The NY Times reports that:
"Global emissions of carbon dioxide from fossil-fuel burning jumped by the largest amount on record last year, upending the notion that the brief decline during the recession might persist through the recovery".
What's more:
"Emissions rose 5.9 percent in 2010, according to an analysis released Sunday by the Global Carbon Project, an international collaboration of scientists tracking the numbers. Scientists with the group said the increase, a half-billion extra tons of carbon pumped into the air, was almost certainly the largest absolute jump in any year since the Industrial Revolution, and the largest percentage increase since 2003".
Over the next few days, leaders from around the world are attending the 17th Conference of the Parties (COP17) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the 7th Session of the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties (CMP7) to the Kyoto Protocol, in Durban, South Africa. Other climate change conferences such as Copenhagen (2009) and Bali (2007) have had tremendous challenges in putting forward meaningful actions on mitigating climate emissions. Finding consensus on mitigating emissions is too difficult with the rising giants of India and China along with several developing countries.
Despite my cynicism, something positive may emerge from Durban. However, after working an internship with SFU for the past 6 months and learning about the many benefits of climate change adaptation, I feel more more inclined to support policies that address ways to respond and prepare for climate change impacts. I have blogged about this extensively. In short, adaptation is far more productive than climate change mitigation because people can begin to understand the potential impacts of climate on their lives and what sort of incentives are available to respond to this.
Matt Kahn at UCLA is famous for his work on the economics of climate change adaptation. Take some of points with a grain of salt, but I think he's on to something that policymakers in the deveoped and developing world alike ought to pay attention to.
More on adaptation soon.
Showing posts with label Climate Change. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Climate Change. Show all posts
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Public Perceptions on Water Issues in British Columbia
For the past two months I have been blogging for the Adaptation to Climate Change Team out of Simon Fraser University (SFU). As part of my internship with them, I have been blogging about Bob Sandford's cross-Canada tour where he has been presenting on the need for strong water governance and water policy reform in this country. Bob has been touring for almost two months now visiting the Prairies, Maritimes, Ontario, Quebec, BC, and Alberta. He is a water policy author for the Adaptation to Climate Change Team.
You can read my blog posts on the tour stops in Vancouver (summary of the presentation here, reactions from the audience here). And for Victoria (summary of the presentation here and reactions from the crowd here).
In short, the presentations in Vancouver and Victoria focused on a number of issues in water management centred on BC's Water Act Modernization Process and the exemplary water strategy in the Northwest Territories that should act as a resource for cities across the country.
Happy reading.
You can read my blog posts on the tour stops in Vancouver (summary of the presentation here, reactions from the audience here). And for Victoria (summary of the presentation here and reactions from the crowd here).
In short, the presentations in Vancouver and Victoria focused on a number of issues in water management centred on BC's Water Act Modernization Process and the exemplary water strategy in the Northwest Territories that should act as a resource for cities across the country.
Happy reading.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Ontario's leadership in Water Conservation
For the past month I have been blogging for the Adaptation to Climate Change Team out of Simon Fraser University (SFU). As part of my internship with them, I have been blogging about Bob Sandford's cross-Canada tour on Canadian water governance. Bob has been touring for a month now visiting the Prairies, Maritimes, Ontario and now BC. He is a water policy author for the Adaptation to Climate Change Team.
Here is the first post on Saskatchewan. Here is the latest post on Ontario.
Happy reading.
Here is the first post on Saskatchewan. Here is the latest post on Ontario.
Happy reading.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Cap and trade in California
A recent article by James Tansey from the Tyee reports that:
"The ARB (California Air Resources Board) voted unanimously on Friday to approve the final regulations that will create the second largest carbon market in the world, beginning in 2013. While the U.S. Federal government's interest in climate policy has declined, California, still the world's seventh largest economy, will implement a cap and trade scheme that represents the most significant issue in U.S. climate policy since the Kyoto Protocol".
This evidently puts pressure on British Columbia to be more committed to the Western Climate Initiative.
"While British Columbia's interest in climate policy was affirmed by the premier earlier in 2011, the government's commitment to the WCI is currently subject to an economic impacts review; often in government this kind of study is the earliest sign of a retreat from a policy position".
This bold move by California (a state that has had tremendous financial hardship through its budget crisis), marks a sense of commitment and leadership to climate policy. Whether other U.S. states follow in a time when the economy dominates every political discussion is unlikely. However, BC has and should consider its commitment to the WCI, not least for a province that ostensibly prides itself on green initiatives like the carbon tax (which I think needs to be reformed) but for a great opportunity to harness the enthusiasm from down south to move forward on climate policy.
"The ARB (California Air Resources Board) voted unanimously on Friday to approve the final regulations that will create the second largest carbon market in the world, beginning in 2013. While the U.S. Federal government's interest in climate policy has declined, California, still the world's seventh largest economy, will implement a cap and trade scheme that represents the most significant issue in U.S. climate policy since the Kyoto Protocol".
This evidently puts pressure on British Columbia to be more committed to the Western Climate Initiative.
