natural sounds

I was part of a meeting with a very high powered financier yesterday and he had an interesting take on things — this economic crisis of the last few years is not what it seems.

What’s happening now, he said, is actually a structural readjustment that began in the 1990s and officially started with the 2001-2002 recession. The “Great Recession” is the end game — the torch of economic leadership for the next 20 years officially passed to China, India and Brazil.

He actually said, and I quote, “The US is Rome in 400 AD,” which is remarkably similar to what some friends and I were joking about at lunch last week.

Of course he also believes the US is still going to be a “really cool place to live” — he doesn’t see barbarians at the gates. And doesn’t factor any sustainability issues into his various calculations. He thinks the US is still going to be a very strong niche player but will lose it’s amazing clout over the next 10 years or so.

Interestingly, none of this bothered him at all.

As he put it, of course there are winners and losers; there always are. And now the winners and losers are changing. As an investor, though, there’s still lots of money to be made, just with new (and exciting) companies and nations. And more international travel.

It makes me think that people like Simon Johnson are a bit naive about how all this is going down.

Really, the economic crisis only matters if you’re still invested (mentally) in a sort of economic patriotism. But if you don’t care about the United States or the West more broadly, then the economic crisis is not a crisis at all — just a monumental shifting of the sands. Money has already rapidly changed hands. Now, the global economy is adjusting.

If you’re still holding on to notions of USA#1, then this is a HUGE problem. But if you think, for example, India is number one, then it’s an amazing opportunity.

If you don’t care about nations at all, then it’s just business.

Needless to say, I’m adjusting my 401k.

by Angela Kim

This Week’s Top Story: Lead Up To Copenhagen

NY Times: Gloomy Negotiators End Bonn Climate Talks
The Guardian: UN’s climate chief warns of real risk of failure at climate change talks
United Nations: Bonn Climate Change Talks – August 2009
Reuters: INTERVIEW-Climate change fight seen costing $300 bln a year

More than 2,000 representatives met in Bonn, Germany for “informal” meetings dealing with the UN Climate Conference last week, August 10 – 14. Two more meetings are scheduled between now and December in Bangkok and Barcelona. This meeting began with trying to pair down a document that has inflated from 50-pages to 200-pages. The document is to be the successor of the Kyoto Protocol. Currently, it has about “2,000 bracketed statements highlighting areas of disagreement” according to the New York Times.

The meeting ended with representatives worrying an agreement may not be possible unless conversations accelerate according to The Guardian. In the article, Kim Castensen, head of WWF Clobal Climate Initiative, said, “”Delegates spent too much time arguing over procedures and technicalities. This is not the way to overcome mistrust between rich and poor nations.”

Yvo de Boer, head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, told Reuters, “Over time, according to my own analysis, we are going to need $200 billion a year for mitigation and probably in the order of $100 billion a year for adaptation … from 2020 onwards.”

The message of urgency is getting louder as the conference in Copenhagen is getting closer.

Other Stories:

New Scientist: US To Map Carbon Sources in the Region
White House Press Release
Last week at the conclusion of the North American Leader’s Summit in Mexico, an announcement to create a “North American Carbon Atlas” was unveiled. The atlas will help find out the large carbon emitting industries and find areas for carbon capture and storage.

Slate/The Big Money: Corporations And What They Support
Corporations are supporting curbing greenhouse gas emissions but also supporting lobby groups that oppose it. What are the stakes? Why are they doing it?

Yale360: Kolbert Interviews Holdren
Elizanbeth Kolbert interviews John Holdren for Yale 360 about what the US has planned domestically and what’s in store for US interests in Copenhagen and beyond. You can also stream the full interview on the site.

Congressional Quarterly: Opposition to Climate Plan Awaits Obama
The Guardian: Oil lobby to fund campaign against Obama’s climate change strategy
A coalition of conservative groups called the Energy Citizens are kicking off rallies this week to decry cap and trade in swing states. A memo was leaked that the oil lobby group, American Petroleum Institute, will be funding the rallies.

