[ad_1]
The reaction of the Trump administration to a major report on the federal climate is perhaps the most thorough, but the authors and reviewers have another audience in mind: state and local policymakers.
The US Global Change Research Program unveiled the report, the fourth installment of the National Climate Assessment, on 23 November. This document, required by law every four years, was written by a team of scientists from 13 agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency. , NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – and non-federal scientists.
The assessment explicitly states that the Earth's climate is changing faster than ever in the history of modern civilization, mainly because of human activity.
The United States is already experiencing the effects of climate change and these will intensify, but the severity will depend on measures taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to unavoidable changes.
Region by region
Authors and critics said the new report also delved much deeper into the impacts of climate change region by region – encompassing the costs of a warming world for economic sectors, how extreme weather could Intensify in a region and the resulting public health damage. could result.
The report is not a prescription for the policy, but it proposes actions to the city and state that climatologists believe other decision makers can easily adopt.
The regional and granular focus was deliberate, in response to calls from local politicians and states to make the report more salient for them, climatologists said. And making sure that these decision-makers can use climate assessment to set policies is even more important now that the Trump administration is reversing most federal climate policies, dismissing science and cutting funding climate-related efforts, scientists added.
Rachel Licker, senior climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told Bloomberg Environment that many cities and states "saw this divide as a lack of federal leadership." They wonder what they can do more, "and it will help them understand the next steps."
Interconnected risks
According to climatologists, climate-related risks are articulated and often aggravated, which is part of the progress of this assessment.
Kristie Ebi, a professor of global health at the Center for Global Health and Environment at the University of Washington in Seattle, told Bloomberg Environment that previous climate assessments have looked at various impacts, such as extreme weather events or health. public. This has made it difficult for regional decision-makers to simultaneously study the effects of climate on their regions.
Seattle, for example, faces rising sea levels, storm surges, ecosystem effects and weather-related damage to public health, Ebi said. writing the assessment chapter on impacts on human health.
Municipal decision-makers "need to look at all of these measures," added Ebi. "It is important to target these regional areas so that they can get a better idea of the totality and timing of the risks, the speed with which we need to act and the timing of the risks. to help them respond to limited funding for investment. . "
Seattle won the Bloomberg American Cities Climate Challenge, an initiative of Michael Bloomberg's US Cities Initiative. Bloomberg Environment is operated by entities controlled by Michael Bloomberg.
Prioritize resources
Such a dynamic can also help decision-makers determine priorities, said Ebi and other scientists.
"Climate change is affecting some resources first and most severely," said Patrick Gonzalez, a climatologist and associate professor at the University of California, Berkeley, Bloomberg Environment. It also varies from region to region, but the assessment gives policymakers a sense of how their region is exposed to climate change, added Gonzalez, who served as lead author of the chapter's coordination. dedicated to the Southwest evaluation.
The report, for example, "allows a county executive to realize that forest fires are more at risk than invasive species or that perhaps heat-related deaths may be more important than forest fires. "said Gonzalez. "This allows this type of prioritization and, hopefully, gives some examples to adopt."
The lack of federal leadership is emerging
Any increased action by states and cities will always be diluted by the lack of federal focus on climate policy and investment.
The report "only highlights the importance of federal leadership," Licker said. "It is clear that we need all the assets for the moment. It's not really the time for the administration to give up its leadership. "
The White House did not immediately comment on the release of the report.
It is possible that part of the leadership deficit will be filled by a Democrat-led House. The new chairs of the House Science, Energy and Trade and Natural Resources Committees recently announced the organization of a series of hearings on Early Climate Science of 2019.
The new Democrat-led House should use the assessment as a blueprint, Green Light, Senior Fellow of the World Resources Institute's World Climate Program, told Bloomberg Environment. He suggested a series of hearings to determine whether the United States was adequately preparing for climate change, not only at the federal level, but also at the state and local levels.
Light led the writing of the chapter of the report on climate change mitigation.
"For the moment, the landscape is very rough," said Light. "Some states are progressing, some cities, but federal guidelines in this area are not enough."
Source link
