220 likes | 348 Views
Climate Change, Energy, and Security . NS4053 week 8. Agenda. Uncertainty? Scientific consensus about trend, but uncertainty about speed and tempo. Type of security concerns? Adaptation Consequence management Policy responses? Implications for energy security. Uncertainty? .
E N D
Climate Change, Energy, and Security NS4053 week 8
Agenda • Uncertainty? • Scientific consensus about trend, but uncertainty about speed and tempo. • Type of security concerns? • Adaptation • Consequence management • Policy responses? • Implications for energy security
Uncertainty? • Little uncertainty over direction of change. • Statistical analysis of data on climate. • Some uncertainty over speed of change. • Wide variety of sources and models on data. • Intended for scientific purposes, not for forecasting or to help politicians make decisions. • Lots of uncertainty over when catastrophic events will occur.
Energy, Security, and Climate Change • Scientific consensus is that fossil fuel use, particularly coal and oil used in power and transportation, is a major contributor to climate change. • Major policy prescription is to reduce the impact: • Reduce use of fossil fuels • Increase efficiency in use of fossil fuels • Decrease the byproducts of fossil fuel use theorized to contribute to climate change • Implications for energy security are mixed.
Types of climate change issues • Not just delta in temperatures • Ocean chemistry and impact on bio systems. • Decline in polar ice caps. • Increase in number and duration of droughts. • Increased frequency of extreme weather events. • Concern over rate of change and potential for acceleration. • Short term challenges of responding to sudden changes, long term challenges of adaptation.
Consequence management concerns • Extreme climate events shift roles for defense forces. • Military support to civilian authorities role becomes more important? • Consequential for budgets, planning and programs? • Consequential for forces most exposed to consequences of climate change? • International emergency response and relief roles become more prominent?
Adaptation concerns • Population support • Water and food • Health • Energy • Human security • Migration • Armed conflict • Governance • State viability • Economic viability
Role of environmental policy (Hepburn) • Case of both market failure and government failure. • So what should government focus on? • Provide accurate information about national-level costs of climate change. • Internalizing costs of climate change in economy so that producers and end-users get prices right. • Establishing stable rules of the game. • Getting risk allocation in rules of the game right.
Policy tools • ‘Wait and see’ • Internalize climate change costs • Create markets • Regulate sources • Market facilitation (information) • Stimulate technological development • Ease economic adaptation • Pursue international coordinated response
Defense Science Board 2011 recommendations • White House OSTP • Identify gaps in climate data • Encourage efforts to relate scientific data on climate to societal impact outcomes. • NOAA/NASA • Low cost/high reliability launch vehicles for civilian science/climate observations. • DNI • Climate change > human security > national security? • Develop indicators
Defense Science Board 2011 recommendations • NSC • Coordinate whole of government approach • DoD • Continued focus on MSCA and emergency response to catastrophic weather • Adapt security cooperation efforts to include climate issues, esp. water. • Enhance partner resilience. • Conflict avoidance/shaping efforts. • Focus on Africa as region at high risk. • Littoral risk assessment and adaptation.
Implications for energy security • Core policy is to reduce use of fossil fuels and associated emissions. • Benefits to energy security: • Greater focus on efficiency. • Switch to cleaner burning natural gas abundant in North America. • More regionally focused economy (North America and Western Hemisphere) where security risks are lower. • Cons for security in general.
Final thoughts • Already successful states: • Cost to address/mitigate climate change • Competition for capital with other states • Magnets for migration • Looked to for aid and disaster response • Less developed states: • Varying impact of climate change. • Poor governance increases risks. • Lower ability to adapt, esp. in agricultural economies • Trans-nationalization of conflicts over water, resources, migration. • Less able to manage uncertainty?