What you will find on this page: LATEST NEWS; climate changes and (US) security issues; REPORT: Conflict vs Climate; cost of sanctioned violence (video); trends in military spending; climate change as a stressor; security & national interests (video); REPORT: Combat vs Climate; sanctioned violence; battle for resources
Latest News 13 July 2016, Renew Economy, Coalition’s myth about renewables and high electricity prices. Fear of rising electricity prices has been one of the mainstays of the Coalition’s re-election campaign: any efforts to increase the share of renewable energy – as proposed by Labor or even more dramatically by The Greens – or impose some sort of carbon price would end up as a Great Big Electricity Tax. Environment minister Greg Hunt is still at it: “And let me say that equally, we are the only ones that can protect against the electricity price rises that the ALP wants,” he told Melbourne radio 3AW in an interview on Tuesday. So, it should probably be seen as something of an irony that in the week after the July 3 poll, wholesale electricity prices shot to their highest levels on record – in most states averaging nearly double the average price when the carbon tax was in place. The reason, most analysts agree, lies mostly with the soaring price of gas, which has also hit record levels due to the impact of the massive LNG export facilities, and supply blockages in Queensland. But the Coalition is not blameless. Apart from being a hugely enthusiastic supporter of the gas export industry, it brought large-scale renewable energy investment to a halt for three years. As we shall see below, if the estimated 4,500MW of large-scale wind and solar that could have been built in that period had been built, then Australia would likely be enjoying much cheaper wholesale electricity prices today. And while the Coalition has railed against the expense of new renewables, the Labor minority government that runs the Australian Capital Territory has quietly been going about its target of sourcing 100 per cent of its electricity needs from renewable energy by 2020. Read More here 12 July 2016, Renew Economy, ACT could make windfall gains from bold 100% renewables target Who is the smartest energy minister in the country? At the moment, you would have to say it was the ACT’s Simon Corbell, the mastermind behind the territory’s bold 100 per cent renewable energy target, and who is poised to deliver massive savings to consumers in the nation’s capital. Indeed, if current wholesale electricity prices continue as they are across Australia, the ACT will not just have zero emissions electricity by 2020, it may also be getting most of it for free. This extraordinary situation arises out of the nature of the contracts that the ACT government has written with the project developers who have won its unique reverse auction tenders. The ACT has locked in fixed prices at between $77/MWh and $92/MWh for a total of 400MW of wind energy capacity so far. If the wholesale price is below those contracts, the ACT government pays the difference. If it is above, the ACT electricity utility ActewAGL receives the excess. In the past two months, wholesale prices across Australia have gone through the roof, mostly because of soaring gas prices (at record levels in most states), and supply constraints. Some of these rises have already been passed on to consumers. The first of the ACT commissioned wind farms, the 19MW Coonooer Bridge project in Victoria, opened earlier this year and gets a guaranteed $81.50/MWh from the ACT. But prices in Victoria have regularly jumped above $100/MWh in the past two months. Read More here 11 July 2016, Carbon Brief, Shifting global cloud patterns could amplify warming, study says. A new study sheds light on one of the biggest uncertainties in predicting future changes to Earth’s climate: clouds. Clouds both warm the planet by insulating the Earth’s surface like a blanket, while simultaneously cooling it by reflecting away energy from the sun. Climate models predict that as the Earth warms in response to greenhouse gases, clouds will shift towards the poles and sit higher in the sky, further speeding up warming. But clouds are tricky to measure and until now, scientists haven’t been able to find direct evidence that these changes were actually happening in the real world. The new study published in Nature uses satellite data to identify how cloud patterns have changed in recent decades, confirming the pace of warming predicted by climate models. Satellite data Scientists use weather satellites to measure the extent, height and thickness of clouds. But these measurements suffer from several issues that can limit how useful they are for detecting long-term changes in cloudiness. Small discrepancies in the data are caused by satellite sensors degrading over time and being replaced by new, more precise instruments. Another issue is the gradual change in the orbit of satellites themselves, says the study’s lead author, Prof Joel Norris, professor of climate and atmospheric sciences at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego. He explains to Carbon Brief: Read More here 11 July 2016, The Guardian, Leaked TTIP energy proposal could ‘sabotage’ EU climate policy. EU proposal on a free trade deal with the US could curb energy saving measures and a planned switch to clean energy, say MEPs. The latest draft version of the TTIP agreement could sabotage European efforts to save energy and switch to clean