climate change

What’s geology got to do with it? 5 – Scottish Independence Referendum

Flo Bullough September 11, 2014

Flo summarises 5 geo-relevant policy issues that are likely to impact on the Scottish Independence Referendum.

Sooooo apologies for the long blog holiday we’ve been on of late, Marion and I have had a fairly hectic summer, but fear not, we will be updating on a more regular basis from now on!

Source – Wikimedia Commons, Credit: Smooth_O.

Hitting the headlines in the UK this week is the impending referendum for Scottish Independence taking place on the 18th September. Latest polling suggests that the vote outcome is on a knife-edge. Either way, the build-up and inevitable political wrangling after the result undoubtedly means that the situation has changed for everyone, regardless of the outcome. One thing is for sure: the implications of an independent Scotland means big changes for both countries, the shape of which is still little understood and requires much discussion in the negotiation stages.

Taking a sidestep from the core politics for the moment, I’m going to have a brief look at 5 geology related topics in the run up to the referendum that could be affected, for better or worse depending on your point of view, by the decisions made next week!

This topic, like others with a geopolitical element, tells another interesting story about the link between the fortuitous geo-location of resources and the creation of nation states.

Fossil Fuel Reserves: The North Sea and Shale Gas

Exclusive economic zones for the North Sea, the green refers to the area covered by the UK Continental Shelf. Source – Wikimedia Commons, Credit: Inwind.

North Sea oil and gas has formed a significant proportion of revenue for the UK since the mid 60’s when the UK Continental Shelf Act came into force. Since then the UK government, via the UK continental shelf economic region, has controlled licensing of hydrocarbon extraction. This has been a particularly crucial source of revenue for the UK which peaked in 1999 with production of 950,000m3 (6 million barrels a day). In an independent Scotland, income from the remaining hydrocarbons in the North Sea would provide a considerable amount of revenue, but the rights over the North Sea, in the event of an independent Scotland are unclear, as it is yet to be negotiated. The majority of the confusion over this issue arises from the line in the North Sea that would demarcate Scottish territory. Many agree that this is likely to be drawn along the ‘median line’ or ‘equidistance principle’: a ‘line between the nearest points of land on either side using the baselines established around the coast of the UK in accordance with international law’ (from the UK Government’s Scotland Analysis: Borders and Citizenship). On this basis, Scotland’s share of the North Sea would be somewhere between 73-95% according to different sources. Further complications lie in the debate over the estimates of reserve remaining and whether it is more difficult to extract (geologists will be more than familiar with this sort of uncertainty!!).

North Sea oil and gas fields distribution. Source – Wikimedia Commons, Credit: Gautier, D.L .

A fact check produced by Channel 4 earlier this year cast doubt on the values of remaining reserves. These unknowns have made confident and informed arguments on this topic difficult for both sides. This may not be critical, however, as leaving the North Sea out of the Scottish economy completely, it is still a thriving economy: only slightly smaller than that of the UK.

Another issue that has been discussed in the run up to the Scottish independence referendum is Scotland’s shale gas reserves and the issue of fracking. A report published just last week by the N56 business body claimed that fracking of what would be Scotland’s oil and gas reserves could almost double the amount recoverable from oil and gas in the North Sea, the target being the Kimmeridge Bay formation, an Upper Jurassic organic rich shale which is the major oil and gas source rock for the Central and Northern North Sea. The BGS has since debunked this estimate stating that there is only “a modest amount” of shale gas and oil reserves.

There is a more detailed discussion of these issues on Carbon Brief’s blog

Climate Change and Renewable Energy

Wether_Hill_wind_farm_-_geograph.org.uk_-_414459

Wether Hill, Dumfries and Galloway wind farm. Source – Wikimedia Commons, Credit: Walter Baxter.

Scotland has some pretty impressive environmental credentials when it comes to renewable energy, a staggering 69% of Scotland’s electricity was generated from a combination of renewables (29.8%) and nuclear (34.4%) in 2012. Scotland has a massive renewable resource and the Scottish National Party (SNP) have been vocal in stating that they want to make Scotland the green capital of Europe. The Yes campaign website states that ‘Scotland is on target to meet all of its electricity needs, and 11% of its heat requirements, from renewable sources such as wind, wave, tidal, solar and biomass by 2020′. As it stands, control over energy policy and funding resides with Westminster. The Scottish Government has shown a commitment to low-carbon energy sources in its 2009 paper which introduced ambitious plans to reduce emissions by at least 80% by 2050.

