The Tarbabys Blog

Axios

U.S. sea levels to rise by a foot through 2050, causing “profound” flooding

Andrew Freedman – February 16, 2022

The U.S. is poised to see as much of a rise in sea levels through the year 2050 as it has experienced in the past century, with additional increases through 2150, according to a comprehensive new federal report out Tuesday.

Why it matters: Sea-level rise is one of the most tangible present-day effects from human-caused climate change that is being felt in the U.S., with coastal flood events becoming far more common and damaging in just the past few decades.

Driving the news: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released the report along with about six other federal agencies that play a role in tracking the rise in sea level.

• It updates figures from 2017 by taking into account the newest sea level rise projections, and breaks trends down into different time periods. Data from tide gauges, satellite instruments and the latest computer models are all incorporated.
• The report includes extreme water level probabilities for points along the U.S. coastline, and will be incorporated into the next National Climate Assessment, which is underway.
• The assessment projects an additional 10- to 12-inch increase in sea levels by 2050, with higher amounts in some parts of the country due to changes in land height and ocean currents.
• The East and Gulf coasts are expected to see a greater rise in sea level than the West Coast, for example.

The big picture: The range of sea level rise at the global, national and regional levels has narrowed since 2017, thanks to improved measurements, a better understanding of polar ice sheets and refinements of computer modeling.

• The report projects the sea level rise along the contiguous U.S. coastline to be between 1 and 7 feet in 2100, compared to 2000 levels, and 2.6 to 13 feet by 2150.
• The range in these projections largely depends on the amount of greenhouse gas emissions and resulting warming.

Threat level: The report warns that the sea level rise through 2050 will dramatically escalate the frequency and severity of coastal flooding, including so-called “sunny day” flooding at times of high tide in areas such as Charleston, S.C. and Miami.

• The report says that nationally, a “flood regime shift” is projected to occur by 2050, with moderate high tide flood frequencies to increase by more than a factor of 10 nationally, along with a five-fold increase in major high tide flood frequencies.
• It notes that “significant consequences” are in store for coastal infrastructure, absent new efforts to reduce risk exposure.
• Moderate and typically damaging high tide flooding is projected to increase from an average frequency of 0.3 events per year in 2020, to 4 events per year in 2050, the report finds.
• And minor or nuisance high tide flooding, currently becoming the norm in parts of Miami and influencing real estate prices, is likely to dramatically increase from about three events per year as a national average in 2020 to more than 10 events per year.
• “The minor nuisance-like flooding that’s becoming a growing problem in many East and Gulf Coast communities, some West Coast, is likely to become damaging flooding,” said NOAA oceanographer William Sweet during a press conference call. “That extra foot on average or so around the country is just going to reach further inland and grow deeper and more severe.”

What they’re saying: Ben Strauss, CEO and chief scientist of the research group Climate Central, said, “Just one foot of sea level rise will change a lot of American lives.”

• “Nationwide, about a million Americans live on land less than one yardstick above the high tide line. That jumps to five million below two yardsticks — the size of Houston plus Chicago, averaging almost 70,000 people per vertical inch,” he said via email.
• “Our national sea level threat has started slowly, but it’s going to accelerate like a rocket,” Strauss added.
• Jeremy Porter, chief research officer at the nonprofit First Street Foundation, said the findings “amplify concerns” raised in his work about the non-linear growth in sea level rise and flood risk.
• “The simple addition of a few inches of sea level rise exponentially increases the consequences of coastal surge events,” he said in an email.

Of note: The most extreme sea level rise scenario from NOAA’s 2017 report, which showed an increase of 8 feet of global mean sea level rise by 2100, is no longer considered plausible, the new analysis shows.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated with Ben Strauss and Jeremy Porter’s comments.

Tampa Bay Times, St. Petersburg, Fla.

Here’s what Tampa Bay can expect from new sea level rise projections

Zachary T. Sampson, Tampa Bay Times – February 16, 2022

Florida’s near-future of higher sea levels and more flooding is coming into sharper focus, according to a new government report, even as scientists say worst-case conditions appear to be further off than initially thought — giving people additional time to prepare.