"While British Columbia's interest in climate policy was affirmed by the premier earlier in 2011, the government's commitment to the WCI is currently subject to an economic impacts review; often in government this kind of study is the earliest sign of a retreat from a policy position".
This bold move by California (a state that has had tremendous financial hardship through its budget crisis), marks a sense of commitment and leadership to climate policy. Whether other U.S. states follow in a time when the economy dominates every political discussion is unlikely. However, BC has and should consider its commitment to the WCI, not least for a province that ostensibly prides itself on green initiatives like the carbon tax (which I think needs to be reformed) but for a great opportunity to harness the enthusiasm from down south to move forward on climate policy.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Localizing climate change to move forward
This article by Anna Fahey summarizes how talking about climate impacts on “socially distant groups” (and probably vulnerable species like polar bears) is likely to amplify polarization about the issue. This statement is complimented by the following elaboration:
"Climate change campaigns in the United States that focus on the risks to people in foreign countries or even other regions of the U.S. are likely to inadvertently increase polarization among Americans rather than build consensus and support for policy action".
The writer offers some insights by a recent study which argues that "when information about the risks of climate change are localized, connected closely to values such as public health, and communicated in terms of co-benefits to the community, these campaign efforts are likely to be more successful at transcending ideological differences and building support for action.”
I think this piece is relevant to all discussions that pertain to climate change. Indeed, climate change is so poorly communicated and politically driven that peoples' perceptions constantly shift along political and ideological lines. This is dangerous, I think, as it does not offer citizens a chance to digest the information and to think about the issues and risks themselves and produce their own logical conclusions.
Communication in the climate change arena needs to be ameliorated. There are some positive examples within the British Columbia context of communicating the local impacts of climate change, but more needs to happen. In an era of social media, we could use YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other tools to build a dialogue about what kind of action we can take right now to help us understand and adapt to climate change. No doubt, this is already happening, but it gets diluted with political sentiment.
Planners have a role here, but so do politicians, climate scientists and our leaders.
"Climate change campaigns in the United States that focus on the risks to people in foreign countries or even other regions of the U.S. are likely to inadvertently increase polarization among Americans rather than build consensus and support for policy action".
The writer offers some insights by a recent study which argues that "when information about the risks of climate change are localized, connected closely to values such as public health, and communicated in terms of co-benefits to the community, these campaign efforts are likely to be more successful at transcending ideological differences and building support for action.”
I think this piece is relevant to all discussions that pertain to climate change. Indeed, climate change is so poorly communicated and politically driven that peoples' perceptions constantly shift along political and ideological lines. This is dangerous, I think, as it does not offer citizens a chance to digest the information and to think about the issues and risks themselves and produce their own logical conclusions.
Communication in the climate change arena needs to be ameliorated. There are some positive examples within the British Columbia context of communicating the local impacts of climate change, but more needs to happen. In an era of social media, we could use YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other tools to build a dialogue about what kind of action we can take right now to help us understand and adapt to climate change. No doubt, this is already happening, but it gets diluted with political sentiment.
Planners have a role here, but so do politicians, climate scientists and our leaders.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
FLOW Tour: Saskatchewan update
As part of my internship with the Adaptation to Climate Change Team, I will be blogging about updates and stories from the FLOW cross-Canada tour. FLOW stands for the Forum for Leadership on Water.
FLOW Co-Chair, Bob Sandford (who was also the lead author of the ACT report I helped edit this summer), is going across Canada to present some of the positive lessons learned from the Northwest Territories Water strategy and to hear from Canadians about what they think needs to be done to better protect our water resources.You can view a list of Bob's tour dates here.
Here is short summary of what came from the Saskatchewan tour stop:
Saskatchewan experienced droughts and floods in the same basin this year, with farmers submitting insurance claims for both in a first for the insurance industry. The issue of flooding, accurately projected from climate models, is a major concern for the people of Saskatchewan and this was manifested at the tour stop through questions regarding ways the province’s water infrastructure should be managed and how to account for the “new normal”.
You can read more of my post here.
FLOW Co-Chair, Bob Sandford (who was also the lead author of the ACT report I helped edit this summer), is going across Canada to present some of the positive lessons learned from the Northwest Territories Water strategy and to hear from Canadians about what they think needs to be done to better protect our water resources.You can view a list of Bob's tour dates here.
Here is short summary of what came from the Saskatchewan tour stop:
Saskatchewan experienced droughts and floods in the same basin this year, with farmers submitting insurance claims for both in a first for the insurance industry. The issue of flooding, accurately projected from climate models, is a major concern for the people of Saskatchewan and this was manifested at the tour stop through questions regarding ways the province’s water infrastructure should be managed and how to account for the “new normal”.
You can read more of my post here.
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance report
In May 2011, I started an internship with the Adaptation to Climate Change Team (ACT) out of SFU. One of my job responsibilities was to review and provide on-going feedback to the Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance report led by policy author Bob Sandford. After months of revisions and feedback from several professionals, academics and students working in the field of climate change adaptation, ACT released the finalized version of the report on Tuesday October 4th. Here is a snapshot of it:
“The days when Canadians take an endless abundance of fresh water for granted are numbered,” warns Bob Sandford, lead author of ACT’s new report Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance. “Increasing average temperatures, climate change impacts on weather patterns and extensive changes in land use are seriously affecting the way water moves through the hydrological cycle in many parts of Canada, which is seriously impacting water quantity and quality."