Carbon Capture and Storage

798px-Peterhead_Power_Station_from_Boddam

Peterhead Power Station, Site of DECC CCS funding. Source – Wikimedia Commons, Credit: PortHenry.

After some very slow progress in the DECC CCS competition (see my earlier post on this), the shortlist (not even the final selection) was eventually announced last year with two shortlisted sites, one of which is the Peterhead Project off the coast of Aberdeenshire, which has been awarded a funded contract to undertake front-end engineering and design studies. The Peterhead Project may well have an uncertain future if the referendum turns out a ‘Yes’ result. Energy Secretary Ed Davey admitted that the progress of the Peterhead CCS plant would be significantly trickier in the event of independence. While the Yes campaign has outlined its low-carbon credentials, a future Independent Scotland may find it hard to justify funding the very expensive CCS scheme alone. We could, however, end up in a situation where rUK (rest of the UK – the successor state in the event of Scottish independence) projects send their CO2 to storage sites in the North Sea, the revenues of which would go to an independent Scotland. This would mean that Scotland could still benefit from CCS development even if development at Peterhead is cancelled.

Research and Science Funding

Grant Institute, School of Geosciences, Edinburgh University. Source – Wikimedia Commons, Credit: Kay Williams.

Much has been written about the future of science research and funding in the event of a Yes vote at the referendum. Some groups of scientists have come out to say that a Yes for independence could damage the country’s research base and hurt the economy, this was stated most recently by the presidents of the Royal Society, the British Academy and the Academy of Medical Sciences. In contrast, the ‘Academics for Yes‘ group states that Scottish independence will secure and enhance the international profile of Scottish universities and also boost work between the research sector and the government to develop Scotland’s economy, as well as giving them control of research priorities. A piece posted just this week in Nature showed that opinion is split with regards to the impact of independence on science research and funding, with some touting improved innovation under independence and others saying that the border would hinder the open exchanges under which science thrives.

Radioactive Waste Disposal

800px-Dounreay_Nuclear_Power_Development_Establishment_geograph-3484137-by-Ben-Brooksbank (1)

Dounreay nuclear power development, Caithness. Source – Wikimedia Commons, Credit: Ben Brooksbank.

The Scottish Government’s energy policies, in contrast to Westminster, favour renewable energy as well as use of North Sea Oil and Gas over what is described as ‘risky’ nuclear power and their policies for radioactive waste disposal also differ from that of Westminster. While Scotland has stated that it won’t be developing new-nuclear power it has an extensive history of nuclear power generation which has its own legacy waste associated with it. The Scottish Government, unlike the UK Government, has stated it will not use geological disposal as a method of waste storage and their policy is that waste should be stored in near-surface facilities and recognises that ‘long-term management options may not be feasible at present or have yet to be developed‘. A recent academic paper on this issue suggested the following:

‘In an independent or further devolved Scotland the task of building the necessary installations for nuclear waste disposal will be a significant cost to a new nation. However, there is also a lack of a legal framework, and this should be addressed with immediate effect.’

Additional confusion with regards to radioactive waste policy arises from the difference between ‘spent fuel’ and waste. Spent fuel is defined by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission as:

the bundles of uranium pellets encased in metal rods that have been used to power a nuclear reactor. Nuclear fuel loses efficiency over time and periodically, about 1/3 of the fuel assemblies in a reactor must be replaced. The nuclear reaction is stopped before the spent fuel is removed. But spent fuel still produces a lot of radiation and heat that must be managed to protect workers, the environment and the public.

