07/06/2020

This Is How Climate Change Will Increase Human Conflict

VICE - James Greig

Water wars, state repression, an Arctic 'Gold Rush' and other ways humans will be tearing each other apart as the planet heats up.



Whether or not climate change will exacerbate conflict is no longer a hypothetical question: according to the Red Cross, it’s already happening.

As long ago as 2018, Peter Maurer, the head of the organisation’s International Committee, told the Guardian: “When I think about our engagement in sub-Saharan Africa, in Somalia, in other places of the world, I see that climate change has already had a massive impact on population movement, on fertility of land. It’s very obvious that some of the violence that we are observing… is directly linked to the impact of climate change and changing rainfall patterns.”

A recent article in the Washington Post agreed with this gloomy analysis: “Climate and climate change have had modest effects on past conflicts, but these effects are expected to get much larger in the future.” A 2013 study, published in Science, confirmed the clear link between climate events and human conflicts.

All of this points to an increase in hostility as the world heats up. But why is it the case that global warming should have such a dramatic effect? And just how bad can we expect things to get?

Migration

Climate Change will create 1.5 billion migrants by 2050 and we have no Idea where they'll go. Izzie Ramirez
Global warming will increase migration for a number of reasons: there will be droughts, crop failures, water scarcity and a rise in sea levels to an extent that makes many coastal areas uninhabitable.

Discussing the threat posed to the US coastline, climate change scientist Orrin Pilkey told VICE: “We should be planning and executing the beginning of a retreat from the shoreline in response to sea level rise and increased storm severity.”

This situation is not limited to the US. In many cases, rising sea levels will affect nations in the Global South that are far less-equipped to deal with the impact. A 2016 study showed that, in countries reliant on agriculture, a 1C temperature increase correlates with a 5 percent increase in outward migration. All of this means that in the years ahead, we can expect to see migration on a scale unparalleled in human history.

Unfortunately, migration almost invariably causes tension; although not in the way you might expect (if you're a xenophobe, anyway). The problem is not migrant communities causing trouble or committing crimes but rather the treatment they receive.

For instance, the only type of terrorism that increases with immigration is the domestic, right-wing kind. To find out more about how climate change might affect conflict, I spoke with Nate Bethea, a writer and US army veteran who runs What a Hell of a Way to Die – a leftist podcast about military and veteran issues.

“I was never in Iraq,” Bethea says, “but there were a number of people who I met who were very disillusioned by their experiences there. They felt that what was done to the Iraqi people would be done to Americans sooner rather than later. It was the idea that, 'It won't be long before they have an Abu Ghraib for Americans.' I think what we're seeing in the US now, with the reactionary right basically getting top cover to run concentration camps for immigrants – and even their US citizen children – is, in some ways, a confirmation of that. I can only see that rhetoric, and the militarisation that comes along with it, getting more and more severe.”

And what does this have to do with climate change? “Global warming is going to drive huge numbers of people to flee into more temperate climates. The US and UK are pretty similar in terms of their hostility to immigration, and you're seeing this militarised response even now when immigration rates aren't particularly high.

“If it's this bad already,” he continues, “with the US letting toddlers die of influenza in concentration camps for minors, and the UK aggressively deporting elderly children of 1940s immigrants – who are very clearly British citizens – what is it going to look like when climate change worsens?"

Scarcity

These climate change arguments need to die. Joe Sandler Clarke
Climate change is expected to cause a disastrous scarcity of resources, which we may start to feel the bite of sooner – and closer to home – that we had previously anticipated.

The head of the Environmental Agency recently warned that the UK could run out of water in as little as 25 years. This would, obviously, be a disaster: an armageddon of troops on the street, evacuations, outbreaks of disease and a lot of portaloos.

We could, however, conceivably get a three-day week in which basically everything is shut except the pub – so there is some silver lining for the lazy pissheads among us.

Armed Kenyan fishermen prepare to sail their boat during a fishing expedition on Lake Turkana, northern Kenya. Photo: Siegfried Modola / Alamy Stock Photo

It makes sense that a scarcity of resources will increase tensions internally; people may find themselves forced to fight for food or water simply to survive. But it’s also likely to happen at an international level. Bethea says, “I absolutely think you will see regional conflicts due to water scarcity, but I think a prelude to that will be significant disorder and violence within affected countries.”

But for all the catastrophes that climate change will undoubtedly cause, there will be opportunities too. We could be at the beginning of a new gold rush. Take the Arctic, where the melting ice caps are expected to reveal a wealth of resources; chiefly fossil fuels but also diamonds and platinum. One government source, who wished to remain anonymous, told me, “Everything changes as a result of higher temperatures in the Arctic, from mass fish migration to fights over fossil fuels.