power, according to MEPs. A 14th round of the troubled negotiations on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) free trade deal between the EU and US is due to begin on Monday in Brussels. A leak obtained by the Guardian shows that the EU will propose a rollback of mandatory energy savings measures, and major obstacles to any future pricing schemes designed to encourage the uptake of renewable energies. Environmental protections against fossil fuel extraction, logging and mining in the developing world would also come under pressure from articles in the proposed energy chapter. Join the Guardian Sustainable Business Aus network for news and features on the social and environmental impact of business, as well as other exclusive benefits.Paul de Clerck, a spokesman for Friends of the Earth Europe, said the leaked document: “is in complete contradiction with Europe’s commitments to tackle climate change. It will flood the EU market with inefficient appliances, and consumers and the climate will foot the bill. The proposal will also discourage measures to promote renewable electricity production from wind and solar.” The European commission says that the free trade deal is intended to: “promote renewable energy and energy efficiency – areas that are crucial in terms of sustainability”. The bloc has also promised that any agreement would support its climate targets. In the period to 2020, these are binding for clean power and partly binding for energy efficiency, in the home appliance and building standards sectors. But the draft chapter obliges the two trade blocs to: “foster industry self-regulation of energy efficiency requirements for goods where such self-regulation is likely to deliver the policy objectives faster or in a less costly manner than mandatory requirements”. Read More here End Latest News US/DNI Releases Report on Implications of Climate Change on National Security © MCT 2014 Since man first became aware of his neighbours “resources” war or more precisely “sanctioned violence” has been the mechanism for obtaining from others what you believe should be rightly yours. The battle for resources is not new and continues unabated in our supposed “civilised” world of today. With all the misery, lost lives, displaced peoples, wasted resources that war produces climate change has now added to this already complex mess. And as pressure builds to keep fossil fuels in the ground the battles to access and use them more apparently goes on. A bit like Golum and his “precious”…..What on earth are they thinking! There are many direct and indirect ramifications of war – all of which distract/undermine the capacity of the global community to respond in a concerted and positive way to the pandora’s box of climate change. Source: Center for Naval Analysis The cost of sanctioned violence Environmental Costs: The impact of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan can be seen not only in the social, economic and political situations of these areas but also in the environments in which these wars have been waged. The long years of war have resulted in a radical destruction of forest cover and an increase in carbon emissions. In addition, the water supply has been contaminated by oil from military vehicles and depleted uranium from ammunition. Along with the degradation of the natural resources in these countries, the animal and bird populations have also been adversely affected. Read More here And what has this to do with climate change? It is adding to the problem. Human Costs: UNHCR’s annual Global Trends report, which is based on data compiled by governments, non governmental partner organizations, and from the organization’s own records, shows 51.2 million people were forcibly displaced at the end of 2013, fully six million more than the 45.2 million reported in 2012. “We are seeing here the immense costs of not ending wars, of failing to resolve or prevent conflict,” said UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres. “Peace is today dangerously in deficit. Humanitarians can help as a palliative, but political solutions are vitally needed. Without this, the alarming levels of conflict and the mass suffering that is reflected in these figures will continue.” Read More here. Access Global Emergency Overview here. Civilians Killed and Wounded:The ongoing conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan have taken a tremendous toll on the people of those countries. At the very least, 174,000 civilians have been determined to have died violent deaths as a result of the war as of April 2014. The actual number of deaths, direct and indirect, as a result of the wars are many times higher than this figure. And what has this to do with climate change? It is often stated that the “vulnerable” are the ones that will suffer the most in facing the impacts of climate change as they have not the resources or resilience to adapt or “bounce back”. The futility of war has literally placed over 50 million people, to date, into this vulnerable category and have denied them the opportunity to be part of the solution. A loss that the rest of the world must cover. Economic Costs: A quote from James Madison, Political Observations, 1795: “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes … known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.