Military takes aim at climate change
Cross-posted from Daniel Cressey on The Great Beyond
Climate change may need a military response from America, according to a story from the New York times which is getting a lot of pick up in the world media.
While most policy discussions around climate change focus on energy wonks, the Times says that military analysts are increasingly of the view that “climate-induced crises could topple governments, feed terrorist movements or destabilize entire regions”. Food and water shortages or huge floods could push vulnerable regions over the edge into crises that could “demand an American humanitarian relief or military response”, it says.
The Times piece quotes from a recent report prepared by retired Marine general Anthony Zinni for private research company CAN. Zinni says:
We will pay for this [climate change] one way or another. We will pay to reduce greenhouse gas emissions today, and we’ll have to take an economic hit of some kind. Or we will pay the price later in military terms. And that will involve human lives. There will be a human toll. There is no way out of this that does not have real costs attached to it. That has to hit home.
Although the Times says the Pentagon is “for the first time” looking seriously at national security and climate change, the idea that global warming could heat up things other than temperatures has been around for a while. Back in July 2008, for example, Nature reporter Jeff Tollefson attended one of the first war games on the subject of global warming. You can read his blog posts from the games in our archive.
Image: frigate USS Doyle in the Pacific Ocean earlier this year / US Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Patrick Grieco
Comments
If the military talks about climate change, it could face another Waterloo one day again? To make the point we start with a question from the previous item (Geoengineering: save the world, or doom us all? August 10): Is geoengineering the best way to fight climate change? By reference to a recent NATURE article: “Jellyfish help mix the world's oceans” (29 July 2009) the subsequent question would be: Is ocean mixing by jellyfish a possible mean of geoengineering?
Now about the reasoning of the military on climate change. What do they think naval warfare is doing in the marine environment. Could it be that the naval warfare was part of the two major climatic shifts during the last century? The first shift commenced at the end of WWI at Spitsbergen causing a very pronounced Arctic warming from 1919 to ca. 1940 (see: http://www.arctic-heats-up.com/ ), the second was a global cooling from 1940 to ca. mid 1970, which started with the coldest winter in Central and Northern Europe for over 100 years only three months after WWII commenced in September 1939 ( see: http://www.seaclimate.com/ ). If the military want to say something about climate change, they should proof beyond any doubt that none of their activities at sea has an impact on the weather and climate; not even 1%.
Posted by: ArndB | August 11, 2009 09:29 PM
Interesting take on the climate crisis. Thanks for the info! Now we all need to implement wind and solar energy to our lives and get rid of this climate crisis!
Posted by: Genergize | August 12, 2009 06:34 AM
Climate change is a perfect super-storm. You can play out dozens of scenarios we don't dare to imagine. I have got to believe that education is the answer if an informed public is to make correct decisions.
I've tried to do my part. Please pass this along if you can:
A Day in the Life of the Earth: Understanding Human-Induced Climate Change, with forward by Jim Hansen, Dir. of NASA/GISS
For teachers and parents to educate our children, and to educate the public. The crisis is real. The crisis is now.
http://blogontheuniverse.org/2009/06/13/a-day-in-the-life-of-the-earth/
Jeff Goldstein
Center Director
National Center for Earth and Space Science Education
USA
Posted by: Jeff Goldstein | August 12, 2009 07:58 AM