Progress in Paris

     As the second week of COP21 ensues,  agreements are being reached concerning the text of what the final agreement will look like. One of the most recent drafts has been put up for public display and can be directly compared to one from last week to visualize the progress of recent negotiations. Most of the progress is well represented by the Paris Agreement website, which is a collaborative platform that displays breaking news from COP21. Live streaming of the event can be viewed at UNFCCC webcasts.
     This momentum will hopefully provide us with a real binding agreement that will call for climate change mitigation from across the board of gathered nations. It is vital for our planets survival that its inhabitants begin caring for its health in order to sustain as much biodiversity as possible as we travel into the future. The words of astronauts from around the globe eloquently convey such a message to those who hold the power to alter the direction in which we are traveling.

Climate Resilience / Disaster Risk Management

     It is widely agreed upon that rising global temperature will lead to increased intensity and frequency of a variety of natural disasters around the world. One of the conferences at the TAP Pavilion covered Disaster Risk Management in Asian Cities. They focused on Asian cities because there is a fast pace of urbanization/carbonization occurring in the region and therefor there is a real need to strengthen city protection and resilience against natural disasters.
     The introducer of the panel of experts on this topic was Tadashi Matsumoto, Director of Regional Development Policy for the Organization for Co-operation and Development (OECD). The moderator of the panel of experts was Rolf Alter, The Director of Public Governance and Territorial Development Directorate at OECD. OECD has a large focus on markets and cities and therefor is highly involved with urbanized planning for cities that are commonly hit with environmental disasters. The talks focused around cities in Indonesia, Korea, Japan and even in central Brazil.

     In these areas some climate risks cities are facing include, but are not limited to; inflow of people which most governments don't have the capacity to manage, water implications such as clean water and sanitation, flash flooding, uncontrolled or unregulated development which leads to things like house fires, air pollution in cities surrounded by certain topography such as mountains, public health issues such as the spread of diseases, the brining of peat lands and deforestation which lead to environmental degradation. Organizations like the UNISDR and the DRR  & CR help governments on a variety of scales work together to combat such issues.
     Some of the action steps or projects that are currently taking place show the constant need for improvement of the environmental resilience and living areas of cities. Many cities have plenty of studies on the effects that natural disasters have, but now is the time for the studies to turn into actions. Governments need improved disaster risk mechanisms (central command stations for communication and planning). There is also a need for more alert systems and better means of communication. Many cities in these areas need civil defense organizations in each city in the form of initial response team, an area that I see potential for militaries/militias. As of now, the US military is filling as role as a global first responder to areas devastated by natural disaster around the world, such as the Haitian earthquake.

Stories of Hope Amidst Climate Change and Conflict

     Even though it seems almost impossible to fight for the environment amidst a warzone, many throughout the world are doing just that on a day to day basis. The Equator Initiative looks to acknowledge those who have found innovative ways to protect the environment and their way of life (two areas that almost always overlap) in regions of intense conflict. During one of the side conferences in the Rio Pavilion at COP21, a panel of award recipients from a variety of countries took turns sharing their powerful stories of endurance and survival. All of the accounts focused on the goal to preserve cultural heritage that was connected to the land and build provide jobs,to those who desperately needed them,in time of conflict and insecurity. All these grass root movements were driven by human rights initiatives that fought for both human and environmental justice.
     One award recipient, from Ethiopia, spoke about community solutions in cases of conflict. He gave a brief presentation on the best practices in Southern Ethiopia and Northern Kenya that have strengthened communities with respect to conflict management. Another speaker, a MASTA member from Honduras, talked about how violence over territory rights in the region have produced instability and insecurity among communities. Additionally, deforestation of local forests are also the main cause of insecurity and conflict, which is only elevated due to the fact that drug trafficking is prominent in the region. For more information, please visit the Equator Prize 2015 Winners to learn about these remarkable stories regions including; Sub-Sahara Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Asia and the Pacific.