… No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.” Nothing much has changed in 200+ years has it? Trends in World Military Expenditure 2014 Source: From 13 April 2015 the SIPRI Military Expenditure Database includes newly released information on military expenditure in 2014. This Fact Sheet describes the global, regional and national trends in military expenditure that are revealed by the new data. Look at the following map of the 15 leaders in military expenditure – and what questions come to your mind? Access map for further details here Trends in World Military Expenditure 2014 A sign of things to come? Climate change impacts becoming a “stressor” in conflicts Did Drought Trigger The Crisis In Syria? What caused the conflict in Syria to erupt when it did, pushing citizens from discontent with the regime to outright rebellion? One possibility is that environmental factors, particularly a long-lasting drought, helped ignite the crisis. Drought affected north-eastern Syria (as well as adjacent regions in Turkey and Iraq) from 2006 to 2011 and resulted in widespread food insecurity, malnutrition, internal displacement from agricultural areas, and the creation of shanty towns on the edges of cities. Read More here National/global security issues and climate change If the deniers want us to believe that climate change is a fabrication and it isn’t a problem then they forgot to convince those “looking after” the security interests of governments. Following are a number of reports that indicate that they are treating climate change as a high profile security issue. From the Center for Naval Analysis. In the videos below, CNA Corporation Military Advisory Board (MAB) members discuss the new report, National Security and the Accelerating Risks of Climate Change. In the first video, Brigadier General Gerald Galloway details how climate change impacts American national security and military readiness, affecting the lives of thousands of military personnel and American civilians around the U.S. In the second video, Admiral Frank “Skip” Bowman emphasizes how climate change is already impacting our national security and international military dynamics. The work of the MAB has been important in advancing the understanding that energy choices are not future threats—they are taking place now—and that actions to build resilience against the projected impacts of climate change are required today. US: National Security and the Accelerating Risks of Climate Change (2014): As a follow-up to its landmark 2007 study on climate and national security, the CNA Corporation Military Advisory Board’s National Security and the Accelerating Risks of Climate Change re-examines the impact of climate change on U.S. national security in the context of a more informed, but more complex and integrated world. The Board’s 2007 report described projected climate change as a “threat multiplier.” In this report the 16 retired Generals and Admirals who make up the board look at new vulnerabilities and tensions posed by climate change, which, when set against the backdrop of increasingly decentralized power structures around the world, they now identify as a “catalyst for conflict.” US 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review: A rather chilling document (a quote: ” The rapidly accelerating spread of information is challenging the ability of some governments to control their populations and maintain civil order.”) Note risk of climate change exec summary and pages 8 & 25. The impacts of climate change may increase the frequency, scale, and complexity of future missions, including defense support to civil authorities, while at the same time undermining the capacity of our domestic installations to support training activities… Climate change poses another significant challenge for the United States and the world at large…. Climate change may exacerbate water scarcity and lead to sharp increases in food costs. The pressures caused by climate change will influence resource competition while placing additional burdens on economies, societies, and governance institutions around the world. These effects are threat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social tensions – conditions that can enable terrorist activity and other forms of violence.….The Department’s operational readiness hinges on unimpeded access to land, air, and sea training and test space. Consequently, we will complete a comprehensive assessment of all installations to assess the potential impacts of climate change on our missions and operational resiliency, and develop and implement plans to adapt as required. Climate change also creates both a need and an opportunity for nations to work together, which the Department will seize through a range of initiatives. We are developing new policies, strategies, and plans, including the Department’s Arctic Strategy and our work in building humanitarian assistance and disaster response capabilities, both within the Department and with our allies and partners. War – Sanctioned Violence/ protecting national security interest Thus, we take another step deeper into the tragedy of U.S. intervention in the Middle East that has become a noxious farce. Consider just one of the head-spinning subplots: We are allied with our declared enemy, Iran, against the bloody Islamic State, which was spawned from the chaos created by our own earlier decisions to invade Iraq and to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria, which has us fighting side-by-side with jihadist crazies financed by Saudi Arabia, whom we are supporting against the Houthis in Yemen, the bitter rivals of Al Qaeda — the perpetrators of 9/11! Read More here NOTE: For those readers that have got this far, if you wish to explore further the dysfunction of our world you may need to include the vast implications of organised crime and corporate and political corruption and the implications for climate change response as well. Climate change and national security issues