“As fish move in search of colder waters,” he continues, “fights between fishermen over increasingly sparse catches will become commonplace. On the international stage, there will be a scramble for the Arctic from both regional and international actors in pursuit of the fossil fuels to which that melting ice gives easier access. This same melting ice also allows easier transport of these fossils fuels once they are extracted; the first cargo ship in history sailed through Russia’s Arctic north in August last year and many more look to follow in its wake.”

Already, the US, China and Russia are jostling for dominance over the region, with the UK changing its defence policy accordingly. With so many spoils to be won, and so many Arctic territories already being contested, it wouldn't be surprising if the region becomes a major source of conflict.

The Heat

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that hot weather increases violence. Given that heat has been proven to make people more aggressive on an individual level, it's not too much of a stretch to imagine this may affect foreign policy, something that is ultimately decided by individuals. Ideally, we don’t want the people in charge of military decisions to be suffering from heat stroke.

But the impact is more likely to be felt at an intra-state level. Hot weather has served as the backdrop to a number of riots in the UK, from Brixton in 1981 to the disorder in 2011 that began in Tottenham before spreading throughout the country. Admittedly, there were no riots during the heatwave last year. But when England beat Sweden at the World Cup, a group of people did storm and trash a branch of IKEA – which is a pretty odd thing to do.

There are a number of factors at play, but if temperatures increase worldwide (as they’re predicted to) we could well see an attendant increase in civil disturbance and violent crime.

Links
at No comments:

Earth Just Had Its Warmest May On Record Amid Startling Siberian Heat Wave

Washington Post - Andrew Freedman

Parts of Siberia had a monthly average temperature of 18 degrees above normal.

Global average surface temperature departures from average during May 2020, compared with 1981-2010. (Copernicus Climate Change Service)


Astonishing warmth in Siberia helped propel global average surface temperatures to a record high during May, according to the Copernicus Climate Change Service, a science division of the European Union.

In addition, the January through May period was the second-warmest such period on record since at least 1979, scientists found. This is likely to be confirmed in the coming days by other science agencies whose data extends back to the late 19th century, such as NASA.

Globally, May was 1.13 degrees (0.63 degrees Celsius) above average compared with average May temperatures from 1981-2010, beating the previous record set in 2016. The past 12-month period (June 2019 through May 2020) was close to 1.3 degrees (0.7 Celsius) above average, matching the warmest 12-month period that was set during October 2015 through September 2016.

This is significant because 2016 was the warmest calendar year on record, boosted to the No. 1 spot by both human-caused global warming and a strong El Niño event in the tropical Pacific Ocean. Such events, which feature above-average sea surface temperatures and altered weather patterns across large parts of the globe, are associated with temporary increases in global average temperatures.

Copernicus reports that the 12-month period is about 2.3 degrees (1.3 Celsius) above preindustrial temperatures, which is of importance to policymakers who are working to limit global warming to well below 3.6 degrees (2 Celsius) above the preindustrial average, with an aspirational goal of holding warming to 2.7 degrees (1.5 Celsius) above preindustrial levels. Scientists have shown that steep and urgent emissions cuts would be required to meet both of these goals.

The regions of the globe that were most above average during May include the areas you’d expect to be cold, even at that time of year, namely Siberia, Alaska and Antarctica. In Siberia, average temperatures were up to 18 degrees (10 Celsius) above typical values for the month, which have been associated with melting snow and ice cover, “zombie wildfires” that may have reignited from the last fire season after a winter spent burning in peatlands below ground, as well as thawing permafrost that may have contributed to a recent oil spill.

Other areas, such as Australia, were unusually cool for the month.

Copernicus uses a technique involving the reconstruction of global weather called reanalysis, which in the past few years grew sophisticated and accurate enough to use to track global climate conditions in near-real-time.

Projections from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration as well as NASA show that the odds favor 2020 setting a new global annual temperature record, beating 2016. However, a periodic cooling in the waters in the tropical Pacific, known as La Niña, could drop it back to a top three warmest year.

Carbon dioxide record

Illustrating the challenges facing the world to limit the severity of global warming, carbon dioxide levels at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii hit a record high during May, registering a level of 414.7 parts per million.

That’s the most carbon dioxide that’s been in the atmosphere in about 3 million years, back when early human ancestors were beginning to emerge in Africa and sea levels were at least 50 to 80 feet higher than they are now.

Insight into our future comes from paleoclimate evidence about that period, known as the Pliocene epoch, as well as others. The unsettling findings show that there was little to no ice on Greenland at the time of the Pliocene, and a drastically reduced Antarctic Ice Sheet as well.

