Will the costs of “loss & damage” be shared by polluting nations?

From an Article by Bob Berwyn and Zoha Tunio, Inside Climate News, Nov. 19, 2022

SHARM El-SHEIKH, Egypt—A new COP27 agreement that establishes a funding mechanism to compensate developing countries for losses and damages caused by global warming may be the biggest breakthrough in global climate policy since the 2015 Paris Agreement. If it sticks?

The deal was reached as two weeks of nail-biting negotiations here went into overtime with little to show for all the talk. Many negotiators arrived at the conference halls Saturday morning with their suitcases packed for the trip home while facing the prospect of being called out for failing to make progress on one of the key promises of the United Nation’s effort to address increasingly severe climate change impacts like floods, droughts and deadly heat waves.

Along with finding ways to stop the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to slow global warming, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was established in 1992 to address the fundamental inequalities of climate change impacts. Developed countries in the Global North are responsible for about 79 percent of cumulative greenhouse gas emissions, but less developed countries in the Global South have taken the biggest hit from climate change and don’t have the financial and technical resources to recover from them.

That disparity is at the heart of global climate justice and the 1992 United Nations climate framework committed all the parties to take “into account their common but differentiated responsibilities,” with developed countries committing to assist developing countries “that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change in meeting costs of adaptation to those adverse effects … by providing new and additional financial resources.”

The 2015 Paris Agreement added more detail by recognizing “the importance of averting, minimizing and addressing loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, including extreme weather events and slow onset events” like sea level rise.

“The issue of climate justice has been at the heart of the climate negotiations from its inception over three decades ago,” said Lavanya Rajamani, an international law expert who advised African nations at COP27. “Yet it is only now that its crucial importance in addressing climate change is being realized. The U.N. climate regime needs to place as much emphasis on adaptation, loss and damage and support as it has on target-setting for mitigation, in fairness to vulnerable nations, and in light of the increasing incidence of devastating impacts as mitigation efforts fall short.”

On Saturday at COP27, 30 years after those first promises were made, developed countries finally agreed to “establish new funding arrangements for assisting developing countries in responding to loss and damage, including a focus on addressing loss and damage by providing and assisting in mobilizing new and additional resources.”

The 11th hour deal was sealed Saturday afternoon when the United States reversed its earlier opposition and agreed to the creation of a specific loss and damage fund, surprising climate activists who just hours earlier had been excoriating the U.S. for its decades of obstruction.

This response to the long-standing demand by developing countries was overdue, said Harjeet Singh, who leads global political strategy for Climate Action Network International, an umbrella organization representing 190 civil society groups in 130 countries.

Intensifying global warming impacts require a systemic response, not just piecemeal post-disaster relief efforts, he said. “Humanitarian aid is welcome, but was never sufficient to help people recover from these impacts,” he said, “We wanted the U.N. climate change system to come in and actually create a mechanism that can help people at scale.”

Under the framework U.N. climate treaty, “Countries with the greatest historical responsibility for emissions, and the greatest capacity to act, have committed to bear the costs of climate change,” said Brian O’Callaghan, lead researcher with Oxford University’s economic recovery project. “Rich countries should act with speed or otherwise increase their future liability.”

The complex negotiations on loss and damage featured shifting alliances among various groups of countries that, at different times in the process, put competing proposals on the table. Ahead of COP27, United States climate envoy John Kerry was careful not to commit to a specific loss and damage mechanism, promising only that the U.S. was open to talking about the issue in the coming years.

Singh said that before COP27 started, the United States appeared to be opposed to the creation of a specific loss and damage fund, preferring to talk about potentially restructuring existing climate finance mechanisms to address those climate impacts that go beyond countries’ capacities to adapt.

The collective push from developing countries and resistance from a large part of the developed world led some attendees to fear a repeat of COP15 in Copenhagen, Denmark in 2009, where a similar rift between the wealthy nations most responsible for climate change and poorer ones that are enduring its worst impacts led to an impasse.

At the end of the two-week talks in Copenhagen, world leaders dropped many of their goals for the negotiations and significantly lowered their targets. The parties agreed to recognize the scientific evidence for keeping global temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius, but made no tangible commitments to reduce emissions in order to achieve that goal.

But this year, civil society groups applied relentless pressure during the talks, and Singh credited activists with keeping negotiators and the public focused on the topic of loss and damage. At the same time, developing countries maintained a unified front in the talks, “which actually made a huge difference in getting this over the line,” he said. Ultimately, it was the United States taking the step and backing the loss and damage funding mechanism that made the difference, he added.

The fact that the agreement came during a climate summit on a continent enduring some of the world’s most severe climate impacts gave it particular relevance. During the two-week conference, 14 flood alerts were issued for Africa, according to the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

“After 30 years a loss and damage fund is coming home and it’s coming home on African soil,” said Mohamed Adow, director of energy and climate change for Power Shift Africa on Saturday afternoon during a press conference by Climate Action Network International.

As written, the loss and damage agreement includes views from all countries, but discussions about “some of the thorny issues around who will pay and where it (the funding mechanism) is going to be located have been moved to next year,” Singh said. “In fact, that’s exactly what we as civil society … were also demanding, because the most important thing to be done here was to establish the fund. You cannot do everything in two weeks.”

Yet to be determined is how the fund will be administered, who will pay into it, and which countries will receive money. He said there is still a long road ahead before it actually starts helping people hurt by climate impacts, “but the important thing is we now can send a message of hope to people who are suffering right now.”

Q.E.D.

Senator Joe Manchin gets more messages, does he listen?

Press Release from Gary Zuckett, WV Citizen Action & Morgan King, WV Rivers Coalition, July 15, 2022

Charleston, W.Va.– Senator Joe Manchin announced that he wants to delay a plan to use the money that wealthy corporations owe to pay for desperately needed projects to help our climate and workers.