“The reform of water governance structures in Canada is essential if we want to successfully manage and protect our water supplies and minimize climate-related impacts on our environment, our economy and our society,” says Sandford."
To inquire about more details of the report along with some of the work I have been doing over the past 5 months, see here.
“The days when Canadians take an endless abundance of fresh water for granted are numbered,” warns Bob Sandford, lead author of ACT’s new report Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance. “Increasing average temperatures, climate change impacts on weather patterns and extensive changes in land use are seriously affecting the way water moves through the hydrological cycle in many parts of Canada, which is seriously impacting water quantity and quality."
“The reform of water governance structures in Canada is essential if we want to successfully manage and protect our water supplies and minimize climate-related impacts on our environment, our economy and our society,” says Sandford."
To inquire about more details of the report along with some of the work I have been doing over the past 5 months, see here.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
The Economic Impacts of Climate Change for Canada
From the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (NRT):
"Climate change could be expensive for Canada. Unless global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are brought down and Canada invests in adaptation, the economic impacts of climate change on Canada could climb to billions of dollars per year.
Those are the conclusions of a new report of the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy called Paying the Price: The Economic Impacts of Climate Change for Canada. This is the first national-level study assessing the economic impacts of climate change on Canada.
We found that the costs of impacts could range from $5 billion per year in 2020 to between $21 billion and $43 billion per year in 2050, depending on global greenhouse gas emissions and domestic economic and population growth. There are also risks that costs could be much higher – for example, there is a 5% chance of costs exceeding $91B per year in the 2050s with high climate change and rapid socioeconomic development".
More about the report here.
"Climate change could be expensive for Canada. Unless global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are brought down and Canada invests in adaptation, the economic impacts of climate change on Canada could climb to billions of dollars per year.
Those are the conclusions of a new report of the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy called Paying the Price: The Economic Impacts of Climate Change for Canada. This is the first national-level study assessing the economic impacts of climate change on Canada.
We found that the costs of impacts could range from $5 billion per year in 2020 to between $21 billion and $43 billion per year in 2050, depending on global greenhouse gas emissions and domestic economic and population growth. There are also risks that costs could be much higher – for example, there is a 5% chance of costs exceeding $91B per year in the 2050s with high climate change and rapid socioeconomic development".
More about the report here.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
An Integrated Planning Approach to Climate Change Adaptation
I will be presenting my research at the Eighth International Conference on Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability in January 2012. The conference will be held at the Robson Square, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada from 10 to 12 January 2012.
My title is "An Integrated Planning Approach to Climate Change Adaptation: Exploring the Water Sector in Canada". My abstract is below and has been slightly revised since. But here is the gist:
Through my internship with the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions, I have been exploring strategies and best practices surrounding climate change adaptation in the water sector in Canada and abroad. Interest in adaptation could not come at a more important time as various academics and practitioners are pressuring the Canadian government to reconsider a more holistic and robust water policy. Given the complexity and uncertainty surrounding climate change, adaptation must take a holistic and pro-active approach to consider environmental and economic strategies that will help us adapt today to bring a more promising tomorrow. Through a literature review, content analysis, and the use of social media, my project develops a planning guide based on best practices in the water sector that the federal government could use to make decisions on how fund or assist communities with their adaptation plans.
The intended results are to complement the growing national movement calling for a Canadian water policy. Through contacting professionals in the water field along with raising awareness of the value of water through social media, this project will engage various perspectives and beliefs - all of which are critical for creating robust adaptation plans with a supportive national water policy.
My title is "An Integrated Planning Approach to Climate Change Adaptation: Exploring the Water Sector in Canada". My abstract is below and has been slightly revised since. But here is the gist:
Through my internship with the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions, I have been exploring strategies and best practices surrounding climate change adaptation in the water sector in Canada and abroad. Interest in adaptation could not come at a more important time as various academics and practitioners are pressuring the Canadian government to reconsider a more holistic and robust water policy. Given the complexity and uncertainty surrounding climate change, adaptation must take a holistic and pro-active approach to consider environmental and economic strategies that will help us adapt today to bring a more promising tomorrow. Through a literature review, content analysis, and the use of social media, my project develops a planning guide based on best practices in the water sector that the federal government could use to make decisions on how fund or assist communities with their adaptation plans.
The intended results are to complement the growing national movement calling for a Canadian water policy. Through contacting professionals in the water field along with raising awareness of the value of water through social media, this project will engage various perspectives and beliefs - all of which are critical for creating robust adaptation plans with a supportive national water policy.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
U.S. partisan divide over the causes of global warming
Stories in 2011 concering the debate about what causes global warming are always supremely entertaining for me. Check out this story from the Environmental Economics blog:
"37% of Democrats believe global warming is the result primarily of human action, while only 14% of Republicans believe this. Conversely, 43% of Republicans believe global warming is the result of natural causes, up from 35% in 2010. Self-identified Tea Party members display still more certainty (49%) that global warming is caused by natural events".