Climate / Migration / Security - human dimension of Climate Change

     My interest during my time at COP21 evolved around the issues of food/water security, natural disasters along with migration that all are expected to intensify with the predicted trends of global warming. Often times, climate change with extreme disasters go hand in hand with conflict. Whether its desertification in sub-Africa to an extended monsoon season in Vietnam, climate change is causing the security of food and water to be threatened which is causing the forced displacement of many people. During these events, the impact on physiology can often increase fear and conflict during migration of climate refugees. Unfortunately, it is also often the case that some would have preferred not to survive form such horrible natural disasters, including floods and droughts, because they become too vulnerable afterwards.
     As of now, both Norway and Switzerland lead the way for aiding displaced people from climate disasters. Now is the time for other countries to follow their lead because those displaced have often not taken part in the actions that have caused them to become displaced (rise of sea levels, tsunamis, deforestation).
     The locations were displacement is most common are; sub-Sahara Africa/Sahel region, poor coastal regions, South East and South Asia, and Islands. In these regions, the environment has become a major factor for migration, just like politics or economics.
     To aid in supporting climate refugees, the Nansen Initiative is one of the agendas with a protection objective focused on people displaced across boarders in the context of disaster and the effects of climate change. Along with initiatives such as this, is the hope to create the globally recognized status of climate refugees in order to take a broader approach on dealing with displacement. Planned relocation is also underway in select regions of the world and is need on a much larger scale in the near future. It is far better if someone can help people move out before disaster hits rather than after the fact. There is a urgent need to relocate villages away from eroding coastlines in Africa and Panama, for example. This requires arrangements between countries, so the migrants are both prepared to move and are not taken advantage of while traveling. There is a need for more protection and assistance, even a military visa for temporary protection. all of this I view as an opportunity for the U.S. military and its allies to get involved and lend a helping hand.
     The head of the Department of the International Organization for Migration wish to help populations migrate with dignity. He explained that " the environment often combines with other factors that lead to displacement." There are also 6 dichotomies to be taken into account:
1. Internal Vs. International migration
2. Temporal Vs. Permanent immigrants
3. Forced Vs. Voluntary migration
4. Migration related to sudden events Vs. Migration due to slow patterns
5. Suffering from the impacts of climate change Vs. Preparing oneself beforehand to move
6. Problem Vs. Solution migration - This is the idea that even though migration is often part of the solution to a problem, it can also lead to many problems that can arise down the road.
Each must be fully considered by the IOM regularly as they deal with migration issues.
Additionally, the Atlas of Environmental Migration, which was published just a few days ago, and the Human Mobility in the Context of Climate Change also contain very important topics of research when it comes to working with climate refugees. For those further interested, there also is a Museum of immigration history in Paris.
     It is currently estimated that 40% of conflict is due to climate change caused events which means that the issue of war and peace is also and environmental issue and a warmer planet will also be a more violent planet. Many currently suspect that the recent drought has played a major role in the Syrian conflict which still rages on today. Also, because similar droughts have occurred in places like Kenya where routes of traditional nomadic populations have been impacted, there is a need to set up migratory corridors. As of now, the legal tools for climate migrants are very few and far between. Unfortunately, it seems that the status of climate refugee will prove to be generally ineffective and the current notion of refugees is usually only used with populations in regions of present conflict. What should occur is the introduction of national level regulation and laws to integrate across boarders to assist migrating climate refugees. There also needs to be a development of regional tools, such as soft laws or guidelines (ethical codes) to dealing with displaced peoples. There should be temporary protection laws to support migrants from natural disasters and human rights must always be implemented, which unfortunately is not currently the case.
Some other notes that I gathered included:
-Where funding will come from is a common sticking point (green fund, private sector, government, FBOs, NGOs, IGOs).
-Need to educate populations about resilience and about migration before it actually occurs.
-Some say that military involvement/aid would only be a catalyst for further conflict in certain situations.
-Climate must be integrated into migratory policies, especially because states want to keep their sovereignty.
-All of this is about people.

Oceans Day

     Friday the 4th was Oceans Day at the Rio Pavilion inside the Climate Generation zone. The forums focused on regional ocean challenges: Pathways to Climate Finance of Small Island Developing States. Because many islands and the artic are regions that put forth the least amount of emissions but take on the most weight of the effects of climate change, there is a need to give sustainable finance to these areas so they can receive debt relief. Many of the talks were through the Global Island Partnership and the Nature Conservancy.
      The vision of these set of conferences were a healthy ocean and a protected climate. They consisted of presidents and chancellors of various islands states who came to talk about the importance of the ocean and how island states are taking the blunt of climate change without reaping the benefits of causing it. Each speaker emphasized how 2015 is a critical year for the oceans and climate and how there is a need for strong implementation of review processes that push countries to update their climate mitigation techniques consistently.
     The President of Palau, a small island country, expressed the importance of the establishment and watch over marine sanctuaries/no take zones thorough the oceans, similar to the one that Palau recently established (the size of France). "Large marine protected areas are critical to allow for marine ecosystems to recover. Image if every country set aside ocean sanctuaries to protect what we have for the future." He ended his speech with saying "industrial fishing and smoke stacks have no place in a sustainable island future."
     The President from COP20 in Lima Peru, who is now also the Minister of the Environment of Peru, emphasized that "when we talk about resilience, we need to include a discussion about the ocean." He also stated, that "blue is the color of the ocean, blue is the color of the sky, it is the color of hope."
     The Commissioner of the European Fisheries from UNESCO stressed that there is currently "lots of pressure on many marine ecosystems." He also explained that to achieve a blue economy, the EU, along with other countries must
1. Achieve an agreement in Paris to keep warming below 2 degrees.
2. Cultivate healthy seas to limit the negative effects of climate change, proper use of maritime    space and reduce marine litter.
3. Remove the obstacles that prevent sustainable blue growth, pursue marine renewable energy by because by the year 2050 the ocean could provide 10% of all European Energy.
4. Improve existing ocean governments and create new ones in order to; protect biodiversity in ocean areas beyond national boarders, improve arctic policy concerning the use of resources and claim rights.
"The ocean is very much apart of our solution to the future."
     The Undersecretary for economic growth in the environment for the US was also present and gave a short speech as well. She stated that "40% of the US population lives in coastal areas" and that "the ocean is warming and becoming more acidic, there is also a rise in sea levels (8inches) more coastal storms, and many species are migrating to cooler waters which is causing ecological and economic disruptions." She also stated that "by 2100, the average global sea level is projected to rise by 1.4ft." Additionally, she also mentioned that NOAA has recently declared the third recorded global coral leeching event.
     Some of the major comments from the President of the Global Ocean Forum and th eorginizer of the event were;
"Since Copenhagen, we have seen new developments that act as irrefutable science of where our climate is headed and the impacts are happening now, and urgent action is needed now, not tomorrow."
"We need and ambitious legally binding agreement and we need urgent attention and target financing to island and coastal states."


There were also other side events that took place throughout the week that were related to this topic, below are my notes from a few of them.
Carrabin Challenge Initiative (Ambassador Spencer Thomas), many others like it, they all serve as a role model for further models of global island states. Cooperation and competition between these organizations/challenges. Many countries involved in these challenges to recognize the importance of tropical (land/sea) ecosystems. Private sector and business were also involved. 10 Countries and 15 companies. Protect 20% of all coastal and marine ecosystems by 2020 is just one of their many goals.

