42 Climate management and Europe would be on average 9°F (5°C) cooler. If this extensive cur- rent were to shut down, it would have a negative impact on the entire ocean/atmospheric system and cause adverse eects worldwide not only in ocean circulation, but also in the jet stream in the atmosphere that drives storm systems. Based on evidence retrieved from ice cores in Greenland, scientists have determined that the THC has been shut down in the past and that every time it has been shut down, an abrupt climate change has occurred. e chief mechanism for shutting down the THC is the addition of freshwater. e report goes on to analyze how an abrupt climate change sce- nario could “potentially de-stabilize the geopolitical environment, leading to skirmishes, battles, and even war due to resource constraints such as: Food shortages due to decreases in net global agricultural production; Decreased availability and quality of freshwater in key regions due to shied precipitation patterns, causing more frequent oods and drought; Disrupted access to energy supplies due to extensive sea ice and storminess.” As these conditions persist and global and local carrying capaci- ties are reduced, tensions could mount around the world, leading to two principal strategies: defensive and oensive. Nations that have the resources and are in a position to do so may build fortresses around their countries, protecting and keeping the resources for themselves. Less fortunate nations—especially those who share borders with war- ring nations—may engage in battle for access to food, clean water, or energy. Unlikely alliances could be formed as defense priorities shi, and the goal becomes resources for survival instead of religion, ideol- ogy, or national honor. If these chains of events were to occur, it would pose new chal- lenges for the United States. Randall and Schwartz suggest that in order to be prepared to deal with such changes, it is important that the United States: 1. 2. 3. 43 The U.S. Political Arena improve predictive climate models to allow investigation of a wider range of possible scenarios in order to be able to antici- pate how and where changes could happen; determine potential impacts of abrupt climate change, through modeling, and how it could inuence food, water, and energy; determine which countries are most vulnerable to climate change and could contribute materially to an increasingly disorderly and potentially violent world; Identify “no-regrets” strategies such as enhancing capabili- ties for water management; Rehearse adaptive responses; Explore local implications; Explore geoengineering options that control the climate. e authors advised the DoD to look at potential responses now because there is already evidence in place that global warming has reached a threshold where the THC could start to be signicantly aected, such as documented measurements of the North Atlantic being freshened by melting glaciers, increased precipitation, and increased freshwater runo making it substantially less salty over the past 40 years. Because of this, Randall and Schwartz recommend the report be elevated from a scientic debate to a U.S. national security concern. In their research, they concluded that weather-related events can have an enormous impact on society. ey inuence food supply, conditions in cities, availability and access of clean water, and the availability of energy. According to the Climate Action Network of Australia, climate change will probably reduce rainfall in rangeland areas, which would cause a 15-percent drop in grass productivity. is could cause a reduc- tion of the average weight of cattle by about 12 percent, which would signicantly reduce the world beef supply. In addition, dairy cows would probably produce 30 percent less milk and insects may invade new fruit-growing areas. Drinking-water supplies would also be aected, possibly causing a 10-percent reduction in water supply. With this given scenario, several major food-producing regions around the world over the next 15 to 30 years may not be able to meet demand. • • • • • • • 44 Climate management When population numbers are added to the equation, the situa- tion becomes dire. Currently, more than 400 million people live in the dry, subtropical, overpopulated, and economically poor regions where the negative eect of global warming poses a severe risk to their politi- cal, economic, and social stability. In other countries that completely lack resources, the situation will be even worse. In these countries, it is expected that there will be mass emigration as desperate people seek better lives in regions such as the United States that have the resources available to allow them to adapt. is scenario has immediate implica- tions for issues concerning food supply, health and disease, commerce and trade, and their consequences for national security. What the study concluded was that large population movements are inevitable. Learn- ing how to manage populations and border tensions will be critical, and new forms of security agreements dealing specically with energy, food, and water will be needed. Disruption and conict will become an everyday way of life. CurrenT LegisLaTion e ultimate goal of political action on climate change is to limit and/or reduce the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere. Political action is a critical component necessary to make any signicant global change because without the implementation of the necessary laws and regu- lations—such as GHG emissions limits, regulatory frameworks within which carbon trading markets can operate, reportable and trackable systems of accountability, and tax incentives or funding assistance— productive and long-term change is not feasible. Although the United States had a slow start toward addressing the global warming issue, current legislation is now percolating, and progress is slowly being made. e global warming issue has also made it to the Supreme Court. On April 2, 2007, in one of its most important environmental decisions in years, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA now has the authority to regulate heat-trapping gases in automobile emissions. e Court further stipulated that the EPA could in no manner “sidestep its authority to regulate the green- house gases that contribute to global climate change unless it could provide a scientic basis for its refusal.” is gives the EPA the right 45 The U.S. Political Arena to regulate carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and other heat-trapping gases under the Clean Air Act. According to Justice John Paul Stevens, “e only way the agency could avoid taking further action now was if it determined that green- house gases do not contribute to climate change or provides a good explanation why it cannot or will not nd out whether they do.” e Supreme Court also heard another case concerning the Clean Air Act, giving the EPA a broader authority over factories and power plants that want to expand or increase their emissions of air pollutants. Under this broader reading, they made a ruling of 9 to 0 against the Duke Energy Corporation of North Carolina in favor of the EPA, which made environmentalists ecstatic, marking a historic occurrence in the U.S. Supreme Court as a positive step toward the mitigation of global warming. Interestingly, since the ruling on the rst case, there has been a growing interest among various industrial groups in working with environmental organizations on proposals for emissions limits. According to a New York Times article on April 3, 2007, Dave McCurdy, president of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said in response to the decision that, “e Alliance looks forward to working constructively with both Congress and the administration in addressing this issue. is decision says that the EPA will be part of this process.” Although many claimed victory with the Supreme Court’s decision, not everyone was satised. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., believed the court should never have addressed the question of the agency’s legal obligations in the rst place. On April 17, 2009, the EPA formally declared CO 2 and ve other GHGs to be pollutants that endanger public health and welfare. is landmark decision will now put in motion a process that will lead to the regulation of GHGs for the rst time in U.S. history. According to the EPA, “e science supporting the proposed endangerment nding was compelling and overwhelming.” e decision received diverse reac- tions. Many Republicans in Congress and industry spokesmen warned that regulation of CO 2 emissions would raise energy costs and kill jobs. Democrats and environmental advocates, however, said the decision was long overdue and would bring long-term social and economic benets. 46 Climate management Lisa P. Jackson, the EPA administrator, said, “is nding conrms that greenhouse gas pollution is a serious problem now and for future generations. Fortunately, it follows President Obama’s call for a low- carbon economy and strong leadership in Congress on clean energy and climate legislation.” e ruling will be followed by a grace period for comments to be made and legislation to emerge from Congress. Once this has occurred, the EPA will determine specic targets for reductions of heat-trapping gases and new requirements for energy eciency in vehicles, power plants, and industry. At that point, the EPA will begin the process of regulating the climate-altering substances under the Clean Air Act. A New York Times article of December 18, 2007, stated that the Congress plans to create a huge new industry with the purpose of con- verting agricultural wastes and other plant material into fuel, citing as its primary motive the reduction of the nation’s dependence on foreign sources of oil and the cutting back of greenhouse gas generation. What Congress is proposing has far-reaching objectives—the fuel types pro- posed have not been produced commercially in the United States before and not everyone backs the idea. Some critics claim the technology is immature, the economics are uncertain, hundreds of new factories will be required, and a huge capital investment will be necessary. According to Mark Flannery, head of energy equity research at Credit Suisse, when asked about the plan’s feasibility: “It’s not clear that it is doable, but it wasn’t clear you could send a man to the moon, either. You don’t know until you try.” Historically, Washington’s eorts in nding new solutions to energy demand and eciency were to develop more fuel-ecient cars, not alternative-fuel cars, making this new approach by Congress signicant. Other portions of the bill are equally groundbreaking. e bill calls for a signicant increase in the amount of ethanol used in the nation’s fuel supply. Congress is proposing to double the nation’s current level of production to 15 billion gallons (57 billion l). It also foresees that by 2022, an additional 21 billion gallons (79 billion l) a year of ethanol or other biofuels will be produced by developing technology that can obtain useful energy from biomass such as straw, tree trimmings, corn stubble, and even common garbage. 