Round Table Meets with NOAA's Director of Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management

RNRF's Washington Round Table on Public Policy met on April 22 with Donna Wieting, NOAA's Acting Director of the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM). OCRM leads the nation's efforts to manage and conserve ocean and coastal resources. An environmental policy analyst, Wieting has served as chief of the Marine Mammal Conservation Division for NOAA'S National Marine Fisheries Service, where she was actively involved in assessing risks to marine mammals by U.S. Navy sonar activity in the Pacific.

Wieting discussed the division's current projects and priorities, many of which have been drawn from work of the Ocean Policy Task Force. The report of the task force is being finalized and will be released soon. OCRM is working with state and territory coastal programs and estuarine research reserves to develop a scientifically-based, comprehensive national system of marine protected areas. She also highlighted programs that the Obama Administration seeks to initiate such as coastal and marine spatial planning. Similar to land planning, spatial planning of the coasts is a public process of analyzing and allocating the spatial and temporal distribution of human activities in marine areas to achieve ecological, economic, and social objectives. The objectives usually have been specified through a political process.

Another proposed program is OCRM's Regional Ocean Partnership Grants. This funding would help regional entities collaborate to conduct research of coastal siting issues, environmental impacts, and analysis of states' roles and rights.

Finally, Wieting presented an overview of budget issues and the President's Request for Fiscal Year 2011.

Additional information about NOAA's Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management is available at http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/

Spring Meeting on Arid Landscapes

RNRF's 2010 spring meeting was conducted on April 12, at the conference facility of the American Geophysical Union in Washington, D.C. The spring meeting is attended by member organization representatives and guests to discuss a topic of interest, exchange ideas, and to network. This year's topic was "Special Challenges for Areas in Arid Landscapes." RNRF Chairman Barry Starke moderated the program.

Tanya Trujillo, professional counsel for the Democratic Majority of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee's Subcommittee on Water and Power. She  oversees the legislative and oversight function of the subcommittee relating to the Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's hydropower functions. Trujillo discussed water challenges for urban regions in arid landscapes. She explained that water conservation is key to the continued existence of urban regions in the West. Trujilo highlighted major federal policies for water management including three of the Bureau of Reclamation's initiatives:
1. Water Smart Grant Program -- which provides financing for water conservation programs.
2. Reclamation Basin Studies -- which conducts comprehensive reviews of water supply and current and long-term demands. The basin studies also assess different water resource management plans.
3. Water Recycling and Reuse Program -- which focuses on identifying and investigating opportunities to reclaim and resue wastewaters and developing new desalinization projects in the West.

Elizabeth Schilling, water program manager at Smart Growth Leadership Institute (SGLI), discussed the ways in which smart growth principles are adapted for arid regions. The institute is a non-profit technical assistance provider dedicated to increasing access to, and understanding of, local and state policies that facilitate smarter growth. SGLI is affiliated with the national advocacy organization, Smart Growth America. Schilling provided an overview of how smart growth is used to rethink the interactions between people and the space they live in and the process by which smart growth involves the community to help develop a region. She elaborated on specific issues for the West including the cultural concern over East-Coast regulations affecting western property rights. As a solution to sprawling development, Schilling offered "regional visioning" which is a new process that allows community members to assess alternate future growth options. This method has demonstrated that given a variety of choices, communities prefer smart growth.
 

 Pictured below (L-R): Tanya Trujillo, Elizabeth Schilling

Geoengineering the Climate System

Human responsibility for most of the well-documented increase in global average temperatures over the last half century is well established. Further greenhouse gas emissions, particularly of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, will almost certainly contribute to additional widespread climate changes that can be expected to cause major negative consequences for most nations.

AMS has released a new policy statement that explains the three proactive strategies that could reduce the risks of climate change: 1) mitigation: reducing emissions; 2) adaptation: moderating climate impacts by increasing our capacity to cope with them; and 3) geoengineering: deliberately manipulating physical, chemical, or biological aspects of the Earth system. Their policy statement focuses on large-scale efforts to geoengineer the climate system to counteract the consequences of increasing greenhouse gas emissions.

