Beijing to apply Level V emissions standard for its motor vehicles in 2012
Researchers demonstrate production of C3 hydrocarbons from biomass with no external H2 required

NRC report: US Navy, Marines and Coast Guard need to begin now to prepare for effects of climate change in the Arctic

Arctic
The Arctic region, in this report, is defined as the area north of the Arctic Circle (highlighted on this map in red). Click to enlarge.

In response to the measured and projected effects of climate change, US naval forces—i.e., the US Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard—should begin now to strengthen operational capabilities in the Arctic, prepare for more frequent humanitarian missions, and analyze potential vulnerabilities of seaside bases and facilities, says a new report by the National Research Council.

In response to the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), the National Research Council appointed a committee operating under the auspices of the Naval Studies Board to study the national security implications of climate change for US naval forces. The committee found that even the most moderate current trends in climate, if continued, will present new national security challenges. Although the timing, degree, and consequence of future climate change impacts remain uncertain, many changes are already under way in regions around the world, such as in the Arctic, and call for action by US naval leadership in response, the report found.

The Terms of Reference (TOR) directed the study to:

  1. Examine the potential impact on US future naval operations and capabilities as a result of climate change.

  2. Assess the robustness of the Department of Defense’s infrastructure for supporting US future naval operations and capabilities in the context of potential climate change impacts.

  3. Determine the potential impact climate change will have on allied force operations and capabilities.

  4. Examine the potential impact on US future naval antisubmarine warfare operations and capabilities in the world’s oceans as a result of climate change; specifically, the technical underpinnings for projecting US undersea dominance in light of the changing physical properties of the oceans.

The report organized its findings around six discussion areas:

  1. Disputes of boundaries and exclusive economic zones as a result of new maritime transits and competition of new resources;

  2. Strains on naval capabilities, given continuing first responder missions, and the opening of new international and territorial waters;

  3. Vulnerabilities to naval coastal installations due to sea-level rise and increased storm surges;

  4. Demands for establishing greater US, allied, and/or international maritime partnerships;

  5. Impacts on the technical underpinnings that enable, in part, naval force capabilities, particularly those that operate and train in the Arctic; and

  6. Investments for additional research and development that have implications for future naval operations and capabilities and might not be met by other groups pursuing climate-related research.

Summer sea ice in the Arctic is declining at an estimated rate of 10% per decade or more, and Arctic Ocean sea lanes could be open as early as the summer of 2030. US security challenges are growing as shipping, oil and gas exploration, and other activities increase in the region, the report says. To protect US interests, US naval forces need to fund a strong, consistent effort to increase Arctic operations and cold weather training programs.

US naval leaders should continue to stress to Congress the value and operational benefits of ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the report says. US naval forces should also work with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and allies to strengthen international capabilities to respond to predicted climate change challenges in the Arctic and worldwide.

Although the likelihood of conflict in the Arctic is low, it cannot be ruled out, and competition in the region is a given. However, cooperation in the region should not be considered a given, even with close allies. Although there are mechanisms for bilateral and multilateral cooperation in the area, including the Arctic Council, these relationships and mechanisms are largely untested for emerging conditions. Additionally, with the ratification of UNCLOS, US naval forces will be better positioned to conduct future naval operations and protect national security interests, especially in the Arctic.

The report recommends that the leadership of US naval forces build maritime partnerships in the Arctic region and encourages the United States to continue to identify and adopt policies and relationships in the Arctic that will build cooperation for new circumstances and minimize the risks of confrontation. (For example, naval leaders should pursue bilateral and multilateral training and exercising of US naval personnel with partner nation personnel in maritime security, search and rescue, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HA/DR), and continue strong support of the US efforts in the Arctic Council.)

There should be no assumption that the geostrategic situation will take care of itself or that US interests in the region are currently protected and promoted.

