The US Military on the Front Lines of Rising Seas (2016)

[abu afak]

More Near-Record Warm Years Are Likely On Horizon

Anyone think this is "Cooling?"

`

 

[abu afak]

`

Opposing (The AGW Consensus)

Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement,[29] NO National or International scientific body any longer rejects the findings of Human-induced effects on climate change.".."[28][30]..

`

 

[ding]

 

[abu afak]

This is the Army’s plan to battle climate change—and still fight wars​

How the branch that operates the fuel-guzzling M1 Abrams tank wants to reduce emissions, while not decreasing the scope of its operations.
FEB 11, 2022

On Tuesday, the US Army released its climate strategy, a big policy plan that details steps and goals for how this branch of the military will be adapting to climate change, while still preserving its ability to fight wars. The strategy, which outlines everything from greenhouse gas reduction targets to electrification of vehicles, is transformative within constraints. As outlined, the Army is working towards doing what it already does while producing fewer emissions, rather than reducing the scope of its operations.

The report, a tight 20 pages front-to-back, outlines three primary areas for how the Army plans to adapt to climate change. These areas cover better buildings, better vehicle purchases and supply chains, and better training.


“The effects of climate change have taken a toll on supply chains, damaged our infrastructure, and increased risks to Army Soldiers and families due to natural disasters and extreme weather,” wrote Christine E. Wormuth, Secretary of the Army, in the foreword to the strategy. “The Army must adapt across our entire enterprise and purposefully pursue greenhouse gas mitigation strategies to reduce climate risks.”

For its more than 130 installations across the globe, the Army intends to incorporate on-site carbon-pollution-free power generation by 2040, which suggests wind and/or solar power, but possibly other options as well. Heating and powering buildings is a major source of energy use, though one the military has passively gotten better at, as it has reduced the number of bases it maintains and builds new facilities in accordance with energy efficiency standards...."

This is the Army's plan to battle climate change—and still fight wars

A short new report outlines the branch's strategy, which focuses on steps to reduce emissions while not shrinking its operational scope.

www.popsci.com

`

 

[abu afak]

Depopulating Military Installations Because of Sea Level Rise​

July 6, 2020

"...In case you missed it, an audit of the U.S. Department of Defense’s installation climate resilience from last year, conducted by the Government Accountability Office, found that “installations have not consistently assessed risks from extreme weather and climate change effects or consistently used projections to anticipate future climate conditions.”

One of those conditions is Sea Level Rise that will affect multiple coastal installations (see here and here).
Sea level rise will not only affect the physical infrastructure on these installations, it will also potentially lead to the inland migration of portions of the populations who live in the surrounding communities – some of whom form part of an installation’s work force. Depending on how far away and how many migrants move, their loss will degrade an installation’s ability to continue to function at an acceptable level over time."..>'

Depopulating Military Installations Because of Sea Level Rise​

By Dr. Marc Kodack In case you missed it, an audit of the U.S. Department of Defense’s installation climate resilience from last year, conducted by the Government Accountability Office, found that …

climateandsecurity.org
`
`

 

[ding]

 

[abu afak]

Climate Change Is Forcing the Insurance Industry to Recalculate
Insurers are at the vanguard of a movement to put a value today on the unpredictable future of a Warming planet
By Bradley Hope and Nicole Friedman
Produced by Jess Kuronen and Tyler Paige
Wall St Journal Oct. 2, 2018
Climate Change Is Forcing the Insurance Industry to Recalculate

When a wildfire engulfed the Canadian oil-sands boomtown of Fort McMurraytwo years ago, it hit insurance company Aviva PLC out of nowhere.

The British firm had been active in Canada since 1835. Its actuaries long believed wildfire risk to homes in the area was almost nonexistent, it says. Yet flames on the town’s outskirts roared across an area larger than Delaware, forcing 100,000 people to evacuate and leaving insurers with $3 billion in damages to cover.

“That is not a type of loss we have experienced in that part of the world, ever,” says Maurice Tulloch, the Toronto-based chief executive of Aviva’s international insurance division. “The previous models wouldn’t have envisioned it.”

Aviva studied the incident and concluded the wildfire was an example of how the earth’s gradually warming temperature is changing the behavior of natural catastrophes. Aviva increased premiums in Canada as a result.
[......]
The price of homes on the U.S.’s eastern seaboard battered by fiercer storms and higher seas is lagging behind those inland.
The price of farmland is rising in North America’s once-frigid reaches, partly because of bets it will become more temperate. Investors are turning fresh water into an asset, a wager in part that climate change will make it scarcer.

