Download Document

Current events in
environmental policy
Seminar #1 Unit #9
Prof. Christopher L. Howard
Climate Change
Defined
• Climate change is a long-term change in the statistical
distribution of weather patterns over periods of time that
range from decades to millions of years. It may be a
change in the average weather conditions or a change in
the distribution of weather events with respect to an
average, for example, greater or fewer extreme weather
events. Climate change may be limited to a specific
region, or may occur across the whole Earth.
• In recent usage, especially in the context of
environmental policy, climate change usually refers to
changes in modern climate. It may be qualified as
anthropogenic climate change, more generally known as
global warming or anthropogenic global warming (AGW).
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change
Known Effects
•
•
•
•
As with any field of scientific study, there are uncertainties associated with the science of climate
change. This does not imply that scientists do not have confidence in many aspects of climate
science. Some aspects of the science are known with virtual certainty1, because they are based
on well-known physical laws and documented trends. Current understanding of many other
aspects of climate change ranges from “very likely” to “uncertain.”
What's Known
Scientists know with virtual certainty that:
Human activities are changing the composition of Earth's atmosphere. Increasing levels of
greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are welldocumented and understood.
The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human
activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.
An “unequivocal” warming trend of about 1.0 to 1.7°F occurred from 1906-2005. Warming
occurred in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, and over the oceans (IPCC, 2007).
The major greenhouse gases emitted by human activities remain in the atmosphere for periods
ranging from decades to centuries. It is therefore virtually certain that atmospheric concentrations
of greenhouse gases will continue to rise over the next few decades.
Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations tend to warm the planet.
Top of Page
areas by the end of 2008
•
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/stateofknowledge.html
•
•
•
•
•
•
Future Impact???
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
What's Very Likely?
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has stated "Most of the observed increase in global
average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic
greenhouse gas concentrations" (IPCC, 2007). In short, a growing number of scientific analyses indicate, but
cannot prove, that rising levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are contributing to climate change (as
theory predicts). In the coming decades, scientists anticipate that as atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse
gases continue to rise, average global temperatures and sea levels will continue to rise as a result and
precipitation patterns will change.
Top of page
What's Not Certain?
Important scientific questions remain about how much warming will occur, how fast it will occur, and how the
warming will affect the rest of the climate system including precipitation patterns and storms. Answering these
questions will require advances in scientific knowledge in a number of areas:
Improving understanding of natural climatic variations, changes in the sun's energy, land-use changes, the
warming or cooling effects of pollutant aerosols, and the impacts of changing humidity and cloud cover.
Determining the relative contribution to climate change of human activities and natural causes.
Projecting future greenhouse emissions and how the climate system will respond within a narrow range.
Improving understanding of the potential for rapid or abrupt climate change.
Addressing these and other areas of scientific uncertainty is a major priority of the U.S. Global Change Research
Program (USGCRP). The USGCRP is developing twenty-one Synthesis and Assessment products to advance
scientific understanding of these uncertainty
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/stateofknowledge.html
Greenhouse Gas
Emission
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Greenhouse Gas Overview
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often called greenhouse gases. This section of the EPA Climate
Change Site provides information and data on emissions of greenhouse gases to Earth’s atmosphere, and also
the removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. For more information on the science of climate change,
please visit EPA's climate change science home page.
Some greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide occur naturally and are emitted to the atmosphere through
natural processes and human activities. Other greenhouse gases (e.g., fluorinated gases) are created and emitted
solely through human activities. The principal greenhouse gases that enter the atmosphere because of human
activities are:
Carbon Dioxide (CO2): Carbon dioxide enters the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels (oil, natural gas,
and coal), solid waste, trees and wood products, and also as a result of other chemical reactions (e.g.,
manufacture of cement). Carbon dioxide is also removed from the atmosphere (or “sequestered”) when it is
absorbed by plants as part of the biological carbon cycle.
Methane (CH4): Methane is emitted during the production and transport of coal, natural gas, and oil. Methane
emissions also result from livestock and other agricultural practices and by the decay of organic waste in municipal
solid waste landfills.