Spent fuel is not currently classified as waste, and therefore can be traded and sent overseas for processing, whereas this is banned for material classified as ‘waste’. Currently, the Thorp Reprocessing plant at Sellafield accepts spent fuel contracts from around the world (including Scotland), that would include an independent Scotland. However, the Thorp plant is due to close in 2018 when current contracts have been completed. This may create an issue with any remaining spent fuel in the UK, regardless of an independent Scotland. However, if either an independent Scotland or the remaining UK decided to reclassify ‘spent fuel’ as waste, this would remove the option to export waste for processing and would require an independent Scotland to develop additional infrastructure to deal with this new waste.

Citizen science: how can we all contribute to the climate discussion?

Marion Ferrat April 4, 2014

Until the turn of the 20th century, science was an activity practiced by amateur naturalists and philosophers with enough money and time on their hands to devote their lives to the pursuit of knowledge and the understanding of the natural world.

Hand-colored lithograph of Malaclemys terrapin, in John Edwards Holbrook’s North American herpetology. Source – Wikimedia Commons.

Today, scientific research is an industry of its own, carried out by highly trained and specialised professionals in academic institutions and research laboratories. From the outside, the world of science can sometimes seem like a mysterious one. A world that conveys wonder yet can feel impenetrable and somewhat detached from the reality of our daily lives.

But science is not that far removed from us, and anyone with an interest in anything from astrophysics to ecology and climate change can get involved and become a citizen scientist.

Citizen science is the engagement of amateur or nonprofessional scientists in scientific research, either through observations in nature, data analysis, or loaning of tools and resources such as computer power. Though the concept has picked up in recent years, citizen science is nothing new: Charles Darwin relied on the observations of amateur naturalists around the world to develop his theory of evolution.

1837 sketch by Charles Darwin of an evolutionary tree. Source – Wikimedia Commons.

From bird watching to galaxies

Citizen scientists can get involved in a number of projects, depending on their interest, how much time they would like to spend, and what facilities they are prepared to loan.

The spiral galaxy NGC 1345. Source – ESA/Hubble/NASA.

Astronomy lovers can participate in the Galaxy Zoo project, where members of the public are asked to help classify galaxies. Humans are much better at pattern recognition than computers, and scientists simply to not have the time and resources to analyse the thousands of images of galaxies captured by telescopes. Amateur astronomers participating in Galaxy Zoo lend their eyes to carry out this task and millions of classifications have been carried out through the project.

Citizen science doesn’t just happen on people’s computers. In the spirit of Darwin, many ecology and wildlife scientific projects make use of thousands of amateur observations. Since the launch of the Garden Birdwatch in 1994, bird lovers help the British Trust for Ornithology understand how birds use our gardens through weekly observations of what species fly into their back yards. For the BioBlitz project, professional and amateur naturalists get together for an intensive 24-hour classification of all species of mammal, bird, insect, plant and fungus found in a particular space.

Great tit in a garden in Broadstone, UK. Source: Ian Kirk, Wikimedia Commons.

Many people have the desire, ability and tools to contribute to research activities. By facilitating the communication between research, policy and the public, citizen science is another instrument for public engagement, with potential mutual benefits for all.

How can citizen science help with climate change research?

In the wake of devastating events such as storm Sandy, typhoon Haiyan, Australian bushfires or the recent floods in the UK, the big question on everyone’s lips is this: Is climate change to blame for more frequent and powerful extreme weather events?

Typhoon Haiyan captured MODIS on NASA’s Aqua satellite. Source: NASA, Wikimedia Commons.

The process of linking specific extreme weather patterns to global climate change, what scientists call attribution, can be tricky. In order to define a causal relationship (did A cause B? Did climate change cause the UK storms?), climate scientists need strong statistical proof. This requires thousands and thousands of simulations of a particular set of conditions, so that any interesting climate trend can be established enough times to be “statistically significant”. But extreme weather events are, by definition, a result of rare and unusual weather conditions and so a great number of simulations have to be run to produce statistically relevant data.

Such a large number of simulations takes time and produces terabyte after terabyte of data that must then be analysed. This requires huge computing resources and universities and research centres often do not have the physical resources to carry out all these simulations rapidly.

UK Floods, Staines-upon-Thames. Source: Marcin Cajzer, Wikimedia Commons.