47 The U.S. Political Arena Another reason why political involvement is crucial is that in order to accomplish these goals, the nation’s key scientists and busi- ness leaders will need political and nancial support to successfully deal with the technical, environmental, and logistical obstacles they will encounter. Martin Keller, the director of the Department of Energy (DOE) BioEnergy Science Center at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, said, “We have the opportunity to revolutionize the way we create fuel for transportation. If we focus on this, we can replace between 30–50 percent of our gasoline consumption with new biofuels.” Christopher G. Standlee, executive vice president of Abengoa Bioenergy remarked, “It certainly is a challenge, but an achieveable challenge.” Under the new legislation, corn ethanol use would reach 15 bil- lion gallons (57 billion l) by 2015. Mandates for next-generation bio- fuel use would reach 9 billion gallons (34 billion l) in 2017 and 21 billion gallons (79 billion l) by 2022. e bill does contain an escape clause, allowing the government to modify the mandates if they do not prove feasible. e measure is not without uncertainty or critics. Some have expressed concern at the short time line of only ve to 15 years. According to Aaron Brady, an ethanol expert at Cambridge Energy Research Associates, “Congress is making the assumption that the technology will appear. To make billions of gallons of next-generation biofuels, a lot of things have to go right within the space of only a few years .” Brady estimates that more than 100 additional corn ethanol plants will be required, along with at least 200 other biomass fuel plants, a number that could rise depending on how technology develops. He also gures that 700,000 tons (635,000 metric tons) of biomass would be needed each year for a distillery to produce 50 million gallons (189 mil- lion l) of ethanol, which adds up in energy costs to transport it. Some environmentalists remain uneasy because ethanol produced from corn still requires energy and fertilizer involving the use of natu- ral gas, oil, and coal. Some food producers argue that the plan would require growing 20 million more acres (8 million ha) of corn—leaving 48 Climate management fewer farming acres for fruits, vegetables, soybeans, alfalfa, and other crops and leading to higher food prices. As with all important issues, there are always pros and cons that must be taken into account when making decisions. To date, there are a number of congressional acts, bills, and legislative proposals concerning the global warming issue. Some of them are summarized below. Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act of 2007 e Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act of 2007 (S.309), also known as the Sanders-Boxer bill, was proposed as a bill to amend the Clean Air Act to reduce emissions of CO 2 . Introduced in the 110th Con- gress by Senators Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) on January 15, 2007, it was based on the increasing scientic evidence that “global warming is a serious threat to both the national security and economy of the United States, to public health and welfare, and to the global environment; and that action can and must be taken soon to begin the process of reducing emissions substantially over the next 50 years.” e bill is considered the most aggressive bill on global warming and is backed by former vice president Al Gore. e bill listed several targets, incentives, and requirements that the EPA would employ to reduce emissions and help stabilize global concentrations of GHGs. e bill set a goal of reducing U.S. green- house gas emissions to a stable global concentration below 450 ppm— a level advised by leading global warming scientists. It required the United States to reduce its emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and make additional reductions between 2020 and 2050. Specically, by 2030, the United States would have to reduce its emissions by one-third of 80 percent below 1990 levels; by 2040, emissions must be reduced by two-thirds of 80 percent below 1990 levels; and by 2050, emissions must be reduced to a level that is 80 percent below 1990 levels. e National Academy of Sciences would be the reporting agency to the EPA and Congress. e bill also included a combination of economywide reduction targets, mandatory measures, and incentives for the development and diusion of cleaner technologies to achieve the goals. e bill also con- tained the following items: 49 The U.S. Political Arena vehicle greenhouse gas emissions standards; power plant greenhouse gas emissions standards; standards for geologic disposal of greenhouse gases; global warming research and development; energy eciency standards in electricity generation; reporting system for global warming pollutants; clean energy task force to support development and imple- mentation of low-carbon technology programs. e bill was never passed into law although it was proposed in sessions of Congress for the past two years. It can be reintroduced. e mea- sure was supported by several environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, the National Audubon Society, and the Union of Concerned Scientists. Global Warming Wildlife Survival Act e Global Warming Wildlife Survival Act was introduced in the House and the Senate in 2007. However, it has since died in committee. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 e Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, which became Pub- lic Law 110-161 on December 26, 2007, directed the EPA to develop a mandatory reporting rule for greenhouse gases. e measure was included in a $500 billion omnibus budget that was signed into law by President Bush and will require U.S. companies to report their green- house gas emissions. e law did not specify, however, which industries must report or how oen they must report. Overall, the EPA would inventory approximately 85 to 90 percent of U.S. GHG emissions—from about 13,000 facilities across the nation. e GHGs included in the inventory include CO 2 , methane (CH 4 ), nitrous oxide (N 2 O), hydrouorocarbons (HFCs), peruorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexauoride (SF 6 ), and other uorinated gases, includ- ing nitrogen triuoride (NF 3 ) and hydrouorinated ethers (HFEs). Collected data will include the total GHG emissions from all sources as well as each gas by category. Once a facility has met the requirements in one year, that facility will continue to report GHG emissions in future years. Companies must reevaluate each facility’s emissions whenever • • • • • • • 50 Climate management there is a process change or other change that may increase the facility’s emissions. Facilities that fail to satisfy the reporting requirements are subject to enforcement and penalties under the Clean Air Act. According to the EPA, data collected would be used in future policy decisions and serve as a benchmark to measure annual progress toward emissions reduction targets. is action is viewed as a rst step toward a massive, comprehensive national climate change regulation. e EPA recommends that as companies work to comply with the proposed rule, they should remain focused on the global issue of cli- mate change and the necessity to prepare for possible further federal mandates to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. ey stress that due to the importance of this issue, reducing emissions is not just a question of compliance; it is now the foundation of business performance. From now on, it should be viewed as part of the cost of doing business. Because this act represents the rst major step toward national comprehensive greenhouse gas emissions regulation, the EPA has pro- posed some guidelines in order to calculate an initial baseline emission measurement. Any owner or operator of a facility in the United States that directly emits GHG from specic source categories or emits 27,558 tons (25,000 metric tons) or more of CO 2 emissions annually from sta- tionary combustion will be required to report emissions data under the regulation. e rst report would be due in 2011 for calendar year 2010. Exempt from this are motor vehicle and engine manufacturers, which would start their reporting for model year 2011. e EPA has identied the following types of businesses that would be required to report their GHG emissions. (See table on opposite page.) e eective date of this rule is 60 days aer the rule is published in the Federal Register. e Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule was published in the Federal Register on October 30, 2009, and became eective on December 29, 2009. e nal rule was changed slightly from its April 2009 version. For example, it now exempts research and development activities from reporting, adds additional monitor- ing options, and requires more data to be reported rather than kept as records so that the EPA can more easily verify reported emissions. e EPA also foresees a future role for the individual states that are already ahead in reporting and controlling emissions. It views these states as an asset for education. States could take the role in educating the 51 The U.S. Political Arena public and businesses and ensuring compliance. In addition, the House and Senate are currently working on a plan that is intended to posi- tion the United States as a global leader on climate change policy at the post-Kyoto discussions to take place in Copenhagen in December 2009. Progressive estimates place implementation of any such U.S. legislation dealing with climate change to take eect no later than 2012 or 2013. Businesses Required to Report GHG Emissions under the FY 2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act SECTOR REPORTERS electricity generation power plants transportation vehicle and engine manufacturers industrial all large industrial emitters, including those in the following industries: • metals iron and steel, aluminum, magnesium, ferroalloy, zinc, and lead • minerals cement, lime, glass, silicon carbide, pulp, and paper • chemicals HCFC-22, ammonia, nitric acid, adipic acid, SF6 from electrical equipment, hydrogen, petrochemicals, titanium dioxide, soda ash, phosphoric acid, electronics • oil and gas components of oil and gas systems (e.g., reneries), underground coal mining other landlls, wastewater treatment, ethanol, food processing agriculture manure management upstream suppliers petroleum reneries, gas processors, natural gas distribution companies, coal mines, importers, industrial gases Source: Environmental Protection Agency [...]