Focus on: Council on Foreign Relations’ Crisis Guide
Council on Foreign Relations have published articles on climate change but recently they’ve also posted this interactive video site that has maximized their multi-media platform. They publish “Crisis Guides” on various subjects ranging from the economy to war. In this installment, they breakdown the climate change debate. Watch how they mix in video, slideshow, pop-up links pertaining to the story on their site during the video, and chapter breakdowns so users can pick and choose segments of interest.

This week’s top story: Getting Up to Speed on the Basics

Part of the problem with climate coverage is there isn’t a series of good, introductory resources to the basics of climate change, Copenhagen and Cap and Trade. Instead, the curious must assemble their own information from numerous sources around the internet.

That said, one of the best places for information is NOAA’s new site.

The site is an adaption to the web of the landmark paper published mid-last month, Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States. Called, “a game changer,” by NOAA chef Jane Lubchenko (interview below), the paper summarized what leading government scientists have been trying to say for the last eight years.

Here are two sizable excerpts from the report — the closest thing to a primer you’ll find.

The full report is available here.

Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal. The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas), with important contributions from the clearing of forests, agricultural practices, and other activities.

Warming over this century is projected to be considerably greater than over the last century. The global average temperature since 1900 has risen by about 1.5ºF. By 2100, it is projected to rise another 2 to 11.5ºF. The U.S. average temperature has risen by a comparable amount and is very likely to rise more than the global average over this century, with some variation from place to place. Several factors will determine future temperature increases. Increases at the lower end of this range are more likely if global heat-trapping gas emissions are cut substantially. If emissions continue to rise at or near current rates, temperature increases are more likely to be near the upper end of the range. Volcanic eruptions or other natural variations could temporarily counteract some of the human-induced warming, slowing the rise in global temperature, but these effects would only last a few years.

Reducing emissions of carbon dioxide would lessen warming over this century and beyond. Sizable early cuts in emissions would significantly reduce the pace and the overall amount of climate change. Earlier cuts in emissions would have a greater effect in reducing climate change than comparable reductions made later. In addition, reducing emissions of some shorter-lived heat-trapping gases, such as methane, and some types of particles, such as soot, would begin to reduce warming within weeks to decades.

Climate-related changes have already been observed globally and in the United States. These include increases in air and water temperatures, reduced frost days, increased frequency and intensity of heavy downpours, a rise in sea level, and reduced snow cover, glaciers, permafrost, and sea  ice. A longer ice-free period on lakes and rivers, lengthening of the growing season, and increased water vapor in the atmosphere have also been observed. Over the past 30 years, temperatures have risen faster in winter than in any other season, with average winter temperatures in the Midwest and northern Great Plains increasing more than 7ºF. Some of the changes have been faster than previous assessments had suggested.

These climate-related changes are expected to continue while new ones develop. Likely future changes for the United States and surrounding coastal waters include more intense hurricanes with related increases in wind, rain, and storm surges (but not necessarily an increase in the number of these storms that make landfall), as well as drier conditions in the Southwest and Caribbean. These changes will affect human health, water supply, agriculture, coastal areas, and many other aspects of society and the natural environment.

[...]

Key Findings:

1. Global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced.
Global temperature has increased over the past 50 years. This observed increase is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases.

2. Climate changes are underway in the United States and are projected to grow.
Climate-related changes are already observed in the United States and its coastal waters. These include increases in heavy downpours, rising temperature and sea level, rapidly retreating glaciers, thawing permafrost, lengthening growing seasons, lengthening ice-free seasons in the ocean and on lakes and rivers, earlier snowmelt, and  alterations in river flows. These changes are projected to grow.

3. Widespread climate-related impacts are occurring now and are expected to increase.
Climate changes are already affecting water, energy, transportation, agriculture, ecosystems, and health. These impacts are different from region to region and will grow under projected climate change.