Insurers are at the forefront of calculating the impact. “We don’t discuss the question anymore of, ‘Is there climate change,’” says Torsten Jeworrek, chief executive for reinsurance at Munich Re, the world’s largest seller of reinsurance—insurance for insurers. “For us, it’s a question now for our own underwriting.”
[......]
`

 

[ding]

Climate Change Is Forcing the Insurance Industry to Recalculate
Insurers are at the vanguard of a movement to put a value today on the unpredictable future of a Warming planet
By Bradley Hope and Nicole Friedman
Produced by Jess Kuronen and Tyler Paige
Wall St Journal Oct. 2, 2018
Climate Change Is Forcing the Insurance Industry to Recalculate

When a wildfire engulfed the Canadian oil-sands boomtown of Fort McMurraytwo years ago, it hit insurance company Aviva PLC out of nowhere.

The British firm had been active in Canada since 1835. Its actuaries long believed wildfire risk to homes in the area was almost nonexistent, it says. Yet flames on the town’s outskirts roared across an area larger than Delaware, forcing 100,000 people to evacuate and leaving insurers with $3 billion in damages to cover.

“That is not a type of loss we have experienced in that part of the world, ever,” says Maurice Tulloch, the Toronto-based chief executive of Aviva’s international insurance division. “The previous models wouldn’t have envisioned it.”

Aviva studied the incident and concluded the wildfire was an example of how the earth’s gradually warming temperature is changing the behavior of natural catastrophes. Aviva increased premiums in Canada as a result.
[......]
The price of homes on the U.S.’s eastern seaboard battered by fiercer storms and higher seas is lagging behind those inland.
The price of farmland is rising in North America’s once-frigid reaches, partly because of bets it will become more temperate. Investors are turning fresh water into an asset, a wager in part that climate change will make it scarcer.

Insurers are at the forefront of calculating the impact. “We don’t discuss the question anymore of, ‘Is there climate change,’” says Torsten Jeworrek, chief executive for reinsurance at Munich Re, the world’s largest seller of reinsurance—insurance for insurers. “For us, it’s a question now for our own underwriting.”
[......]
`

That's called weather, dummy.

 

[abu afak]

That's seven posts/Trolls in six threads (in 10 mins) you Obsessively STALKED.
I generally just ignore and use them now when I want to bump up my threads.

You're a ONE LINE TROLL, but again good for looking like my posts are replies instead of blogging.
`

 

[ding]

That's seven posts/Trolls in six threads (in 10 mins) you Obsessively STALKED.
I generally just ignore and use them now when I want to bump up my threads.

You're a ONE LINE TROLL, but again good for looking like my posts are replies instead of blogging.
`

Keeping you honest is a full time job. I usually don't need more than a sentence or two to do it.

Why do you keep arguing weather events are climate?

 

[abu afak]

Keeping you honest is a full time job. I usually don't need more than a sentence or two to do it.

Why do you keep arguing weather events are climate?

I do not.
However sea level rise will MAKE weather events into persistent Climate ones.

If you want to complain about misuse of Weather Events I suggest you speak to Skookerasball and ALL his threads, including his 9 YEAR (backwards) BLOG, "skeptics are winning" which is almost exclusively weather.
But you are a DISHONEST little Whacky Hypocrite TROLL.
`

 

[ding]

I do not.
However sea level rise will MAKE weather events into persistent Climate ones.

If you want to complain about misuse of Weather Events I suggest you speak to Skookerasball and ALL his threads, including his 9 YEAR (backwards) BLOG, "skeptics are winning" which is almost exclusively weather.
But you are a DISHONEST little Whacky Hypocrite TROLL.
`

You are constantly arguing weather events are signs of climate change. That's arguing weather is climate, dummy.

 

[abu afak]

`



`

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Naval Station Norfolk—the largest naval installation in the world—is projected to face 4.5 feet to nearly 7 feet of sea level rise this century.

Sounds serious!!!!
If we buy $2 trillion worth of windmills, how much will the sea level rise?

Denier!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

`



`

Shutting the global economy in 20-21 didn't move the needle on CO2

Fuck him militarizing your fake fucking "science"

 

[abu afak]

Shutting the global economy in 20-21 didn't move the needle on CO2

Fuck him militarizing your fake fucking "science"

The Global economy was not shut.
You still had Power? Ate processed foods (trucked in)? Drove your car?
Wore the hell out of your computer and TV set.
Our livestock still producing GHG Methane
etc, etc, etc

IAC, call it HALF the usage (which would probably still Increase GHGs).

CO2 PPM might go from 410 to 408. MIGHT, in one year.
That will not change the Temp.
It does not start at Zero every morning/week/year.
You are by far Thee Stupidest person on this message board and have voiced this IDIOCY at least a dozen times.

`

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Global economy was not shut.
You still had Power? Ate processed foods (trucked in)? Drove your car?
Wore the hell out of your computer and TV set.
Our livestock still producing GHG Methane
etc, etc, etc

IAC, call it HALF the usage (which would probably still Increase GHGs).