... through the financing of emissions reductions projects in developing countries where the costs are much lower than they would be in industrialized countries The CDM is supervised by the CDM executive board (CDM EB) and is overseen by the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) According to the UNFCCC, the CDM is viewed as a trailblazer It is the. .. emission-intensive and energy-inefficient products For example, if there is a better financial incentive to purchase a fuel-efficient hybrid car over a gas guzzler, people will buy the hybrid The IMF has also determined that mitigation would not have as drastic an impact on the world economy as some fear The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change is one of the best-known reports on the economics... establish the highest renewable energy requirement in the nation To subsidize the program, a fee that utility consumers are already paying will finance it Under the bill, however, utility companies cannot use hydropower to meet the new goal because of concern about  Climate management  the impact of hydropower on the environment; the renewable energy must be from solar, wind, geothermal, and other renewable... dozens of hybrid, plug-in hybrid and even all-electric vehicle models The national program will be finalized once the Department of Transportation and the EPA finalize the specifics, followed by a public review period 3 Cap and Trade and Other Mitigation Strategies T hroughout the United States and the world, regions are adopting policies in an attempt to make progress against climate change Positive... percent of the GDP The insurance industry is very concerned about the economic implications of global warming Since 1960, the number of major natural disasters has tripled Over the past 30 years, the proportion of the global population affected by weather-related disasters has doubled, rising from 2 percent in 1975 to 4 percent in 2001 Cap and trade and other mitigation strategies A 2005 report from the. .. percent of the global GDP by 2 030 In 2007, the chairman of Lloyd’s of London, Lord Peter Levene, stated, The threat of climate change must be an integral part of every company’s risk analysis.” The former U.S vice president Al Gore recently challenged the nation to produce every kilowatt of electricity through wind, solar, and  0 Climate management other renewable sources of energy He believes the cost... Especially encouraging is the fact that carbon trade is now being conducted within the United States, which is not a participant in the Kyoto Protocol Carbon credits are sold in 100-ton (91 metric-ton) units If a business is selling credits but does not have 100 tons, then the carbon trading company combines more than one available partial unit together to make a salable unit There is still debate on... population and Cap and Trade and Other Mitigation Strategies 63 Greenhouse gas emissions by sector the smaller pie charts break down the GHGs in specific gases by sector xvi+264_GW-ClimManage.indd 63 3/12/10 12:59: 23 PM  Climate management economic growth expected to occur in California, politicians and environmentalist realize how critical it is to make much more efficient use of their processes by immediately... emissions.” The cap is the foundation on which the   Climate management policy is constructed—it is the permissible carbon emission limit In other words, for a country, it is the absolute, nationwide limit on global warming pollution This measurement is usually set on a scale of billions of tons of CO2 (or equivalent for other greenhouse gases [GHGs]) released into the atmosphere each year Once the cap... in place and is being met, then over time, the cap is lowered in order to further cut emissions; the principal objective being to lower it enough over time to avoid the worst consequences of global warming The trade portion of the system is a market created by powerful incentives for companies to reduce the pollution they would normally emit The trade market also works with the individual emitters and . regions around the world over the next 15 to 30 years may not be able to meet demand. • • • • • • • 44 Climate management When population numbers are added to the equation, the situa- tion becomes. e cap is the foundation on which the 3 Cap and Trade and Other Mitigation Strategies 56 Climate management policy is constructed—it is the permissible carbon emission limit. In other words,. overseen by the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). According to the UNFCCC, the CDM is viewed as a trailblazer. It is the rst