4. Climate change will stress water resources.
Water is an issue in every region, but the nature of the potential impacts varies. Drought, related to reduced precipitation, increased evaporation, and increased water loss from plants, is an important issue in many regions, especially in the West. Floods and water quality problems are likely to be amplified by climate change in most regions. Declines in mountain snowpack are important in the West and Alaska where snowpack provides vital natural water storage.

5. Crop and livestock production will be increasingly challenged.
Many crops show positive responses to elevated carbon dioxide and low levels of warming, but higher levels of warming often negatively affect growth and yields. Increased pests, water stress, diseases, and weather extremes will pose adaptation challenges for crop and livestock production.

6. Coastal areas are at increasing risk from sea-level rise and storm surge.
Sea-level rise and storm surge place many U.S. coastal areas at increasing risk of erosion and flooding, especially along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, Pacific Islands, and parts of Alaska. Energy and transportation infrastructure and other property in coastal areas are very likely to be adversely affected.

7. Risks to human health will increase.
Harmful health impacts of climate change are related to increasing heat stress, waterborne diseases, poor air quality, extreme weather events, and diseases transmitted by insects and rodents. Reduced cold stress provides some benefits. Robust public health infrastructure can reduce the potential for negative impacts.

8. Climate change will interact with many social and environmental stresses.
Climate change will combine with pollution, population growth, overuse of resources, urbanization, and other social, economic, and environmental stresses to create larger impacts than from any of these factors alone.

9. Thresholds will be crossed, leading to large changes in climate and ecosystems.
There are a variety of thresholds in the climate system and ecosystems. These thresholds determine, for example, the presence of sea ice and permafrost, and the survival of species, from fish to insect pests, with implications for society. With further climate change, the crossing of additional thresholds is expected.

10. Future climate change and its impacts depend on choices made today.
The amount and rate of future climate change depend primarily on current and future human-caused emissions of heat-trapping gases and airborne particles. Responses involve reducing emissions to limit future warming, and adapting to the changes that are unavoidable.

On a side note: Stewart Brand at TED@State
TED today posted a lecture that Stewart Brand gave at the State Department last month where he lays out his idea on the future of cities. The last eight minutes of the 16-minute talk focus on climate pressures. Brand gives a big push for more nuclear — including micro-nuclear — and makes this statement: “Mitigation is not going to work.” According to Brand, State needs now to start a diplomatic process for geo-engineering, planning for a time when anyone with US$1 billion can radically alter the climate.

Other stories of note (a little long because I missed last week, sorry!):

NYTimes: Krugman: Boiling the Frog
“At this point, the central forecast of leading climate models — not the worst-case scenario but the most likely outcome — is utter catastrophe, a rise in temperatures that will totally disrupt life as we know it, if we continue along our present path. How to head off that catastrophe should be the dominant policy issue of our time.”

Foreign Policy: The Last Straw
“Water is already undermining Pakistan’s stability. In recent years, recurring shortages have led to grain shortfalls. In 2008, flour became so scarce it turned into an election issue. As the glaciers melt and the rivers dry, Pakistan—unstable, facing dramatic drops in water supplies, caged in by India’s vastly superior conventional forces—will be forced to make one of three choices. It can let its people starve. It can cooperate with India in building dams and reservoirs, handing over control of its waters to the country it regards as the enemy. Or it can ramp up support for the insurgency, gambling that violence can bleed India’s resolve without degenerating into full-fledged war.”

Fort Worth Star-Telegram: ‘Once-in-a-century’ drought sending campers indoors and stunting crops
“North Texas has had average rainfall this year, and three “cool” days this week felt like Christmas in July. But don’t tell your friends in Central and South Texas, because they are feeling hot, parched and bothered. A “once-in-a-century” drought is baking a big swath of Texas …The drought is “zeroing out” crops and forcing ranchers to liquidate their herds. It’s also crimping summer recreation.”