The new weather@home project, set up by a team of Oxford climate scientists, asks interested members of the public to loan their spare computer time to help climate scientists run more numerous and faster climate simulations. It specifically aims to determine whether the UK’s wet winter and unusually strong storms were triggered by rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations and associated climate change.

How does it work?

For climate simulations to work, scientists have to tell the model where to start. For a chosen period of time to be modelled, they enter the set of particular conditions (“initial conditions”), such as atmospheric temperature, humidity, wind speed and greenhouse gas levels, that was observed at the start of the chosen period. They might decide to start their model one particular month and will use relevant data for that month as the model’s starting point.

Using these initial conditions, the model will then calculate how weather conditions evolve over time. Looking at the specific period of time when an extreme weather event occurred, scientists can model that same period thousands of times over in their climate model to see how often the model predicts the extreme event, and how often weather patterns unfold as normal, with no extreme event.

To determine whether this winter’s storms are linked to human-induced climate change, the weather@home team is running their model with two different sets of initial conditions.

– Real conditions that were actually measured (with high levels of greenhouse gases).

– ‘Natural’ atmosphere and ocean conditions that would have existed without the influence of human emissions.

By running thousands and thousands of these simulations, the Oxford team can then compare how frequently the extreme events occur in both sets of simulations and see whether the impact of human emissions have made these events more likely and/or stronger.

The weather@home project is on going, and the more simulations are carried out, the more robust the conclusions will be.

The first results are in!

The scientists are analysing the model results as they come in from citizen scientists’ homes, and anyone can monitor how the data evolves as more results are published on the website. Their first four batches of results are online here and it is possible to observe first hand how the plots are slowly building up as more and more data comes in. Thousands and thousands of simulations are still needed in order to acquire statistically significant results, and it is still time to join the project. The more the merrier. And the better scientists’ understanding of last winter’s extreme weather.

The Water-Energy Nexus

Flo Bullough February 4, 2014

Tarbela Dam on the Indus river in pakistan. The dam was completed in 1974 and was designed to store water from the Indus River for irrigation, flood control, and the generation of hydroelectric power. The use of water for power captures the interdependence of energy and water. Source - Wikimedia Commons

Flo Bullough writes on the concept of the water-energy nexus; its implications for energy and water security and the impact of climate change and future planning and regulation.

I first came across the concept of the water-energy nexus when the former UK Chief Scientific Advisor John Beddington discussed the interdependence of food, water and energy as part of his tenure at government: something he described as a ‘perfect storm’. Since then, much has been written about this topic and below is an overview of the issues as they relate to the geosciences.

Tarbela Dam on the Indus river in pakistan. The dam was completed in 1974 and was designed to store water from the Indus River for irrigation, flood control, and the generation of hydroelectric power. The use of water for power captures the interdependence of energy and water. Source - Wikimedia Commons

Water stress and scarcity is one of the most urgent cross-cutting challenges facing the world today and is intrinsically linked with the need for energy. Water is required for extraction, transport and processing of fuel as well as to process fuels, for cooling in power plants and for irrigation in the case of biofuels. While energy is required for pumping, transportation and the purification of water, for desalination, and for wastewater. The interconnectedness is such that water and energy cannot be addressed as separate entities. This interdependence is termed the ‘water-energy nexus’, an approach which allows a more holistic assessment of energy and water security issues. Water scarcity is intensifying due to excessive withdrawal , whilst concern for energy provision is sparked by diminishing fossil fuel reserves and the built-in problem of CO2 emissions and climate change.

Over the last 50 years, the amount of water withdrawals has tripled while the amount of reliable supply has remained constant. This has resulted in depletion of long term water reservoirs and aquifers, most acutely in emerging economies with high population growth such as China, India and areas in the Middle East. Additionally, pressures such as the growing cost of fuel extraction, climate change and the of the energy mix has put pressure on the security of energy supply.

Map of the global distribution of economic and physical water scarcity as of 2006. Source – Wikimedia Commons

Energy limited by water

The energy sector relies heavily on the use and availability of water for many of its core processes. Resource exploitation, the transport of fuels, energy transformation and power plants account for around 35% of water use globally. Thermoelectric power plants are particularly thirsty and use significant amounts of water accounting for the majority of water use by the energy sector. In the USA in 2007, thermoelectric power generation, primarily comprising coal, natural gas and nuclear energy, generated 91% of the total electricity and the associated cooling systems account for 40% of USA freshwater withdrawals (King et al., 2008).