In response, the West Virginia Climate Alliance submitted a letter to Senator Manchin. When the letter was sent, the Alliance requested an in person meeting with Senator Manchin, noting they had not been able to meet with the Senator in over a year to discuss grassroots concerns about climate impacts in the state.

“Every day that we delay taking action on the climate crisis makes our weather more extreme and the implementation of solutions even more challenging. The country, and indeed the planet, need Senator Manchin to negotiate in good faith on a bill addressing the climate crisis with the goal of keeping global warming below an increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Passage of this bill should not be contingent on a one month inflation report,” said Perry Bryant, founder of the WV Climate Alliance.

Manchin’s move comes just one day after more than 100 homes, roads and bridges in McDowell County, WV were damaged from climate-related flooding. The Climate Alliance representing dozens of regional groups underscores the urgency of the climate crisis; and, a rally at Manchin office took place on Monday, July 18th.

The Rev. Jeffrey Allen, executive director of the West Virginia Council of Churches, stated, “Climate change is a crisis of today. It’s flooding in West Virginia and Virginia; fires in the West; and drought here and abroad. There is an enormous cost that we already bear due to our lack of action and it’s a cost being borne by our neighbors. Passing climate change legislation is as local as it gets. This legislation is not only for our neighbors, but for all of those people who we care deeply about. For their sake, we cannot afford to delay any longer.”

Karan May, Sr. Campaign Representative, Sierra Club: “Folks in Appalachia are among the hardest hit by the effects of climate change. West Virginians are paying the price for poor health outcomes from pollution; here and in Kentucky and Southwest Virginia, year after year, we are paying the enormous price for catastrophic flooding. Senator Manchin has the opportunity to facilitate meaningful change for his constituents and, yet, is choosing to walk away from legislation that could help alleviate this suffering. We will continue to fight for policy that will address the climate crisis, while also putting money back into our communities with investments in clean energy and sustainable economic development.”

Linda Frame, President of the WV Environmental Council, said “After a year of good-faith discussions with Senator Manchin and his team it’s hard not to be deflated by this latest delay. We continue to urge Senator Manchin to seize this opportunity to do the right thing for our state, our country, and our planet because the alternative is unthinkable.”

Eve Marcum-Atkinson, Comms. Coord. For WV Citizen Action Group said that “The overall cost of building climate change resilient infrastructure, as well as the transition to a clean energy economy, can be paid for now. Tax minimums for millionaires and the elimination of zero-tax-paying loopholes for corporations are how we do this. They have financially benefited from our people’s labor, our nation’s infrastructure, and our economy. We need them to pay their fair share to help us all, as we continue to struggle with the effects of rising prices, increases in dangerous storms, record temperatures, drought, flooding, and more. We need Senator Manchin to fully embrace this now, as climate change is a now issue, a global issue. It’s not going away.”

Dana Kuhnline, Campaign Manager for ReImagine Appalachia said that “No matter our race or income, we want to live and raise our families in healthy and safe communities. Done right, the reconciliation bill is an opportunity to create bridges across our differences rather than making them deeper. Appalachia has been hit hard both by climate change impacts and global energy shifts – with Black and brown communities seeing disproportionate impacts. At the same time, we have an incredible opportunity to mitigate the climate crisis by investing in the communities hardest hit. Appalachian communities need action from Congress, this delay on key climate provisions not only hurts communities struggling with flooding and job loss due to the downturn of the coal industry, it pushes back other urgent actions we need to see from Congress.”

Morgan King, climate campaign coordinator of WV Rivers Coalition said that “Promoting good energy legislation is part of Senator Manchin’s role as chair of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. We call on him to not further delay action on the issues he proclaims to champion. It’s past time to listen to the science that shows a transformational clean energy transition will mitigate climate change while saving lives and creating new jobs.”

###

FOUNDED in 2020, the WEST VIRGINIA CLIMATE ALLIANCE is a broad-based coalition of almost 20 environmental organizations, faith-based, civil rights and civic organizations, and other groups with a focus on climate change. Members of the Alliance work together to provide science-based education on climate change to West Virginia citizens and policymakers.

FOR MORE ON THE CLIMATE ALLIANCE, VISIT: WVClimateAlliance.org

Regional Initiatives Across the United States

From an Article by Sarah Vogelsong, Virginia Mercury, March 17, 2021

The $43 million was “in the state’s hot little hands,” Mike Dowd told the group. So what next?

That was the question facing not only Mike Dowd, director of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality’s Air Division, but also a collection of developers, state officials and environmental and low-income advocacy groups who had gathered over Zoom.

All were focused on the best uses of that $43 million in carbon money, the first round of funds Virginia had received through its participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, an 11-state agreement that puts a price on the carbon emissions that are driving climate change, requires power plants to pay that price and then channels the proceeds back to the states.

Most of that funding will eventually be paid for by customers of the state’s electric utilities, which are allowed under state law to pass on the costs of carbon allowances to customers, with no extra returns for investors. State officials had conservatively projected annual proceeds from RGGI’s carbon auctions to be in the range of $106 to $109 million. But with allowances trading at $7.60 per short ton of emissions at this March’s quarterly auction, actual revenues now look to be much higher, amounting to perhaps as much as $174 million annually if prices hold.

What to do with that major new stream of income — especially in a pandemic year when purses are tight — has been the preoccupation of dozens of Virginia officials this winter.

The law passed by the General Assembly in 2020 authorizing participation in RGGI spells out certain high-level priorities for the funds: 50 percent for low-income energy efficiency programs, 45 percent for a new Community Flood Preparedness Fund to assist communities affected by recurrent flooding and sea level rise, 3 percent for DEQ to oversee Virginia’s participation in RGGI and carry out statewide climate change planning and the remainder for other administrative work.

But between those goals and projects on the ground lies a lot of space. Should the state be creating new programs or beefing up existing ones? Should certain housing types or certain geographic areas get priority — particularly given new equity commitments designed to ensure that benefits are felt across the board?