CO2 PPM might go from 410 to 408. MIGHT, in one year.
That will not change the Temp.
It does not start at Zero every morning/week/year.
You are by far Thee Stupidest person on this message board and have voiced this IDIOCY at least a dozen times.

`

There were so few cars on the roads in 2020, office buildings were empty, shopping online increased dramatically....and CO2 moved up

Your stupid man madeup global climate warming change theory fails at so many levels.

The AGW Cult has never once demonstrated any statistically significant "warming" from increasing CO2 from 280 to 400 PPM

Your predictions never materialize

All you have is the constant Global Climate drum beat of American hating press and Globalists who seek to destroy America

 

[abu afak]

There were so few cars on the roads in 2020, office buildings were empty, shopping online increased dramatically....and CO2 moved up

Your stupid man madeup global climate warming change theory fails at so many levels.

The AGW Cult has never once demonstrated any statistically significant "warming" from increasing CO2 from 280 to 400 PPM

Your predictions never materialize

All you have is the constant Global Climate drum beat of American hating press and Globalists who seek to destroy America

`

`
`

 

[abu afak]

• Aug 15, 2018
• Add bookmark
• #84

polarbear said:
Ridiculous! Obama was at odds with the military and ordered it (Executive Order 13653 of November 1, 2013) to comply, declaring climate change a "national security threat".....while Iran and North Korea were going nuclear, China and Russia were upgrading their armaments and he decimated the US military readiness. -
So let`s see who was at odds with the military shall we?
The Obama era is over. Here's how the military rates his legacy
More than half of troops surveyed in the latest Military Times/Institute for Veterans and Military Families poll said they have an unfavorable opinion of Obama and his two-terms leading the military
Their complaints include the president’s decision to decrease military personnel (71 percent think it should be higher), his moves to withdraw combat troops from Iraq (59 percent say it made America less safe) and his lack of focus on the biggest dangers facing America (64 percent say China represents a significant threat to the U.S.)
Click to expand...

TRUMP AND THE MILITARY ARE AT ODDS ON CLIMATE CHANGE
SEAN MOWBRAY
JAN 18, 2018
Trump and the Military Are at Odds on Climate Change

While the Trump administration has largely rejected climate change as an issue, the Department of Defense and Congress have identified it as a major potential threat to national security. The United States government appears to be of two minds, with utterly opposing worldviews, on climate change policy.

On one hand, the Trump administration has pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement, proposed eliminating three vital new climate satellites, reneged on an Obama-era $2 billion commitment to the Green Climate Fund, and wants to slash funding to the Environmental Protection Agency's domestic climate programs and the Department of State's USAID climate programs around the globe. The president has also denounced global warming as a Hoax and a Chinese plot.

On the other hand, the Republican-dominated Congress has affirmed that climate change is a prominent national security threat and mandated that the Department of Defense (DOD) look closely at how climate change is going to affect key installations, while also addressing the need to boost the military's finances considerably to deal with global warming threats. When Trump's national security strategy—announced in January—erased climate change as a threat to U.S. security, that decision drew the ire of a bipartisan group of congressional legislators.

As a result of this dichotomy, the DOD has emerged as an unlikely champion of climate action in the Trump government, with the Pentagon declaring emphatically that a Rapidly warming world is bringing with it Alarming security risks ranging from rising sea level (which threatens naval bases such as Norfolk, Virginia, the largest in the world), to the "mother of all risks"—unpredictable and worsening political instability around the globe brought by climate chaos.
[.....]​

`

 

[abu afak]

High-Ranking Defense Official Explains Why Salt Marsh Is Critical for Military and Communities​

Natural habitats help to buffer bases and installations from storm surge, flooding, and Sea level Rise​

ARTICLE March 25, 2022

".....Today, the 57-year-old U.S. Military Academy (West Point) and Yale Management School graduate, who hails from a family that has served in the military and militias for more than 300 years, is the deputy assistant secretary of defense for environment and energy resilience, a top-ranking Department of Defense position that manages, among other things, the agency’s climate change programs, compliance with environmental laws, pollution prevention, and energy resilience, including renewable energy.

This interview about Kidd’s work and the South Atlantic Salt Marsh Initiative—an effort to protect shorelines, military installations, and wildlife by conserving a million acres of coastal habitat from North Carolina to northern Florida—has been edited for clarity and length:

Why is it important for the Department of Defense to address climate change, particularly in the Southeast?​

[.................]
[.................]
[.................]

High-Ranking Defense Official Explains Why Salt Marsh Is Critical for Military and Communities

Richard Kidd witnessed the horrors of war as an Army soldier, an international emergency relief worker, and a diplomat in countries ranging from Afghanistan and Bosnia to Rwanda and Mozambique.

www.pewtrusts.org

`