Across the United States, sea levels are expected to jump 10 to 12 inches in the next three decades — about the same rise that took place over the last 100 years, according to researchers at several federal agencies and universities, led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Damaging floods could happen 10 times as often, scientists say.

In Tampa Bay, a regional advisory panel has recommended that local governments plan for a range of sea level rise between roughly 11 and 31 inches from 2000 to 2050, based on a similar federal study published five years ago. The new projections, announced Tuesday, would raise the low end of that spectrum to just over a foot and drop the high end to about 19 inches in St. Petersburg.

“It’s a shift in the timing, not so much in the height,” said Gary Mitchum, associate dean at the University of South Florida College of Marine Science, who served as a reviewer for the federal report. Mitchum is a member of the regional science advisory panel, which he said will assess the data and revise its guidelines as needed.

Though the latest study lops off a previous “extreme” projection for sea level rise over the next few decades, Mitchum said people could still face similar conditions after 2100. He said Floridians should think of the estimates like a “cone of uncertainty” for approaching hurricanes.

“We’ve taken that cone, and we’ve narrowed it down,” he said. “There’s still going to be a hurricane. There are still going to be impacts. But we have a much better idea now of what they are.”

Sea level rise has accelerated across the world, spurred by global warming. People burn fossil fuels, releasing greenhouse gases that heat the atmosphere. Warm temperatures cause water to expand and ice sheets to melt. Scientists say earth is locked into more heating and sea level rise, but people can stave off the worst consequences of climate change by lowering emissions.

Compared to past research, the new report frames discussions more around a 30-year window, relatable to people as the length of a standard mortgage. Richard Spinrad, who leads the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, called it “a wake-up call for the United States.”

Nicole LeBoeuf, director of the National Ocean Service, said she grew up on the Texas coast and knows how shorelines shift naturally. But the problems mounting before cities today are different.

“These are not the kind of changes we grew up with,” LeBoeuf said. “Make no mistake: Sea level rise is upon us.”

South Florida, and especially Miami, is already a prominent example for sunny-day flooding, which fills streets with seawater during peak tides. That phenomenon will migrate to other cities and soak waterfront neighborhoods more frequently, said Thomas Wahl, a University of Central Florida engineering professor who was a reviewer for the government report.

Meanwhile, he said, storm surges that Floridians already fear will be more devastating.

“We don’t need as big a storm surge anymore — we maybe don’t need a Category 3 hurricane making landfall, but maybe a tropical depression” to cause serious flooding, Wahl said.

Tampa Bay is especially prone to destruction from surges, a threat that a recent Tampa Bay Times special report shows will grow substantially over the next 30 years. Mitchum’s research has predicted a rise in sunny-day floods over time, too.

A few inches of saltwater intrusion is costly. Regular floods cause infrastructure like stormwater pipes to degrade more quickly and can make low-lying neighborhoods hard to reach.

Higher water doesn’t only affect people and property. It will lead to more beach erosion and the loss of coastal marshes in places like Hernando County, said Davina Passeri, a research oceanographer for the U.S. Geological Survey in St. Petersburg. The state’s natural shoreline has offered protection from flooding and waves during storms, while serving as a key habitat for animals like birds and turtles.

“Between the dunes and the marshes … we’re going to lose that natural buffer,” said Passeri, who, like Mitchum and Wahl, reviewed the federal report. She is also a member of Tampa Bay’s Climate Science Advisory Panel.

Florida’s state leaders have started to direct hundreds of millions of dollars toward flood infrastructure projects such as revamped stormwater drains and seawalls. Adapting to future flooding will cost many billions of dollars. Hardening defenses will not be enough to save everything people have already built. In some spots, including the Florida Keys, officials are already managing a limited retreat from vulnerable properties.

In Pinellas County, the research reinforces the need for local governments to react, said Hank Hodde, the county’s sustainability and resiliency coordinator.

“I just hope this report can help fine-tune what we’re already doing and bring new people on board,” he said.