More here.
"37% of Democrats believe global warming is the result primarily of human action, while only 14% of Republicans believe this. Conversely, 43% of Republicans believe global warming is the result of natural causes, up from 35% in 2010. Self-identified Tea Party members display still more certainty (49%) that global warming is caused by natural events".
More here.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Links on climate change adaptation
Multidisciplinary team led by Indiana University professor Elinor Ostrom to conduct research on impact of climate change, capacity for adaptation.
For those who do not know Elinor Ostrom (2009 Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences for her analysis of economic governance,) see here.
How to pursue policies that are based on climate change adaptation and mitigation to yield benefits in both camps.
For those who do not know Elinor Ostrom (2009 Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences for her analysis of economic governance,) see here.
How to pursue policies that are based on climate change adaptation and mitigation to yield benefits in both camps.
Monday, September 5, 2011
A radical SuperFreakonomics story has come to fruition
A year ago, I blogged about a famous book called "SuperFreakonomics" by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner (read my review here). One chapter in their book titled "What Do Al Gore and Mount Pinatubo Have in Common?" is all about solutions to climate change. In this chapter, Levitt and Dubner specifically embrace geo-engineering solutions which are highly controversial in climate change circles. One of the wild and far fetched geo-engineering ideas reported, evidently thought of by Intellectual Ventures, is the garden hose to the sky:
"A team of British researchers called SPICE (Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering) is trying to pump particles of water into the atmosphere as a test run before moving onto sulfates and aerosols that would reflect sunlight away from earth, mimicking the aftereffect of a massive volcanic eruption. SPICE is building the garden hose at an undisclosed location, with £1.6 million in U.K. government funding and the backing of the Royal Society".
Essentially a long garden hose from the Earth would pump sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere to allow for a cooling effect.
Sound a little nuts to you? This is one of many geo-engineering ideas out there. Amid the ambivalence about how to mitigate GHGs and adapt to climate change, geo-engineering nerds and fanatics are proposing solutions that, while controversial on the surface, may have some merit if we explore our curiosities and gamble with risks. I am skeptical of geo-engineering myself but am interested nonetheless.
More about this here.
"A team of British researchers called SPICE (Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering) is trying to pump particles of water into the atmosphere as a test run before moving onto sulfates and aerosols that would reflect sunlight away from earth, mimicking the aftereffect of a massive volcanic eruption. SPICE is building the garden hose at an undisclosed location, with £1.6 million in U.K. government funding and the backing of the Royal Society".
Essentially a long garden hose from the Earth would pump sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere to allow for a cooling effect.
Sound a little nuts to you? This is one of many geo-engineering ideas out there. Amid the ambivalence about how to mitigate GHGs and adapt to climate change, geo-engineering nerds and fanatics are proposing solutions that, while controversial on the surface, may have some merit if we explore our curiosities and gamble with risks. I am skeptical of geo-engineering myself but am interested nonetheless.
More about this here.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Is the G.O.P. Anti-Science?
In a recent Op-Ed in the NY Times', columnist Paul Krugman argues that the Grand Old Party (GOP for short and the nickname for the Republican Party in the U.S.) is becoming anti-science. Paul cites just a few examples of Republican party contender nominees who still question topics such as evolution and climate change:
"Mr. Perry, the governor of Texas, recently made headlines by dismissing evolution as “just a theory,” one that has “got some gaps in it” — an observation that will come as news to the vast majority of biologists. But what really got peoples’ attention was what he said about climate change: “I think there are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects. And I think we are seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change.”
The article proceeds with Paul's worries and sentiments about the prospect of having a U.S. president -- or simply a U.S. party-- that is aggressively anti-science and anti-knowledge. This is concerning to say the least, particularly because of the emerging consensus about human induced climate change and the general importance of scientific research that informs public policy. Dismissing scientific research such as climate change or worse yet, cutting funding to it, is not only backwards but frightening!
Read the full article here.
"Mr. Perry, the governor of Texas, recently made headlines by dismissing evolution as “just a theory,” one that has “got some gaps in it” — an observation that will come as news to the vast majority of biologists. But what really got peoples’ attention was what he said about climate change: “I think there are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects. And I think we are seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change.”
The article proceeds with Paul's worries and sentiments about the prospect of having a U.S. president -- or simply a U.S. party-- that is aggressively anti-science and anti-knowledge. This is concerning to say the least, particularly because of the emerging consensus about human induced climate change and the general importance of scientific research that informs public policy. Dismissing scientific research such as climate change or worse yet, cutting funding to it, is not only backwards but frightening!
Read the full article here.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Climate Change Narcissism
Check out Daniel Sarewitz's piece on climate change narcissism. His article suggests that climate survivalism, that is, how individuals protect themselves and live in a world of climate change, ought to focus more on adaptation and not just mitigation.
But beyond the "individual", society will need to collectively adapt to the pressures brought on by climate change. Evidence of communities around the world that have suffered from natural disasters provide even more compelling reason to consider more strict policies such as rigid building codes and drought resistant crops to alleviate the burdens of hurricanes and heat waves respectively. Policies that are brought about by our governments need to recognize the realities of human behaviour. Asking millions of North Americans to cut down on driving is logical but simply unrealistic. Providing smart incentives to use transit, among other things, is one way to help society adapt in a world of higher fuel prices and help mitigate the impact of congestion, for example.
From the article:
"I assume that climate survivalism is not the version of adaptation that most people who are concerned about climate change would advocate. Yet the attention of climate change policy advocates (as well as climate change researchers) has never seriously focused on sensible approaches to adaptation. Until recently, leaders of the mainstream environmental community resisted open discussion about adaptation because they naively thought that they could get the world to stop using fossil fuels, and that any discussion about adaptation would simply give comfort to those who didn’t, or couldn’t, fully buy into their agenda."
More here.
But beyond the "individual", society will need to collectively adapt to the pressures brought on by climate change. Evidence of communities around the world that have suffered from natural disasters provide even more compelling reason to consider more strict policies such as rigid building codes and drought resistant crops to alleviate the burdens of hurricanes and heat waves respectively. Policies that are brought about by our governments need to recognize the realities of human behaviour. Asking millions of North Americans to cut down on driving is logical but simply unrealistic. Providing smart incentives to use transit, among other things, is one way to help society adapt in a world of higher fuel prices and help mitigate the impact of congestion, for example.
From the article:
"I assume that climate survivalism is not the version of adaptation that most people who are concerned about climate change would advocate. Yet the attention of climate change policy advocates (as well as climate change researchers) has never seriously focused on sensible approaches to adaptation. Until recently, leaders of the mainstream environmental community resisted open discussion about adaptation because they naively thought that they could get the world to stop using fossil fuels, and that any discussion about adaptation would simply give comfort to those who didn’t, or couldn’t, fully buy into their agenda."
More here.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
New York Times: Drought: A Creeping Disaster
Check out this article from the NY Times on the devastating effects of drought (in the U.S. and the World) and what can be done about it.
This is yet another article on the importance of adaptation to climate change in the water sector. As part of my PICS internship, I am doing a lot of research on climate change adaptation in the water sector in the Canadian context. I plan on sharing more news articles, presentations and summaries of my research through Enviro Boys. While adaptation to climate change is site-specific (i.e. Holland's flood mitigation techniques may not apply directly to New Orleans) there is, nonetheless, a comprehensive collection of best practices that we can use to be more effective and productive with our efforts.
One thing is for sure, the time to generate knowledge and information about this topic is now so we can start to move forward on it.
This is yet another article on the importance of adaptation to climate change in the water sector. As part of my PICS internship, I am doing a lot of research on climate change adaptation in the water sector in the Canadian context. I plan on sharing more news articles, presentations and summaries of my research through Enviro Boys. While adaptation to climate change is site-specific (i.e. Holland's flood mitigation techniques may not apply directly to New Orleans) there is, nonetheless, a comprehensive collection of best practices that we can use to be more effective and productive with our efforts.
One thing is for sure, the time to generate knowledge and information about this topic is now so we can start to move forward on it.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Water's connection to climate change adaptation
This summer I have been working as an intern with the Adaptation to Climate Change Team (ACT) based out of Simon Fraser University's Public Policy School.
"ACT is a five-year series of six-month sessions on top-of-mind climate change issues that brings leading experts from around the world together with industry, community and government decision-makers to explore the risks and generate recommendations for sustainable adaptation".
Among many of the climate change topic areas (biodiversity, energy, extreme weather), I have had the fortune of working on the water session. This particular session focuses on water governance and water policy in Canada and how our governments (municipal, provincial and federal) can start working toward policy that is based on adaptation to climate change. Certain places have been more progressive than others - my job is to investigate why and how such critical lessons can be applied across the country.
What does adaptation mean, exactly? Well, in the climate change world, there are two really popular words that are thrown around; these include "mitigation" and "adaptation". Both words became quite popular when British economist Nicholas Stern released his 700 page report on the economics of climate change in October 2006.
In short, Stern argued that we can mitigate greenhouse gas emissions through policies that support the development of a range of low-carbon and high-efficiency technologies. Further, we could use economic instruments such as carbon pricing, taxes and cap-and-trade to alleviate emissions. Adaptation by contrast (which has been less popular but is now emerging) is an approach where institutions can invest in technologies, systems and ideas that help us prepare for the impacts of climate change. These adaptation solutions are diverse but can be as simple as more efficient air conditioners that alleviate the impacts of heat waves, or floatable homes that, in the event of a flood, do not sink or lose their structural integrity. For those who are interested in the economics of climate change adaptation, please read Matt Kahn's Climatopolis.
Enviro Boys has written about adaptation in the past and will continue to do in the future given the salience of climate change. But from a water perspective, and based on what I am learning through my work, adaptation strategies such as water conservation or natural flood control tactics, while having higher upfront investment costs, the benefits and future returns on lessening the impacts of droughts, floods or even heat waves can be immense. In addition, getting people to think about the impacts of climate change can foster a collective and community oriented approach where groups think of creative solutions and where businesses and entrepreneurs start to innovate in response to the demand created.