The Age: Rudd gives Copenhagen talks little hope
“Right now I don’t think we are on track to get an agreement at Copenhagen,” Mr Rudd told Mr Rasmussen. “There are too many problems.” In an embarrassing gaffe, Mr Rudd’s comments were picked up by Australian TV microphones that had been allowed in briefly to film bilateral talks with Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen, who is to host the Copenhagen summit in December. “

BBC: Mumbai faces acute water shortage
“Officials say that there are two ways to impose a water cut – one by reducing the number of hours of water supply and, second, to cut the supply at source. India’s capital, Delhi, is also reeling from depleted water supplies, while many towns and villages across the country still have woefully inadequate safe drinking water facilities. “

Providence Journal: Climate change may be benefiting poison ivy, studies suggest
“In two laboratory studies he conducted in 2007, poison ivy plants virtually doubled in size and their itchy oil became more potent when the test plants were grown in atmospheres of increased carbon dioxide.”

WSJ: Wind Power: China’s Massive–and Cheap–Bet on Wind Farms
“China will break ground this month on a gigantic, $17 billion wind power farm in the northwestern part of the country that will produce 5 gigawatts of power by next year and 20 gigawatts by 2020, according to the official Xinhua news service.”

Reuters: Arctic ice thinned dramatically since 2004: NASA
“In 2003, 62 percent of the Arctic’s total ice volume was stored in multi-year ice and 38 percent in first-year seasonal ice. By last year, 68 percent was first-year ice and 32 percent the tougher multi-year ice.”

NYTimes: By Degrees: Buses May Aid Climate Battle in Poor Cities
“The long, segmented, low-emission buses are part of a novel public transportation system called bus rapid transit, or B.R.T. It is more like an above-ground subway than a collection of bus routes. Versions of these systems are being planned or built in dozens of developing cities around the world — Mexico City, Cape Town, Jakarta, Indonesia, and Ahmedabad, India, to name a few — providing public transportation that improves traffic flow and reduces smog at a fraction of the cost of building a subway.”

NYTimes: Green Power Takes Root in the Chinese Desert
“While the House of Representatives approved a requirement last week that American utilities generate more of their power from renewable sources of energy, and the Senate will consider similar proposals over the summer, China imposed such a requirement almost two years ago. Although coal remains the biggest source of energy and is almost certain to stay that way, the rise of renewable energy, especially wind power, is helping to slow China’s steep growth in emissions of global warming gases.”

Reuters: Los Angeles will end use of coal-fired power
“Los Angeles will eliminate the use of electricity made from coal by 2020, replacing it with power from cleaner renewable energy sources, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said. Consumers of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, the largest city-owned utility in the United States, will see higher power bills in the fight against climate change.”

Guardian: ExxonMobil continuing to fund climate sceptic groups, records show
“The world’s largest oil company is continuing to fund lobby groups that question the reality of global warming, despite a public pledge to cut support for such climate change denial, a new analysis shows.”

NYTimes: Friedman: Just Do It
“More important, my gut tells me that if the U.S. government puts a price on carbon, even a weak one, it will usher in a new mind-set among consumers, investors, farmers, innovators and entrepreneurs that in time will make a big difference — much like the first warnings that cigarettes could cause cancer. The morning after that warning no one ever looked at smoking the same again.”

NYTimes: Editorial: Climate in the Senate
“The House’s approval last week of a bill capping greenhouse gases was a remarkable achievement, almost unthinkable six months ago. Yet all of the hard work — the hearings, the negotiating, the arm-twisting — will add up to zero if the Senate cannot be persuaded to do the same, and preferably better. The country would be left with an outdated energy policy and the planet would be stuck with steadily rising emissions.”

Guardian: Lovelock: Climate war could kill nearly all of us, leaving survivors in the Stone Age
“The followers of the peace lobbies of the 1930s resembled the environmentalist movements now; their intentions were more than good but wholly inappropriate for the war that was about to start. It is time to wake up and realize that Gaia, the Earth system, is no cozy mother that nurtures humans and can be propitiated by gestures such as carbon trading or sustainable development.”