Geoengineering could lower greenhouse gas concentrations, provide options for reducing specific climate impacts, or offer strategies of last resort if abrupt, catastrophic, or otherwise unacceptable climate-change impacts become unavoidable by other means. However, research to date has not determined whether there are large-scale geoengineering approaches that would produce significant benefits, or whether those benefits would substantially outweigh the detriments. Indeed, geoengineering must be viewed with caution because manipulating the Earth system has considerable potential to trigger adverse and unpredictable consequences.

Geoengineering proposals fall into at least three broad categories: 1) reducing the levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases through large-scale manipulations (e.g., ocean fertilization or afforestation using non-native species); 2) exerting a cooling influence on Earth by reflecting sunlight (e.g., putting reflective particles into the atmosphere, putting mirrors in space, increasing surface reflectivity, or altering the amount or characteristics of clouds); and 3) other large-scale manipulations designed to diminish climate change or its impacts (e.g., constructing vertical pipes in the ocean that would increase downward heat transport).

Geoengineering proposals differ widely in their potential to reduce impacts, create new risks, and redistribute risk among nations. Techniques that remove CO2 directly from the air would confer global benefits but could also create adverse local impacts. Reflecting sunlight would likely reduce Earth’s average temperature but could also change global circulation patterns with potentially serious consequences such as changing storm tracks and precipitation patterns. As with inadvertent human-induced climate change, the consequences of reflecting sunlight would almost certainly not be the same for all nations and peoples, thus raising legal, ethical, diplomatic, and national security concerns.

Exploration of geoengineering strategies also creates potential risks. The possibility of quick and seemingly inexpensive geoengineering fixes could distract the public and policy makers from critically needed efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build society’s capacity to deal with unavoidable climate impacts. Developing any new capacity, including geoengineering, requires resources that will possibly be drawn from more productive uses. Geoengineering technologies, once developed, may enable short-sighted and unwise deployment decisions, with potentially serious unforeseen consequences.

Even if reasonably effective and beneficial overall, geoengineering is unlikely to alleviate all of the serious impacts from increasing greenhouse gas emissions. For example, enhancing solar reflection would not diminish the direct effects of elevated CO2 concentrations such as ocean acidification or changes to the structure and function of biological systems.

Still, the threat of climate change is serious. Mitigation efforts so far have been limited in magnitude, tentative in implementation, and insufficient for slowing climate change enough to avoid potentially serious impacts. Even aggressive mitigation of future emissions cannot avoid dangerous climate changes resulting from past emissions, because elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations persist in the atmosphere for a long time. Furthermore, it is unlikely that all of the expected climate-change impacts can be managed through adaptation. Thus, it is prudent to consider geoengineering’s potential benefits, to understand its limitations, and to avoid ill-considered deployment.

Therefore, the American Meteorological Society recommends:
1) Enhanced research on the scientific and technological potential for geoengineering the climate system, including research on intended and unintended environmental responses.
2) Coordinated study of historical, ethical, legal, and social implications of geoengineering that integrates international, interdisciplinary, and intergenerational issues and perspectives and includes lessons from past efforts to modify weather and climate.
3) Development and analysis of policy options to promote transparency and international cooperation in exploring geoengineering options along with restrictions on reckless efforts to manipulate the climate system.

Geoengineering will not substitute for either aggressive mitigation or proactive adaptation, but it could contribute to a comprehensive risk management strategy to slow climate change and alleviate some of its negative impacts. The potential to help society cope with climate change and the risks of adverse consequences imply a need for adequate research, appropriate regulation, and transparent deliberation.

Contact: AMS, 45 Beacon Street, Boston, MA 02018; (617) 227-2425. Website: http://www.ametsoc.org.

SOCIETY OF WOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Renewable Energy Investment is Remaining Strong Through the Economic Crisis

A new report entitled, ''Global Trends in Sustainable Energy Investment 2009,'' has been prepared by global information provider New Energy Finance for the UN Environment Programme's (UNEP) Sustainable Energy Finance Initiative. The report assesses the development of the renewable energy industry in light of the current economic crisis. According to the report, $155 billion was invested in 2008 in clean energy companies and projects worldwide -- not including large hydro. The 2008 investment is more than a four-fold increase since 2004.