More to come on how governments in Canada are thinking about this and what the opportunities are from a water policy and governance perspective.
"ACT is a five-year series of six-month sessions on top-of-mind climate change issues that brings leading experts from around the world together with industry, community and government decision-makers to explore the risks and generate recommendations for sustainable adaptation".
Among many of the climate change topic areas (biodiversity, energy, extreme weather), I have had the fortune of working on the water session. This particular session focuses on water governance and water policy in Canada and how our governments (municipal, provincial and federal) can start working toward policy that is based on adaptation to climate change. Certain places have been more progressive than others - my job is to investigate why and how such critical lessons can be applied across the country.
What does adaptation mean, exactly? Well, in the climate change world, there are two really popular words that are thrown around; these include "mitigation" and "adaptation". Both words became quite popular when British economist Nicholas Stern released his 700 page report on the economics of climate change in October 2006.
In short, Stern argued that we can mitigate greenhouse gas emissions through policies that support the development of a range of low-carbon and high-efficiency technologies. Further, we could use economic instruments such as carbon pricing, taxes and cap-and-trade to alleviate emissions. Adaptation by contrast (which has been less popular but is now emerging) is an approach where institutions can invest in technologies, systems and ideas that help us prepare for the impacts of climate change. These adaptation solutions are diverse but can be as simple as more efficient air conditioners that alleviate the impacts of heat waves, or floatable homes that, in the event of a flood, do not sink or lose their structural integrity. For those who are interested in the economics of climate change adaptation, please read Matt Kahn's Climatopolis.
Enviro Boys has written about adaptation in the past and will continue to do in the future given the salience of climate change. But from a water perspective, and based on what I am learning through my work, adaptation strategies such as water conservation or natural flood control tactics, while having higher upfront investment costs, the benefits and future returns on lessening the impacts of droughts, floods or even heat waves can be immense. In addition, getting people to think about the impacts of climate change can foster a collective and community oriented approach where groups think of creative solutions and where businesses and entrepreneurs start to innovate in response to the demand created.
More to come on how governments in Canada are thinking about this and what the opportunities are from a water policy and governance perspective.
Friday, June 3, 2011
Technology and Forest Conservation
I just read a fascinating article from the Science and Technology section of The Economist. The essence of the article is about a new lidar monitoring technology (The Economist is calling it a Lidar-tector) which is a light detection and ranging system that works by broadcasting electromagnetic waves towards a target and then building up a picture from the reflection. This technology is now being used for forest conservation purposes to determine the carbon content of trees. How does it work?:
"In the case of lidar, the waves are in the form of an infra-red laser beam. And in the case of the forests of south-western Nepal, the target is the trees. During a forest survey, an aircraft-borne lidar sweeps a beam that fires about 70,000 pulses a second over the canopy. A sensor on the aircraft records the time it takes to receive the backscattering of pulses, and that is used to compute distances to the forest canopy and to the soil beneath".
Further:
"The result, when processed through the computers of Arbonaut, a Finnish natural-resource-management company, is a three-dimensional image of the forest that can be correlated with, and calibrated by, the efforts of the chaps with the tape measures. And that, in turn, can be used to estimate the amount of carbon stored in the plot examined, and extrapolated to calculate the carbon stored in larger areas of forest that have been scanned by lidar, but not measured with tapes."
In the world of carbon sequestration projects, there is a lot of mendacity and mistrust when it comes to reporting numbers. In particular, policymakers and scientists are keen to know the carbon content of various forests to determine which ones are more worthy of preservation than others. While this may sound absurd, it is useful information for carbon trading scheme projects (which I do not completely agree with and will blog about shortly). Additionally, it provides further impetus to contain these forests and allow them to sequester carbon. In so doing, countries like Nepal can:
"In the case of lidar, the waves are in the form of an infra-red laser beam. And in the case of the forests of south-western Nepal, the target is the trees. During a forest survey, an aircraft-borne lidar sweeps a beam that fires about 70,000 pulses a second over the canopy. A sensor on the aircraft records the time it takes to receive the backscattering of pulses, and that is used to compute distances to the forest canopy and to the soil beneath".
Further:
"The result, when processed through the computers of Arbonaut, a Finnish natural-resource-management company, is a three-dimensional image of the forest that can be correlated with, and calibrated by, the efforts of the chaps with the tape measures. And that, in turn, can be used to estimate the amount of carbon stored in the plot examined, and extrapolated to calculate the carbon stored in larger areas of forest that have been scanned by lidar, but not measured with tapes."
In the world of carbon sequestration projects, there is a lot of mendacity and mistrust when it comes to reporting numbers. In particular, policymakers and scientists are keen to know the carbon content of various forests to determine which ones are more worthy of preservation than others. While this may sound absurd, it is useful information for carbon trading scheme projects (which I do not completely agree with and will blog about shortly). Additionally, it provides further impetus to contain these forests and allow them to sequester carbon. In so doing, countries like Nepal can:
Saturday, May 28, 2011
The problem of water leakage
Water leakage is a significant problem in the developing and developed world alike. When water is pumped into the system, being transported from a water treatment plant to your home, a percentage of it is lost due to cracked or corroded service pipes or aging distribution pipes. In the City of Lagos, Nigeria, a significant amount of the water pumped into the distribution system is lost to leaks, theft or non-payment. There are debates about how much water is lost, but ostensibly, it is as much as 85%. Other water supply systems face similar challenges particularly when it comes to leaks. When water systems leak, not only is water wasted and lost, but energy is wasted because it takes energy to move water in and around our cities.