In addition, for Arctic national security operations, the US Coast Guard should have operational control of the nation’s three icebreakers, rather than the National Science Foundation. The report reiterates a previous Research Council report that says the icebreakers—which should provide access to many sites throughout the year—are old, obsolete, and underfunded. The Coast Guard should have the authority to determine future icebreaker requirements.

Naval forces will also need to meet growing demands for HA/DR efforts in response to a range of predicted crises created by climate change, including floods, droughts, intense storms, and geopolitical unrest. Of particular concern is the future of US Navy hospital ships to provide evacuation services and trauma care. The Navy and Marine Corps should retain the medical capability of the current two-ship hospital fleet at a minimum and also consider other options such as contracting with private ships to meet growing demands. In the near term, the report says, the Navy need not specifically fund new capabilities to deal with projected climate change but instead modify existing structures and forces as demands become more clear.

Although the future degree and magnitude of climate change on regional scales is uncertain, it’s clear that the potential for environmental disasters is on the rise due to the changing nature of the hydrologic cycle and sea level. Naval forces must be prepared to provide more aid and disaster relief in the decades ahead.

—Antonio J. Busalacchi, committee co-chair and director of the Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center at the University of Maryland, College Park

The report notes that rising sea levels accompanied by stronger, more frequent storm surges could leave US naval installations vulnerable. An estimated $100 billion of Navy installations would be at risk from sea-level rise of 1 meter or more. The Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard should work together to ensure that a coordinated analysis addresses vulnerabilities of shore-based facilities to the consequences of climate change.

The report also discusses climate-change-related technical issues impacting naval operations.

...there is a high likelihood that a warming climate will increase the operational tempo in polar regions; consequently, the demands on navigation systems, communication systems, and nautical charts in polar regions will intensify. The initial increase in tempo will be driven by scientific and exploratory missions, especially so in the Arctic. As the degree of precision required by military combat operations can be more extreme than that required by peacetime operations, if tensions in the Arctic increase, the technical challenges will be multiplied.

Some of the technical issues include:

  • naval navigation systems infrastructure;
  • communication systems performance in polar regions;
  • ice characterization in operational safety in Arctic navigation;
  • climate-change-related antisubmarine warfare (ASW) impacts; and
  • submarine operations.

The study was sponsored by the US Department of the Navy. The National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and National Research Council make up the National Academies.

Resources

Comments

ejj

HarveyD: I think our government has spread enough wealth around in the past few years with horrible results. It is time for major spending cuts & reforms...I hope and pray the GOP can get a balanced budget amendment for the constitution in exchange for raising the debt ceiling. It is time to transform the slimy political process once and for all. If Buffett wants to donate vast sums of his wealth to the federal government - that's great. Leave the job creators and producers of society out of it.

kelly

Reel$$, the comments began with:

"This report, and the time & money spent preparing it, is really a colossal waste."..
"We can talk of what should be done, but if there are no funds, then it is just talk."..

The topic shifted to money without me. For my two cents: double the rich tax rate as before, end military occupations, regulate big business pollution, and the climate will be fine.

But when "leaders" keep lining their pockets, robbing decades of paid-in citizen entitlements, betraying the Constitution, no-bid contracting their buddies, busting collective bargaining, etc. it usually leads to blood in the streets.

ai_vin

Yes Reel I found it interesting. To bad YOU didn't read it pass your need to quote mine.

HarveyD

Lords and Kings had most of the wealth for 1000+ years but not all were effectively multi-billionaires but they had 10,000+ times more per capita wealth than the average citizen..

The imbalance started to change 200+ years ago. Democracies flourished in many countries. Many poor people were promoted to middle class. Standards of living went up in most democracies. People's well being progressed.

As economies progressed, opportunities grew and many master speculators and lobbyists started to coin ways to benefit from the new democratic liberties and cornered huge tax free fortunes. They effectively replaced the Lords and Kings of older days.

