New Arctic Climate Change Report: Stark Findings Confront Secretary of State Tillerson Ahead of G7

, senior climate scientist | May 10, 2017, 10:01 am EST
Bookmark and Share

On May 11, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will cap two years of US chairmanship of the Arctic Council and present progress made over that time and look at likely future directions.

The forthcoming declaration by the Nordic ministers puts climate change front and center in the lead up to this week’s Arctic Ministerial meeting. The world is paying attention and will be looking for how the issue of climate change is addressed in the Arctic Council ministerial statement, including any signals indicating how Secretary Tillerson might characterize future US actions under the Paris Climate Agreement.

SWIPA 2017: Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic (2017) – long from AMAP on Vimeo.

Stark findings

The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program report, Snow, Water, Ice, Permafrost (SWIPA 2017) will be presented at the Arctic Ministerial meeting this week. It includes two stark findings. First, the least bad scenario for sea level rise has gotten a lot worse—what scientists thought was the best possible chance (i.e. the lower end of the confidence range) for a slow and manageable sea level rise under a fully implemented Paris Climate Agreement just got faster and higher. Second, the global costs run into trillions stemming from  the changes over this century in the Arctic region.

One reason we are in suspense is that there is one additional seat at the table—the proverbial seat occupied by the elephant in the room (i.e. evidence from the just-released science report requested by the Arctic Council).

It is likely that a binding agreement for continued scientific cooperation will be signed by the eight Artic Nations. Will the security implications of the SWIPA 2017 report be a cause for recalibration of the mix of investments in climate adaptation and mitigation (i.e. tackling the root causes of accelerating changes in the Arctic)?

The forthcoming Fairbanks Declaration from this tenth Arctic Ministerial may well reverberate around the world with implications for the G7 leader’s summit in Sicily at the end of May.

Arctic warning: Time to update adaptation plans for sea level rise

According to SWIPA 2017, Arctic land ice contributed around a third of global sea level rise between 2004 and 2010. Overall, two-thirds of global sea level rise is attributed to the transfer of water previously stored on land (as ice or underground or in other reservoirs on land) and one-third of global sea level rise is attributed to warming of the ocean.

Global Sea Level Rise Contributions 2004-2010

Global sea level rise is attributed to a third from warming of the ocean and two thirds from the transfer of water previously stored on land (as ice or underground or in other reservoirs on land) to the ocean. Source: AMAP SWIPA 2017

The SWIPA 2017 report compares the “greenhouse gas reduction scenario” (known as RCP 4.5, which also serves as a proxy for an emissions scenario consistent with the long term goals of the Paris Climate Agreement) with the high emissions scenario (known as RCP 8.5 and used as a proxy for business as usual without a Paris Agreement).

It may be time to update adaptation plans to fully take into account more realistic projections of global sea level rise—SWIPA 2017 “estimates are almost double the minimum estimates made by the IPCC in 2013” for global sea level rise from all sources.

The difference between a fully implemented Paris Climate Agreement scenario and business as usual could not be more stark. The report declares that “the rise in global sea level by 2100 would be at least 52 cm  (20 inches) for a greenhouse gas reduction scenario and 74 cm (29 inches) for a business-as-usual scenario.” This is the best estimate likely “lock in” range for minimal, least-cost, coastal adaptation depending on the choices we make to reduce heat-trapping emissions and short-lived climate forcers.

Arctic slush fund: The high costs of displaced communities, melting, flooding, and burning in the Arctic

The Arctic matters to all of us: what happens in the Arctic does not stay in the Arctic. Case in point is the recent economic analysis presented in SWIPA 2017.

Global cumulative costs of changes underway in the Arctic would likely cost $7–$90 trillion US dollars over 2010-2100. The costs include a wide range of climate change consequences, from Arctic infrastructure damage to communities exposed to sea level rise. For comparison, the US annual “real” gross domestic product in 2016 was $18.6 trillion in current dollars.

Implications for the G7 summit and Paris Climate Agreement

The Arctic Ministerial meeting May 11 is a chance for high level officials from the Arctic Council to meet and discuss progress in a setting historically noteworthy for peaceful cooperation to achieve shared goals.