“There’s not a whole lot of direction there, so I think it’s really important … to think about the spirit of the legislation and try to address some of the underlying causes,” said Dawone Robinson, director of an energy affordability program run by the Natural Resources Defense Council and a member of one of the advisory boards Virginia convened to decide how to spend its carbon dollars.

Compounding the challenge has been time constraints: Virginia’s fiscal year ends on June 30. With the first auction funds arriving this March, agencies have only a few short months to spend them. While RGGI funds are nonreverting, meaning agencies won’t lose them at the end of the fiscal year, most are eager to get the funds out of the door immediately.

“If we’d had our druthers, we would have been working on this last year,” said Carmen Bingham of the Virginia Poverty Law Center, who is also serving on the same advisory board as Robinson. Between slowdowns due to COVID-19 and the RGGI law not going into effect until July 1, however, the agencies that will receive the bulk of the carbon funds — the Department of Housing and Community Development, which will oversee the low-income energy efficiency funds, and the Department of Conservation and Recreation, which will oversee the Flood Preparedness Fund — have been forced to move quickly to narrow down their priorities.

“We’re in this very weird place of having to work frantically in order to come up with how do we spend this first round of money,” said Bingham. But, she added, “that’s the hand we’re dealt and the cards we’ve got to play.”

Low-income energy efficiency in Virginia

From the beginning, Gov. Ralph Northam’s administration zeroed in on the possibilities the funds earmarked under the RGGI law for low-income energy efficiency offered for affordable housing.

Low-income tenants ideally would be able to rent “more highly efficient properties” as a result of RGGI funding, then-Deputy Secretary of Commerce and Trade Angela Navarro said during a webinar last July. An administration memo similarly identified “deeper levels of energy efficiency” in affordable housing and upgrades to public housing as priorities.

Advocates, however, pointed in a different direction: weatherization, a set of improvements to a building that cut down on energy waste and consequently tend to lower electric bills.

The federal government has funded weatherization programs for low-income households since the 1970s, but federal program guidelines strictly define what falls under the weatherization umbrella. Improvements like roof or wall repairs that are deemed health and safety issues don’t qualify, even if they are fixes that have to occur before weatherization can be done. When weatherization providers encounter these issues, they have to walk away, creating what’s called a “deferral.”

In Virginia, those number in the hundreds: Janaka Casper, CEO of Community Housing Partners, the state’s largest weatherization provider, said that as of 2019 his organization had recorded 525 deferrals.

In practice, that has meant that “the homes that are most in need of weatherization services can’t be worked on,” said Chelsea Harnish, executive director of the Virginia Energy Efficiency Council. “This is housing stock that is in desperate need. This could be a hole in the roof. It could be a hole in the floor. To me that directly goes to energy efficiency.”

To many advocates, who have been asked by the Department of Housing and Community Development how its portion of the RGGI money — which this fiscal year will amount to $21.7 million — should be spent, the deferrals were a top priority. Not only did they represent an identified need, but they offered the opportunity to address some of the commonwealth’s most vulnerable populations, including historically economically disadvantaged and minority communities.

“From a sheer climate perspective, it has often been the preferred route to tackle the low-hanging fruit,” said Robinson. “That’s not low-income housing. That’s not rental housing.”

But policymakers must “look at the totality of benefits that can be achieved,” he insisted. “If you value equity, what is the cost of achieving racial equity? If you value increasing indoor air quality, what is the value of human health?” he asked. “These are invaluable measures that aren’t addressed and aren’t calculated in a traditional cost-benefit (analysis).”

As the Department of Housing and Community Development’s RGGI advisory group met throughout the winter, weatherization slowly slid onto the priority list. This Monday, the group signed off on a recommendation for how this year’s carbon funds should be spent: 60 percent on weatherization and 40 percent on efforts to increase energy efficiency for affordable housing through the state’s Affordable and Special Needs Housing Program.

Advocates like Bingham said the split bridged the state’s immediate needs and longer-term ones. Weatherization “has that immediate impact that we can actually see, whereas housing projects are going to take awhile. They’re not going to be as quick to get a benefit right away,” she said.

…. Part 2 scheduled to appear next ……
.

... take me home down country roads ...

Article from Staff Reports, Charleston Gazette Mail, September 22, 2020

A Citizens Guide to Climate Change, a 16-page report on the impending climate crisis and summaries of potential solutions proposed to counter it, has been released by the newly formed West Virginia Climate Alliance.

“This guide is the beginning of a dialog with West Virginians,” said Charleston’s Perry Bryant, a member of the Alliance. “Regardless of who wins the election this November, climate change legislation is likely to be considered in 2021. West Virginians need to understand the range of options for addressing climate change and how these options will affect our state and its people.”

Strategies under consideration for mitigating the effects of climate change are covered in the guide, including carbon fees and taxes, cap-and-trade pricing for carbon, fuel economy standards and tax incentives for low-carbon technologies. Key components of the Green New Deal are also discussed.

According to the guide’s introduction, information used in its compilation is “scientifically valid,” and relies heavily on research from government agencies. The guide was produced for “people who are concerned about climate change and want more information.”

“We’re noticing more West Virginians seeking to have a better understanding of climate change,” said Angie Rosser, director of the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, one of the groups that make up the West Virginia Climate Alliance. “It’s a complex issue with many implications for our state, and this guide is a starting point for people to become more informed.”

In West Virginia, climate change may have played a role in deadly flooding in June 2016, caused by a downpour severe enough to be expected only once in 1,000 years, according to the guide, citing a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report. Some of the hottest temperatures on record for September and October were recorded last year during those months, according to the guide.

While West Virginia is located in the heart of coal country, “we believe people can help fight climate change and at the same time, treat coal miners with dignity and respect,” Bryant said.

The West Virginia Climate Alliance includes the American Friends Service Committee, Center for Energy and Sustainable Development, Citizens Climate Lobby West Virginia, League of Women Voters of West Virginia, Christians for the Mountains, Moms Clean Air Force-West Virginia, Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, Sierra Club of West Virginia, West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, West Virginia Citizen Action Education Fund, West Virginia Interfaith Power and Light and the West Virginia Rivers Coalition.