The imbalances corrected 200+ years ago, with our new democracies, are coming back at full speed and more. We, the people, have to find ways to peacefully correct the situation. Unfortunately, about 50% of us (wrongly or rightly) believe that we can join the wealthy 5% and will support their dominance. That is the American dream. This fairly tale cannot exist. We cannot all be tax free millionaires and billionaires because we would run out of cheap labor and/or they would refuse to work or rebel. That's what happened before and history has a propensity to repeat itself. It is a matter of time unless we re-act properly to correct the growing imbalance.

ai_vin

Reel, I also want to thank you for reminding me about the House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee Hearings: I've been meaning to check up on the progress of John Shimkus, and yeah he did get his sought after assignment to the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Reel$$

Yeah wrong ai_vin: I could've included THIS conclusion made by Dr. Pielke:

"Future assessment Committees need to appoint members with a diversity of views and who do not have a significant conflict of interest with respect to their own work. Such Committees should be chaired by individuals committed to the presentation of a diversity of perspectives and unwilling to engage in strong-arm tactics to enforce a narrow perspective. Any such committee should be charged with summarizing all relevant literature, even if inconvenient, or which presents a view not held by certain members of the Committee.”

The fiefdom is falling ai_...

ai_vin

You want to continue to quote mine? Fine, how about THIS conclusion from the good doctor: "Humans are significantly altering the global climate, but in a variety of diverse ways beyond the radiative effect of carbon dioxide. The IPCC assessments have been too conservative in recognizing the importance of these human climate forcings as they alter regional and global climate."

ai_vin

Pielke has a somewhat nuanced position on climate change, which is sometimes taken for skepticism, a label that he explicitly renounces. He has said: "the evidence of a human fingerprint on the global and regional climate is incontrovertible as clearly illustrated in the National Research Council report and in our research papers"

Of course I prefer to read a more complete statement of position; https://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/roger-a-pielkes-position-on-climate-change/

Reel$$

Notice how ai_vin ALWAYS tries to reframe the argument. Back to some twisted attempt to save face. No ai - here we have a distinguished climate scientist telling the world that the little band of "strong- arming" trolls dishing out climate alarmism is... well my words - a little band of trolls.

What he acknowledges as would any cogent scientist is there are many factors beyond CO2, unrecognized by IPCC and friends that may affect regional and global climate.

Self serving, strong arm wielding trolls ai. My words.

ai_vin

Yes Reel, your words. ;^)

ToppaTom

We are close to the point that the number of people who GET taxes equals the number who pay. Sobering
– I would not like to be in a home owners association where those who pay no dues get to decide who gets a new roof.

Those with the top 1% adjusted gross income pay 38% of the income tax revenue per the IRS.

As our basic instincts (that say those who work hard and/or efficiently get to keep what they make) weaken - we believe "entitlements" cost nothing.

The under achievers just say we should increase taxes on the achievers.

We elect Chicago style politicians and blame the previous politician for spending that has skyrocketed on THIS watch.

It is not the rich who cause this inequality, it is our acceptance of graft - such things as earmarks, tax evaders as Secretary of the treasury.
The acceptance of politicians accepting bribes from big business, the rich, unions etc.

Per Van Jones, the short lived White House Czar for Green Jobs, Social Justice is “ . . if you could write your life on a card and put it in a hat filled with cards from everyone else in your country, and that you could then be totally assured that any card you pulled out would be a good life for you to live, then you know you live in a social justice country.”

Oh yes, please send me your SSN and ID, Mr. Warren Buffet, I’ll send you mine.

ai_vin

It is not the rich who cause this inequality, it is our acceptance of graft - such things as earmarks, tax evaders as Secretary of the treasury.

Every dollar the Internal Revenue Service spends for audits, liens and seizing property from tax cheats brings in more than $10, a rate of return so good the Obama administration wants to boost the agency’s budget. House Republicans, seeing the heavy hand of a too-big government, beg to differ. They’ve already voted to cut the IRS budget by $600 million this year and want bigger cuts in 2012. IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman told the committee Tuesday that the $600 million cut in this year’s budget would result in the IRS collecting $4 billion less through tax enforcement programs.

The comments to this entry are closed.