There is a high degree of overlap between the Arctic council members and observer non-Arctic states and the Group of 7 (G7) summit in Sicily a few weeks later. There is also a high degree of overlap with the highest emitting nations and the members of the Arctic Council.

The lessons learned and issues of climate change that are grappled with during the Arctic Ministerial may very well carry through to the G7 forum. After the summit we expect to hear more definitively about US actions regarding contributions to the Paris Agreement going forward.

For the moment, eyes are focused on Secretary of State Tillerson and his remarks in Fairbanks Alaska, and the Fairbanks declaration, expected to be signed on May 11.

[UPDATE, May 12, 2017, 9:01am: Rex Tillerson signed the Fairbanks Declaration that supports the implementation of the Paris Agreement, that reiterates the need for global action to reduce global warming gases and short-lived pollutants, and that reaffirms the Arctic region’s commitment to sustainable development and to promoting the well-being of indigenous groups.]

 

AMAP SWIPA 2017

Posted in: Global Warming Tags: , , , , , ,

Support from UCS members make work like this possible. Will you join us? Help UCS advance independent science for a healthy environment and a safer world.

Show Comments


Comment Policy

UCS welcomes comments that foster civil conversation and debate. To help maintain a healthy, respectful discussion, please focus comments on the issues, topics, and facts at hand, and refrain from personal attacks. Posts that are commercial, self-promotional, obscene, rude, or disruptive will be removed.

Please note that comments are open for two weeks following each blog post. UCS respects your privacy and will not display, lend, or sell your email address for any reason.

  • La Nita

    Wouldn’t it be great for this warming problem to solve itself?
    It would save alot of money, trouble & would help with the severe weather intensity that disrupts so many lives.
    It would help save our ecosystem & could even boost our economy.
    I vote for praying for this. Praying still works. We need a miracle.

  • The world fiddles while Rome is burning.

  • Ken Sayers

    You talk about 50 years from now or 100 years from now. You nee to be more immediate than that. In the next 15 to 20 years such and such is going to happen. You need to find a way to hammer in what is actually happening now. For instance, by the last 2 weeks in April, we were seeing temperatures in the low to mid 90’s, here in North Florida. Now, not even in the first two weeks in May we are steady in the mid 90’s. Last summer we had to get up at 0630 to walk the dogs before it got too hot. What are we going to do this year? In 10 years do you think your kids are even going to be able to go outside? What will your cooling bill be like when you have to run your A/c 24/7 for 10 months of the year?

    The nice thing about winter is that it kills germs and reduces the pest populations. What do you think will happen when there is no more winter? What do you think will happen when it is too hot to grow things? The new blossoms on my gardenias crush and float to the ground, to dry to even open it is so hot and dry here right now. It was 95•F with 18% relative humidity today. Another thing I like about winter is that the snake population hibernates, I can let the dogs out in the backyard and not worry about snakes when the temperature is below 63°F. These warm winters are not good for that.

    Climate change is happening right now and the severe storms and the consequences are real and immediate. What are you going to do when you insurance company goes bankrupt? or the power goes out for a week and the temperatures climb?

    Simply put, how are you going to keep your kids alive?

    • Patriciabconley

      If you were looking for a way to earn some extra income every week… Look no more!!!! Here is a great opportunity for everyone to make $95/per hour by working in your free time on your computer from home… I’ve been doing this for 6 months now and last month i’ve earned my first five-figure paycheck ever!!!! Learn more about it on following link
      TopJobsWorldNetworkGroupMoney/Media/Net…..

      • The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program report, Snow, Water, Ice, Permafrost (SWIPA 2017) will be presented at the Arctic Ministerial meeting this week. It includes two stark findings. First, the least bad scenario for sea level rise has gotten a lot worse—what scientists thought was the best possible chance (i.e. the lower end of the confidence range) for a slow and manageable sea level rise under a fully implemented Paris Climate Agreement just got faster and higher. Second, the global costs run into trillions stemming from the changes over this century in the Arctic region.

  • Peter Anderson

    I am interested in a polite, scientific debate about human-caused catastrophic climate change.