Extremely difficult financial market conditions prevailed during 2008 as a result of the global economic crisis. Nevertheless investment in clean energy topped 2007's record investments by 5%, largely due to the contributions of China, Brazil, and other emerging economies.

Of the $155 billion, $105 billion was spent directly developing 40 GW of power generating capacity from wind, solar, small-hydro, biomass, and geothermal sources. A further $35 billion was spent on developing 25 GW of large hydropower. This $140 billion investment in 65 GW of low carbon electricity generation compares with the estimated $250 billion spent globally in 2008 constructing 157GW of new power generating capacity from all sources. Which means that renewables currently account for the majority of investment and over 40% of actual power generation capacity additions last year.

Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary General and UNEP Executive Director, said: ''Without a doubt the economic crisis has taken its toll on investments in clean energy when set against the record-breaking growth of recent years. Investment in the United States fell by two percent and in Europe growth was very much muted. However, there were also some bright points in 2008 especially in developing economies -- China became the world's second largest wind market in terms of new capacity and the world's biggest photovoltaic manufacturer and a rise in geothermal energy may be getting underway in countries from Australia to Japan and Kenya. Meanwhile other developing economies such as Brazil, Chile, Peru, and the Philippines have brought in, or are poised to introduce policies and laws fostering clean energy as part of a green economy. Mexico for example, is expected to double its target for energy from renewables to 16 percent as part of a new national energy policy.''

Wind and Solar Surge Ahead--
Wind attracted the highest new investment ($51.8 billion, 1% growth on 2007), although solar made the largest gains ($33.5 billion, 49% growth) while biofuels dropped somewhat ($16.9 billion, 9% decrease). Investment in the second half of 2008 was down 17% on the first half, and down 23% on the final six months of 2007, a trend that has continued into 2009.

Government Stimulus on the Rise--
One response to the global economic crisis has been announcements of stimulus packages with specific, multi-billion dollar provisions for energy efficiency and renewable energies. To date, government stimulus packages account for an estimated $183 billion of commitments. The U.S. and China remain the leaders, each devoting roughly $67 billion. ''These 'green new deals' lined up by some economies, including China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, European countries, and the United States contain some serious clean energy provisions. These will help support the market,'' said Mr. Steiner. ''However, the biggest renewables stimulus package of them all can come at the UN climate convention meeting in Copenhagen [December, 2009]. This is where governments need to seal the deal on a new climate agreement -- one that can bring certainty to the carbon markets, one that can unleash transformative investments in lean and clean green tech.''

Green Energy Costs Coming Down--
The investment surge of recent years and softened commodity markets have started to ease supply chain bottlenecks, especially in the wind and solar sectors, which will cause prices to fall towards marginal costs and several players to consolidate. The price of solar PV modules, for example, is predicted to fall by over 43% in 2009.

Carbon Markets Continue Upward--
Transaction value in the global carbon market grew 87% during 2008, reaching a total of $120 billion. Following the lead of the EU and Kyoto compliance markets, several countries are now putting in place a system of interlinked carbon markets and working towards a global scheme under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Growth Shifts to the Developing World--
On a regional basis, investment in Europe in 2008 was $49.7 billion, a rise of 2%, and in North America investment was $30.1 billion, a fall of 8%. These regions experienced a slow-down in the financing of new renewable energy projects due to the lack of project finance and the fact that tax credit-driven markets are mostly ineffective in a downturn. With developed country market growth stalled (down 1.7%), developing countries surged forward 27% over 2007 to $36.6 billion, accounting for nearly one third of global investments. China led new investment in Asia, with an 18% increase over 2007 to $15.6 billion, mostly in new wind projects, and some biomass plants. Investment in India grew 12% to $4.1 billion in 2008. Brazil accounted for almost all renewable energy investment in Latin America in 2008, with ethanol receiving $10.8 billion, up 76% from 2007. Africa achieved a modest increase by comparison, with investments up 10% to approximately $1.1 billion.

2009 and Beyond--
New investments in the first quarter of 2009 fell by 53% to $13.3 billion compared to the same period in 2008, reflecting the depth of the global financial crisis, according to the report, which notes ''green-shoots of recovery during the second quarter of 2009, but the sector has a long way to go this year to reach the investment levels of late 2007 and early
2008.''
   
For more information and to view the full report visit, http://sefi.unep.org/english/globaltrends2009.html#c2427

Concentrated Solar Power's Global Potential

A new report released by Greenpeace International, SolarPACES, and ESTELA evaluates concentrated solar power (CSP) global potential. CSP systems produce heat or electricity using hundreds of mirrors to concentrate the sun's rays to a temperature typically between 400 and 1000ºC. There are a variety of mirror shapes, sun-tracking methods, and ways to provide useful energy, but they all work under the same principle. Individual CSP plants are now typically between 50 and 280MW in size, but could be larger still. CSP systems can be specifically integrated with storage or in hybrid operation with fossil fuels, offering firm capacity and dispatchable power on demand. It is suitable for peak loads and base-loads, and power is typically fed into the electricity grid.

CSP is a large-scale, commercially viable way to make electricity. It is best suited to those areas of the world with the most sun; Southern Europe, Northern Africa and the Middle East, parts of India, China, Southern U.S., and Australia, where many are suffering from peak electricity problems, blackouts, and rising electricity costs. CSP does not contribute to climate change and the source will never run out. The technology is mature enough to grow exponentially in the world's 'sun belt.'

In the last five years, the industry has expanded rapidly from a newly-introduced technology to become a mass-produced and mainstream energy generation solution. CSP installations were providing just 436 MW of the world's electricity generation at the end of 2008. Projects currently under construction, mostly in Spain, will add at least another 1,000 MW by around 2011. In the U.S., projects adding up to 7,000 MW are in the planning and development process. Spain is preparing bring 10,000 GW online by 2017.

Under an advanced industry development scenario, with high levels of energy efficiency, CSP could meet up to 7% of the world's projected power needs in 2030 and a full quarter by 2050. Even with a set of moderate assumptions for future market development, the world would have a combined solar power capacity of over 830 GW by 2050, with annual deployments of 41 GW. This would represent 3.0 to 3.6% of global demand in 2030 and 8.5 to 11.8% in 2050.

This study finds that under just a moderate scenario, the countries with the most sun resources could together:
•    create €11.1 billion (USD 14.4) investment in 2010, peaking at €92.5 billion in 2050
•    create more than 200,000 jobs by 2020, and about 1.187 million in 2050
•    save 148 million tonnes of CO2 annually in 2020, rising to 2.1 billion tonnes in 2050

To put these figures into perspective, the CO2 generated by Australia alone is 394 million tonnes a year; Germany has annual CO2 emission of 823 million tones. The cost of CSP electricity is dropping and many developers say it will soon be cost-competitive with thermal generation from mid-sized gas plants. The factors affecting the cost of CSP electricity are the solar resource, grid connection and local infrastructure, and project development costs. Power costs can be reduced by scaling-up plant size, research and development advances, increased market competition, and production volumes for components. Government action can bring costs down further through preferential financing conditions and tax or investment incentives.

Policy Recommendations--
Since 2004, some key national government incentives have boosted CSP technology, creating a massive growth in local installations. In Spain, the premium tariff was raised to a level that made projects bankable and, within two years, over 1,000 MW was under development in that country alone.
The measures that countries in the world's 'sun belt' need in order to make CSP work are:
•    A guaranteed sale price for electricity. Feed-in tariffs have been successful incentives for development in Spain, with France, Italy, and South Africa soon to follow.
•    National targets and incentives, such as renewable portfolio standards or preferential loans programs that apply to solar thermal technologies.
•    Schemes placing costs on carbon emissions either through cap-and-trade systems or carbon taxes.
•    Installation of new electricity transfer options between nations and continents through the appropriate infrastructure and political and economic arrangements, so that solar energy can be transported to areas of high demand.
•    Cooperation between Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa for technology and economic development.
•    Stable, long term support for research and development to fully exploit the potential for further technology improvements and cost reduction.
With these key policy foundations in place, CSP is set to take its place as an important part of the world's energy mix.
   
For more information and to download the full report visit, http://www.estelasolar.eu/

 
Climate Change is a Detectable Driver of Migration

Unless aggressive measures are taken to halt global warming, the consequences for human migration and displacement could reach a scope and scale that vastly exceed anything that has occurred before, according to a report released by CARE, UN University's Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS), and Columbia University's Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN).

The report entitled, ''In Search of Shelter: Mapping the Effects of Climate Change on Human Migration and Displacement'' claims that climate change is already contributing to migration and displacement. All major estimates project that the trend will rise to tens of millions of migrants in coming years. Within the next few decades, the consequences of climate change for human security efforts could be devastating.

The exact number of people that will be on the move by mid-century is uncertain. The International Organization for Migration estimates that there may be 200 million environmentally-induced migrants by 2050. ''While human migration and displacement is usually the result of multiple factors, the influence of climate change in people's decision to give up their livelihoods and leave their homes is growing,'' says Dr. Charles Ehrhart, CARE's climate change coordinator and one of the report's authors.

Mexico and the Central American countries are already experiencing the negative impacts of climate change both in terms of less rainfall and more extreme weather, such as hurricanes and floods. Rainfall in some areas is expected to decline by as much as 50 percent by 2080, rendering many local livelihoods unviable and dramatically raising the risk of chronic hunger.
''The potential impacts of future sea level rise are at least as startling. In Vietnam's densely populated Mekong River Delta, for example, a sea level rise of two meters would –- assuming current populations' densities –- flood the homes of more than 14.2 million people and submerge half of the region's agricultural land,'' Ehrhart adds.

Other maps in the report show the impacts of: glacier melt in the Himalayas; drying trends in West Africa; sea level rise in the Ganges River Delta; and sea level rise in the Nile River Delta.
Most displaced people will seek shelter in their own countries while others cross borders. Some displacement and migration may be prevented through the implementation of adaptation measures. However, poorer countries are under-equipped to support widespread adaptation. As a result, societies affected by climate change may find themselves locked into a downward spiral of ecological degradation, causing social safety nets to collapse while tensions and violence rise. In this all-too-plausible worst-case scenario, large populations would be forced to migrate as a matter of immediate survival. Gender roles, as well as cultural prescriptions and prohibitions, can make it impossible for women and female headed-households to migrate in response to environmental change even if migration would be a case of survival.

''New thinking and practical approaches are needed to address the threats that climate-related migration poses to human security and well-being,'' says Dr. Koko Warner, Head of Section of the UNU-EHS and lead author of the report. People have always relied on long- and short-term migration as ways of dealing with climatic changes. The challenge is to better understand the dynamics of climate-related migration and displacement and incorporate human mobility into international and national plans for adapting to climate change.

The new report provides empirical evidence from a first-time, multi-continent survey as well as policy recommendations and an analysis of both the threats and potential solutions. Original maps show climate change impacts and population distribution patterns. ''Migration needs to be recognized as not being negative per se, but a sometimes necessary response to the negative impacts of climate change. The policy decisions we make today will determine whether migration can be a choice, a pro-active adaptation measure, or whether migration and displacement is the tragic proof of our collective failure to provide better alternatives,'' Warner concludes.
   
For more information and to download the full report visit, http://www.care.org/newsroom/articles/2009/06/Climate-change-report-drives-migration-20090610.asp?s_src=170920500000&s_subsrc=

Mitigating Climate Change Through Food and Land Use

A new report released by the Worldwatch Institute outlines the benefits of managing land for climate change mitigation. Land makes up a quarter of Earth's surface, and its soil and plants hold three times as much carbon as the atmosphere. More than 30 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions arise from the land use sector. Thus, no strategy for mitigating global climate change can be complete or successful without reducing emissions from agriculture, forestry, and other land uses. Moreover, only land-based or ''terrestrial'' carbon sequestration offers the possibility today of large-scale removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, through plant photosynthesis.
   