Nitrous Oxide (N2O): Nitrous oxide is emitted during agricultural and industrial activities, as well as during
combustion of fossil fuels and solid waste.
Fluorinated Gases: Hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride are synthetic, powerful
greenhouse gases that are emitted from a variety of industrial processes. Fluorinated gases are sometimes used
as substitutes for ozone-depleting substances (i.e., CFCs, HCFCs, and halons). These gases are typically emitted
in smaller quantities, but because they are potent greenhouse gases, they are sometimes referred to as High
Global Warming Potential gases (“High GWP gases”).
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/index.html#ggo
Future Trends
•
•
•
•
•
Emission Trends & Projections
Estimates of future emissions and removals depend in part on assumptions about changes in
underlying human activities. For example, the demand for fossil fuels such as gasoline and coal is
expected to increase greatly with the predicted growth of the U.S. and global economies.
The Fifth U.S. Climate Action Report concluded, in assessing current trends, that greenhouse gas
emissions increased by 17 percent from 1990-2007. Over that same time period, the U.S. GDP
increased by 65 percent and population increased by 21 percent. The dominant factor affecting
U.S. emissions trends is CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, which increased by 21.8
percent over the 17-year period, while methane and nitrous oxide emissions decreased by 5
percent and 1 percent, respectively. The declines in methane emissions are mostly due to
increased collection and combustion of landfill gas, as well as improvements in technology and
management practices at natural gas plants. The decline in nitrous oxide emissions is largely due
to the installation of newer N2O control technologies in motor vehicles throughout the past
decade. Fluorinated substances (HFCs, PFCs, and SF6) accounted for 2 percent of total U.S.
GHG emissions in 2007. The increasing use of these compounds since 1995 as substitutes for
ozone depleting substances has been largely responsible for their upward emissions trends. (Fifth
U.S.Climate Action Report, 2010)
Many, but not all, human sources of greenhouse gas emissions are expected to rise in the future.
This growth may be reduced by ongoing efforts to increase the use of newer, cleaner technologies
and other measures. Additionally, our everyday choices about such things as commuting, housing,
electricity use and recycling can influence the amount of greenhouse gases being emitted.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/index.html#ggo
Health Effects
•
•
•
•
•
•
Throughout the world, the prevalence of some diseases and other threats to human health depend largely on local
climate. Extreme temperatures can lead directly to loss of life, while climate-related disturbances in ecological
systems, such as changes in the range of infective parasites, can indirectly impact the incidence of serious
infectious diseases. In addition, warm temperatures can increase air and water pollution, which in turn harm
human health.
Human health is strongly affected by social, political, economic, environmental and technological factors, including
urbanization, affluence, scientific developments, individual behavior and individual vulnerability (e.g., genetic
makeup, nutritional status, emotional well-being, age, gender and economic status). The extent and nature of
climate change impacts on human health vary by region, by relative vulnerability of population groups, by the
extent and duration of exposure to climate change itself and by society’s ability to adapt to or cope with the
change.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) concluded:
Human beings are exposed to climate change through changing weather patterns (for example, more intense and
frequent extreme events) and indirectly through changes in water, air, food quality and quantity, ecosystems,
agriculture, and economy. At this early stage the effects are small but are projected to progressively increase in all
countries and regions.
Given the complexity of factors that influence human health, assessing health impacts related to climate change
poses a difficult challenge. Furthermore, climate change is expected to bring a few benefits to health, including
fewer deaths due to exposure to cold. Nonetheless, the IPCC has concluded that, overall (globally), negative
climate-related health impacts are expected to outweigh positive health impacts during this century (IPCC, 2007).