These conditions were associated with carbon dioxide levels at the time and indicate where our current climate may be headed, though the source of the carbon emissions back then were natural, and not added by human activities as they are now.

Links
at No comments:

(US) Renewables Surpass Coal In US Energy Generation For First Time In 130 Years

The Guardian - 

 ‘We are seeing the end of coal,’ says analyst as energy source with biggest impact on climate crisis falls for sixth year in a row

The Four Corners Power Plant in Waterflow, New Mexico, one of the country’s largest emitters of carbon dioxide, is one of 13 coal plants to have announced closure plans. Photograph: Susan Montoya Bryan/AP

Solar, wind and other renewable sources have toppled coal in energy generation in the United States for the first time in over 130 years, with the coronavirus pandemic accelerating a decline in coal that has profound implications for the climate crisis.

Not since wood was the main source of American energy in the 19th century has a renewable resource been used more heavily than coal, but 2019 saw a historic reversal, according to US government figures.

Coal consumption fell by 15%, down for the sixth year in a row, while renewables edged up by 1%.

This meant renewables surpassed coal for the first time since at least 1885, a year when Mark Twain published The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and America’s first skyscraper was erected in Chicago.

Electricity generation from coal fell to its lowest level in 42 years in 2019, with the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) forecasting that renewables will eclipse coal as an electricity source this year.

On 21 May, the year hit its 100th day in which renewables have been used more heavily than coal.

“Coal is on the way out, we are seeing the end of coal,” said Dennis Wamsted, analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. “We aren’t going to see a big resurgence in coal generation, the trend is pretty clear.”

US renewable energy consumption has surpassed coal for the first time
in over 130 years
British thermal units (trillion)
Guardian graphic
US Energy Information Administration (EIA)

The ongoing collapse of coal would have been nearly unthinkable a decade ago, when the fuel source accounted for nearly half of America’s generated electricity.

That proportion may fall to under 20% this year, with analysts predicting a further halving within the coming decade.

A rapid slump since then has not been reversed despite the efforts of the Trump administration, which has dismantled a key Barack Obama-era climate rule to reduce emissions from coal plants and eased requirements that prevent coal operations discharging mercury into the atmosphere and waste into streams.

Coal releases more planet-warming carbon dioxide than any other energy source, with scientists warning its use must be rapidly phased out to achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050 and avoid the worst ravages of the climate crisis.

Countries including the UK and Germany are in the process of winding down their coal sectors, although in the US the industry still enjoys strong political support from Trump.

“It’s a big moment for the market to see renewables overtake coal,” said Ben Nelson, lead coal analyst at Moody’s. “The magnitude of intervention to aid coal has not been sufficient to fundamentally change its trajectory, which is sharply downwards.”

Nelson said he expects coal production to plummet by a quarter this year but stressed that declaring the demise of the industry is “a very tough statement to make” due to ongoing exports of coal and its use in steel-making.

There are also rural communities with power purchase agreements with coal plants, meaning these contracts would have to end before coal use was halted.

The coal sector has been beset by a barrage of problems, predominantly from cheap, abundant gas that has displaced it as a go-to energy source.

The Covid-19 outbreak has exacerbated this trend.

With plunging electricity demand following the shutting of factories, offices and retailers, utilities have plenty of spare energy to choose from and coal is routinely the last to be picked because it is more expensive to run than gas, solar, wind or nuclear.

Many US coal plants are ageing and costly to operate, forcing hundreds of closures over the past decade.

Just this year, power companies have announced plans to shutter 13 coal plants, including the large Edgewater facility outside Sheboygan, Wisconsin, the Coal Creek Station plant in North Dakota and the Four Corners generating station in New Mexico – one of America’s largest emitters of carbon dioxide.

The last coal facility left in New York state closed earlier this year.

The additional pressure of the pandemic “will likely shutter the US coal industry for good”, said Yuan-Sheng Yu, senior analyst at Lux Research. “It is becoming clear that Covid-19 will lead to a shake-up of the energy landscape and catalyze the energy transition, with investors eyeing new energy sector plays as we emerge from the pandemic.”

Climate campaigners have cheered the decline of coal but in the US the fuel is largely being replaced by gas, which burns more cleanly than coal but still emits a sizable amount of carbon dioxide and methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, in its production.

Renewables accounted for 11% of total US energy consumption last year – a share that will have to radically expand if dangerous climate change is to be avoided. Petroleum made up 37% of the total, followed by gas at 32%.

Renewables marginally edged out coal, while nuclear stood at 8%.

“Getting past coal is a big first hurdle but the next round will be the gas industry,” said Wamsted. “There are emissions from gas plants and they are significant. It’s certainly not over.”

Links
at No comments: