Recently in Climate change Category

The American Geophysical Union, the American Chemical Society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and 15 other major science groups have written a letter to Congress asking them to take action on carbon emissions:

Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver.

These conclusions are based on multiple independent lines of evidence, and contrary assertions are inconsistent with an objective assessment of the vast body of peer-reviewed science.

Moreover, there is strong evidence that ongoing climate change will have broad impacts on society, including the global economy and on the environment.

For the United States, climate change impacts include sea level rise for coastal states, greater threats of extreme weather events, and increased risk of regional water scarcity, urban heat waves, western wildfires, and the disturbance of biological systems throughout the country. The severity of climate change impacts is expected to increase substantially in the coming decades.

If we are to avoid the most severe impacts of climate change, emissions of greenhouse gases must be dramatically reduced. In addition, adaptation will be necessary to address those impacts that are already unavoidable. Adaptation efforts include improved infrastructure design, more sustainable management of water and other natural resources, modified agricultural practices, and improved emergency responses to storms, floods, fires and heat waves.

We in the scientific community offer our assistance to inform your deliberations as you seek to address the impacts of climate change.

A brief roundup of policy news stories last week indicates that political temperatures are rising in the run up to new climate talks, and that Iran is slowly becoming more flexible over opening up its nuclear program.

Climate bill faces hurdles in Senate
The climate-change bill that has been moving slowly through the Senate will face a stark political reality when it emerges for committee debate on Tuesday reports the Washington Post: With Democrats deeply divided on the issue, unless some Republican lawmakers risk the backlash for signing on to the legislation, there is almost no hope for passage.

US Envoy: No bilateral climate deal with China
Todd Stern, President Obama's envoy for climate change has dashed hopes of a bilateral deal on climate change during this month's presidential trip to China in an interview with NPR's Louisa Lim.

"There is no agreement per se," Stern says, adding that there had been no intention of cutting a separate bilateral deal.

Obama's trip will focus on clean energy cooperation, and aligning Chinese and American positions ahead of the upcoming global climate change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark.

The US is pushing for China to cut its greenhouse gas emissions.

"They absolutely have to cap their emissions in the sense of having them reduced significantly as compared to where their trend line is," Stern said. "China could make a reduction twice as ambitious as the US is doing, and that would still involve their emissions going up somewhere from where they are now."

But Beijing is resisting US pressure, arguing that it is using other measures. It already has announced a goal of improving energy efficiency by 20 percent by 2010. China also is planting trees over an area the size of California.

Jiahua Pan of the Institute for Urban & Environmental Studies in, Beijing says that negotiations will depend largely on decisive mitigation action being taken by the developed nations. China will have every reason to follow suit if the rich nations demonstrate leadership and commit to more substantial cuts than they have offered so far.

India pushes for common responsibility
Rajendra K. Pachauri says in Nature that India wants to be a constructive partner in Copenhagen negotiations on climate change. The country is taking domestic action even though it cannot accept mandatory emissions limits.

UN inspectors visit uranium enrichment facility in Iran
UN inspectors have received their first formal look inside Iran's once-secret uranium enrichment facility that has raised western suspicions about the extent of their nuclear program.

The semi-official Mehr news agency reported that the four-member team visited the heavily protected facility, carved into a mountainside south of Tehran. The tour marked the first independent examination of the site, but no conclusions about the state of the facility are expected until after the next IAEA committee meeting.

Chart: How the ‘Darpa for Energy’ is slicing its $150-Million pie
Wired.com has created a chart describing which area's the Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency will be handing out more than $150 million for what the agency describes as “bold, transformational” energy projects (see also DOE awards 'Smart Grid' and ARPA-E grants).

The UK Royal Society has released its long awaited comprehensive report on the risks associated with geoengineering the climate.

The 12-member working group spent a year assessing the impact of two major different methods that could counter global warming: blocking sunlight from reaching the Earth by injecting dust into the stratosphere, and secondly different technological ways to pull carbon dioxide out of the air.

Geoengineering is "no magic bullet," said John Shepherd of the University of Southampton, who chaired the RS report. "It is an unpalatable truth that unless we can succeed in greatly reducing CO₂ emissions we are headed for a very uncomfortable and challenging climate future," said Shepherd. "and geoengineering will be the only option left to limit further temperature increases."

The report cautions that there could be serious unintended and detrimental side effects on ecosystems and human population. It recommends further research to discover whether the potential risks outweigh the benefits. Not one single technological method can be used to cool the planet says the report, and none of the techniques are ready to be deployed on a large scale.

"Geoengineering and its consequences are the price we may have to pay for failure to act on climate change," said Shepherd. "However, used irresponsibly or without regard for possible side effects, geoengineering could have catastrophic consequences similar to those of climate change itself. We must ensure that a [international] governance framework is in place to prevent this."

Paul Guinnessy

Related Link
Geoengineering the Climate

Related Physics Today articles
Geoengineering: What, how, and for whom? February 2009
Will desperate climates call for desperate geoengineering measures? August 2008

A blue-ribbon panel—chaired by Thomas Young, former head of Goddard Space Flight Center—has called on the White House to overhaul the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) program as costs have spiraled out-of-control to nearly double its original $7 billion price tag.

NPOESS, which was established in 1993, is designed to replace weather forecasting satellites from the Department of Defense and National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, and to help gather long-term climate data. But the instruments have been scaled back and the project has "extraordinarily low probability of success," says the panel's report.

At an oversight hearing held by the House of Representatives Committee on Science and Technology last month, that also included an assessment from the Government Accountability Office, Young stated that maintaining access to weather data is "at extreme risk" and placed management—a committee with equal weight given to representatives of NASA, NOAA, and DOD—as the main reason for the program's failure.

"This Committee has devoted years of oversight to NPOESS," said Subcommittee Chairman Brad Miller (D-NC). "Despite our pressure to get this program under control, we are again facing cost overruns and slipping schedules. At the current pace, we won't see a NPOESS launch until 2039. That is obviously unacceptable. The time has come to reorganize the management of this program to guarantee a successful launch."

Young recommended that NOAA, which is the principle stakeholder in the project, be put directly in charge.

Paul Guinnessy

Related Links
Subcommittee Examines Troubled NPOESS Program
Thomas Young report
GAO report

As part of President Obama's efforts to improve energy efficiency the White House announced new efficiency standards on fluorescent and incandescent lighting yesterday.

"I know light bulbs may not seem sexy, but this simple action holds enormous promise because 7 percent of all the energy consumed in America is used to light our homes and our businesses," said Obama. "Between 2012 and 2042, these new standards will save consumers up to $4 billion a year, conserve enough electricity to power every home in America for 10 months, reduce emissions equal to the amount produced by 166 million cars each year, and eliminate the need for as many as 14 coal-fired power plants."

Obama directly linked raising the US economy's productivity to energy efficiency in his speech, announcing that a $346 million program in the stimulus bill to improve the development, deployment, and use of energy-efficient technologies in residential and commercial buildings would be speeded up.

"By adopting [available] technologies in our homes and businesses, we can make our buildings up to 80 percent more energy efficient—or with additions like solar panels on the roof or geothermal power from underground, even transform them into zero-energy buildings that actually produce as much energy as they consume," he said.

"We can remain the world's leading importer of oil, or we can become the world's leading exporter of clean energy. We can allow climate change to wreak unnatural havoc, or we can create jobs utilizing low-carbon technologies to prevent its worst effects. We can cede the race for the 21st century, or we can embrace the reality that our competitors already have: The nation that leads the world in creating a new clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the 21st century global economy."

This was the third event on energy that the White House had organized in the last three days, and another event with Obama and Energy Secretary Steven Chu is scheduled for today. The new energy push comes after the House of Representatives passed a climate change bill on Friday and the Senate starts working on passage of its own version of the bill.

Paul Guinnessy

On Friday, the Democrats narrowly won passage in the House for the 1200-page American Clean Energy and Security Act by a 219-212 votes—two votes more than required. The bill calls on the US to cut production of greenhouse gases by 17% of 1990 levels by 2020 and 83% by mid-century. Currently US greenhouse gas emissions are rising on average by 1% each year.

Despite statements on both sides of the aisle insisting that they want to combat climate change, a number of Republicans and Democrats have been mounting a rear-guard action to weaken the bill, particularly in its long and convoluted passage through the House Energy and Commerce committee.

The outcome depended on locking in the so-called "Blue Dog Democrats" and the number of moderate Republicans—despite pressure from republican leadership to kill the bill.

President Obama personally called a number of representatives to get passage of the bill after it looked like it wouldn't pass the chamber. On Thursday he called it "a vote of historic proportions ... that will open the door to a clean energy economy" and green jobs." Obama did not mention climate change in his speech, but the dangers of US "dependence on foreign oil." More than forty Democrats, concerned about being labeled tax hikers in next years district elections, still voted against it. Only eight Republicans voted for the bill.

The bill—proposed by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA)—works by finally putting a price on US carbon emissions through a scheme called a cap-and-trade system. The emissions "cap" is decreased each year, and emitters are allowed to "trade" their emissions for cash to allow for some flexibility in meeting CO₂ targets. Energy intensive industries such as aluminum smelters, and users of fuels such as coal and oil are encouraged to switch to more efficient cleaner energy sources through these techniques. House builders are encouraged to build more energy-efficient buildings as part of the initial construction plans.

Passage was not guaranteed as Republicans tried to tar the bill. Minority leader John Boehner (R-OH) misleadingly stated on numerous occasions that the average family would have to pay an additional $3100 per household toward their energy costs. "Democratic leaders are poised to march many moderate Democrats over a cliff ... by forcing them to vote for a national energy tax that is unpopular throughout the heartland," said Boehner.

However, the Congressional Budget Office projects average costs of $175 a year per household by 2020.

Another report—from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE)—actually suggests consumers come out ahead as appliances and household electronics become more energy efficient.

To ease these cost concerns and obtain passage, the bill was altered through negotiations with Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN) to provide extra money for the agriculture sector—a major greenhouse gas emitter—and to lock in House votes from the rural districts.

But the impression that the public is against this bill could be wrong. Fifty-two percent of the US public support cap-and-trade legislation, and 75% support regulating greenhouse gas emissions, says a Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Cost to the average household is a distraction from the true goals of the bill—limiting climate change. The increasingly compelling scientific analysis suggesting that climate change is happening at a much more rapid rate than scientists had previously predicted, puts concerns over the cost of the program (if implemented correctly) into the background as the costs of doing nothing are increasingly being viewed as potentially catastrophic.

The Senate—where the Obama administration will have to put a lot of support behind the bill—has yet to act on the measure. Obama in his weekly address hailed the bill and stated that he was looking forward for the Senate to clearing passage ""so that we can say, at long last, that this was the moment when we decided to confront America's energy challenge and reclaim America's future."

Paul Guinnessy

Energy and climate change remained front and center last week, as the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources finished weeks of work and approved a mammoth energy bill that seeks to accelerate the introduction of new clean energy technologies.

The measure would require utilities to produce an increasing proportion of their electricity from renewable sources, beginning at 3% in 2011, and growing to 15% in 2021. Utilities producing fewer than 4 megawatt-hours per year are exempted from the “renewable standard.”

The Senate bill would revamp the existing Department of Energy loan guarantee program, establishing a “Clean Energy Investment Fund” to be used to support more technology deployments. The legislation also creates a new entity housed in DOE—the Clean Energy Deployment Administration—that would provide financial expertise to help create an attractive investment climate for the development and deployment of clean energy technologies.

Other provisions would encourage improvements in energy efficiency improvements by industry and by consumers, and speed the development of a new “smart grid” to accommodate widely distributed electricity generation from renewable sources such as wind and solar.

Opposites attract

With the Democrats' energy and climate bills gaining traction, House Republicans introduced their alternative to the 946-page climate and energy bill that was approved along party lines in a key committee at the end of May.

The GOP bill would promote expansion of nuclear power as an alternative to mandatory limits on carbon dioxide emissions that are proposed in the climate change measure approved by the Committee on Energy and Commerce in May.

Introduced by Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), the bill would establish a goal for 100 new US reactors to be built over 20 years. It would also provide incentives for domestic and offshore oil production and allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has indicated she wants the House to vote on the Democrats' bill before the 4 July recess.

David Kramer

Various: Japan, a major emitter of greenhouse gases and an important player in the global warming debate, announced last Wednesday that by 2020 it intended to reduce emissions 15 percent from 2005 levels says the New York Times. The goal immediately criticized as inadequate by environmentalists and industry officials.

Meanwhile, Xie Zhenhua, China's special representative on climate change says that China's adoption of energy efficiency targets is "achieving remarkable progress."

China has reduced its energy consumption per unit of GDP by 1.79 percent, 4.04 percent, and 4.59 percent respectively for 2006, 2007, and 2008, which strongly suggests that by 2010, China would have met the 20 percent cut in emissions set by the national government in 2005 Xie adds.

However the Chinese economy has grown on average by 15% per year over the last five years, indicating that China's CO₂ emissions have increased despite improvements in efficiency.

China must be far more ambitious in tackling climate change if the international community wants to prevent calamitous levels of global warming, suggests David Sandalow, US assistant secretary of state for energy.

Sandalow said the continuation of business as usual in China would result in a 2.7C rise in global temperatures by 2050 even if every other country slashed greenhouse gas emissions by 80% writes in the Guardian.

"China can and will need to do much more if the world is going to have any hope of containing climate change," said Sandalow, who is in Beijing as part of a high-level negotiating team that aims to find common ground ahead of the crucial Copenhagen summit at the end of this year.

The news is not encouraging says climate consultant Elizabeth Balkan. " Amassing all the parts from the past week, it appears that China is no more willing to commit to reductions than it indicated previously, while the US may be backing away from this request altogether," she summarizes. "If this is the case, the ground on which meaningful climate commitments may be achieved...may not yield the favorable results hoped for by many."

Paul Guinnessy

President Obama woke up the US scientific community with a Monday morning address to the annual meeting of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), where he reaffirmed the support for science that he showed throughout the campaign. In addition to completing the 10-year doubling of federal support for basic research in the physical sciences begun by his predecessor, Obama set forth a goal for the country to spend 3% of its gross domestic product on R&D, compared with the current 2.6% of GDP. That would require substantial increases to both the one-third of R&D supplied by government and the much larger share provided by industry. The president said he will double the nation's research effort to fight cancer, and spend $150 billion over 10 years on expanding renewable energy and improving the nation's energy efficiency. He pledged to expand programs by the US Department of Energy and NSF to improve the teaching of science and mathematics. That would provide the opportunity for thousands of American students to pursue careers in science, engineering, and entrepreneurship related to clean energy, he said.

Washington's short attention span was apparent last week, as Congress moved on from economic stimulus spending and outrage over bonus payments for AIG executives to the weighty task of crafting legislation to address climate change and promote clean energy. House and Senate leaders made clear their intent to enact the country's first-ever mandatory limits on emissions of carbon dioxide through a cap-and-trade mechanism and pledged to do so this year. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee began its markup of an energy bill, leaving the more contentious provisions, including cap-and-trade, to deal with after lawmakers' return from their two-week Easter recess.

In the House, Henry Waxman (D-CA), the newly installed chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and Ed Markey (D-MA), the chairman of the energy and environment subcommittee, unveiled a 648-page draft bill that includes a cap-and-trade mechanism. Hearings on that legislation also are set for after the recess, while the chairmen expect to report a bill for full House consideration by Memorial Day. Their proposal calls for a 20% cut by 2020 in CO₂ emissions from 2005 levels, compared with the 14% reduction contained in President Obama's budget released in February. The draft bill also would require that by 2025 25% of US electricity be supplied from renewable energy sources, an enormous increase from the 7% share contributed by renewable sources in 2007, according to the Energy Information Administration.

Meanwhile, more details emerged about the Obama administration's forum on energy and climate change, which Physics Today mentioned last week. The forum will consist of a series of meetings that will convene representatives from the European Union, the US, and 16 other nations that produce the lion's share of the world's greenhouse gases.

While the Obama administration claims it as its own, the forum was actually established during the Bush administration to serve as an alternative forum to the United Nation's Kyoto Protocol--which the US declined to join--for the consideration of multilateral actions in response to climate change. The White House said the forum "will facilitate a candid dialogue among key developed and developing countries, help generate the political leadership necessary to achieve a successful outcome at the UN climate change negotiations that will convene this December in Copenhagen, and advance the exploration of concrete initiatives and joint ventures that increase the supply of clean energy while cutting greenhouse gas emissions."

The preparatory session will be held 27-28 April at the US State Department. In July, Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi will host the leaders of the forum nations, in La Maddalena, Italy.

David Kramer