This Week’s Top Story: ACES React.

The American Clean Energy and Security Bill passed the House last week by a paper-thin margin (219-212). Forty Democrats voted against — most saying it was too weak — and eight Republicans voted for it.

Here’s John Broder’s article for the New York Times.

The bill now heads to the US Senate where eventual passage is generally accepted, though how much weaker the bill becomes before arriving on Obama’s desk is still very much up in the air.

Here’s a smattering of opinions on the bill from around the world.

SolveClimate: Obama: House Climate Talks Were ‘Constructive’ Blueprint for Senate
“Obama said he expects “a series of tough negotiations.” Perhaps more telling, he described Rick Boucher’s strong-arming for the coal industry in the House as “constructive” and a blueprint for the Senate. (Boucher himself bragged that he ensured coal a long, bright future.). “

Reuters: China welcomes U.S. climate bill, says more needed
“China’s top climate change official said the bill was a positive break with the stance taken by the Administration of former President George W. Bush. “We think that we should give a positive evaluation to this bill,” he said. “But in the area of tackling climate change, especially on the issue of cutting emissions, if they could take some more positive, effective measures it would give a bigger impetus to the year-end talks.”

Reuters: Australian PM hails U.S. greenhouse bill passage
“”That is good news for the world,” Rudd told reporters. “And can I just say to those who are delaying action in the Australian parliament, look at what is happening in the United States.””

Climate Progress: The U.S. House of Representatives approves landmark (bipartisan!) climate bill, 219 – 212.
“This bill makes possible an international deal in Copenhagen this December — as well as a bilateral deal with China, hopefully sooner.  Had the bill failed, the chance of humanity avoiding catastrophic climate change would be all but eliminated. …  And for those who say this doesn’t do enough — I agree 100%.  But it [begins] a process and establishe[s] a framework that [can] be strengthened over time as the science warrant[s].”

DotEarth: The Specter of the ‘93 Energy Tax
“In an effort to blunt the momentum of the  energy and climate bill that  the House narrowly passed on Friday, Republicans are raising the specter of the failed effort by President Bill Clinton to craft an energy tax in 1993.”

NYTimes: Krugman: Betraying the Planet
“Indeed, if there was a defining moment in Friday’s debate, it was the declaration by Representative Paul Broun of Georgia that climate change is nothing but a “hoax” that has been “perpetrated out of the scientific community.” I’d call this a crazy conspiracy theory, but doing so would actually be unfair to crazy conspiracy theorists. After all, to believe that global warming is a hoax you have to believe in a vast cabal consisting of thousands of scientists — a cabal so powerful that it has managed to create false records on everything from global temperatures to Arctic sea ice. Yet Mr. Broun’s declaration was met with applause.”

Breakthrough Institute: Democratic Congressmen on ACES Climate Bill: “Doing nothing actually results in more renewable energy than approving ACES”
“Rep. Doggett is citing analysis by the EPA, which found that ACES would reduce the amount of renewable energy deployed in the United States relative to business-as-usual, increase the amount of coal-fired electricity generation relative to 2005 levels, and provide no incentive for a move to cleaner cars.”

Worldchanging: U.S. House Acknowledges Planetary Atmosphere!
“We need to be thinking about how to completely eliminate excess climate emissions from our economy. We need to set the stage for Copenhagen, and we need to get President Obama to take that stage and help make history. And then we still have to create a new model of sustainable prosperity and rebuild our entire material civilization to support it.”

AP: Kahn: Climate Bill Winners & Losers
“The sharply debated bill’s fate is unclear in the Senate. A major struggle is expected with 60 votes needed to overcome a certain Republican filibuster. How much it will affect other industries is still a matter of intense debate, though the primary winners and losers are already emerging.”

HuffPo: Stavins: National Climate Change Policy: A Quick Look Back at Waxman-Markey and the Road Ahead
“So, the Waxman?Markey bill has its share of flaws, but it represents a reasonable starting point for Senate deliberation on what can become a national climate policy that will place the United States where it ought to be -? in a position of international leadership to help develop a global climate agreement that is scientifically sound, economically rational, and politically acceptable to the key nations of the world.”

