinces of Henan and Hebei. According to the Chinese ministry of civil affairs, 125,000 people were in urgent need of basic assistance.
This monsoon season has been one of the strongest in China's recent history, with 150 towns and cities reportedly suffering record rainfall. The Yangtze river basin has been particularly hard hit, with 22 inches of rain falling in 24 hours last month at Wuhan, the Hebei state capital.
The city, which is downstream of the Three Gorges dam and protected from flooding, was inundated after its drainage system and flood controls failed. Much of the damage is thought to have occurred because the city's rapid expansion in the past 20 years filled in many small lakes and wetlands which used to store water.
Elsewhere, Nepal has been lashed by torrential monsoon rains, flash floods and landslides. The government says 14 of the mountainous country's 75 districts have been affected by floods, 54 people have died and many major rivers are running at dangerous levels. Tens of thousands of Nepalese are still living in tents following devastating earthquakes last year.
The army has been deployed to repair dams and helicopters are being used to distribute food and medicines to homeless people who have taken shelter on roads and in upland areas.
Meteorologists say that the 2016 Asian monsoon is one of the strongest in many years, and has been intensified by the El Niño natural phenomenon which sees Pacific water temperatures rise and leads to droughts and severe weather worldwide.
The summer heatwaves that have affected much of the Middle East, north Africa and north America have slackened in the last few days.
"At the [north American] heatwave's peak on July 22, almost 124 million people in north America were under heat-related warnings or advisories. Additionally, high overnight low temperatures meant little relief from the oppressive heat," said the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO).
The WMO has set up a committee to examine whether a 54C temperature recorded in Kuwait in July has set the new highest temperature for Asia, as well as for the entire eastern hemisphere.
Climatologists at the WMO said they expected more heatwaves because of climate change. "The length, frequency and intensity of heatwaves will likely increase further during this century, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change," said the agency.
But they said it was likely that only a weak "La Niña" will follow the strong El Niño phenomenon later this year. La Niña is the opposite of El Niño and is marked by cooler temperatures worldwide.

Links

UN Asked Australia To Cover Up Great Barrier Reef Lobbying

Climate HomeKarl Mathiesen

Lady Elliot Island, the southernmost coral cay of Australia's Great Barrier Reef (Pic: Catlinseaviewsurvey.com)
The UN asked the Australian government to cover up details of lobbying that lead to all mention of Australia being scrubbed from a major report on climate threats to world heritage sites.
A draft of the UNESCO report, containing details of the threats posed by climate change to the Great Barrier Reef, Kakadu and the Tasmanian wilderness, was sent to Australia’s ambassador to UNESCO George Mina in February.
Mina forwarded it to the Environment Department for comment. Several emails were exchanged with UNESCO officials. The report was published in May without any mention of Australian sites.
The doctoring was revealed by the Guardian in May, leading to global concern and outrage over the apparent ability for a government to influence the UN body’s scientific reporting.
Correspondence between Mina, staff at UNESCO’s World Heritage Centre and the Department of Environment was released to Climate Home after a Freedom of Information (FoI) request. But the documents were almost entirely blacked out at UNESCO’s behest.
Deb Callister, an environment department official, told Climate Home that she had consulted with UNESCO about releasing the emails that lead to the removal of the Australian sections.
“UNESCO advised that it is their practice not to disclose exchanges of letters or correspondence between the Secretariat and its Member States, and requested that this type of material not be disclosed pursuant to this FOI request,” said Callister.
Given this, she said disclosure of the emails “would or could reasonably be expected to, cause damage to the international relations of the Commonwealth” – making them exempt from FOI requests.
UNESCO spokesman George Papagiannis would not comment on the conversations between Callister and the World Heritage Centre and denied that governments have the power to veto the contents of any UNESCO publication.
“This was a report on the impact of climate change on World Heritage,” said Papagiannis.
“It was not a report on the Great Barrier Reef. All World Heritage sites are affected, in varying degrees, by climate change. The report sought to illustrate this through a selection of sites. This was accomplished and should be the focus of our attention.”

Unesco’s director-general Irina Bokova is currently running for the top job at the UN.
Papagiannis said Bokova was not involved in the decision-making during the original amending of the report, or the subsequent quashing of the email release.
Professor Will Steffen, a scientific reviewer on the Great Barrier Reef section of the report, said he was surprised by the apparent collusion between the Australian government and UNESCO in keeping the details of the lobbying secret.
“But I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. It is indeed concerning, though, when scientifically authoritative and credible information is suppressed for any reason,” he said.
According to Papagiannis, UNESCO chose to replace the Great Barrier Reef with the Lagoons of New Caledonia and the Rock Islands Southern Lagoon in Palau to represent the threat of climate change to coral reefs in the report.
He made no mention of what was used to replace the particular concerns associated with the other two sites that were excised.
The lead author of the report Adam Markham said it was his understanding that the decision to change the report was taken in order to avoid a battle with the Australian government.
Australia and UNESCO have had a difficult recent history, with Australia lobbying hard (and successfully) against a proposal to include the Great Barrier Reef on the list of world heritage sites ‘in danger’.
“UNESCO officials have said that they didn’t want Australia’s request to delay the report because it contained important info, and they that they didn’t want to go to the mat on the issue because the report was meant to be illustrative of different types of climate impacts,” he said.
Markham, who is director of climate change at the Union of Concerned Scientists but not a scientist himself, said: “I think scientists should listen to what Australia and UNESCO have to say about what transpired and decide for themselves how they feel.” He would work with UNESCO again, he added.
The Australian government has previously said it had told UNESCO that publication of a document detailing the perilous future under climate change might adversely affect tourism at the sites.
Details of this correspondence, including whether UNESCO asked the Australian government to provide evidence to back up this claim, or if that was the sum total of Australia’s representation to the body, are hidden by the censor’s marker.


Susie de Carteret, a British tourism operator who sells holidays exclusively to Tasmania, told Climate Home that reports about environmental damage could affect tourism in isolated cases.
“There are a few passionately eco-conscious folk who will be put off travelling there because they believe there is a significant ecological or environmental concern wrought by human actions,” she said. “You are talking a very small number but it doesn’t take much to affect the brand.”
However, de Carteret added, “news coverage of the Australian government insisting on scratching every reference to the country in the report is the most damaging thing to the brand and simply highlights that the country has a problem.”
The 104-page report that was eventually published detailed the risks posed by climate change to 31 world heritage properties in 29 countries.
Stonehenge, Venice, Yellowstone National Park and the Galápagos Islands were among popular tourism destinations featured in the report, apparently without objection from their own national governments.
In one of the few meaningful passages of the correspondence between Australia and UNESCO to escape erasure, an environment department official details the minimisation of tourism impacts in Kakadu National Park.
The emails make clear that the Great Barrier Reef and Tasmania’s world heritage forests – which were suffering an exceptional and likely climate-driven fire event at the very moment the emails were being exchanged – were also discussed although all details regarding Tasmania have been removed.
Two sentences regarding the reef remain. They note the progress being made under the Australian government’s Reef 2050 Plan. This plan had been positively mentioned in the draft report.

Links