Five major strategies for reducing and sequestering terrestrial greenhouse gas emissions are:
•    Enriching soil carbon. Soil is the third largest carbon pool on Earth's surface. Agricultural soils can be managed to reduce emissions by minimizing tillage, reducing use of nitrogen fertilizers, and preventing erosion. Soils can store the carbon captured by plants from the atmosphere by building up soil organic matter, which also has benefits for crop production. Adding biochar (biomass burned in a low-oxygen environment) can further enhance carbon storage in soil.
•    Farming with perennials. Perennial crops, grasses, palms, and trees constantly maintain and develop their root and woody biomass and associated carbon, while providing vegetative cover for soils. There is large potential to substitute annual tilled crops with perennials, particularly for animal feed and vegetable oils, as well as to incorporate woody perennials into annual cropping systems in agroforestry systems.
•    Climate-friendly livestock production. Rapid growth in demand for livestock products has triggered a huge rise in the number of animals, the concentration of wastes in feedlots and dairies, and the clearing of natural grasslands and forests for grazing. Livestock related emissions of carbon and methane now account for 14.5 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions -- more than the transport sector. A reduction in livestock numbers may be needed but production innovations can help, including rotational grazing systems, manure management, methane capture for biogas production, and improved feeds and feed additives.
•    Protecting natural habitat. The planet's four billion hectares of forests and five billion hectares of natural grasslands are a massive reservoir of carbon -- both in vegetation above ground and in root systems below ground. As forests and grasslands grow, they remove carbon from the atmosphere. Deforestation, land clearing, and forest and grassland fires are major sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Incentives are needed to encourage farmers and land users to maintain natural vegetation through product certification, payments for climate services, securing tenure rights, and community fire control. The conservation of natural habitat will also benefit biodiversity in the face of climate change.
•    Restoring degraded watersheds and rangelands. Extensive areas of the world have been denuded of vegetation through land clearing for crops or grazing and from overuse and poor management. Degradation has not only generated a huge amount of greenhouse gas emissions, but local people have lost a valuable livelihood asset as well as essential watershed functions.

Restoring vegetative cover on degraded lands can be a win-win-win strategy for addressing climate change, rural poverty, and water scarcity. Agricultural communities can play a central role in fighting climate change. Even at a relatively low price for mitigating carbon emissions, improved land management could offset a quarter of global emissions from fossil fuel use in a year. In contrast, solutions for reducing emissions by carbon capture in the energy sector are unlikely to be widely utilized for decades and do not remove the greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere. To tackle the climate challenge, we need to pursue land use solutions in addition to efforts to improve energy efficiency and speed the transition to renewable energy.
   
Yet so far, the international science and policy communities have been slow to embrace terrestrial climate action. Some fear that investments in land use will not produce ''real'' climate benefits, or that land use action would distract attention from investment in energy alternatives. There is also a concern that land management changes cannot be implemented quickly enough and at a scale that would make a difference to the climate.
   
For more information and to purchase the full report visit, http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6126

+
River Managers Plan a Bleak Water Future for Europe

An ambitious European scheme to fix and safeguard its rivers and secure its water future is at risk of being undermined by poor and inadequate plans for water management, a new study by WWF and the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) has found. The analysis has found none of the draft plans rates well across a range of water safety, conservation, and management measures. “The European Water Framework Directive when adopted in 2000 was far from perfect but it had the makings of a world-leading vision to change the way we manage, use, and value water at a time when the world’s water future looked much more secure than it does today,” said Sergey Moroz, Water Policy Officer at WWF.