Finally this week:
Elizabeth Kolbert profiles NASA’s Jim Hansen in June 29, 2009 issue of the New Yorker, Hansen pretty much invented climate science and climate modeling. He’s a cap-and-trade opponent, favoring a straight carbon tax. He doesn’t comment directly on ACES in the article, but he does say, “I had high opes that Obama understood the reality of the issue and would seize the opportunity to marry the energy and climate and national-security issues and make a very strong program … Maybe he still will, but I’m getting a bad feeling.”

Other stories of note:

NYTimes: Algae Farm Aims to Turn Carbon Dioxide Into Fuel
“The ethanol would be sold as fuel, the companies said, but Dow’s long-term interest is in using it as an ingredient for plastics, replacing natural gas. The process also produces oxygen, which could be used to burn coal in a power plant cleanly. … The exhaust from such a plant would be mostly carbon dioxide, which could be reused to make more algae.”

BBC: China ‘to block’ Hummer takeover
“A Chinese firm’s bid to buy the gas-guzzling Hummer car brand will be blocked on environmental grounds, according to Chinese state radio.”

New Scientist: Ozone hole has unforeseen effect on ocean carbon sink
“The Southern Ocean is a major carbon sink, guzzling around 15 per cent of CO2 emissions. However, between 1987 and 2004, carbon uptake in the region was reduced by nearly 2.5 billion tonnes – equivalent to the amount of carbon that all the world’s oceans absorb in one year.”

Reuters: Scotland agrees to world’s toughest 2020 climate goal
“Scottish lawmakers Wednesday backed a binding goal to cut greenhouse gases by 42 percent by 2020 from 1990 levels, edging Germany into second place in a ranking of the most ambitious developed world targets.”

Reuters: Swiss glaciers melting faster than ever before: study
“”The last decade was the worst decade that we have had in the last 150 years. We lost a lot of water,” said Daniel Farinotti, research assistant at the ETH.”

Earth2Tech: Is China On the Cusp of Becoming a Huge Solar Panel Market?
“On top of all this, the country has what Polly Shaw of Suntech Power, called the “most aggressive” renewable portfolio standard in the world. It aims to get 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020, with some 100 gigawatts of wind capacity and 1.8 gigawatts of solar. The country is already rethinking its solar target, and will “probably” revise it to 10 or even 20 gigawatts this year, Shaw said.”

NYTimes: Sears Tower to Be Revamped to Produce Most of Its Own Power
“The plan, to begin immediately, aims to reduce electricity use in the tower by 80 percent over five years through upgrades in the glass exterior, internal lighting, heating, cooling and elevator systems — and its own green power generation.”

This week’s top story: COP-15 Roundup

The best sum-up of the recent “Road to Copenhagen” meeting in Bonn, Germany comes from Nature News:

Not much got done, but nobody really expected anything important to happen. The negotiating text ballooned as parties sought to insert and clarify countless disagreements and positions, but that’s the way it always works. Nobody gave an inch on their negotiating positions, but what kind of self-respecting negotiator would reveal the bottom line at this stage in the game?

As is often the case, the biggest deals are likely to be struck at the last minute.

In the weeks since, there has been movement — some of it forward, some side-to-side — and some major handwringing.

At this week’s US-led Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate in Mexico City, US Climate Negotiator Todd Stern said that the 40% cuts in green house gas emissions by 2020 that developing (non-Annex 1) nations are calling for — most notably, China — are neither politically feasible nor necessary. Meanwhile, the medium term goal — 80% reductions by 2050 — are being favorably considered.

There was also wide discussion on the creation of a “Green Bank,” perhaps to be administered by the World Bank, that would govern developing-world carbon projects and sponsor global technology transfer.