At the same time, the quality of medical care and public health systems in the United States may lessen climate
impacts on human health within the U.S.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/health.html
Energy Alternatives
•
Clean Energy-Environment State Partnership
–
•
Climate Leaders
–
•
In 1992, EPA introduced ENERGY STAR as a voluntary labeling program designed to identify and promote energy-efficient products to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. ENERGY STAR has been a joint EPA-Department of Energy program since 1996. Today more than 1,400
manufacturers use the ENERGY STAR in over 40 product categories. EPA also offers the ENERGY STAR partnership to businesses and
organizations of all types and sizes including schools, hospitals, hotels, small businesses and congregations and to key industries such as auto
manufacturing, petroleum refining and pharmaceuticals. ENERGY STAR delivers the technical information and tools that organizations and
consumers need to choose energy-efficient solutions and best management practices. ENERGY STAR has successfully delivered energy and
cost savings across the country, saving businesses, organizations and consumers approximately $10 billion in 2004. ENERGY STAR also has
international partnerships intended to unify voluntary energy-efficiency labeling programs in major global markets and make it easier to
participate in the program.
EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality Voluntary Programs
–
•
The CHP Partnership is a voluntary program to reduce the environmental impact of power generation by promoting the use of CHP. CHP is an
efficient, clean and reliable approach to generating power and thermal energy from a single fuel source. The Partnership works closely with
energy users, the CHP industry, state and local governments and other stakeholders to support the development of new projects and promote
their energy, environmental and economic benefits.
ENERGY STAR
–
•
Climate Leaders is an EPA industry-government partnership that works with companies to develop comprehensive climate change strategies.
Partner companies commit to reducing their impact on the global environment by setting aggressive greenhouse gas reduction goals. Through
program participation, companies create a credible record of their accomplishments and receive EPA recognition as corporate environmental
leaders. Climate Leaders Partners range from Fortune 100 corporations to small businesses and represent a variety of industries and sectors,
from manufacturers and utilities to financial institutions and retailers, with operations in all 50 states.
Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Partnership
–
•
The Clean Energy-Environment State Partnership Program is a voluntary state-federal partnership that encourages states to develop and
implement cost-effective clean energy and environmental strategies. These strategies help further both environmental and clean energy goals
while achieving public health and economic benefits. Under the Partnership Program, states work across their relevant agencies to develop and
implement a comprehensive strategy for using existing and new energy policies and programs to promote energy efficiency, clean distributed
generation, renewable energy and other clean energy sources that can provide air quality and other benefits.
Transportation and Air Quality voluntary programs aim to reduce pollution and improve air quality by means of forming partnerships with small
and large businesses, citizen groups, industry, manufacturers, trade associations and state and local governments. For example, in February
2004 EPA announced the SmartWay Transport Partnership. The Partnership is a collaborative voluntary program between EPA and the freight
industry that will increase the energy efficiency and energy security of our country while significantly reducing air pollution and greenhouse
gases. Additional transportation and air quality voluntary programs at EPA include: the Green Vehicle Guide, Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program,
Clean School Bus USA, Best Workplaces for Commuters and It All Adds Up to Cleaner Air.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/policy/neartermghgreduction.html
Sustainable
Development
•
•
•
•
Sustainable development (SD) is a pattern of resource use that aims to
meet human needs while preserving the environment so that these needs
can be met not only in the present, but also for generations to come
(sometimes taught as ELF-Environment, Local people, Future). The term
was used by the Brundtland Commission which coined what has become
the most often-quoted definition of sustainable development as
development that "meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs."[1][2]
Sustainable development ties together concern for the carrying capacity of
natural systems with the social challenges facing humanity. As early as the
1970s "sustainability" was employed to describe an economy "in equilibrium
with basic ecological support systems."[3] Ecologists have pointed to The
Limits to Growth,[citation needed] and presented the alternative of a "steady
state economy"[4] in order to address environmental concerns.
The field of sustainable development can be conceptually broken into three
constituent parts: environmental sustainability, economic sustainability and
sociopolitical sustainability.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_development
Nuclear Power
•
•
Nuclear potential energy is the potential energy of the particles inside an
atomic nucleus. The nuclear particles are bound together by the strong
nuclear force. Weak nuclear forces provide the potential energy for certain
kinds of radioactive decay, such as beta decay.