Of the different types of power plants, gas fired plants consume the least water per unit of energy produced, whereas coal powered plants consume roughly twice as much water, and nuclear plants two to three times as much. By contrast, wind and solar photovoltaic energy consume minimal water and are the most water-efficient forms of electricity production.

Comparative water consumption values by energy type. Data source – WssTP

There has been much discussion over the variable CO2 contributions of different fuels but these can be misleading, as the consideration of water consumption (as opposed to withdrawal, see Link) is often omitted. For example, unconventional fracked gas is often presented as a preferable source of energy over coal due to its reduced associated CO2 emissions, but the extraction of fracked gas consumes seven times more water than natural gas, oil extraction from oil sands requires up to 20 times more than conventional drilling and bio fuels can consume thousands times more water due to the need for irrigation. Additionally, carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology has the capacity to remove CO2 from the system but is also estimated to need 30-100% more water when added to a coal fired power plant. Looking at carbon intensity alone may result in a scenario where electricity production is constrained by water scarcity, while global demand for electricity increases.

Water limited by Energy

The flipside to the need for water for energy production is the need for energy in order to produce and deliver water for drinking and other domestic, agricultural and industrial use. Domestic water heating accounts for 3.6% of total USA

Water treatment works. Source – Wikimedia Commons

energy consumption (King et al., 2008) while supply and conveyance of water is also energy-intensive and is estimated to use over 3% of USA total electricity. Energy is required at every step of the supply chain, from pumping ground water (530 kW h M-1 for 120 m depth), to surface water treatment (the average plant uses 370 kWh M-1) and transport and home heating (King et al., 2008). Water treatment will require even more energy with the addition of treatment technologies and purification measures. Water companies in the UK report increases of over 60% in electricity usage since 1990 due to advanced water treatment and increased connection rates, and conservative estimates predict increases of a further 60-100% over 15 years in order to meet the myriad relevant EU directives. This increased energy use may result in displacement of the pollution problem from that in water bodies to build up of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Desalination

One of the most problematic developments in the competition for water and energy is the growth of desalination. It is used in areas suffering from water scarcity, but have viable energy sources to power the energy-intensive purification process. In areas such as the Middle East, the Mediterranean and Western USA, governments have increased their investment in desalination technology in order to secure a more stable water supply. However, the high-energy requirements, steep operational costs, wastewater disposal issues and large CO2 emissions often make this an unsustainable solution.

Desalination is often made economical through access to cheap, local energy sources and an abundant water source. This

Desalination can be very energy intensive. A view across a reverse osmosis desalination plant. Source – Wikimedia Commons

usually precludes the adoption of desalination in many land-locked countries, as operational costs increase with distance from the water source. However, increased water stress is leading to calls for more ambitious projects such as the planned Red Sea-Dead Sea project (see an earlier Four Degrees post on this) to build a desalination plant and a 180 km pipeline through Israel, Palestine and Jordan.

Desalination can use 10-12 times as much energy as standard drinking water treatment, and is expensive, unsustainable and can lead to increased CO2 emissions (King et al., 2008). These undesirable effects have led to widespread opposition to desalination in areas such as California and Chennai, India. Utilising renewable energy resources, coupled with the use of saline or wastewater for cooling at the power plants, could make the process more sustainable.Water and energy are set to become increasingly interdependent, and by 2050 water consumption to generate electricity is forecast to more than double.