AP: US nixes 40 percent cuts at climate change talks
Canadian Press: EU postpones decision on climate change funding for poor nations until October

Meanwhile, governments and other regional entities are beginning to make noises about contingency — what if the world fails to make a deal at Copenhagen? The Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate — which started as a Bush 2 end around the UNFCCC — may end up playing a significant role.

Reuters: Nations may form global CO2 market without U.N. deal
Reuters: Major economies consider halving world CO2

Other stories of note:

Reuters: Slim, Tata, others advise U.N.’s Ban on climate
“U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has formed an advisory group on climate change that includes Mexico’s Carlos Slim, India’s Ratan Tata, other business tycoons and executives from nongovernmental organizations, one member of the group said.”

WSJ: Veggie Power: Plant-based Jet Fuel Outperforms Oil-based Jet Fuel
“Boeing says the blends didn’t damage the equipment, and actually proved to have more oomph, or “greater energy content” than standard jet fuel – meaning potentially better fuel economy. The greenhouse gas benefit was evident as well: a blend that included jatropha and camelina can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from 65% to 80% from standard petroleum-based fuel.”

Reuters: Arctic nations say no Cold War; military stirs
“Arctic nations are promising to avoid new “Cold War” scrambles linked to climate change, but military activity is stirring in a polar region where a thaw may allow oil and gas exploration or new shipping routes. “

Guardian: Here is the weather for 2080: floods, droughts and heat waves
“And now for the weather. The 2020s are looking warm and dry, with occasional heavy winter showers. The 2050s should be sunny and warm, with scattered deaths due to heatwaves across London and the south-east. And looking ahead to the 2080s, temperatures could reach 41C, so be sure to pack the suncream for your picnic. And watch out for those great white sharks!”

AP: Water supplies at risk from fires in dead forests
“Water supplies for 33 million people could be endangered if millions of acres of beetle-ravaged forests in the Rocky Mountains catch fire, a U.S. Forest Service official said Tuesday.”

WSJ: The Climate Change Climate Change
“Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. … The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S.”

Riverside Press-Enterprise: Desert icon Joshua trees are vanishing, scientists say
“The ancient plants are dying in the park, the southern-most boundary of their limited growing region, scientists say. … Experts expect the Joshuas to vanish entirely from the southern half of the state within a century.”

Yes this is late. I got sick and busy. What can I say, you get what you pay for.

Top story: China’s got a brand new bag

China has up until recently been a mystery on climate and energy.

China is officially a “non-Annex 1 country”, as defined by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which means it’s “developing” and not historically responsible for the build-up of green house gases in our atmosphere.

That said, however, China’s economic boom of the last 20 years has catapulted it to the top of current green house gas emitters, though it’s worth noting that in terms of per capita emissions and energy use, China is still far below the US, Canada and most of Western Europe.

Because it’s a non-Annex 1 country, the Kyoto Accord did not apply to China. But the new treaty being worked on in anticipation of the Copenhagen summit in December is designed to include all countries big and small, developed and developing.

Before the recent round of negotiations started last year, not much was known about China’s position on climate change and emission-policy. The stance by the government seemed to be “economic growth at all cost,” and the central government was very harsh on emissions caps and any other policies that would limit growth.

That view has changed by a few degrees.

First, China is a short-, medium- and long-term climate change “loser.” All 15 climate models (including China’s own) show the expansion of the globe’s subtropical deserts, which would directly threaten China’s ability to feed itself, already not taken for granted. Most climate models also show the intermittent-to-permanent failure of the northwest monsoon, which would affect both short- and long-term fresh water supplies through all of Southern and SE Asia. Finally, the melting Himalayan glaciers are already causing disastrous floods in large swaths of central China. These floods will continue until the glaciers are gone, which will usher in a long, extremely dry period throughout the entire region.

Geopolitical analysts see the Chinese-Russian border is a potential hotspot 50 to 75 years down the road: the boundary is still disputed in many areas and if Siberia becomes a new breadbasket while many millions of Chinese become food and water refugees, the potential for conflict, even nuclear, seems high.