Nuclear particles like protons and neutrons are not destroyed in fission and
fusion processes, but collections of them have less mass than if they were
individually free, and this mass difference is liberated as heat and radiation
in nuclear reactions (the heat and radiation have the missing mass, but it
often escapes from the system, where it is not measured). The energy from
the Sun is an example of this form of energy conversion. In the Sun, the
process of hydrogen fusion converts about 4 million tonnes of solar matter
per second into electromagnetic energy, which is radiated into space.
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_energy
•
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_energy
•
Japan Crisis
•
•
•
•
•
Here is the status of the six reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant as of March 29:
Reactor No. 1: An explosion on March 12 ripped the top off of the reactor building after a presumed partial
meltdown in the reactor core produced hydrogen gas that was vented as part of the struggle to cool the reactor.
The primary containment vessel is said to be intact. Radioactive isotopes have been found in its seawater
discharge. Power was re-established for the control room lighting, an important first step toward turning on the
cooling system, but the reactor's temperature has shown a worrisome increase. On March 27, cesium was found
in the water in the turbine building attached to the reactor.
Reactor No. 2: On March 14, the pumps sending seawater into the reactor to cool it failed temporarily, leading to
a partial meltdown. On March 15, an explosion breached the containment vessel and the torus, an enclosed pool
of water surrounding the reactor into which steam is released. The damage meant that radioactive steam was
escaping. A high-voltage cable was extended to its pumps on March 20, but was not powerful enough to restore
operation. Radioactive isotopes have been found in its seawater discharge. On March 26, a worker measuring
radiation in puddles outside the reactor finds levels too high for his instrument to gauge.
Reactor No. 3: On March 14, an explosion damaged the building surrounding the containment vessel. On March
15, officials made conflicting statements that suggested that the containment vessel had cracked and was
releasing radioactive steam. On March 17, efforts focused on its storage pool, where the spent rods may have
become uncovered. Water continues to be sprayed by fire cannons. This reactor used a mixture of uranium and
plutonium, known as mox, which produces more toxic radioactivity. Power has been turned on, but only for lights,
not for the cooling system. On March 22, black smoke belched from the reactor for an hour, forcing a temporary
evacuation of workers. On March 25, officials said that there was evidence that the reactor's containment vessel
may have been breached; a senior nuclear executive said there was a long crack down one side. Fresh water is
now being pumped into the reactor.
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/energy-environment/atomic-energy/index.html
Crisis Cont.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Reactor No. 4: Shut before the earthquake, as were Reactors Nos. 5 and 6, its spent fuel rods
were stored in a pool within the reactor building. The failure of cooling systems led the rods to
overheat, setting off a fire and explosion on March 15. The water in the pool reached the boiling
point, releasing radioactive steam and raising the danger of a meltdown and a large-scale release
of radioactive gases, as the fuel is outside the containment vessel. The chairman of the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission said on March 17 that the water covering the spent fuel rods may
have boiled off. Engineers say the spent fuel pool appears to be leaking as water is disappearing
too quickly to be only caused by evaporation.
Reactor No. 5 and Reactor No. 6: Temperatures in their spent fuel pools reached roughly double
the normal level of 77 degrees Fahrenheit. But on March 20th both were reported to have cold
shut down, meaning that temperatures had returned to normal. Power has been restored to their
cooling units.
Background
Japan is one of the world’s top consumers of nuclear energy. The country’s 17 nuclear plants —
boasting 55 reactors — have provided about 30 percent of its electricity needs. With virtually no
natural resources, Japan has considered nuclear power as an alternative to oil and other fossil
fuels since the 1960s.
The reactors at Fukushima date from the 1960s and are of a design known as boiling water
reactors. A controlled nuclear reaction produced by fuel rods containing pellets of uranium creates
heat used to make steam that turns turbines to produce electricity. The flow of water also serves
to cool the reactor.
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/energy-environment/atomic-energy/index.html
MIC
•
•
•
•
•
Bayer CropScience said it is continuing to review the final report and
recommendations made Jan. 20 by the U.S. Chemical Safety Board
regarding the fatal Aug. 28, 2008, explosion and fire at Bayer CropScience's
Institute site.