Tokyo, by contrast, has one of the most efficient water systems in the world. Through efficient approaches of detecting and repairing leaks, the city has reduced the amount of water wasted in the past ten years from 150 million cubic meters of water to 68 million cubic meters of water.
From a technological perspective, Tokyo uses a computerized system that calculates and gathers whole information on leakages by computer such as the causes, details of each repair work, the cost for repairs. Such progress on water leak reduction can be seen as a climate change adaptation strategy. Climate change brings with it a number of uncertainties around water supply. In general, it is expected that as climate change unfolds, there will be more demand for water and hence more pressure on water infrastructure systems. With Tokyo's pro-active approach to water management such as repairing water leaks annually, their water infrastructure is already becoming more efficient and will be more resilient to climate change impacts in the future.
Read more here.
Tokyo, by contrast, has one of the most efficient water systems in the world. Through efficient approaches of detecting and repairing leaks, the city has reduced the amount of water wasted in the past ten years from 150 million cubic meters of water to 68 million cubic meters of water.
From a technological perspective, Tokyo uses a computerized system that calculates and gathers whole information on leakages by computer such as the causes, details of each repair work, the cost for repairs. Such progress on water leak reduction can be seen as a climate change adaptation strategy. Climate change brings with it a number of uncertainties around water supply. In general, it is expected that as climate change unfolds, there will be more demand for water and hence more pressure on water infrastructure systems. With Tokyo's pro-active approach to water management such as repairing water leaks annually, their water infrastructure is already becoming more efficient and will be more resilient to climate change impacts in the future.
Read more here.
Monday, April 25, 2011
The unintended consequences of environmentalism
This post is about the unintended consequences of environmentalism, something well articulated by Edward Glaeser, author of a recent book called Triumph of the City: How Our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer, Smarter, Greener, Healthier and Happier.
To begin, Ed Glaeser is one of my favourite urban scholars. He teaches economics at Harvard and has written about cities for a long time. His new book is a great read intended for anyone who loves cities and is curious about how they can/will change in the future as they become even more populated. For anyone wishing to grasp a historical and contemporary overview of how cities have shaped this world, his book is worth a read. The book features a number of cities from the booming IT sector in Bangalore to the ostensible greenery that Manhattan residents practice on a daily basis. The thesis of the book is that cities, if governed well by sensible public policies and institutions, are the world's greatest centres for allowing human beings to interact, innovate, create and live healthy and environmentally friendly lifestyles.
The greenness of cities is one part of Glaeser's book where he writes about how much more green and sustainable cities are than suburbs because urbanites use less electricity. For those statistical geeks out there, the book is full of numbers and impressive facts that illustrate how much more "green" cities are and can be over the much beloved suburban lifestyle that has been pervasive across the U.S. since 1945.
Some facts: the average single family detached home consumes 88 percent more electricity than the average apartment in a five or more unit building. The average suburban household consumes 27 percent more electricity than the average urban household. Electricity consumption is not only higher in suburban environments, but also in humid climates that require copious amounts of air conditioning. When gasoline consumption enters the discussion, things get even more dismal.
So, what about the unintended consequences of environmentalism? The idea here is that certain places in the United States like Houston, have local governments that are much more friendly to developers and pro-growth than other places in Coastal California or the Northeast. California has a more hospitable climate that does not require as much cooling in the summer or heat in the winter. Home heating and air conditioning are energy intensive and can be expensive household items overtime. By contrast, Houston or Atlanta, much more humid by comparison, require more energy for habitability.
Local environmentalists, many times fueled by NIMBYism, are eager to block housing development in the climate friendly areas. Most often, the arguments are for the protection of wildlife and ecosystems that are sensitive to development. These are valid reasons, however, they are often made based on incomplete environmental impact assessments.
"By using ecological arguments to oppose growth, California environmentalists are ensuring that America's carbon footprint will rise, by pushing new housing to less temperate climates".
Given California's more natural climate that minimizes the need for air conditioning and home heating, it is, from a carbon emissions point of view, a much more environmentally friendly place to develop housing than the aforementioned cities. Sadly, growth in places like Santa Clara County (California) has been slow; between 1990 and 2008, the county grew by 17.8 percent, significantly less than the national average. Prices have also remained high in these more climate friendly areas due to limited growth (constrained housing supply, land use restrictions and NIMBYism.
This problem is a fascinating one that should intrigue urban planners. While Glaeser is quick to criticize some aspects of the planning profession, he recognizes that this particular problem is one that warrants more attention and the involvement of planners given our current discussions about cities, suburbs and climate change.
