Climate change - not just about blueberries
- 26 Jan 2012, 18:00
- Christian Hunt & Robin Webster
It is a truth often acknowledged (in certain sections of the
media) that we don't need to worry about climate change, because we
can 'just adapt' to whatever happens.
The trouble with this argument is that often it is just way of
saying 'we should do nothing', without actually coming out and
saying that.
Well, a bumper report from DEFRA out today begins to map out what
the logic of that argument entails. The '
UK Climate Change Risk Assessment' is the 2,000 page
culmination of a 3-year project looking at what might happen in the
UK as a result of climate change - both positive and negative.
Primarily aimed at government departments, its production was a
legal requirement under the 2008 Climate Change Act and its aim is
to inform what action the Government takes to reduce the risks and
seize the biggest opportunities.
There are plenty of uncertainties in the report, and plenty of the
predictions are made with low or medium certainty. But there are
also clear warnings, made with high confidence, about changes which
will have a significant impact on the UK in the near future.
There is 'high confidence' that there will be 'high negative
consequences' from changes in flooding patterns as soon as the
2020s, for example. There is also high confidence that agricultural
land is going to be threatened by flooding and coastal erosion, and
that keeping people cool in cities is going to get more
difficult.
Probably the clearest message in the report is over flooding,
where there are some fairly startling figures. For example - in
England and Wales, damage costs from flooding are currently 1.2
billion per annum. By the 2020s this will have risen to between 1.5
and 2.5 bn (high confidence). By the 2050s, the cost will be
between 1.8 bn and 6.8 bn, and by the 2080s between 2bn and
12bn.
So by the 2080s the annual economic impacts of flooding in this
country will rise by, at the least, 80%, and at the most,
1000%.
But what about the positives? Predictably, the
Daily Mail's reportage of Defra's findings rather enjoy these -
focusing cheerily on predictions of "fresher blueberries, plentiful
fish and fewer winter deaths" - the "unforeseen upside" of global
warming (in fact, the url of the Mail article gives a pretty good
clue as to where they are coming from on all this, reading as it
does:
Imagine-grazing-blueberries-fresh-plaice-warm-winters-Global-warming-doesnt-sounds-bad.html)
The report does suggest that there will be between 5,000 to 24,000
fewer premature deaths from cold as winters get warmer, although it
also notes that without measures to alleviate problems by the 2050s
there will be an extra 1,000 to 6,000 premature deaths per year due
to hotter summers. Even though the report notes that there is less
confidence in the projection for winter deaths, you could sum that
up as a plus.
There are also predictions that "Warmer conditions would be more
favourable to the cultivation of less common crops such as
blueberries and miscanthus and new crops not currently grown in
this country." and that "Rising sea temperatures may result in some
species of fish (e.g. plaice and sole) becoming more abundant in UK
waters, offering new fishing away from current fishing
ground"
Overall however, UKCRR does not paint a picture of pros cancelling
cons. The report also concludes that UK water resources are
projected to come under increased pressure - with 27-59 million
people in the UK living in areas affected by supply-demand deficits
by the 2050s (based on existing population levels); and sensitive
ecosystems that are already threatened by land use changes may come
under increased pressure. The report says that:
"The impacts on species may have knock-
on affects on habitats, ecosystem function and the goods and
services humans receive. Whilst some species would benefit from
these changes, many more would suffer...there may be tipping points
in land, aquatic and marine ecosystems that have major and possibly
irreversible changes, which we currently know little about"
In assessing the question of positive vs benefits, the following
table from the report lays it out reasonably clearly:
Opportunities are labelled green; threats pink to read - and the
level of darkness indicates the level of certainty. Although some
may focus on the positive, the chart makes it pretty clear that
they do not predominate.
So what does this all mean for the UK Government response? The
report's findings are based on Defra's "UKCPO9"
climate projections, which projects a range of changes in the UK
climate over this century, accounting for both natural variability
and the "uncertain response of regional climates to global
warming". Interestingly, although the future trajectory of
emissions is uncertain, the report says that
"...the range of plausible emissions
scenarios does not significantly affect the range of possible UK
climate changes until the latter part of the 21st Century, because
the different emissions pathways do not start to diverge until
mid-Century in terms of their effects on temperature rise."
So cutting emissions is important, but what we do now in terms
of mitigation may have more impact on the latter part of this
century than in the first half.
What the report does underline is that adaptation is clearly very
important. Many of the negative impacts can presumably be hedged
against by taking sensible steps now - although on the issue of
flood risk, this will mean government spending significant amounts
of money on an ongoing basis.
The report also points out that potential climate risks in other
parts of the world are much greater than they are in the UK. In
terms of impacts, the impacts of a changing global climate on
global health, global politics, migration, and international supply
chains could be as important for the UK as the direct effects of
climate change.
So even if some 'skeptics' like to portray adaptation as the
easier, cheaper and more sensible alternative to cutting emissions,
reports like this make it clear that adaptation is an additional
necessity, not an alternative, response to the challenges of
climate change.