Despite increasing water challenges exacerbated by climate change, draft plans developed so far by Member States are generally putting off major and necessary decisions, providing few mechanisms and little funding to achieve good status for water bodies. "These plans don’t create an impression that we are finally departing from the unsustainable practices that led us to the current water crisis," said Pieter de Pous, EEB Water Policy Officer. "For example, it is in the interests of agriculture and industry to become less vulnerable to increasingly insecure water supplies but there is very little in the plans when it comes to reducing their water consumption." There is particular concern about increasing water scarcity in Italy and Greece where it is unclear whether they are actually planning to finalize strategies that are even remotely comparable to what the rest of Europe is doing.

Some countries like the Netherlands that have lost much of their natural rivers and waters in the past, are now starting initiatives to give rivers more space for flooding and thus improving their ability to face future climate change impacts. The Netherlands also managed to secure funding for river restoration, although the amounts are still inadequate. "Worries about diverging trends now emerge from Eastern and Southern Europe, like in Czech Republic and Portugal, where rivers continue to be poured into concrete straightjackets for the purpose of navigation, flood defense, or hydropower," said de Pous. In Portugal up to 10 new hydropower dams are currently proposed for construction without any adequate consideration of the likelihood that there may not be enough water to run them.

Water pollution remains a serious issue also not sufficiently addressed in the majority of plans and large portions of Europe’s waters remain at risk of becoming unavailable or in need of expensive treatment. Water efficiency measures were particularly poor in most draft plans. A partial exception was Frances Loire Bretagne basin where a water efficiency objective is proposed for the drinking water supply for rural and urban areas. “To tackle Europe’s water challenges, Member States’ plans need to be visionary, abandoning a minimalist approach to implementation and becoming the central plank of efforts to tackle lasting food and energy security, public health, and climate challenges,” said Moroz.

For more information and to view the full report visit: http://www.panda.org/wwf_news/news/?165701/River-managers-plan-a-bleak-water-future-for-Europe

The Resilience Assessment of Coral Reefs

International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) latest report, "Resilience Assessment of Coral Reefs:  Rapid assessment protocol for coral reefs, focusing on coral bleaching and thermal stress" argues that a better assessment of the threats to coral reefs along with improved management will give corals a much higher chance of survival in the face of warming oceans. "We already know that climate change is destroying coral reefs through warming waters that cause coral bleaching and through acidifying oceans that hinders coral skeleton growth. We also know that if we want to save these beautiful living entities we must do something about it immediately,” says Gabriel Grimsditch, IUCN Corals Expert. “By better understanding and management of stresses on corals such as unsustainable and destructive fishing practices or unregulated coastal development, we can increase the chance of coral survival, even as climate change warms the oceans."

The report, shows that the amount of damage done to corals depends not only on the rate and extent of climate change, but also on the ability of coral reefs to cope with change. This report outlines a protocol that defines basic resilience indicators that can be quantified using rapid assessment methods. "Unmanaged, these stresses have the potential to act in synergy with climate change to functionally destroy many coral reefs," says David Obura, Director of Coastal Oceans Research and Development East Africa. "While science is providing important insights about climate change impacts on coral reefs, strategies for managing them are only just emerging."

The need for quick results for measuring coral reef resilience is becoming increasingly acute, especially in the developing world. It is crucial to develop monitoring and assessment protocols to build an understanding of bleaching resistance and resilience indicators for application in management, and to determine how Marine Protected Area management actions can influence resilience and resistance. "Research assessment for coral reefs builds our understanding of past management actions in maintaining the resilience of coral reefs, and helps managers combat the effects of climate change," says Carl Gustaf Lundin, Head of IUCN's Global Marine Programme. "Greater investment must be made in using research findings for adaptive management."

"The story of coral reefs is particularly powerful and compelling, being one of the first ecosystems to clearly show climate change impacts, and being well-understood, highly visible, and charismatic," adds Lundin. "As a result, increasing our knowledge base of resilience-based science, management, and policy for coral reefs has broader value for other ecological and human systems globally.” "Findings from coral reefs should be more efficiently incorporated into the United Nations’ climate change negotiations in Copenhagen in December."

For more information and to view the full report visit: http://www.iucn.org/news_events/news/focus/2009_marine/all/?3043/resilienceassessmentcoralreefs

Nine Chemicals Added to Global Toxics Treaty, With Gaping Exemptions

The Center for International Environmental Law reports on the May, 2009 international talks on toxic chemicals in Geneva:
The fourth Conference of the Parties (COP‐4) of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) teetered on the brink of collapse. But in the end, 162 countries and the European Union (EU) reached consensus to add nine new POPs to the treaty’s original "Dirty Dozen." The United States signed the POPs treaty under President George Bush in 2001, but has yet to ratify the agreement to make it binding U.S. law.

Five of the new POPs, including obsolete pesticides and byproducts, are no longer in production, so their addition to the treaty provoked little controversy. Agreement on the other four chemicals proved much more difficult, leading to some major exemptions that potentially undercut the treaty’s goals of protecting human health and the environment from POPs. Lindane, a pesticide nominated by Mexico and still used in some countries, is slated for elimination. But a specific exemption is allowed for pharmaceutical use to treat lice and scabies for five years with the possibility of extension. Safer, more effective alternatives to lindane are already available in many countries.

Two commercial mixtures of brominated flame retardants, known as pentaBDE and octaBDE, were also added to the treaty. However, the EU raised concerns about how to manage products – such as cell phones, computers, and cars –containing these chemicals, as they become waste. Under the Stockholm treaty wastes that contain POPs cannot be recovered, recycled, reclaimed, or directly reused. The listing of pentaBDE and octaBDE was accompanied by an exemption that will allow their recycling to continue until as long as 2030. Other parties resisted this loophole for recycling of POPs chemicals and expressed deep concerns about the possible dumping of POPs-containing products in developing countries. To help prevent this, the amendment restricts exports of such products for recycling if they are not allowed for sale in the exporting country.

PFOS belong to a family of chemicals with special non-stick properties. Unlike the other POPs added to the treaty, PFOS is still produced in large volumes for use in a variety of applications including semiconductors, medical devices, firefighting foam, metal plating, and more. Many countries claimed that they had no feasible alternatives to PFOS and demanded broad exemptions to cover nearly all-existing uses. These broad exemptions effectively ensure continued production and use of PFOS, an extremely persistent and dangerous POP.

For more information visit: http://www.ipen.org/

Ocean Acidification Must be on the Copenhagen Agenda, World's Scientists Warn

The world's science academies warned that ocean acidification, one of the world's most important climate change challenges, may be left off the agenda at the United Nations Copenhagen conference. Ocean acidification is expected to cause massive corrosion of our coral reefs, dramatic changes in the makeup of the biodiversity of our oceans, and have significant implications for food production and the livelihoods of millions of people.

The warning is made in a joint statement published by the Royal Society, the UK national academy of science, and the academies of sixty nine other countries around the world through their membership of the InterAcademy Panel. Martin Rees, President of the Royal Society said, "Everybody knows that the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere leads to climate change. But it has another environmental effect ocean acidification which hasn't received much political attention. Unless global CO2 emissions can be cut by at least 50% by 2050 and more thereafter, we could confront an underwater catastrophe, with irreversible changes in the makeup of our marine biodiversity. The effects will be seen worldwide, threatening food security, reducing coastal protection and damaging the local economies that may be least able to tolerate it. Copenhagen must address this very real and serious threat."

The statement calls for world leaders to explicitly recognize the direct threats posed by increasing atmospheric CO2 emissions to the oceans and its profound impact on the environment and society. It emphasizes that ocean acidification is irreversible and, on current emission trajectories, suggests that all coral reefs and polar ecosystems will be severely affected by 2050 or even earlier. The statement was issued during the UNFCCC conference in Bonn. The conference will ultimately shape the Copenhagen negotiations, where agreement must be reached on carbon emission reduction targets needed to avoid dangerous climate change.

For more information visit: http://royalsociety.org/news.asp?id=8572

Home  /   News   /   Meetings   /   Programs   /   Publications   /   Board of Directors   /   Members/Links /   Policy Principles Statement   /  Internships/Education   /   Subscriptions