19 September 2016, American Security Project: The National Intelligence Council, part of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, has just released a new White Paper titled “Implications for U.S. national security of Anticipated Climate Change.” The report analyzes the potential effects of climate change on national security in the coming 20 years. The report uses previous IPCC reports as a scientific baseline for analysis. The report begins with a strong assertion of the dangers of climate change for societies, economies, and governments across the world: t goes on to list some of the pathways to “wide-ranging national security challenges for the United States and other countries,” including “threats to the stability of countries, adverse effects on food prices and availability, and negative impacts on investments and economic competitiveness.” The report gives possible time-frames for these emerging national security challenges, suggesting that based on “changing trends in extreme weather,” the future will almost certainly hold more “climate related disruptions.” The majority of climate change-related risks to U.S. national security in the next five years will come from “distinct extreme weather events”, and “the exacerbation of currently strained conditions,” including water shortages. The report comes after years of significant research inside and outside of the government on climate security. The National Intelligence Council last released a report on this issue in 2009. Many in the security community have spoken on the emerging national security risks posed by climate change. ASP and countless other organizations have urged policy makers not to underestimate the security challenges posed by climate change and the rising seas. Read More here and access full report here
10 November 2015, Yale Connections: Drought, water, war, and climate change” is the title of this month’s Yale Climate Connections video (above) exploring expert assessments of the interconnections between and among those issues. With historic 1988 BBC television footage featuring Princeton University scientist Syukuru (“Suki”) Manabe and recent news clips and interviews with MIT scientist Kerry Emanuel, Ohio State University scientist Lonnie Thompson, CNN reporter Christiane Amanpour, and New York Times columnist and book author Tom Friedman, the six-minute video plumbs the depths of growing climate change concerns among national security experts. Source: Yale Connections
Total world military expenditure in 2014 was $1776 billion. This is equivalent to 2.3 per cent of global GDP. According to the SIPRI Military Expenditure Database, Australia is ranked at number 13 as the biggest spender for 2014.Total Australia spending AUD29.3 billion ($b.,MER) 25.4. Share of GDP 1.8%. Share of world military expenditure 1.4%
And what has this to do with climate change? It goes with out saying that responding to climate change and transforming the energy and economic systems of the world in a carbon restricted world would be made a lot easier on everyone if military budgets were focused on what could help the world rather than plunder it. 
5 October 2016. The Military and Climate Security Budgets Compared. Fifteen of the sixteen hottest years ever recorded have occurred during this new century, and the near-unanimous scientific consensus attributes the principal cause to human activity. The U.S. military’s latest National Security Strategy says that climate change is “an urgent and growing threat to our national security, contributing to increased natural disasters, refugee flows, and conflicts over basic resources like food and water.” What they don’t say is that the overall balance of U.S. security spending should be adjusted to fit that assessment. And we know less about how much we are spending on this urgent threat than we used to, since the federal government hasn’t produced a climate security budget since 2013. In this new report, Combat vs. Climate, the Institute for Policy Studies steps in to provide the most accurate climate change security budget currently available, drawing data from multiple agencies. And it looks at how these expenditures stack up within our overall security budget. Then, the report ties the military’s own assessment of its urgent threats to a budget that outlines a “whole of government” reapportionment that will put us on a path to averting climate catastrophe. This is our status quo: As global temperatures hit one record after another, the stalemate in Congress over funding to respond continues. Climate scientists warn that, as in Syria, unless the global greenhouse gas buildup is reversed, the U.S. could be at risk for conflicts over basic resources like food and water. Meanwhile, plans to spend $1 trillion to modernize our entire nuclear arsenal remain in place, and projected costs of the ineffective F-35 fighter jet program continue to climb past $1.4 trillion. Unless we get serious about moving the money, alarms from all over about the national security dangers of climate change will ring hollow. Access article here. Access report here.