The Impact of Water Scarcity

Freshwater scarcity is a growing issue and by 2030, demand is set to outstrip

India is a very green and wet country courtesy of its regular monsoons but poor management and overexploitation has left is with problems with water scarcity. Source - Wikimedia Commons

India is a very green and wet country courtesy of its regular monsoons but overexploitation of its water resources has left it with problems with water scarcity. Source – Wikimedia Commons

supply by 40%. This is due in part to economic and population growth, but also the rise of aspirational lifestyles, which creates demand for more water-intensive products. This increase in demand will put additional pressure onto water-stressed regions, as well as intensifying current trans-boundary water conflicts. The issue of water shortages often intersects geographically with fragile or weak governments and institutions that may lack the capacity to put in place measures to address water security. In 2004, 29% of India’s groundwater reserves resided in areas that were rated semi-critical to overexploited. About 60% of India’s existing and planned power plants are located in water-stressed areas and there are plans to build a further 59 GW of capacity, around 80% of which will be in areas of water stress and scarcity.

Click on the image to watch an animation showing the average yearly change in mass, in cm of water, during 2003-2010, over the Indian subcontinent. Source – Wikimedia Commons

Climate change impacts

Climate change presents a challenge to business-as-usual assumptions about future energy and water provision. Predicted major heat waves and droughts will add pressure to both water and energy security. Climate change is set to affect areas around the world in unprecedented ways; in southern Europe, temperatures are likely to rise, and drought will become more common in a region already vulnerable to water stress. Particularly in Spain, a country that derived 14.3% of its electricity production from hydropower in 2010, where hydroelectric plants have been under considerable stress in the last 20 years due to long running issues with drought (Perez et al., 2009; Trading Economics, 2013). Power cuts caused by extreme weather events, which are expected to become more frequent, will affect areas that rely heavily on energy-intensive ground water extraction for drinking water.

The 2013 EIA Energy Outlook up to 2040 shows steady increases in the need for all fuel types for energy use. Source – Wikimedia Commons

What can be done?

The conflict between more water-intensive energy production and the water needs of a growing population, seeking a better quality of life, will exacerbate an already stressed water-energy nexus.Additionally, Climate change is now considered an issue of national security in many countries, threatening both people and the environment within and across state boundaries. For this reason, climate change mitigation and adaptation must be managed at a new strategic level, beyond that of national law making. A more holistic approach to management of environmental change, water and energy security will also be required. It will also require strategic planning of water and energy security over much longer timescales than previously.New water and energy production plants must be sited with consideration for water withdrawal, consumption and local power accessibility in addition to future unpredictability in climate as the lifetime of such developments is several decades or more.

Regulatory Changes

Another important tool to address these issues is regulation. Current regulatory frameworks such as the European Climate and Energy Package and the Water Framework Directive (WFD) need to be developed in light of the water-energy nexus model. The EU is committed to 20-30% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2020 compared to levels in 1990, with reductions of up to 50% by 2030 and 80% by 2050 under negotiation. In contrast, the WFD requires additional treatment measures and this will need additional energy, exacerbating tensions between water and energy demand.

There are many policy instruments that can be used to regulate the role of water and energy management, such as water pricing and charges on carbon emissions to incentivise sustainable behaviour. A recent example of this includes the new US Environment Protection Agency announcement that they will be limiting greenhouse gas emissions for all new electricity generating power plants for coal and gas. The development of CCS technology could reduce the carbon footprint of power plants, but water consumption implications should be taken into consideration. Adoption of disincentives for certain types of land-use change and stricter building and engineering regulations could also be introduced to increase resilience against extreme weather.

The growing geopolitical issues of water location and scarcity will need to be managed through adaptable water sharing agreements, since many of the world’s largest and most important river basins, such as the Mekong River, which passes

Map of the Mekong River – The long and complicated route of the Mekong river and its intersection with many borders shows the complexity of water management. Source – Wikimedia Commons

through south-east Asia, cut across many borders. Co-management strategies such as shared water level and quality information will become important so as the water systems can be managed effectively. Governments must also improve their resilience to extreme weather conditions individually and collectively.

A greater focus on recycling energy- and water-intensive commodities would also alleviate water stresses when taken together with other measures. Education about recycling and water and energy conservation programmes could produce benefits, but also require investment and careful management.

This broad set of issues can only be effectively ameliorated through a holistic approach. A broad analytic framework is needed to evaluate the water-energy relationship, and this must be balanced with local policy contexts and different regulatory measures to ensure water and energy are sustainably managed in the 21st century.

A version of this post first appeared in the European Federation of Geologists magazine ‘European Geologist‘.

References and Further Reading

Gassert, F., Landis, M., Luck, M., Reig, P., Shiao, T. 2013. Aqueduct Global Maps 2.0. Aqueduct, World Resources Institute. (accessed here in March 2013: http://aqueduct.wri.org/publications)

Glassman, D., Wucker, M., Isaacman, T., Champilou, C. 2011. The Water-Energy Nexus: Adding Water to the Energy Agenda. A World Policy Paper. (accessed here in March 2013: http://www.worldpolicy.org/policy-paper/2011/03/18/water-energy-nexus)

IEA World Energy Outlook 2011. (accessed here in March 2013: http://www.iea.org/newsroomandevents/speeches/AmbJonesDeloitteConference21MayNN.pdf)

King, C, W., Holman, A, S., Webber, M, E. 2008. Thirst for energy. Nature Geoscience, 1, 283-286.

Lee, B., Preston, F., Kooroshy, J., Bailey, R., Lahn, G. 2012. Resources Futures. Chatham House. (accessed here in March 2013: http://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/papers/view/187947)

Perez Perez, L., Barreiro-Hurle, J. 2009. Assessing the socio-economic impacts of drought in the Ebro River Basin. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 7, No 2, 269-280.

Trading Economics. Electricity Production from Hydroelectric Sources (%of total) in Spain. (accessed here in March 2013: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/spain/electricity-production-from-hydroelectric-sources-percent-of-total-wb-data.html)

WssTP The European Water Platform. 2011. Water and Energy: Strategic vision and research needs. (accessed here in March 2013: http://www.wsstp.eu/content/default.asp?PageId=750&LanguageId=0)

Climate and Policy Roundup – January 2014

Flo Bullough January 27, 2014

The European Commission, Brussels - Source: Sébastien Bertrand, Wikimedia Commons.

News

EU announces climate and energy goals for 2030

The European commission has announced a target to reduce its emissions by 40% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. It also stated that 27% of total energy production should come from renewable sources. The announcement came on 22 January following intense negotiations between its member states.

The European Commission, Brussels – Source: Sébastien Bertrand, Wikimedia Commons.

The 40% reduction is at the high end of the range of projected decisions, and is the toughest climate change target of any region in the world. The renewable energy target of 27% is an EU-wide binding agreement, meaning that individual states are not obliged to commit to increasing renewables to this level.

The decision to remove country-specific targets places faith in individual states to meet these targets.

The EU targets are the first to be announced ahead of the international meeting that will take place in Paris in 2015, where world governments will discuss a global framework to avoid dangerous levels of emissions and global warming. Every country is expected to announce its own emission and energy targets ahead of the meeting.

The UK energy and climate change secretary Ed Davey opposed the target but was overruled as other big member states such as France, Germany and Italy backed it.

More details and commentaries can be found on Carbon Brief. A step-by-step account of the day can be found on The Guardian website. You can watch the press conference here.

UK Chief Scientific Adviser talks climate

The UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser Sir Mark Walport will give a series of lectures on climate change at Science and Discovery Centres around the country. The tour will kick-off at the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester on January 28^th. It will continue throughout February and March 2014 with events in Bristol, Belfast, Birmingham, London and Edinburgh.

US sets greenhouse gas targets for power plants

A coal fired power plant in Minnesota. Source – Wikimedia Commons

The US Environmental Protection agency have recently published a rule that governs the limit of the amount of greenhouse-gas emissions that can be released from power plants. The rule effectively means that any new coal-fired power plants built in the US must capture and sequester around 40% of their emissions. This post on the Union of Concerned Scientists‘ website focusses on the science around this new policy initiative.

The EU goes blue

Source: Wikimedia Commons.

The European Commission unveiled an action plan to harvest renewable energy from Europe’s Seas and Oceans, otherwise known as “Blue Energy”. This includes developing technologies to capture energy from waves, tides and temperature differences in the water. It is thought that the resources available in the world’s waters could exceed the world’s present and projected future energy needs. The Commission has set up an Ocean Energy Forum to address the challenges faced by the Blue Energy sector, including high cost of technology and complicated licensing rules.