Until recently, we did not even know if China was aware of its fate. Turns out, the leaders there know exactly what’s going on.

In recent diplomatic forums, including the Bonn meetings earlier this month and the bilateral US-China discussions that ended last week, China is still drawing a very hard line on emissions reductions for Annex 1 countries — demanding 40% from 1990 levels — and, without that, refusing to commit to any hard targets for its own emissions.

However, China is already committing billions of dollars toward transforming its economy and energy infrastructure in a way the dwarfs what’s happening here in the US and in most other Annex 1 nations. Only Germany is investing more.

China is also developing the industrial infrastructure to build the world’s new green machines. The country’s begun a top-down economic initiative to build electric bicycles and cars — skipping ahead of traditional and hybrid models. Chinese companies have signed deals with American energy companies to provide wind turbines; American and British manufacturers are complaining the Chinese are keeping foreign competition out of their developing infrastructure. It’s not yet clear if this is the “World War 2 size effort” that many say is needed to prevent catastrophe, but it is a much more clear step in that direction than exists anywhere else in the world.

Given these mixed messages, what is the path to Copenhagen? Obama (and the world) knows that any agreement is impossible without China and US lead climate negotiator Todd Stern is still optimistic. However, after little movement during the last set of meetings in Beijing, how the two countries move forward is still a mystery.

Further reading:

Center for American Progress: China Begins Its Transition to a Clean-Energy Economy China’s Climate Progress by the Numbers

Time: On the Streets of China, Electric Bikes Are Swarming

Economist: Heating up or cooling down?

AFP: US expects China to cut emissions after a ‘peak year’

CNN: Pachauri: Stern stance on China climate talks ‘pragmatic’

New Scientist: Silk Road threatened by melting glaciers

Other stories of interest:

LATimes: A ‘time bomb’ for world wheat crop (Ed: And it’s NOT climate change!)
“Crop scientists fear the Ug99 fungus could wipe out more than 80% of worldwide wheat crops as it spreads from eastern Africa. It has already jumped the Red Sea and … is poised to enter the breadbasket of northern India and Pakistan. … “It’s a time bomb,” said Jim Peterson, a professor of wheat breeding and genetics at Oregon State University in Corvallis. “It moves in the air, it can move in clothing on an airplane. We know it’s going to be here. It’s a matter of how long it’s going to take.””

Wired: High-Altitude Wind Machines Could Power New York City
“The first rigorous, worldwide study of high-altitude wind power estimates that there is enough wind energy at altitudes of about 1,600 to 40,000 feet to meet global electricity demand a hundred times over. … Even better, the best high-altitude wind-power resources match up with highly populated areas including North America’s Eastern Seaboard and China’s coastline.”

NYT: Making the Case for Climate as a Migration Driver
“The study … combined climatological and demographic data with field interviews of migrants already on the move. The aim was to provide an overview, with rich maps and an oft-lacking dose of empiricism, of where the changing environment is driving decision-making on the ground and which areas are likely to be hit hardest if things get worse.”

AP: Russia to bolster presence in energy-rich Arctic
“Russia will rebuild its Soviet-era network of polar stations and use its icebreaker fleet to help support its claim to the vast resources of the Arctic, the man who led a mission to plant a Russian flag on the Arctic seabed said Wednesday.”

Reuters: U.S. startup turning human waste into fuel
“EnerTech Environmental, an Atlanta startup, on Thursday unveiled the United States’ first commercial biosolids-to-energy facility in California’s Inland Empire. “Biosolids” is the nice term for processed sewage sludge. The product customers buy is 95 percent solid and interchangeable with coal, according to Chief Executive Kevin Bolin, whose grandfather invented the company’s patented “SlurryCarb” technology.”

Reuters: Climate change blamed for Caribbean coral deaths
“The analysis of 500 surveys of 200 reefs, conducted between 1969 and 2008, showed the most complex types of reef had been virtually wiped out across the entire Caribbean.”