"The Climate Crisis and the Adaptation Myth"

Hello, All – Robert Repetto of Yale University and a Senior Fellow of the United Nations Foundation has published a very readable report on the prevailing myth that the USA is prepared to adapt to climate change. He talks about the differences between “anticipatory or preventive adaptation” and “reactive adaptation,” and the economic consequences of reacting to rather than preparing for climate change.

The 24-page report, "The Climate Crisis and the Adaptation Myth," is published by the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies and is available for viewing or downloading at http://www.environment.yale.edu/publication-series/climate_change/

Importantly, the report discusses the behavior of people and organizations, and why we are so sluggish in responding to new conditions. He says, “Humans are myopic decision-makers, sharply discounting events in the farther future or past...exhibit strong ‘anchoring’ to the status quo… [and] tend to resist and deny information that contradicts their value or ideological beliefs.”

The report has specific references to our American Southwest where Repetto points out that 30 million people depend upon a limited and dwindling water supply, yet New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado and Texas have done very little in terms of factoring climate change into long range water supply planning. Additionally, land and resource managers for the Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service – responsible for vast tracts of land in the American West – have ignored a directive by the U.S. Department of the Interior to consider climate change in their management plans.

The Science Daily article below briefs the report, but I urge you to read the full document that treats prevailing questions about our abilities to adapt to climate change. The report reconfirms climate change as a measured phenomenon that has affected temperature and precipitation patterns worldwide for the past 50 years, and will have even greater impacts during the coming decades.

Remember that estimates of the economics of climate change indicate that attempting to adapt to climate change is likely to be substantially more expensive than the lesser costs of cutting carbon emissions by moving into a new clean-energy economy.


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081202115427.htm

Science Daily/Yale University

Most U.S. Organizations Not Adapting To Climate Change, Report Finds

ScienceDaily (Dec. 3, 2008) — Organizations in the United States that are at the highest risk of sustaining damage from climate change are not adapting enough to the dangers posed by rising temperatures, according to a Yale report.

"Despite a half century of climate change that has already significantly affected temperature and precipitation patterns and has already had widespread ecological and hydrological impacts, and despite a near certainty that the United States will experience at least as much climate change in the coming decades just as a result of current atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, little adaptation has occurred," says Robert Repetto, author of "The Climate Crisis and the Adaptation Myth" and a senior fellow of the United Nations Foundation.

Repetto says that private- and public-sector organizations face significant obstacles to adaptation because of uncertainties over the occurrence of climate change at the regional and local levels, over the future frequency of extreme weather events, and over the ecological, economic and other impacts of climate change.

In addition, organizations lack relevant data for planning and forecasting, and the data that are available are typically outdated and unrepresentative of future conditions. Other institutional barriers to adaptation are overcoming or revising codes, rules and regulations that impede change; the lack of clear directions and mandates to take action; political or ideological resistance to the need for responsiveness to climate change; the preoccupation with near-term challenges and priorities and the lingering perception that climate change is a concern only for sometime in the future; and the inertia created by a business-as-usual assumption that future conditions will be like those of the past.

"Those organizations in the public and private sectors that are most at risk, that are making long-term investments and commitments and that have the planning, forecasting and institutional capacity to adapt, have not yet done so," says Repetto, who until recently was a professor in the practice of economics and sustainable development at the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies. "There have been very few changes in forecasts, plans, investment decisions, budgets or staffing patterns in response to climate risks."

The report cites:

New York City's 40-year-old building codes that require structures to withstand only 110 mph winds, when climate change is causing more intense hurricanes that could bring speeds of up to 135 mph, and its flood maps that are based on historical data and not on climate change modeling data. Increases in sea levels and surges associated with severe storms would likely inundate Kennedy Airport and lower Manhattan, including the subway entrances and tunnels into Manhattan.

Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Texas, where water supply is critical and climate change is not factored into state agencies' current water management plans.

A 2007 GAO report that land and resource managers for the Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service have ignored a directive by the Interior Department to consider climate change in their management plans.

Federal planning guidelines that states and municipalities must follow to receive funding for transportation investments that do not require consideration of climate change in the design and siting of highways and rail lines.

Municipal public health agencies in Los Angeles, Chicago and Philadelphia, among others, that have not factored climate change into plans for confronting public health risks, despite the belief that climate change will increase the incidence and severity of vector-borne diseases and respiratory illnesses.

"To say that the United States has the technological, economic and human capacity to adapt to climate change does not imply that the United States will adapt," said Repetto. "Without national leadership and concerted efforts to remove these barriers and obstacles, adaptation to climate change is likely to continue to lag."

Adapted from materials provided by Yale University, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Yale University (2008, December 3). Most U.S. Organizations Not Adapting To Climate Change, Report Finds. ScienceDaily. Retrieved December 3, 2008, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2008/12/081202115427.htm

US Renewable Energy

Hello, All -- The latest monthly report from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the U.S. Department of Energy shows that domestically produced renewable energy is now only slightly less than the total of domestically produced nuclear energy from the 103 nuclear power plants now operating in the USA.

Renewable energy now accounts for slightly less than 11 (eleven) percent of total domestically produced energy in the USA, and slightly more than 7 (seven) percent of total USA energy consumption from domestic plus imported energy.

I added three links to EIA information in and below the article for your research and reading pleasure.

Happy Holidays!


http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/infocus/story?id=54199

Renewable Energy World/U.S. Energy Information Administration

December 1, 2008

US Renewable Energy Demand Increases 7.4%

Washington, D.C., United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com]

According to the latest "Monthly Energy Review" issued by the U.S. Energy Information Administration on November 24, 2008, renewable energy accounted for almost 11 percent of the domestically-produced energy used in the United States in the first eight months of 2008.
See: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/contents.html
For the period January 1 – August 31, 2008, the United States consumed 67.550 quadrillion Btus (quads) of energy - of which 45.428 quads was from domestic sources and 22.122 quads was imported. Domestically-produced renewable energy (biomass/biofuels, geothermal, hydropower, solar, wind) totaled 4.886 quads, an amount equal to 10.76% of U.S. energy consumption that is domestically-produced.__

This share is only slightly less than the contribution from nuclear power (12.39%). And while consumption of nuclear power dropped slightly during the first eight months of 2008, compared to the same period for 2007 (5.629 quads, down from 5.637 quads), domestic renewable energy production's share increased by more than seven percent (4.886 quads, up from 4.549 quads). __

Biomass and biofuels combined presently constitute the largest source of renewable energy in the United States (2.554 quads) followed by hydropower (1.916 quads).

Wind power, however, experienced the largest growth rate, increasing by almost 45% compared to the first eight months of 2007 (0.300 quads, up from 0.207 quads).

Solar’s and geothermal’s contributions were at roughly the same levels in 2008 as they were in 2007 – although both are poised to greatly expand their market share in the near future.

Additional References:

Energy Information Administration – Official Energy Statistics From the U.S. Government: http://www.eia.doe.gov/

EIA Renewable & Alternative Fuels: http://www.eia.doe.gov/fuelrenewable.html