Erratic weather over the festive season

There has been much written about the erratic weather and devastating flooding around the UK over the festive period. With particular focus on the impacts of the cuts in the Department of Farming and Rural Affairs and the Environment Agency and whether this would have an impact in the future. Now a new report says that spending plans have a £500 million shortfall over 25 years which could put more than 250,000 homes at risk. See the story on BBC News – Flood funds gap puts ‘250,000’ homes at risk’

More El Nino in a warming world

The 1997 El Nino seen by TOPEX/Poseidon. Source – Wikimedia Commons

This week there have been a few stories on the mutual impact of Climate Change and El Nino. This article in Nature discussed how the frequency of extreme El Nino events could double as the world warms while others discussed concern over 2013 being the hottest year on record despite it not being an El Nino year, normally a key driver of hotter years.

Exploring one of the world’s most mysterious seas

The next big project for the International Ocean Discovery Program (IODP) is to unravel the geological history of the South China Sea. In particular, the project will focus on the formation of the Sea, due to its unique position between the highest point on Earth in Himalayas and the deepest point, the Mariana Trench.

The South China Sea. Source – Wikimedia Commons.

Research highlights

A distant connection between the North Atlantic Ocean and Antarctic sea ice

Antarctic mountains and pack ice – Source: Jason Auch, Wikimedia Commons.

Temperature changes in the North Atlantic Ocean could directly influence the amount of sea ice in Antarctica, a new study has shown. This could explain the observed increase in Antarctic sea ice, despite the region experiencing the most pronounced amount of warming.

Researchers from the Courant Institute of Mathematical Science at New York University looked at satellite data, observations of ocean temperature and data from 18 Antarctic research stations. Using this data and a global atmospheric climate model, they found a relationship between decade-long winter temperatures in the North and tropical Atlantic surface waters and the concentration of Antarctic sea ice.

Their results suggest that the Atlantic Ocean could play an important role in influencing Antarctic climate, and should be taken into account when modelling future impacts of climate change.

The results were published in the journal Nature.

Ancient moss reveals Arctic warming unprecedented in 44,000 years

Baffin Islans - Source: Wes Gill, Wikimedia Commons.

Baffin Island – Source: Wes Gill, Wikimedia Commons.

Present-day temperatures in the Canadian Arctic are warmer than the natural historical variability of the past 44,000, researchers have suggested.

A team led by scientists from the University of Boulder, Colorado, collected and analysed 365 moss samples from 110 locations on Baffin Island in the eastern Canadian Arctic. The mosses were originally buried under ice and have been exposed by the recent warming of this region.

Radiocarbon dating of these biological samples suggested that the region is warmer now than in any century in the past 5000 years, and in some areas warmer than in the past 44,000 years. The authors conclude that human activities have led to unprecedented warmth in the region.

The results were published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.

El Nino events twice as likely in a warming world

Higher surface water temperature in the eastern Pacific Ocean in a warming world could increase the frequency of extreme El Nino events, an international team of scientists has shown. Anomalous El Nino events can disrupt global weather patterns, causing catastrophic floods and droughts in different regions of western South America, as well as severely impact marine and bird life.

The research team used a series of twenty global climate models to simulate rainfall associated with extreme El Nino events during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, up to the year 2090.

Their results suggest that extreme events will occur more frequently during this century than in the past due to climate change. This could lead to more occurrences of extreme weather, the authors warned.

The results were published in the journal Nature Climate Change.

Around EGU

Laura Roberts of Geology Jenga talks to Sarah Day, Earth Science Communicator at The Geological Society in
Diamonds. Source – Wikimedia Commons

the 10 minute interview.
Joel Gill of Geology for Global Development reports on his field research into geohazards from Guatemala!
Rosalie Tostevin of Geology for Global Development writes on the role of natural resources in shaping the development of Namibia in Diamonds aren’t forever.
Flo Bullough at Four Degrees talks about the latest House or Lords inquiry into ‘Creating value from waste’.
Also on Four Degrees, Marion Ferrat takes a look at the media reporting of climate change of the last two IPCC reports.

Flo and Marion