To view A Citizen’s Guide to Climate Change, go to wvrivers.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/wvclimate.pdf

For a printed copy of the guide, or to comment on its content, contact Bryant at perrybryantwv@outlook.com

SOURCE: https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/energy_and_environment/climate-change-guide-released-by-coalition-of-wv-environment-social-justice-groups/article_e72d325d-d2d3-5661-8df0-043afd0a8756.html

############################

See also: What is the West Virginia Center on Climate Change? — The West Virginia Center on Climate Change (“the Center” or “WV3C”) is a nonprofit organization headquartered in Morgantown and Thomas, WV. The Center is an initiative of the Friends of Blackwater (“FOB”), a regional conservation group.

Costs are escalating dramatically every decade

From an Article by Bob Berwyn, InsideClimate News, August 25, 2020

Lisa Paul was still recovering from the wildfire trauma of 2017 when she experienced a renewed wave of sickening dread last week, the skies above her home and vineyard in the mountains east of Sonoma, California, filled with lightning that sparked hundreds of wildfires.

“I had pretty close to a panic attack when the Hennessy Fire, near Lake Berryessa, exploded into almost a mushroom cloud,” she said, adding that she could see the blaze just over the hills, “where the 2017 fires crested.”

The Wine Country fires of two years ago were fanned by a diablo wind that pushed the flames directly toward her property, destroying gardens, orchards and vineyards.

Those fires killed 22 people and damaged or destroyed more than 5,600 structures, burning across about 56 square miles. Property damage totaled $14.5 billion. Firefighting costs were estimated at $1.5 billion.

One year later, the $16.5 billion Camp Fire burned across 240 square miles and incinerated the town of Paradise in Butte County, California, about 180 miles northeast of Sonoma, killing 85 people and destroying or damaging more than 18,000 buildings.

The cost of this year’s fires—the first of which have so far burned their way across more than 1,400 square miles, destroyed hundreds of structures and are still not close to being contained—can’t even be guessed at. Fire season is just beginning. And global warming is going to make it worse, according to a new analysis commissioned by the nonprofit advocacy organization Environmental Defense Fund that looks at the cost of climate-linked natural disasters.The report details how the financial impacts of fires, tropical storms, floods, droughts and crop freezes have quadrupled since 1980.

“It shows what happens if we don’t do anything about global warming,” said EDF’s Elgie Holstein. “There’s no denying the trends and the fact this all becomes more expensive going forward.”

Extreme Weather Disasters are Proliferating — As if to underscore Holstein’s point, the latest swarm of wildfires to erupt in northern and central California have pushed the state’s wildfire fighting capacity to the edge, with officials warning that they are running out of resources to respond to new blazes, and urgently requesting help from other regions.

Here are five take-aways from the report:

1. Climate Disasters are Expensive, and the Damage is Increasing

In the last 40 years, 663 disasters linked to climate change in the United States killed 14,223 people. The total cost: an estimated $1.77 trillion, a bit more than Canada’s Gross National Product in 2018.

Economic losses in Europe resulting from climate-linked extreme weather from 1980 to 2017 were lower, totaling $537 billion. The difference was the cost of tropical storms, which don’t affect Europe but accounted for nearly half of the U.S. total costs.

The report analyzed data going back to 1980 from several sources, including a database of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that catalogues climate disasters with costs of $1 billion or more and is continually updated. Only disasters with costs of that magnitude were included in the analysis.

The $1.77 trillion total cost in the United States included $954.4 billion from 45 tropical storms and hurricanes, by far the most costly extreme weather category. Next came $268.4 billion in costs from 125 hail, wind, ice storms and blizzards, followed by $252.7 billion from drought, $150.4 billion from flooding and $85.4 billion from wildfires.

In the 1980s, the annual average cost of climate and extreme weather disasters in the United States was about $18 billion per year. By the 2010s, the total annual cost more than quadrupled, to $80 billion per year.

A key assessment by the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change estimated that the the economic damage caused by climate change will continue to increase by about 1.2 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product for every 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit warming, coming out to $257 billion, just a little more than California’s entire current state budget of $222 billion.

2. Scientific Evidence Shows Strong Links to Climate Change

Tropical storms, hurricanes, droughts and floods account for about three-quarters of the cost of the extreme weather damage categorized in NOAA’s $1 billion disaster database, and there is strong scientific evidence showing that global warming caused by humans is making their impact worse. Based on that research, the EDF report says the current costs are “only a lower bound to what is anticipated” if global temperatures continue to rise.

Here are the costs of various types of disasters in the United States in the 40 years from 1980 to 2020, and how global warming is making such extreme weather worse.:

Most of the damage from tropical storms and hurricanes is caused by flooding, and damage from the storms totaled $954.4 from 1980 to 2020. The warmer the atmosphere gets, the more moisture it can hold, at the rate of 7 percent for every 1.8 degree Fahrenheit warming. So tropical storms also have the potential to produce heavier rains.

One study showed that global warming made Hurricane Harvey three times more likely and 15 percent more intense.

Other research suggests that hurricanes may stall more often over coastal areas to drop devastating rainfall, and there are signs that global warming will cause an increase in the number of the largest and most damaging hurricanes, prompting warnings of “super storms.”

Research also suggests hurricane paths are shifting, potentially threatening new areas that aren’t expecting destructive storms.

Added to that is the steady increase in sea level rise, which is happening faster in tropical and subtropical areas where hurricanes are active. Low-lying coastal areas are increasingly being swamped by sunny flooding because the ocean is creeping up. When a hurricane pushes a storm surge on shore, it magnifies that increase, pushing coastal flooding farther inland.

Droughts accounted for 14.1 percent of the total cost of climate-linked disasters in the 40-year period analyzed in the EDF report, totaling $252.7 billion, nearly the size of the annual budget of Germany, the world’s fourth-largest economy.

Global warming makes drought worse because a warmer atmosphere sucks moisture out of the ground and from plants, and also shifts rain patterns, as well as the timing and melt of snow.

One indicator of the change is the steep decline of spring season snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere. That trend sets the stage for drying during the hottest summer months.

Global warming is drying up the Colorado River Basin and the larger surrounding Southwest region, with huge implications for the 40 million people who depend on the river for water.

The current climate trajectory is toward a Southwest megadrought that could last for centuries, perhaps punctuated by a few decades of extreme rains.

Consistent with climate evidence from past geologic eras of warming, Earth’s dry subtropical belts, which include most of the world’s desert areas, are expanding poleward, which could be the force that’s driving the intensification of regional droughts.

Floods were the fourth-costliest type of extreme climate disasters from 1980 to 2020, accounting for $150.4 billion, about 8.4 percent of the total cost. Climate science shows that global warming is driving up extreme precipitation in some regions, leading to greater chances of flooding. Flooding from sea level rise alone is forcing coastal cities to spend millions to build seawalls and levees and protect water sources.

Global warming is changing snowfall and snowmelt patterns, tripling the risk of particularly destructive rain-on-snow floods, when unseasonable rain suddenly melts the snowpack.

Globally, the risk of glacier outburst floods is increasing, and a warming climate is changing seasonal flooding patterns, with new risks that some communities may not be expecting.

3. The Poor and People of Color Are Most Vulnerable

With nearly every climate-related disaster, poor people and people of color, and often, indigenous communities, are most vulnerable. They have the fewest resources to adapt, or to get themselves out of harm’s way.

During the current California wildfires, thousands of agricultural workers are harvesting produce in extreme heat and exposed to unhealthy levels of smoke that can cause severe illness. During the 2017 fires, some vineyards had to close because workers left after losing their homes.

A December 2019 study found that during Hurricane Harvey in 2017, “Hispanic, black and other racial/ethnic minority households experienced more extensive flooding than white households,” and lower income households faced more extensive flooding than higher income households.

A 2008 report from a Washington, D.C. think tank said that Hurricane Katrina in 2005 offered a “bitter gift” by refocusing attention on the enduring legacy of racial segregation and poverty in the Gulf South.

Climate experts have found that drought in Central America is part of the reason for a continued stream of migration to the United States, which can multiply the already existing environmental injustice in immigrant and refugee communities.

Globally, drought and water shortages have increased the potential for international conflicts.

4. Nowhere is Safe; Specific Threats Vary by Region

Nowhere is immune to the threat of increasing weather extremes, made more likely by global warming. The National Climate Assessment outlines the regional risks.

Based on the damage trends over the last 40 years, the Gulf Coast and the Southeastern United States are most at-risk for deadly and costly damages from sea level rise flooding, storm surge and the extreme winds of tropical storms and hurricanes.

Extreme rainfall events have increased substantially in the Midwest, leading to more extreme floods that damage homes and fields, and so also threatening food supplies.

The Southwest is threatened by a persistent and intensifying drought that has dried up forests and brushlands and drained rivers and reservoirs.

Wildfires have increased exponentially with warming temperatures, and global warming will increase the risk in most of the West, especially California, recent research concluded.

Parts of the East Coast are sea level rise hotspots, according to a 2017 study.

5. The Biggest Future Safeguard: A Zero Emissions Economy

The EDF report recommends that, to protect the most vulnerable communities that are hit by “climate change-fueled extreme weather events first and worst,” federal lawmakers should invest in adaptive strategies in advance of disasters and not just after the fact.

Coastal areas vulnerable to sea level rise and flooding from tropical storms should build up natural ecosystems like dunes and wetlands to buffer storm and sea level rise impacts

Some emergency response funds should be freed up to help with analyzing growing risks from floods and droughts.

Overall, the biggest goal must be to build a zero emissions renewable economy to avoid as much additional global warming as possible

The EDF report focused in part on decarbonizing the transportation sector by switching to electric vehicles. Electrification of school bus fleets and commercial trucks represent low-hanging fruit, the report said.

Modernizing regional electric grids will help integrate and maximize the benefits of the rapidly growing supply of renewable energy, according to the report. Making buildings more energy efficient is another short-term goal with a big payoff.

Finally, investing now in sustainable agriculture will help protect food supplies and farm livelihoods.

None of this is new, said EDF’s Holstein, who was a high-level NOAA official in the early 2000s. “We already knew ice caps were melting and that glaciers were retreating,” he said. “The changes we’re seeing are best explained by climate change. Nothing has changed, except all the indicators are moving in the direction of bad news. That’s what is in this report. There’s no denying the trends and the fact this becomes more expensive going into the future.”

Wild fires in Australia and elsewhere are extreme

From the Interview of Peter Dykstra by Steve Curwood

CURWOOD: It’s Living on Earth, I’m Steve Curwood. The signs of a changing climate seem to be emerging more and more behind the headlines, so for the latest we are on the line now with Peter Dykstra, an editor for Environmental Health News, that’s EHN.org and DailyClimate.org. Hi Peter!

DYKSTRA: Hi Steve, how often do you hear the phrase ‘the fire is too big to put out’ from firefighters? That’s what they’re saying about a huge bush fire outside of Australia’s largest city, Sydney. They say that the city may be couched in smoke for months to come.

CURWOOD: That is not very good news. And of course, it’s due to this massive drought over there.
DYKSTRA: We’ve seen pictures of the iconic Sydney Opera House, and the Sydney Harbour Bridge sort of covered in smoke. That’s the most populous area of the country. And it’s a very, very strong message that climate change is here to stay. And we’re also looking at others from around the world.

CURWOOD: Okay, what do you have in mind?
DYKSTRA: In Bali, tourism center in Indonesia, there’s a combination of drought and the increase in tourism that are really doing a number on the water supply.

CURWOOD: So running out of water for tourists who want their long showers and then how do you grow food?
DYKSTRA: Growing food is part of it. And it’s this inevitable clash between the tourist industry and tourists on one hand and the local residents on the other to get their day-to-day needs. But there’s still another one from Africa.

CURWOOD: Okay, and what’s that one?
DYKSTRA: Victoria Falls, another iconic tourist destination on the Zambezi River. More than half a mile long waterfall is running dry in a way that no one’s ever seen before as a result of the worst drought in that area in a century.

CURWOOD: So is there no water going over the falls or is it just sort of . . . .
DYKSTRA: It’s a trickle. There are some remarkable pictures where you see what used to be in what’s normally this cascade of water stretched out over half a mile. It’s now mostly barren cliffs with just a little stream heading over the falls.

CURWOOD: And I bet this isn’t the last of things along these lines that you’ve noted.
DYKSTRA: There’s one more unfortunately, we need to go to the Alps where it is winter and instead of the Southern Hemisphere summer, and winter, of course is ski season, and we’re looking at an increasing number of closed and even abandoned ski resorts in the Alps, due to a decline in skiable days during the winter months.

CURWOOD: Signs of climate disruption everywhere. Hey Peter, what else do you have for us today?
DYKSTRA: Well, here’s something it seems we’re mentioning this all the time. Unfortunately, we have to mention it again. Because last week, two more indigenous environmental activists, anti-logging activists, were murdered in what appears to be a drive-by shooting in the northeastern Brazilian state of Maranhao.

CURWOOD: Oh man, this is just happening way too much. I think last year 100 and, more than 160 environmental activists were killed. When will this stop do you think?
DYKSTRA: It’s, I don’t know that it’s ever going to stop. There are still brave people who have obviously literally put their lives on the line.

CURWOOD: What do we have from the annals of history for today, Peter?
DYKSTRA: There’s a 20th anniversary, and for me it’s hard to believe that this is already 20 years ago. December 18, 1999, Julia Butterfly Hill came down from the tree she had been sitting in for more than two years, a Northern California Redwood that was slated for cutting.

/// — Julia Butterfly Hill lived in a nearly 200 foot tall California redwood dubbed ‘Luna’ for 738 days to draw attention to the plight of forests. (Photo in Transcript) — ///.

CURWOOD: That tree, I believe, was called Luna.
DYKSTRA: Luna was the name given to the tree. There was an attempt to kill Luna out of spite. But as far as we know, the tree is still alive and well and growing and enormous. Something is different about Julia Butterfly Hill. Her website says she’s “no longer available to discuss the epic tree sit, and that her life has moved on.” I guess somebody that could deal with more than two years worth of absolute solitude may not want to deal with celebrity for the rest of her life.

CURWOOD: Who could blame her? Thanks, Peter. Peter Dykstra is an editor with Environmental Health News, that’s EHN.org and DailyClimate.org. We’ll talk to you real soon, right after the holidays.

DYKSTRA: Well good to talk to you as always and happy holidays to you and happy holidays to everyone.
CURWOOD: And there’s more on these stories at the Living on Earth website, LOE.org.

Related links:

Actress Diane Lane one of those arrested for protesting climate change

### Save the EARTH one VOTE at a time! YOUR VOTE COUNTS! ###

From an Article by Michael E. Mann, Washington Post, November 2, 2018

PHOTO in NEWSPAPER ARTICLE: Thick smoke covers a beach near the village of Sarti in Halkidiki, northern Greece, as a wildifire rages in the area on October 25th.

Summer 2018 saw an unprecedented spate of extreme floods, droughts, heat waves and wildfires break out across North America, Europe and Asia. The scenes played out on our television screens and in our social media feeds. This is, as I stated at the time, the face of climate change.

It’s not rocket science. A warmer ocean evaporates more moisture into the atmosphere — so you get worse flooding from coastal storms (think Hurricanes Harvey and Florence). Warmer soils evaporate more moisture into the atmosphere — so you get worse droughts (think California or Syria). Global warming shifts the extreme upper tail of the “bell curve” toward higher temperatures, so you get more frequent and intense heat waves (think summer 2018 just about anywhere in the Northern Hemisphere). Combine heat and drought, and you get worse wildfires (again, think California).

Climate scientists have become increasingly comfortable talking about these connections. Much like how medical science has developed key diagnostic tools, we have developed sophisticated tools to diagnose the impact climate change is having on extreme weather events.

One of these tools, “extreme event attribution,” can be thought of as climate science’s version of an X-ray. In this case, a climate model is run both with and without the human effect on climate. One then compares how often a particular extreme event happens in both the “with” and “without” cases. If it occurs sufficiently more often (i.e., beyond the “noise”) in the former case, a study can “attribute” and quantify how climate change affected the extremeness of the event.

The scorching European heat wave this summer, according to one such study, was made more than twice as likely by global warming. The record rainfall in North Carolina from Hurricane Florence was, according to another study, increased by as much as 50 percent by warming oceans.

The climate models used in these sorts of studies represent remarkable achievements in the world of science. But no tool is perfect. In our medical analogy, some injuries — such as soft tissue damage — are too subtle to be detected by an X-ray. So medical professionals developed even more sophisticated tools, such as MRI. Similarly, some climate-change impacts on extreme weather are too subtle to be captured by current generation climate models.

In a study my co-authors and I recently published in the journal Science Advances, we identified a key factor behind the rise in extreme summer weather events (such as the ones that played out in summer 2018) that — as we demonstrate in our study — is not captured by current generation climate models.

Using an alternative approach based on a combination of models and real-world observations, we showed that climate change is causing the summer jet stream to behave increasingly oddly. The characteristic continental-scale meanders of the jet stream (its “waviness”) as it travels from west to east are becoming more pronounced and are tending to remain locked in place for longer stretches of time.

Under these circumstances — when, for example, a deep high-pressure “ridge” gets stuck over California or Europe — we usually see extreme heat, drought and wildfire. And typically there’s a deep low-pressure “trough” downstream, stuck over, say, the eastern United States or Japan, yielding excessive rainfall and flooding. That’s exactly what happened in summer 2018. The spate of extreme floods, droughts, heat waves and wildfires we experienced were a consequence of such jet stream behavior.

Our study shows that climate change is making that behavior more common, giving us the disastrous European heat wave of 2003 (during which more than 30,000 people perished), the devastating 2011 Texas drought (during which ranchers ranchers in Oklahoma and Texas lost 24 percent and 17 percent of their cattle, respectively), the 2016 Alberta wildfire (the costliest natural disaster in Canadian history) and yes, the extreme summer of 2018.

Just as climate models almost certainly underestimate the impact climate change has already had on such weather extremes, projections from these models also likely underestimate future increases in these types of events. Our study indicates that we can expect many more summers like 2018 — or worse.

Climate-change deniers love to point to scientific uncertainty as justification for inaction on climate. But uncertainty is a reason for even more concerted action. We already know that projections historically have been too optimistic about the rates of ice sheet collapse and sea-level rise. Now it appears they are also underestimating the odds of extreme weather as well. The consequences of doing nothing grow by the day. The time to act is now.

>>> Michael E. Mann is director of the Penn State Earth System Science Center and co-author with Tom Toles of “The Madhouse Effect: How Climate Change Denial Is Threatening Our Planet, Destroying Our Politics, and Driving Us Crazy.”

The lives if real people in the USA & elsewhere are being disrupted

From an Article by Oliver Milman, The Guardian, September 24, 2018

After her house flooded for the third year in a row, Elizabeth Boineau was ready to flee. She packed her possessions into dozens of boxes, tried not to think of the mold and mildew-covered furniture and retreated to a second-floor condo that should be beyond the reach of pounding rains and swelling seas.

Boineau is leaving behind a handsome, early 20th-century house in Charleston, South Carolina, the shutters painted in the city’s eponymous shade of deep green. Last year, after Hurricane Irma introduced 8in of water into a home Boineau was still patching up from the last flood, local authorities agreed this historic slice of Charleston could be torn down.

“I was sloshing through the water with my puppy dog, debris was everywhere,” she said. “I feel completely sunken. It would cost me around $500,000 to raise the house, demolish the first floor. I’m going to rent a place instead, on higher ground.”

Millions of Americans will confront similarly hard choices as climate change conjures up brutal storms, flooding rains, receding coastlines and punishing heat. Many are already opting to shift to less perilous areas of the same city, or to havens in other states. Whole towns from Alaska to Louisiana are looking to relocate, in their entirety, to safer ground.

Children on Isle De Jean Charles, Louisiana, play outside where only 20 families are left. Channels cut by loggers and oil companies eroded the island. What little remains will eventually be inundated as the sea level rises.

The era of climate migration is, virtually unheralded, already upon America.

The population shift gathering pace is so sprawling that it may rival anything in US history. “Including all climate impacts it isn’t too far-fetched to imagine something twice as large as the Dustbowl,” said Jesse Keenan, a climate adaptation expert at Harvard University, referencing the 1930s upheaval in which 2.5 million people moved from the dusty, drought-ridden plains to California.

This enormous migration will probably take place over a longer period than the Dustbowl but its implications are both profound and opaque. It will plunge the US into an utterly alien reality. “It is very difficult to model human behaviour under such extreme and historically unprecedented circumstances,” Keenan admits.

The closest analogue could be the Great Migration – a period spanning a large chunk of the 20th century when about 6 million black people departed the Jim Crow south for cities in the north, midwest and west.

By the end of this century, sea level rise alone could displace 13 million people, according to one study, including 6 million in Florida. States including Louisiana, California, New York and New Jersey will also have to grapple with hordes of residents seeking dry ground.

“There’s not a state unaffected by this,” said demographer Mat Hauer, lead author of the research, which is predicated on a severe 6ft sea level increase. There are established migration preferences for some places – south Florida to Georgia, New York to Colorado – but in many cases people would uproot to the closest inland city, if they have the means.

“The Great Migration was out of the south into the industrialized north, whereas this is from every coastal place in the US to every other place in the US,” said Hauer. “Not everyone can afford to move, so we could end up with trapped populations that would be in a downward spiral. I have a hard time imagining what that future would be like.”

Within just a few decades, hundreds of thousands of homes on US coasts will be chronically flooded. By the end of the century, 6ft of sea level rise would redraw the coastline with familiar parts – such as southern Florida, chunks of North Carolina and Virginia, much of Boston, all but a sliver of New Orleans – missing. Warming temperatures will fuel monstrous hurricanes – like the devastating triumvirate of Irma, Maria and Harvey in 2017, followed by Florence this year – that will scatter survivors in jarring, uncertain ways.

The projections are starting to materialize in parts of the US, forming the contours of the climate migration to come.

“I don’t see the slightest evidence that anyone is seriously thinking about what to do with the future climate refugee stream,” said Orrin Pilkey, professor emeritus of coastal geology at Duke University. “It boggles the mind to see crowds of climate refugees arriving in town and looking for work and food.”

Pilkey’s new book – Sea Level Rise Along Americas Shores: The Slow Tsunami – envisions apocalyptic scenes where millions of people, largely from south Florida, will become “a stream of refugees moving to higher ground”.

“They will not be the bedraggled families carrying their few possessions on their backs as we have seen in countless photos of people fleeing wars and ethnic cleansing, most recently in Myanmar and Syria,” Pilkey states in his book. “Instead, they will be well-off Americans driving to a new life in their cars, with moving trucks behind, carrying a lifetime of memories and possessions.”

Dejected with frigid New York winters, Chase Twichell and her husband purchased a four-bedroom apartment in Miami Beach in 2011, with the plan of spending at least a decade basking in the sunshine. At first, keeping a pair of flip-flops on hand to deal with the flooded streets seemed an acceptable quirk, until the magnitude of the encroaching seas became apparent when the city spent $400m to elevate streets near Twichell’s abode.