Minister of the Environment for the State of Australia (Hon. Greg Hunt) all about regional and cooperative initiatives. At 50b tons of net CO2 globally. Many ocean initiatives. Great Barrier Reef is under extreme stress. Many plans to preserve the Reef on a variety of time scales, also focus on the improvement of water quality. Ban forever the disposal of carbon dredge material around the Great Barrier Reef sea park. Coral Triangle initiative. Supporting nations provide education and marine conservations. Australia has given $13m so far.

COP21/UNFCCC-Photos

    Here are some general pictures of the first week of the 21st Conference of parties and The Climate Generations Pavilion.

Here are some cool pictures from the COP Solutions Pavilion, outside of the COP21 area.

 

Conservation and Faith

     Throughout the week, there were a variety of conferences that evolved around the topics of hope for international conservation through (FBOs) Faith Based Organizations. A Rocha, a Christian nature  conservation organization ones one of the main FBOs that presented on their progress over the last decade or so. Organizations such as this strive to pursue scientific knowledge with the wisdom we obtain through faith, which I very much connect with.
     Katherine Hayhoe, a distinguished scientist from Texas, gave a lecture on why facts aren't enough, when talking to skeptics about climate change. Our arguments for protecting the earth should be based on moral and religious values, not just the cold hard facts. Her message is very well portrayed in recent documentary titled Years of Living Dangerously. "Climate change exasperates many risks and there are many connections between poverty and climate change. Through it all, God gives us the responsibility to act."
                                 2 Timothy 1:7 - How we should respond
"Only when our clever brain and our human heart work together can we achieve our full potential."
     -Jane Goodall
     A Bishop from Manila, the secretary general of the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA), talked about how the vast majority of climate activism musty come from religious communities, since it is the cornerstone values of such organizations that call for immediate action. He calls for a climate justice, a moral dimension of climate change that goes beyond just prayer. "If we destroy creation, it will destroy us" (Pope Fancis). Because "churches are the harvester of hope," the Bishop from Manila calls for a "common command voice of the religions to solve this global issue." There is a need for more government, NGO, and FBO involvement to provide relief assistance to the poorest of the planet, especially in the face of climate change.
                              Colossians 1:16
     Caroline Pomeroy, the director for Climate Stewards for Tomorrow Today, has always had a passion to help Christians get individually involved with caring for creation. The question is often asked, does carbon offsets=modern papal indulgences? With Caroline's company, she does all she can to fight this stigma. Their vision is to "Reduce what you can, and offset the rest." One of their many programs is planting trees in Ghana as a educational tool for young kids in school and to help give local farmers more income. Through all their programs, they teach local indigenous people how to work with outside FBOs and NGOs to increase their resilience to the future impacts of climate change.
      One of the Co-directors from A Rocha, a priest form the UK, also spoke on impacting papers that covered the above mentioned topics, such as the Death of Environmentalism. This paper focuses on the idea that religion is still relevant in the context of climate change and has a vast amount of material and human resources to solve the issue. This along with others, like the 1986 Assisi Declarations call for faith groups getting active to combat climate change. This is largely because churches own huge areas of land that are considered ecological refuges because they are sacred hot spots and the churches around the world also are major investor when it comes to climate change. There is also a call for re-aligned vocation of many churches from both Ego/Eco-centric to something more in the middle. We need a "new theocentric view, one of knowing our place in caring and preserving. in this way, humans are the ultimate keystone species. Wholism (oikos) must be adopted, we must know that we are part of a biggetr picture and find rootedness in our own places."
Perdeep Singh Rai- "Any tree without roots will cause damage, it is the same for a child."
                            Psalm 104:10-31 the biodiversity Psalm/the interdependent Psalm
                            Psalm 24:1 creation care




MY NOTES
    

Look at climate stewards online and climate caretakers online / citizen’s climate lobby  Get church leaders to think about the issue more to get their church’s involved. In their carbon offsetting-they have met accreditation standard to make the effort worth while. Built in insurance buffers as well to ensure a confidence of integrity. Start with the values and then tie in the science later to convince others about climate change. Reason why we all care comes from the same place, and we can approach the problem from very unique backgrounds. All about sacrifice for what we love, and showing it publically to inspire hope. Need to convey very personal stories/prophetic action-what made them do that.Do the action and share the stories to foster courage for change

Mayor of St. Cloud

                The morning of the 3rd we were able to meet with the mayor of St. Cloud outside of the official proceedings of COP21/UNFCCC. He has traveled to Paris for COP21 as a representative of the Mississippi River Basin Association, which consists of some 60 mayors or so representing their cities along the river.  This association was formed by a collection of cities to improve water quality of the river. Since 20m people rely directly on it for fresh water, it is imperative that there is collaboration between towns all along the river to keep the river water clean. The association also focuses on food transportation along the river, since by 2030, with a world population of 9.6b people, 25% off all the world’s food will be grown along the ten major river basins of the world.

               The mayor, along with three other mayors from the Mississippi River Basin Association are attending COP21 to connect with other officials who represent people living along the major river basins around the world. While meeting with the other officials, they hope to learn best practices for water quality upkeep and food transportation along river basins. They also wish to pursue further, and stronger, collaboration with other forms of governments representing other river basins.

                The city of St. Cloud, MN, has a state of the ark water treatment facility and two hydroelectric dams, so it does not deal with transportation of food and other goods along the Mississippi River. IT instead, focuses more on the water quality, since it is a city that takes many gallons out of the river and puts many back in daily. Also, because St. Cloud is the first major city along the Mississippi river, it is crucial that it, of all cities along the river, does no irresponsibly use the water.

                The Mayor advocates strongly for the bipartisan power of cities to just get up and start pursuing sustainable development practices without laws or regulations being passed at the state or federal level. All these things have been done by the City of St. Could simply because that is what the community wants, clean drinking water, clean food, and fresh air. Because of this, I personally am very skeptical of what the mayor is doing at COP21 in the first place, since he expresses little interest to take anything away from the convention except publicity for himself and the city of St. Cloud.

                St. Cloud also has a 101 class (online at St. Cloud website) to inform citizens of their management practices so that the citizens can become more involved in the planning and decision making process. So younger citizens in particular can be more involved in making their voices heard for things such as more trials and sidewalks in their city. 

Tara - Ocean Science

     The Tara is a state of the ark Arctic research vessel that is the focal point for a variety of talks at COP21 concerning the ocean and climate change. All the conferences (4 main round table discussions) stemmed from a Pan Arctic awareness centered on the cryosphere. Each round table lecture was given by world distinguished Arctic scientists and their student researchers. The lectures were given to a crowd of 50+ fellow scientists and Arctic explorers.
     Round Table #1 (RT1), given by director of WCRP, Dave Carlson, was titled melting snow and ice. It gave a snapshot of the past century or so of; CO2 emissions, arctic sea ice volume, worldwide glaciers, NH snow cover, permafrost temperatures, Greenland mass loss and the arctic sea ice volume, followed by other graphs depicting current arctic sea ice volume. The conclusions of this talk were; Arctic sea ice extent and Arctic sea ice thickness have decreased by 50% each. Arctic sea ice volume (or mass) has decreased by 75% at the end of the summer compared to 20 years ago and how long it will take for the remaining 25% to disappear is unknown, but largely speculated. Also, Arctic polar amplification due to global warming has more impact during winter than during summer. It implies other effects such as GHG trapping long waves radiation and/or heat advected from lower latitudes to the Arctic for being more responsible of the increase of Arctic sea ice melting than the albedo effect. The end of the lecture also covered the tipping points of the Arctic situation expressed by climate models. The models include; future warming and Arctic amplification, impacts of summer Arctic sea ice loss, future challenges, and certain temperature anomalies caused by an altered jet stream. This discussion ended with an explanation of APECS (association for young scientists of polar early career services) and how important it is to build upon what we know now with further research.
     Round Table #2 (RT2), which was given by biologists and Ecologists from the UK, was titled Impacts of Climate Change on Arctic Fauna and Flora. It covered the observed changes in phenology, distribution and interactions of Arctic organisms over the past century to summarize the changing biodiversity in the Arctic. The polar bear was used as a case study to show how many Arctic habitats are rapidly shrinking. The conclusion of this lecture was that, as habitats shrink in the Arctic, there is a need for new policy for fauna linked with pack ice in terms of the establishment of more wildlife refugees.
     Round Table #3 (RT3) was given by Lee-Karp from Maine University and was titled, Changes in Marine Ecosystems.It focused on plankton and ice algae, which occupies the bottom trophic levels of the Arctic food chain. The lecture explained why both ocean stratification and acidification is negatively impacting these basic organisms, which in turns, negatively impacts all other Arctic animals. This is all because of the high vulnerability of each Arctic food chain level due to the lack of biodiversity in each.
     Round Table #4 (RT4) was given by Jeremy Wilkon from Cambridge University and was titled, Changes in Arctic Sea Routs, Social and Economic Impacts. With the increased accessibility of the Arctic, in terms of hydrocarbons, there will be an increase of human activity and therefor and increase of pollution in the Arctic. The main shipping lane that is opening up, due to ice melt, is between Russia and the North Pole. As the ice continues to melt, if economic conditions favor it, neighboring countries will increase their presence in the Arctic, which could lead to future conflict and search and rescue missions as international trade and destination shipping increase in the region. This lecture was rapped up with an explanation of the new polar codes for only commercial vessels that will be operating in the Arctic and the major omissions from the policy. The policy focuses on safety at sea and the protection of the environment.

Overall, the theme coming out of this conference is that scientists and policy makers need to approach Arctic research, and its finding, more holistically.

 A few of the organizations that collaborated to this event include; CRNS, UPMC, WCRP, WMO, CNRS, UPMC, and APECS.

New context for COP21

     Ever since the events that unfolded in Paris, France throughout the 14th of November, it's clear that the context for the upcoming United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has been dramatically altered. Regardless of the motivations of the senseless attacks, one thing is clear, that many wish to show that such acts of terror will not inhibit the progress of such events like COP21. Both François Hollande and Barrack Obama have stated that they both want to show that the world will not be afraid of extremists. It is also clear that, even though most events are still scheduled to take place, fear surrounds the coming events.
     As time passes, and the mourning continues, many are beginning to look deeper into the motivations behind the attacks. This, of course, will not be fully understood for some time, but as for now, Paris finds itself at a crossroads of hope and fear.


