Can the Tide Turn on Climate Politics?

May 15, 2014

Amazingly (for American TV) lucid and (almost) strawman and shibboleth free, this conversation between MSNBC’s Chuck Todd and former EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman draws parallels between the current climate debate, and previous, seemingly intractable conflicts over acid rain, and ozone hole pollution.

Alex Kirby for Climate News Network:

Powerful voices in finance and the armed forces raise concerns about the risks of increasingly extreme weather events causing billions of dollars of damage and potentially igniting humanitarian disasters and regional conflicts

LONDON, 15 May − The risks associated with climate change have got some very important people worried − the people who pick up the bills, and those who clear up the mess or try to prevent it happening.

The world’s biggest and oldest insurance market, Lloyd’s of London, has published a report that urges insurers to include climate risks in their models. It says: “Scientific research points conclusively to the existence of climate change driven by human activity.

“Nevertheless, significant uncertainty remains on the nature and extent of the changes to our climate and the specific impacts this will generate. Many of the effects will become apparent over the coming decades and anticipating them will require forward projections, not solely historical data.”

Quoting the Munich Re insurance group , the World Bank says damage and weather-related losses around the world have increased from an annual average of $50bn in the 1980s to nearly $200bn over the last decade.

Causing havoc

The Lloyd’s report was published the day after the US National Climate Assessment (NCA) warned Americans that climate change is already causing havoc across the country. John Holdren, the White House science adviser, said the NCA was the “loudest and clearest alarm bell to date signalling the need to take urgent action to combat the threats to Americans from climate change”.

The most expensive year on record for natural disasters was 2011, when insured losses cost the industry more than $126bn. In 2012, Superstorm Sandy caused $35bn of insured losses, making it the most expensive hurricane in US history after Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

The Lloyd’s report says a 20cm rise in sea level at the southern tip of Manhattan Island increased Sandy’s surge losses by 30% (up to $8bn) in New York alone.

John Nelson, chairman of Lloyd’s, told the Guardian newspaper in London: “The destruction Sandy brought to the eastern US seaboard was responsible for claims of up to $300m in lost fine art, a consequence of the many expensive US beachfront homes damaged.”

Typhoon Haiyan, which devastated much of the Philippines and other parts of south-east Asia in November 2013, was one of the strongest tropical cyclones on record.

Trevor Maynard, head of exposure management and reinsurance at Lloyd’s, said: “Climate change is very much here to stay. Hurricanes are getting stronger worldwide, and especially over the north Atlantic. . .  At the moment we are heading for a rise of four degrees by the end of the century.”

Mission reality

IT’S NOT ONLY the insurers who believe that climate change is a real and growing risk. Increasingly, the prospect is preoccupying military planners.

Mark Wright, a Pentagon spokesman, said: “This is a mission reality, not a political debate. The scientific forecast is for more Arctic ice melt, more sea-level rise, more intense storms, more flooding from storm surge, and more drought.”

A former US Navy officer, retired Vice-Admiral Lee Gunn, is reported by NBC News as saying that the 2011 Arab Spring uprising could in part be traced to a winter drought in China, plus record heat waves and flooding in several other countries, including Russia.

Gunn concluded: “There was a drought and a wheat shortage that resulted in an increase in wheat prices and, therefore, an increase in bread prices − a staple in North Africa.”

NBC says US security experts are also concerned by possible threats to the rice harvest in south-east Asia, and specifically in Vietnam. They say the melting of the Himalayan glaciers would add to sea-level rise, ruining rice production and ravaging Bangladesh. If it did, they believe, that could create a flow of refugees into India, and also threaten fresh water resources in India and Pakistan.

Dennis McGinn, the US Navy assistant secretary for energy, installations and environment, told NBC that there were also worries in military circles about unstable governments and fragile societies.

“The last thing in the world these nations need are the severe and more frequent effects of bad weather, including crop failures,” McGinn said. “Therein is a recipe for the kind of instability that will inevitably involve the United States in humanitarian assistance, disaster relief or, indeed, in a regional conflict.”

A further report, by 16 retired generals and admirals, says climate change is a direct threat to national security and the US economy. The authors, members of the Military Advisory Board of the not-for-profit CNA Corporation, blame rising temperatures for, in part, worsening international tension. 

Their study says that the impacts of climate change are already intensifying instability in vulnerable regions, especially the resource-rich and rapidly changing Arctic. It says the projected impacts within the US will threaten its homeland security and major sectors of its economy. − Climate News Network




10 Responses to “Can the Tide Turn on Climate Politics?”

  1. omnologos Says:

    People placing fine art in beachfront property. I wonder who agreed to insure those masterpieces and at what levels of premium.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Good old Omno!—-always clueless, always irrelevant! (and again trying to get there “firstest with the leastest”.

      • omnologos Says:

        You are really obsessed with this silly first comment stuff and the thumbs.

        In the meanwhile…I hope the insurance companies had placed strong enough premiums. Otherwise there is going to be lots of fine art lost in future hurricanes.

        • dumboldguy Says:

          Speaking of clueless and irrelevant, I’m sure those people around the world who will be drowning and starving and fighting wars because of the effects of AGW will be REALLY worried about the insurance on the fine art collections of the greedy rich whose actions have driven AGW. DUH!

          Go away, Omno—-you are F-ing up another good post from Peter before the discussion even gets off the ground. Seek attention elsewhere.

          PS YOUR obsession with trying to get the better of me is obvious, and you again demonstrate your cluelessness by failing to see that I have beaten your brains out countless times. You will again prove me right by answering this—I’m done with you on this thread. And if no one else encourages you, maybe we can begin to have a substantial discussion here.

          • omnologos Says:

            Why would I try to get the better of you? Why would I even care. Only thing could you please write 20 words at most?

          • dumboldguy Says:

            What part of “I’m done with you on this thread”, “Go away”, and “Seek attention elsewhere” do you not understand? (exactly 20 words)

  2. dumboldguy Says:

    Nice summary of all the things now building that will contribute to the coming tsunami of change in attitudes towards AGW—the “Great Awakening”, as Gilding calls it in The Great Disruption (a terrific book so far!)

    The Todd-Whitman interview was great, IMO. The only thing that really annoyed me was the “climate is always changing” foolishness from Whitman. She is a Republican with a brain and a conscience, and her message may resound with the folks on the right. Remember that she did resign in protest over the craziness of Bush and Cheney, so the wing-nuts probably still don’t like her, but the more reasonable Republicans (there must be some) should listen.

    • Wes Says:

      Glad you’re reading Gilding’s book. He’s made the best estimate of what is coming, and somewhat optimistically laid out a recovery plan for those of us left. His premise that we won’t do anything significant until the economy crashes is depressing but probably true. The statistic that matters most is the fact that the world economy is already running at 120%+ of long term sustainability – we’re running it up on our credit card, in other words. So collapse is inevitable, with or without climate.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        It was obvious to me back in the 1970’s when Limits to Growth and the Population Bomb and all the evidence about pollution came out that it was not sustainable. Mankind has been resourceful enough to kick those cans down the road for a while, but now AGW has dropped out of the sky and landed on us and exacerbated all the problems from 40 years ago. I can’t wait to see what Gilding’s solutions are, but I do agree with him that there are going to be far fewer humans living in much reduced circumstances, and that’s only if we don’t “go Venus”.

  3. […] Amazingly (for American TV) lucid and (almost) strawman and shibboleth free, this conversation between MSNBC's Chuck Todd and former EPA administrator Christine Todd Whitman draws parallels between…  […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: