Is it perhaps unintentionally revealing – not to mention ironic – that the text below has greater potential to influence my thinking on climate change than all that’s gone before? That retired flag and general officers might sway my thinking on climate change, where previously I maintained a kind of scepticism bordering on hostility?
Global climate change presents a serious national security threat that could affect Americans at home, impact U.S. military operations and heighten global tensions, according to a study released today by a blue-ribbon panel of retired admirals and generals.
The study, “National Security and the Threat of Climate Change,” explores ways projected climate change is a “threat multiplier” in already fragile regions of the world, exacerbating conditions that lead to failed states—the breeding grounds for extremism and terrorism.
The CNA Corporation, a nonprofit research and analysis organization, brought together eleven retired four-star and three-star admirals and generals to provide advice, expertise and perspective on the impact of climate change on national security. CNA writers and researchers compiled the report under the board’s direction and review. The full report will be available on SecurityAndClimate.cna.org
I’m not above understanding that retired officers of all sorts need to find paying work too, but many of the people referenced here – Marine General Anthony Zinni is one, Admiral Joe Prueher is another – have solid reputations as straight shooters to go with their unquestioned intellectual acumen. Even so, I still wonder what in the world doing something about this is going to cost.
Their text is worth reading. You can get to it through the BlogAd on the right column.
Irony is to be found everywhere, it seems.
This overlooks a couple of things at least.
First, climate change is an extremely gradual thing, punctuated by catastrophic effects. Subsistence societies will have every chance to move. Move where? Well, that brings up the second point.
Areas on the edge that will be punished by global warming have their counterparts in areas of marginal utility now that will become viable with a little warming. There will be benefits to warming as well as casualties.
Change is the norm, not an aberration. People who expect to maintain the planet and the environment where it is now have bought into some kind of chauvinism that thinks this is the best of all possible worlds because, well, because I’m here.
Oooo, the things I could say about flag officers. Take away their staffs, and they can start sounding pretty stupid. These guys have one thing in common, ambition. None have reached their lofty heights without it. They’re usually not stupid, but some are. Generals with something worth listening to, are usually smart enough to keep their mouths shut. Zinni may be a “straight-shooter”, but he’s no longer one of us, and he hasn’t been for a while now.
Life imitates art, it seems:
http://battlefield.ea.com/battlefield/bf2142/
Here’s my problem with the whole issue:
The 2 primary components of Greenhouse Gasses are C02 and Methane. CO2 comes from exhaling, and all the air breathing fauna of the planet do that. Methane is a biproduct of bovine and other animal digestion. Both are naturally occurring and NOTHING can be done about that.
If mankind is solely responsible for the warming on planet Earth, then how come all the other planets are heating up as well?
I don’t know the answers, I’m just saying neither does anyone else.
CO2 also is a byproduct of Carbon Fuel combustion… so there is that too. Not so much naturally occurring… why? I am operating a 35MMSCFD Hydrogen SMR as I write this. And I’m spewing TONS of CO2 in the air as I write this too…
Not sure that all this leads to Global Warming or not, I think it a might arrogant of us to jump to that conclusion, but, I do know that we’re pumping CO2 into the atmosphere in vast quantities, and not just from our exhalations…
Please, sir, retain your skepticism. I can tell you first hand that it will cost the people of this country to make the changes that some say need to be made. It will cost us our way of life. I will read the report. I will also remember that 30 years ago, folks were yelling about global cooling.
According to climatescience.gov…”Human-influenced sources of methane include landfills, natural gas and petroleum production and distribution systems, agricultural activities, coal mining, stationary and mobile combustion, wastewater treatment, and certain industrial processes. About 60% of global methane emissions come from these sources and the rest are from natural sources…”
We as humans do have some control over this. This looks like a good place to start.
OTOH (playing Devil’s Advocate here) IF there *is* a global climate change on the order of “Greenland turns green again,” there ARE military/security implications.
[Example leaping off of the top of my head: A warmer Siberia is one with a LOT of untapped natural resources that are suddenly easier to get to, for either the current owner (Russia) or a covetous neighbor with a lot of spare unmarried men lying about.]
If the experts are speaking to their expertise, it’s worth a listen.
Color me skeptical. Based on what I’ve read, from multiple sources, the jury is still out as to whether global warming is actually occurring and as to whether it’s actually caused by mankind. Incidentally, there are just as many reliable sources that deny the existance of global warming as those that support the theory.
The more important question is: Why do many general officers minds and thought processes take an immediate, abrubt left turn upon retirement? This is true as regards the question of global warming as well as politics in general…which, BTW play a big part in the GW controversy.
I read this recently and I think it rings true, “The ultimate arrogance of man is to believe that 1. He caused global warming and 2. He can do anything about it.
Arguments for or against global warming aside, the paper tries to predict how a warming trend will change the strategic structure across the globe. It does so with some generalizations, more so than the typical threat assessment papers we churn out on a daily basis regarding every region of the globe. Like most of those, this one concludes as follows: “My department will require a budget increase to handle these new tasks.”
Thing is, climate change is really slow compared to a drought or a tsunami or even dropping aquifer levels. It takes *years* to have an effect, so shifting populations and resources are a slow affair that cause little immediate stress and strife compared to natural disasters and normal cyclic weather patterns.
Based upon that, this report failed to focus on the real long-term effects, such as Cadrys mentioned above. That should be telling.
– Max
“The 2 primary components of Greenhouse Gasses are C02 and Methane.”
Actually, water vapor accounts for 35-90 percent of the green house effect, depending on the climate. Human activity has no affect on the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere.
Methane has about 200 times the green house affect as CO2 and has increased by 150 percent since the start of the industrial era (circa 1750 or so). The major sources of methane is decomposing organic material, mining, agriculture, oil production. The latter three have increased steadily as the population has increased. The fact that population increases exponentially up to a certain point can account for the increases seen in methane production.
The climate is always changing, and has always changed from what we can tell. Sometimes it is warmer, some times it is cooler. There have been several prolonged ice ages in the last million years. We have been on a warm upswing since the end of the “mini ice age” which began in around 1450 and ended around 1700 or so. Before 1450, Europe was much warmer. When the Vikings settled on Greenland it was actually green. Then, for reasons unknown the Gulf Stream slowed or stopped, which had a rapid cooling effect on Europe.
Perhaps that will happen again.
I think that human activity is having some impact on the climate. I do not think it is as drastic as some would have you believe (Al Gore). As far as how to pay for the “needed changes,” I think a free market, phased in approach, with government incentives for developing cheaper alternative energy technology is a start. After all, the price of gasoline and oil products are artificially low in the country. Take some of those oil subsidies and divert them toward solar power, safe nuclear power plants (yes, they actually are environmentally friendly) wind power, etc, etc.
Okay. Isn’t this more than a little strange?
You might consider believing, not because of some new scientific discovery, but because these particular retired flag officers state that global climate change is a national security threat? Uh huh…. well, as you said, irony abounds.
As to the substance of it, I doubt that all climate change is caused by humans. But I don’t doubt that we are responsible for at least some of it. Although I don’t think that’s really the point.
No matter who or what is causing it to what degree, assuming we are the highest functioning beings on earth (there are some days when I question that proposition), it might be in our best interests to try to do something about it. Because assuming, without deciding for the moment, that the results could be as bad as “they” say, I don’t really see the point in watching our world dissolve while we point fingers elsewhere. “It wasn’t us. We didn’t do it.” Glub, glub, glub…..
And if its for real, then the cost of dealing with it really is inconsequential in the long run, isn’t it? I mean, compared to the cost of not dealing with it.
You know, I couldn’t help but notice how fast, in the movie “The Day After Tomorrow”, they wiped out Nova Scotia…….swoosh…..gone
Before we begin to solve the climate change issue here on Earth, perhaps we should ask what humans have done to upset the delicate balances of Mars, Jupiter and Saturn, all which are showing never seen before temperature increases.
Inside, I’m a selfish kinda guy as I truly wanna grow mangoes in the SFBay area. let it warm.
-SJBill
I guess that retired flag and general officers have a little less personal skin in the game by declaring an emerging crisis, then requesting governmental grants to study it.
Reading closer, it looks to me as though they’re saying “if” this, “then” that – without too closely arguing whether or not the “if” statement is likely.
Not their field, actually. Which brings us back to the first paragraph, and hence the rub.
“CO2 also is a byproduct of Carbon Fuel combustion?
“CO2 also is a byproduct of Carbon Fuel combustion… so there is that too. Not so much naturally occurring… ”
Man-made sources of CO2 emissions are a tiny faction of total CO2 output, including volcanic emissions and decaying plant material, among other things.
There is loads of empirical data showing that the Earth’s temperature has been swinging up and down in an approximately 1500 year cycle for about the last million years. It’s been warming up since about 1850. The difference is that the Romans were simply pleased that the climate was warm enough for them to grow grapes in what would later be Great Britain. Today, over a thousand years later, we can react appropriately with superstitious fear and terror.
Dear Lex:
Back in 2003, the Pentagon actually commissioned a couple of climatologists to do a “what if” study regarding climate change. An abbreviated version was printed in either Fortune or Forbes in February of 2004. The gist of the study was related to America’s security concerns if climate change occurred. It was pretty interesting. If you’re interested, I can bring a copy of the article to DC.
Sound great, RPL – looking forward to reading it. And meeting you.
Q. What caused the previous ice ages to end?
A. Global warming.
30 years ago it was the coming ice age. When that didn’t pan out, the lunatics on the left jumped on the global warming band wagon.
Consensus science is junk science.
Yep the planet is a little warmer than in years past, but my guess, er, hypothesis is that it will cool off again too.
When the democrats jumped onto the global warming train, I reached for my wallet, just knowing that it would be emptied by their inane arguments.
Our weather men and women struggle just to get next week’s weather right, with the very latest in scientific equipment no less. Other than realizing that the Earth is slowly getting warmer, how can scientists possibly claim to know the cause and ultimate effects of this warming?
I fully believe global warming is happening, but it definitely isn’t being caused by us. To think so is to fail to recognize just how big the world is.
Steve H, it is small in comparison to what you stated, however, it is not a “tiny fraction”. My point was that we are putting CO2 into the atmosphere in vast quantities. I just am not convinced that that is a cause of global warming and or climate change. I tend to lean towards the belief that Mother Earth is in a natural cycle, of which we currently are on an upwards swing in temperatures. Of course, who can really be sure, besides the Big Man Upstairs…
I hope global warming is real, it might make the yankees move back up north
Hmmm…..
You planning on coming for a visit, unkawill?
If so, we’ll crank up the bbq in your honour, whatever that may do to/for the environment