My quick assessment of the conundrum raised by Glaeser is that planners should actually utilize a framework that illustrates the effect of housing on climate change. It's not just a matter of locating housing in more temperate environments, such as coastal California, but also thinking about increasing residential density in places that will have the least impact on carbon emission output. Whether this is Manhattan or San Francisco, both of which are very expensive places, we must consider the full costs of housing including the environmental impact.
To begin, Ed Glaeser is one of my favourite urban scholars. He teaches economics at Harvard and has written about cities for a long time. His new book is a great read intended for anyone who loves cities and is curious about how they can/will change in the future as they become even more populated. For anyone wishing to grasp a historical and contemporary overview of how cities have shaped this world, his book is worth a read. The book features a number of cities from the booming IT sector in Bangalore to the ostensible greenery that Manhattan residents practice on a daily basis. The thesis of the book is that cities, if governed well by sensible public policies and institutions, are the world's greatest centres for allowing human beings to interact, innovate, create and live healthy and environmentally friendly lifestyles.
The greenness of cities is one part of Glaeser's book where he writes about how much more green and sustainable cities are than suburbs because urbanites use less electricity. For those statistical geeks out there, the book is full of numbers and impressive facts that illustrate how much more "green" cities are and can be over the much beloved suburban lifestyle that has been pervasive across the U.S. since 1945.
Some facts: the average single family detached home consumes 88 percent more electricity than the average apartment in a five or more unit building. The average suburban household consumes 27 percent more electricity than the average urban household. Electricity consumption is not only higher in suburban environments, but also in humid climates that require copious amounts of air conditioning. When gasoline consumption enters the discussion, things get even more dismal.
So, what about the unintended consequences of environmentalism? The idea here is that certain places in the United States like Houston, have local governments that are much more friendly to developers and pro-growth than other places in Coastal California or the Northeast. California has a more hospitable climate that does not require as much cooling in the summer or heat in the winter. Home heating and air conditioning are energy intensive and can be expensive household items overtime. By contrast, Houston or Atlanta, much more humid by comparison, require more energy for habitability.
Local environmentalists, many times fueled by NIMBYism, are eager to block housing development in the climate friendly areas. Most often, the arguments are for the protection of wildlife and ecosystems that are sensitive to development. These are valid reasons, however, they are often made based on incomplete environmental impact assessments.
"By using ecological arguments to oppose growth, California environmentalists are ensuring that America's carbon footprint will rise, by pushing new housing to less temperate climates".
Given California's more natural climate that minimizes the need for air conditioning and home heating, it is, from a carbon emissions point of view, a much more environmentally friendly place to develop housing than the aforementioned cities. Sadly, growth in places like Santa Clara County (California) has been slow; between 1990 and 2008, the county grew by 17.8 percent, significantly less than the national average. Prices have also remained high in these more climate friendly areas due to limited growth (constrained housing supply, land use restrictions and NIMBYism.
This problem is a fascinating one that should intrigue urban planners. While Glaeser is quick to criticize some aspects of the planning profession, he recognizes that this particular problem is one that warrants more attention and the involvement of planners given our current discussions about cities, suburbs and climate change.
My quick assessment of the conundrum raised by Glaeser is that planners should actually utilize a framework that illustrates the effect of housing on climate change. It's not just a matter of locating housing in more temperate environments, such as coastal California, but also thinking about increasing residential density in places that will have the least impact on carbon emission output. Whether this is Manhattan or San Francisco, both of which are very expensive places, we must consider the full costs of housing including the environmental impact.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Thom Mayne's floatable house
A couple of months ago I wrote a review of Matt Kahn's newest book, Climatopolis. Among many of the stories and arguments Kahn presents on the need to adapt to climate change, he mentioned a UCLA architect named Thom Mayne who designed a floatable house.
"Known as the FLOAT House, the structure is a new model for flood-safe, affordable and sustainable housing and is designed to securely float with rising water levels. The innovative house was built for actor Brad Pitt's Make It Right Foundation, which is helping with the rebuilding of New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward, one of the neighborhoods hardest hit by Hurricane Katrina."
NPR picked up on this story about a year and half ago. Listen to this 4 minute interview with Thom Mayne to hear about why he designed the floatable house and what he thinks it will be able to do. For anyone interested in climate change adaptation, floatable houses are a very promising design solution. They are expensive and it would be unrealistic to expect flood prone cities like New Orleans to invest in thousands of them, but the potential for reduced damage from flooding can be greatly minimized along with millions of dollars saved from this pro-active and adaptive technology.
"Known as the FLOAT House, the structure is a new model for flood-safe, affordable and sustainable housing and is designed to securely float with rising water levels. The innovative house was built for actor Brad Pitt's Make It Right Foundation, which is helping with the rebuilding of New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward, one of the neighborhoods hardest hit by Hurricane Katrina."
NPR picked up on this story about a year and half ago. Listen to this 4 minute interview with Thom Mayne to hear about why he designed the floatable house and what he thinks it will be able to do. For anyone interested in climate change adaptation, floatable houses are a very promising design solution. They are expensive and it would be unrealistic to expect flood prone cities like New Orleans to invest in thousands of them, but the potential for reduced damage from flooding can be greatly minimized along with millions of dollars saved from this pro-active and adaptive technology.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)