Twichell began to notice water pumps were spewing plastic bags, condoms and chip packets into the bay. Friends’ balconies started getting submerged. Twichell, a poet, found apocalyptic themes creeping into her work. Last year, she sold the apartment to a French businessman and moved back to upstate New York.

“It was like end of the world stuff,” she said. “It was crazy for us to have such a big investment in such a dangerous situation.” Her neighbours initially scolded her but now several are also selling up, fretting that the real estate and insurance markets for properties like theirs will seize up.

“It was horrible but fascinating to see it,” Twichell said. “It’s like we got to see the future and it wasn’t pretty. It’s like a movie where there’s a terrible volcano that is destroying everything, only it’s much slower than that.”

A sense of fatalism is also starting to grip some local officials. Philip Stoddard, mayor of South Miami, has seen a colleague, spooked by sea level rise, move to California and some neighbours sell their houses before an expected slump in prices. Stoddard and his wife regularly discuss buying a fallback property, perhaps in Washington DC.

“Most people will wait for the problem to be bad to take action, that’s what I worry about,” he said. “We can buy a lot of time, but in the end we lose. The sea level will go over the tops of our buildings.”

Sanitation is an immediate preoccupation for Stoddard, given the large proportion of residents who aren’t served by sewage works. “If you’re using a septic tank and your toilet starts to overflow into your bathroom because of water inundation, that’s a basis-of-civilization problem,” he said. “A medieval city wasn’t a nice smelling place and they had a lot of diseases.”

Those living near the coasts will face pressures of the gradual (sea level rise) as well as dramatic (storms) nature but people inland will also be harried to move by climate change.

Farming techniques and technology have improved immeasurably since the Dustbowl but rising temperatures are still expected to diminish yields for crops such as maize, soybeans and wheat, prompting the departure of younger people from farming. By 2050, Texas county, the largest wheat-producing county in Oklahoma, could spend an extra 40 days a year above 90F (32C) compared with now.

Widespread Flooding Disrupts Many Communities

Are West Virginia’s Floods The Result Of Climate Change?

From an Article by Ken Silverstein, Forbes Magazine, June 30, 2016

For a state that has been racked with recession and unemployment, the flash floods that have ravaged West Virginia don’t help much. But the key question to ask — no matter how unpleasant — is whether the coal sector there shares some of the blame.

At issue is the concept of climate change and whether the warmer atmosphere is holding more water and therefore intensifying the storms. To that end, West Virginia’s prime industry has been coal, a fuel that when burned is responsible for a third of all human-induced carbon emissions.

Even more, the surface mining that has occurred is lopping off whole mountaintops and removing the vegetation, leaving the landscape vulnerable to erosion. The water running off the mountain is thus more rapid, adding to the problem of flash flooding, says Kathleen Miller, a scientist with the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., in a phone interview.

“The climate is highly variable and you can’t attribute specific events to climate change,” adds Dr. Miller. “But when you look long term, many environmental changes are all pointing in the same direction and supporting the conclusion that global climate change is underway: melting sea ice, melting glaciers and rising sea levels. “It is the weight of the evidence that must be considered.”

Photo in original article:  WV State Trooper C.S. Hartman, left, and Bridgeport WV, fireman, Ryan Moran, wade through flooded streets as they search homes in Rainelle. A rainstorm that seemed no big deal at first turned into a catastrophe for the small town in West Virginia, trapping dozens of people whose screams would echo all night.

As for the storms and the resulting floods in West Virginia, at least 25 people have died while thousands of homes have been destroyed. It’s the third worst flood in state history, with the worst one occurring in 1972 — a rainfall so hard that a dam built over a coal slurry pond had dislodged and ravaged the community of Buffalo Creek, WV,  killing hundreds.

One of the hardest hit areas of the 2016 flood is Greenbrier County, where the famed Greenbrier Resort is located and where the New Orleans Saints have training camp. The amount of rain that occurred last week is said to be a once-in-a-thousand year event. Is it because of climate change?

According to Kevin Trenberth, distinguished senior scientist at the Center for Atmospheric Research, there is about 10 percent more moisture in the atmosphere since 1970. That immediately increases precipitation by 10 percent.

“But that process then releases latent heat into the storm and can invigorate the storm so that the net increase in precipitation is up to 20 percent,” he says, meaning that rainfall can be double the resident moisture in the atmosphere.

In the Northeastern region that includes West Virginia, rainfall in the most extreme precipitation events has increased by 73 percent from 1958 to 2012, says the Third U.S. Climate Assessment — a problem particularly acute for the coal-producing state, which has water running off of mountains and into the townships below.

To be sure, some scientists point out that the aberrant weather patterns may not be the result of climate change. Rich Muller, a climate scientist from the University of California at Berkeley, who was hired by the Koch brothers, concludes that rising temperatures are the result of burning fossil fuels. But he says that at least hurricanes and tornados have actually decreased with time.

Specifically, he told this writer in an earlier talk that from 1750 to the present, global temperatures have risen by 1.5 degrees Celsius — directly tied to the excessive release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. He said that his models indicate that temperatures will continue to rise into the future.

“Global warming is real and it is caused by humans … But climate change is not contributing to more intense tornados and hurricanes,” Muller says.  To be clear, 17 of the warmest years on record have occurred in the last 18 years, says Dr. Miller, with the National Center for Atmospheric Research. And 2015 was, in fact, the hottest ever.

One of things that the climate skeptics will point to, she notes, is that a short-term trend can indicate a “warming pause.” But she emphasizes that short-term trend calculations can be manipulated by selecting an unusually warm starting point. The longer-term trend paints a different picture:

>>> It’s difficult news for a state like West Virginia to absorb— one that has built an economy on a fuel that is responsible for a third of all man-made heat-trapping emissions. What is the leadership to do?

>>> It must stop with the politics and look instead to science. Just as businesses consider “what if” scenarios when they look forward, responsible leaders must do the same.

>>> As for West Virginia, it must wean itself from coal and rapidly diversify from both an environmental and economic standpoint.

See also: Local Flood Report from WV Public Radio