Company spokesman Tom Dover said, "We will consult with the agency
over the coming weeks as we prepare our full response to the final report."
Bayer CropScience is apparently planning to restart its methyl isocyanate
unit at the Institute site in the middle of this month. "As noted by the
Chemical Safety Board, we plan to restart upon completion of our project,"
Dover e-mailed on Tuesday. "I'll keep you posted on timing."
Dover pointed out that in accord with the Chemical Safety Board's initial
recommendations, "we had a qualified third party review the design for the
project. They returned last month to follow up and confirm that all of their
recommendations had been incorporated into the project."
http://www.dailymail.com/Business/201102021401
Bhopal Disaster
•
•
•
•
•
The Bhopal disaster was the world's worst industrial catastrophe. It occurred on the night of December 2–3, 1984
at the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India. A leak of methyl
isocyanate gas and other chemicals from the plant resulted in the exposure of hundreds of thousands of people.
Estimates vary on the death toll. The official immediate death toll was 2,259 and the government of Madhya
Pradesh has confirmed a total of 3,787 deaths related to the gas release.[1] Other government agencies estimate
15,000 deaths.[2] Others estimate that 3,000 died within weeks and that another 8,000 have since died from gasrelated diseases.[3][4] A government affidavit in 2006 stated the leak caused 558,125 injuries including 38,478
temporary partial and approximately 3,900 severely and permanently disabling injuries.[5]
UCIL was the Indian subsidiary of Union Carbide Corporation (UCC). Indian Government controlled banks and the
Indian public held 49.1 percent ownership share. In 1994, the Supreme Court of India allowed UCC to sell its 50.9
percent share. The Bhopal plant was sold to McLeod Russel (India) Ltd. UCC was purchased by Dow Chemical
Company in 2001.
Civil and criminal cases are pending in the United States District Court, Manhattan and the District Court of
Bhopal, India, involving UCC, UCIL employees, and Warren Anderson, UCC CEO at the time of the disaster.[6][7]
In June 2010, seven ex-employees, including the former UCIL chairman, were convicted in Bhopal of causing
death by negligence and sentenced to two years imprisonment and a fine of about $2,000 each, the maximum
punishment allowed by law. An eighth former employee was also convicted but died before judgment was
passed.[8]
On 28th Feb 2011 the Supreme Court of India issued notice to the Union Carbide Corporation, Dow Chemicals
and others on the Centre’s extra-ordinary petition seeking an additional compensation of Rs7,844 crore for the
victims of 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy. Through its curative petition, the Central Government has requested Supreme
Court to take a re-look at the entire evidence and enhance the compensation amount. The bench also decided to
hear CBI's curative petition asking the court to restore the stringent charges of culpable homicide not amounting to
murder against the accused in the criminal case.[9]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster
Mountain Top
Removal
•
•
•
Mountaintop removal mining is a form of surface mining that involves the
mining of the summit or summit ridge of a mountain. Entire coal seams are
removed from the top of a mountain, hill or ridge by removing the so-called
overburden (soil, lying above the economically desired resource). After the
coal is extracted, the removed material is put back onto the ridge to
approximate the mountain's original contours.[1] Any overburden the mining
company considers excess (that which it's not able to place back onto the
ridge top) is moved into neighboring valleys.[2] Mountaintop removal is most
closely associated with coal mining in the Appalachian Mountains in the
eastern United States.
Peer-reviewed studies show that mountaintop mining has serious
environmental impacts, including loss of biodiversity, that mitigation
practices cannot successfully address.[3] There are also adverse human
health impacts which result from contact with affected streams or exposure
to airborne toxins and dust.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining
Wrapping It Up
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Climate Change
Known effects
Future impact
Greenhouse gases
Future trends
Health effects
Alternatives
Sustainable development
Nuclear Energy and Japan
MIC and Bhopal
Mountain Top Removal Mining