Other posts related to the topic
Paris attacks - COP21 and the war on terror
Paris attack and COP21

White Paper: U.S. Military Policy on Climate Change

       Since the Cold War, the United States military has come to unanimously classify climate change as a national security threat. The U.S. military views climate change as a threat multiplier which has potential to exacerbate other security threats on both a national and global scale. An excerpt from the latest Department of Defense’s (DoD) climate change adaptation roadmap states, “A changing climate will have real impacts on our military and the way it executes its missions. This military could be called upon more often to support civil authorities, and provide humanitarian assistance and disaster relief in the face of more frequent and more intense natural disasters. Coastal installations are vulnerable to rising sea levels and increased flooding, while droughts, wildfires, and more extreme temperatures could threaten many training activities” (2014). Whether or not it is widely accepted as reality, the U.S. military sees climate change for what it is, an anthropogenic issue that requires an anthropogenic solution. This paper will cover the; brief history of the topic, current overview of where the DoD now stands, and action steps that will be taken by the U.S. military to ensure sustainable operations. Long before the White House backed the idea of anthropogenic climate change “discussion of the environment and climate change as national security and foreign policy matters trickled in from the late 1970’s and the early 80’s” (Campbell, 2008).

            With the waning of the cold war, military and state leaders have grown to understand the security threat of climate change as one that will only become more prevalent. In 1974, General Maxwell Taylor suggested creating “an expanded National Security Council charged with dealing with all forms of national security, military and nonmilitary” In the late 1980’s, Egypt’s Foreign Minister, Bourtros Ghali warned that the next war in the Middle East world be over water (Campbell, 2008). Later in 1989, Jessica Mathews, the Vice President of the World Resource Institute wrote in an issue of Foreign Affairs, under the article titled Redefining Security, that:

“Global developments now suggest the need for another analogous, broadening definition of national security to include resource, environment and demographic issues. Environmental strains that transcend national boarders are already beginning to break down the sacred boundaries of national sovereignty. No one nation or group of nations can meet these challenges, and no nation can protect itself from the actions-or inactions-of others. No existing institution matches these criteria”

 Senator Sam Nunn, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, articulated in 1990 that:

“A new and different threat to our national security is emerging-the destruction of our environment. The defense establishment has a clear stake in countering this growing threat. I believe that one of our key national security objectives must be to reverses the accelerated pace of environmental destruction around the globe.”

 Just after 9/11 and George W. Bush’s war on terror, In a 2005 article titled Climate Change Poses Greater Security Threat than Terrorism, Janet Sawin of Worldwatch Institute asserted that:

“Transformation in the climate would disrupt global water supplies and agriculture activities, resulting in drought and famine, which would lead some people to turn to extralegal organizations and terrorist groups that would be able to provide for their basic needs better than existing economic and political institutions”

 In 2005, the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change appointed by former UN secretary general Kofi Annan warned of a vicious cycle of poverty disease, environment degradation, and civil violence.

A landmark report was later issued in 2007 by the Center for Naval Analysis (CNA) that attracted major attention in the national security community because of its advisory board of former senior U.S. military officers. 53 authors, all generals and admirals, recognized that although much uncertainty about climate change persists, “moving beyond the argument of cause and effect” is critical. According to the report “The chaos that results can be an incubator of civil strife, genocide, and the growth of terrorism.” They warned that these developments may lead to state failures, interstate conflicts or security issues in many geographic regions that may require a response from an overburdened U.S. military. Transformation in the environment resulting from climate change could also complicate regular U.S. military operations. The board affirmed that they as military officers had long recognized the need to assess the risks of climate change-driven events if the consequences could prove sufficiently severe. Today, the U.S. military is fully committed to undertaking the foreseeable impacts that climate change will pose on its ability to sustainably continue its operations.

            Climate change is and will create a cornucopia of problems that will directly affect the military. It truly is a threat multiplier. As of now, the military is bracing for specific stresses that climate change will bring. They include, but are not limited to, energy consumption, trade relations, future conflicts due to unavailability of resources, natural disasters and diseases, mass migration of environmental refugees, and vulnerability of infrastructure and installations. Each one in itself poses much more than just a huge threat to military operations.

            It is no secret that the U.S. military is a top energy consumer and one of the leading greenhouse gas producers. As of 2010, “the average fuel demand per soldier has increased from about 1 gallon per day (WWII) to 20 gallons,” roughly half of which is used to generate electrical power. This dependency translates to a vulnerability, as a “significant proportion of US combat casualties in operations Enduring and Iraqi Freedom may be attributed to resupply operations” (Justice). National defense leaders, the defense community and academia increasingly recognize that energy poses a strategic, operational and fiscal challenges to the military. The Pew Project for National Security claims, “Our dependence on foreign oil reduces our international leverage, places our troops in dangerous global regions, funds nations and individuals who wish to harm us, and weakens our economy” (Reichert, 2010). With respects to future energy consumption, trade and other international relations will also be put to the test as the economic opportunities in the Arctic Ocean begin to present themselves.

            As sea ice in the Artic continues to melt, more natural resources are coming within reach as shipping lanes open up in the first time in recorded history. The military predicts that this will affect bilateral and multilevel operations. According to the National Research Council, “The decline in sea ice thickness and extent could result in increased access to and conflict over offshore resources in the Arctic Ocean in association with northwest and southeast passages-overall increase of stress on international relations” (2010). With the shrinking availability of other basic resources such as food and water, due to climate change, escalated conflict is yet another dilemma that the military must face.

            As unstable regions of the world continue to run out of necessary resources, future armed conflicts and even wars are expected to break out. According to the Center of Naval Analysis, there are distinct links between environmental scarcity and violent conflict. Impacts on resource availability, such as water and food represents a stress multiplier. Because of this, governments may face increasing difficulty sustaining their populations and maintaining political stability as they cope with resource stresses induced by climate change (2007). The National Intelligence Assessment for 2030 concluded that climate change alone is unlikely to trigger state failure in that time frame, but the exacerbation of existing problems could be enough to endanger domestic stability in some states, giving rise to threats of regional conflict or creating openings for criminal activity or terrorism. For example, a dysfunctional government response to water stress-of a sort expected to become more common under climate change-is generally agreed to be one of the contributing factors to the current humanitarian disaster in Syria (Houser, 2015). Correlations between climate extremes and violence is being realized more and more. According to Solomon Hsaing and his colleagues, “the magnitude of climate’s influence is substantial.” For each one standard of deviation change in climate toward warmer temperatures or more extreme rainfall, median estimates indicates that the frequency of interpersonal violence rises 4 percent and the frequency of intergroup conflict rises 14 percent” (2013). For perspective on the size of these effects, historically observed oscillations in the global climate have been implicated in contributing to 21 percent of civil conflicts since 1950 (Hsiang, Meng, & Cane, 2011). Not only will the U.S. military be called to future climate caused conflicts, but it will also have to deal with an increase of global disease outbreaks and natural disasters.

            The increase in humanitarian aid and disaster response stemming from changes in climate extremes is highly expected by the military. The U.S. military often has a unique ability to respond to large-scale extreme weather or natural disasters. In the wake of Typhoon Haiyan, which struck the Philippines on November 8, 2013, the United States not only provided 37million in humanitarian aid but also deployed more the 14,000 U.S. military personnel to help stabilize the area and provide relief. The U.S. military gets a request for humanitarian assistance and disaster response about once every two weeks (Houser, 2015). As climate change heightens humanitarian emergencies, the demand for U.S. assistance for homeland defense or combat operations that may arise. Emergence of new strains of disease, a profound cultural and demographic tensions in several regions, are just some of the trends whose complex interplay may spark or exacerbate future conflicts. Humanitarian emergencies that require the mobilization of domestic and international militaries are also security consequences of concern and may be more likely and more immediate concerns than conflict (Busby, 2015).  With events such as armed conflict, natural disasters and diseases predicted for the future, the U.S. military has to also be vigilant when it comes to mass migrations of environmental refugees.

            Because it is the most unstable regions of the world that will be hit hardest by the effects of climate change, mass migration is becoming more and more prevalent. The increasing trend of environmental immigrants is clashing with widespread anti-immigrant sentiment in both developed and developing countries around the world. Some countries are describing migration and particularly unauthorized international migration as a security threat and are turning to military forces to deter or manage the human flows, a trend that is likely to grow (Smith, 2007). The U.S. government and military alike, fear that abrupt, massive tides of 'climate refugees' (people displaced by the adverse impacts of climate change) would threaten international security and possibly lead to armed conflicts (Reuveny 2007; Christian Aid 2007; Myers 2005). Now, more than ever, the U.S. military will be called upon to answer new emerging threats brought on by climate change. This demands that training for future operations be a priority for the military, unfortunately, climate change will also negatively impact future training exercises along with military infrastructure and installations.

            In order to train to meet the coming security threats of climate change, the U.S. military must rely on its installations and infrastructure to do so. The military also sees these as extremely vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Vulnerabilities of continental U.S. (CONUS) army installations and operations from projected changes in climate are diverse in both consequence and timing of impacts. Three levels of impacts can be identified. At the highest level of impact, an installation may no longer be able to support current and future mission requirements. At the intermediate level of impact, missions could be accomplished, but would require adaptive actions to prevent, remediate, or repair impacts, which could carry high costs and require significant time for planning and implementation. Other impacts at this level could be acute (e.g., flooding and tornado events), with high short-term costs and short-term disruption, but would not prevent mission accomplishment over the long-term. At the lowest level of impact, operations may need to be modified, but could be accomplished within established processes and with no significant commitment of additional resources. These impacts on army installations can be described through three broad categories: installation missions (including training, testing, industrial base operations, and logistical and deployment support), the built infrastructure, and the lands and ranges that support these installation missions (Hayden, 2014). According to the DoD 2014 Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap, the potential harmful effects of climate change on the department concern; plans and operations, training and testing, built and natural infrastructure, and acquisition and supply chain management. From military bases being engulfed by rising seas to increased weather extremes, such as heat waves, wildfires, droughts and floods, there is much that the U.S. military has to be concerned for in terms of future training and operations.

Even though climate change doubt is manufactured at a large scale, this cannot be an excuse for the military to delay action. Military planners know that, as military strategist Carl Von Clausewitz wrote, “All action must, to a certain extent, be planned in mere twilight” (DoD, 2014). In order for the U.S. military to ensure sustainable operations in years to come, it must lead into the future by example. The White House’s vision for the U.S. military is that it leads with purpose, strength, capable partners, instruments of U.S. power, and long term perspective (2014). In order to accomplish these objectives, the U.S. military must; spearhead further research of climate change, lead and facilitate the transition to renewable energy/technology and overall greenhouse gas reductions, monitor and enforce binding climate change agreements, strengthen its multilateral cooperation’s, and train more to be a global first responder to natural, diseases and climate based armed conflict. If the military is to fulfill its role as the upholder of American and global security, it’s crucial that research into the most prevenient security threat is increased.

Because climate change is such a complex issue with no one clear cut solution, its effects must be studied by the U.S. military. Both the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and the White House call for climate-impact assessment at all of the DoDs permanent installations. Several studies have been completed or are currently underway by the individual military service branches, and DoD’s Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP). This program recently launched a comprehensive research project to examine climate-change effects on coastal installations (SERDP, 2013). SERDP is using case studies to quantify the potential effects of near-term sea-level rise and storm activity on coastal infrastructure and Pacific Islands and atoll systems that are home to critical U.S. military installations. As information about the coming effects of climate change grows, so to should the military’s ability to be a catalyst for other countries to quickly pursue sustainable development.

Because the military is a massive producer of greenhouse gas emissions, it has a responsibility to lead and facilitate the transition to renewable energies and technologies. According to the National Research Council, the “military ought to play an important role in reducing the US contribution to global GHG emissions, both through direct reductions and by providing a large market and consumer base for low-energy emission technology” (America’s Climate Choices, 2010). To increase overall energy efficiency, each branch of the military must decrease overall energy consumption while increasing in renewable fuels, pursue LEED certified building techniques and aid underdeveloped countries to do the same. According to the DoD’s 2010 GDR:

“The Department is increasing its use of renewable energy supplies and reducing energy demand to improve operational effectiveness, reduce greenhouse gas emissions in support of U.S. climate change initiatives, and protect the Department from energy price fluctuations.”

In more recent years, this view has been dealt with even more sincerity. Admiral Roughead, chief of naval operations, has stated that, “We have the great opportunity together to be early adopters of new energy technologies that will improve our security and will one day have a broader utility to the nation and world.” Also, the Secretary of the Navy has said that, “Changing the way we use and produce energy is fundamentally an issue of national security, it is an economic necessity, and it is the responsible thing to do as custodians of the environment” (Papp, 2013). Further, adapting to climate change “will be extremely expensive. Developing countries with their small reserves of capital, shortages of scientists and engineers, and weak central governments will be the least able to adapt, and the gap between the developed and developing worlds will almost certainly widen” (Mathews, 1989). Because of its global influence, the military must not neglect to assist in helping the world achieve a zero net carbon future.

            For a sustainable future to be reached, the U.S. military must aid in the monitoring and enforcing of global, binding, climate change agreements made during events like COP21. According to the White House, The DoD and National Intelligence Council systems could, and should, play an important role in providing coverage of large regions of the globe and in monitoring local or point sources in remote or hostile locations so major world leaders can impose sanctions to keep them in check (2015). In order for the military to fill such a role, it must strengthen its multilateral cooperation’s with other security institutions.

            The U.S. military must increase its partnerships with other militaries so that it may work bilaterally with other countries. This is needed because, diplomacy, intelligence, military force, and economic aid are components of an integrated and coherent strategy for addressing climate change adaptation in the context of national and global security (CNA, 2007). In order to do this, “NATO and other economic and military organizations should be studies as models for international cooperation to combat climate change” (Campbell, 2008). Civilian strategists and active-duty and retired military officers at a conference at the U.S. Army War College titled The National Security Implications of Global Climate Change concluded that, “climate change– related security problems likely would require multi-agency cooperation, especially for domestic emergency management, and typically multinational action” (Douglas, 2007). In 2008, the CNA advised that:

“DoD go beyond military dimensions with the U.S. government to seek to enhance the resilience of the international community in the face of climate related threats by strengthening the governance, health care, and disaster prevention and relief capabilities of foreign countries. They noted that the recent creation of the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) seems to serve such a purpose. The authors also recommended that the United States help limit climate change through unilateral and multilateral measures; the Department of Defense could contribute through more efficient use of energy and other measures” (Campbell).

 While military forces have roles in disaster relief, the broader impact of serious climate change will require multinational, multi-agency cooperation on a scale heretofore unimaginable and could provide no-fault ground for global cooperation (Douglas, 2007). As the military strengthens its ties with over governments, it should also be prepared to respond to a variety of climate change induced disasters around the globe.

            At this viscera of this plan for future operations is the concept that U.S. military would train more to be a global first responder to natural disasters, diseases and climate based armed conflict. America and the U.S. military is the world leader in fighting pandemics, including HIV/AIDS, and in improving global health security. At home, they must strengthen their ability to prevent outbreaks and ensure sufficient capacity to respond rapidly and manage biological incidents. As an exemplar of a modern and responsive public health system, they should accelerate work with partners through the Global Health Security Agenda in pursuit of a world that is safer and more secure from infectious disease. In order to save lives by strengthening regulatory frameworks for food safety and developing a global system to prevent avoidable epidemics, detect and report disease outbreaks in real time, and respond more rapidly and effectively. They should also continue to lead efforts to combat the rise of antibiotic resistant bacteria (White House, 2014). In the future, military responses will likely come in different forms. If military forces are deployed for the purpose of engaging in humanitarian or search and rescue operations, for instance, their involvement may actually relieve the plight of the migrants and prevent further tragedy. If, on the other hand, military troops and assets are deployed solely for interdiction or enforcement, they may exacerbate the migrants’ suffering. The longer term dilemma for states—and for the world in general—is how to accommodate the predicted surge in environmental migrants. This is not merely a logistical or immigration question, it is also a moral one. International migration can be a coping mechanism that provides relief to those suffering, as was seen in the case of the tens of thousands displaced by Hurricane Katrina (Smith, 2007). It is the duty of the U.S. military to serve and protect those which it has influence over. Therefore the role of future military operations will more coincide with humanitarian aid and the suppression of conflict in terms of global climate change.

            In order for the U.S. military to ensure sustainable operations in the context of global warming, the above mentioned actions steps must be put into practice before it is too late. “The cost of climate change will be measured in lost lives, lost livelihoods, lost homes, lost businesses. Hundreds of billions of dollars in emergency services and disaster relief. In fact, those who are already feeling the effects of climate change don’t have to deny it-they’re busy dealing with it” (Obama, 2013). If one thing is for certain, it is that the U.S. military has been and will continue to be busy dealing with climate change and the security threats that it imposes.

           

Works Cited

 

Busby, J. (2015). Climate Change and National Security. US Army Research, Development and Engineering Command, ADA613137, 1-17.

 

Campbell, K. M. (2008). Climatic Cataclysm: The Foreign Policy and National Security. Washington D.C., Brookings Institution Press. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com/lib/csbsju/reader.action?docID=10338437&ppg=1

 

Center for Naval Analysis Corporation, National Security and the Threat of Climate Change (Alexandria, Va.: CNA, April 2007).

 

Christian Aid, (2007). Human Tide: the real migration crisis. Retrieved from http://www.christianaid.org.uk/Images/human-tide.pdf

 

Douglas, V. (May 1, 2007). “Global Climate Change: National Security Implications,” Strategic Studies Institute Colloquium Brief (Carlisle Barracks, Pa.: U.S. Army War College).

 

White House, (2014). National Security Strategy, Executive Office of the President. Retrieved from http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA616357

 

Fitzgerald, E. K. & Cordesman, A. H. & Arleigh, A. (2009). The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review. Center for Strategies & International Studies. Retrieved fromhttp://csis.org/files/publication/090809_qdrahc_revised.pdf

 

Hayden, T. J. et al. (2013). Department of the Army: High-level Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment. U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Retrieved from http://www.asaie.army.mil/Public/ES/doc/ArmyHigh-LevelClimateChangeVulnerabilityAssessment2013final.pdf

 

High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility (New York: United Nations, 2005), p. 15.

 

Houser, T. & Hsaing, S. & Kopp, R. & Larsen, K. (2015). Economic Risks of Climate Change: An American Prospectus. New York. Columbia University Press. Retrieved fromhttps://books.google.com/books?id=0QTSBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA190&dq=us+military/climate+change&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEQQ6AEwA2oVChMIlamLq-zTyAIViXceCh01nArL#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Hsiang, S. M. & Burke, M. & Miguel, E. (2013). Quantifying the Influence of Climate Change on Human Conflict. Science, 341(6151), DOI: 10.1126  

 

Hsiang, S. M. & Meng, K. C. & Cane, M. A. (2011). Civil conflicts are associated with the global climate change. Nature, 476(438), DOI: 10.1038

 

Mathews, J. T. (Spring 1989). Redefining Security. Foreign Affairs, 68(2): 162-177, DOI: 10.2307. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20043906.pdf?acceptTC=true

 

Maxwell D. T. (April 1974). “The Legitimate Claims of National Security,” Foreign Affairs 52: 575– 94.

 

National Research Council, (2010). America’s Climate Choices: Panel on Advancing the Science of Climate Change: Advancing the Science of Climate Change. Washington D.C., The National American Press. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com/lib/csbsju/reader.action?docID=10439400&ppg=1

 

Obama, B. H. (June 25, 2013). President Barrack Obama’s speech on Climate-Change, Georgetown University.

 

Office for the Deputy under Secretary of Defense (2014). Department of Defense 2014 Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap. Installations and Environment. Retrieved fromhttp://www.proactivewaterworks.com/tellerenergy/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/DOD_2014_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Roadmap.pdf

 

Janet L Sawin, “Climate Change Poses Greater Security Threat Than Terrorism,” Global Security Brief 3 (Washington: Worldwatch Institute, April 2005). See also Gregory D. Foster, “A New Security Paradigm,” Worldwatch, January– February 2005, p. 45.

 

Justice, N. G. & Vane, M. A. & Stevenson, M. H. (2010). Power and Energy Strategy White Paper. Army Capabilities Integration Center – Research, Development and Engineering Command, Retrieved fromhttp://www.arcic.army.mil/app_Documents/ARCIC_WhitePaper_Power-and-Energy-Strategy_01APR2010.pdf

 

Myers K (2005) Racetalk: Racism Hiding in Plain Sight. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

 

Papp, R. J. (2013). U.S. Coast Guard Artic Strategy – Vision for Operating in the Artic Region: Ensure safe, secure, and environmentally responsible maritime activity in the Artic. Retrieved fromhttp://www.uscg.mil/seniorleadership/DOCS/CG_Arctic_Strategy.pdf

 

Reichert, J. & Cuttino, P. & Lightbody, L. & Lubetsky, J. F. (2010). Reenergizing America’s Defense: How the Armed Forces are Stepping Forward to Combat Climate Change and Improve the U.S. Energy Posture, The Pew Project on National Security, Energy and Climate, Retrieved from

 

Reuveny, R. (2007). Climate change-induced migration and violent conflict. Political Geography, 26: 656-673. Retrieved fromhttp://ac.els-cdn.com/S0962629807000601/1-s2.0-S0962629807000601-main.pdf?_tid=1bcfa278-912c-11e5-ab2f-00000aab0f6c&acdnat=1448205613_835f5ae2ae818cc34b44550369e3c8f7

 

Rudy Abramson, “Nunn Sees Military Role in Aiding Environment,” Los Angeles Times, June 29, 1990, p. 31

 

SERDP, (2013). Mission Description and Budget Item Justification, Office of Secretary of Defense. Retrieved from http://www.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y2013/OSD/stamped/0603716D8Z_3_PB_2013.pdf

 

Smith, P. (2007). Climate Change, Mass Migration and the Military Response. Elsevier/Foreign Policy Research Institute, 51(4), 617-633. Retrieved fromhttp://ac.els-cdn.com/S0030438707000786/1-s2.0-S0030438707000786-main.pdf?_tid=c70edea2-912b-11e5-b6dc-00000aacb362&acdnat=1448205471_393d0ac555b8977855791b8fd90a3f09