The study also highlights how quickly science is advancing while climate change becomes a more urgent, universal discussion.

Wahl remembers that when he started his career 15 years ago, “We didn’t have a name for high tide flooding.” Now everyone knows the term, if they haven’t already experienced the effects themselves.

The Bellingham Herald

Sea-level rise is coming for Washington communities. Here’s how Whatcom is preparing

Ysabelle Kempe – February 17, 2022

Washington’s shorelines are at risk as scientists predict an average 4 to 6 inches of sea-level rise for the region over the next three decades, according to a new government report by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and other agencies.

In Whatcom County, that has profound implications for coastal communities, tribes, ecosystems and agriculture. Rising sea levels could also increase flooding inland, as the Nooksack River’s flow into Bellingham Bay is further obstructed by pressure from the ocean, said Ellyn Murphy, chair of Whatcom’s Climate Impact Advisory Committee.

The new federal report is a stark reminder of how our lives and communities are being altered by human-caused climate change, which fuels sea-level rise as warming seawater expands and ice sheets and glaciers melt. The document’s findings, which update those from 2017 and project about a foot of sea-level rise by 2050 across the U.S. on average, elicited calls to action from leaders nationwide, including Sen. Maria Cantwell from Washington.

“Today’s NOAA report is alarming – in the next 30 years the sea will rise as much as it has in the last 100 years,” Cantwell said in a statement on Tuesday, Feb. 15. “We have to ensure that our coastal communities have the tools and resources to prepare and adapt to climate change and sea-level rise.”-

Almost 10% of Whatcom’s population — more than 20,000 people — live in the 100-year floodplain, or the area that has a 1% chance of flooding each year, according to NOAA. There is critical infrastructure in this at-risk area: four schools, one police station and four fire stations.

NOAA’s sea-level rise projections until 2050 are highly certain, even if humans do dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions spewed into the atmosphere as we continue to burn fossil fuels, the agency says. But we still need to curb our emissions, the agency warned in the report. Failing to do so could cause even worse sea-level rise — between 1.5 and 5 additional feet by the end of the century.

Whatcom, Lummi plans

Whatcom is already confronting how rising oceans will change our communities. Last year, the public and County Council asked county staff to include sea-level rise in the 2021 update to its Shoreline Management Program, a land-use policy and regulation document, said Chris Elder, senior planner of natural resources for the county, in an email to The Bellingham Herald.

But the county staff needed more data to determine the extent and potential impacts of sea-level rise, so it hasn’t yet been included in county code modifications, Elder said. However, the conversation prompted the county to apply for and earn $100,000 in state Department of Ecology grant funds to complete a project that will guide how sea-level rise should be integrated into local planning efforts. A number of other organizations and governments will participate in the project: Bellingham, Ferndale and Blaine cities, Port of Bellingham, Lummi Nation, U.S. Geological Survey and Washington Sea Grant.

“Several of these organizations are already implementing their own coastal resilience projects and we’re hoping that through this County effort we can really get all Whatcom coastal jurisdictions on a similar page of understanding around the impacts and build some collaborative efforts to address those impacts,” Elder wrote in an email to The Herald.

The county and other local partners are also providing support and funding for the Puget Sound Coastal Storm Modeling System, an effort by the U.S. Geological Survey to arm communities with tools for assessing and managing sea-level rise impacts.

The Lummi Nation is particularly vulnerable to the creeping fingers of sea-level rise: The low-lying reservation is home to the Lummi River floodplain and is bordered to the east by the Nooksack River floodplain, according to the 2016 Lummi Nation Atlas. In November, flooding from the Nooksack River cut off the reservation from the mainland.

Sea-level rise endangers Lummi Schelangen, or “way of life,” according to the tribe’s 2016 Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Plan: It will inundate much of the tidelands that make up about a third of the reservation’s acreage. Tidelands provide important habitat to shellfish, which the tribe harvests for food, and are important for ceremonial and commercial reasons. Coastal erosion could damage tribal burial sites, archaeological sites and artifacts.

When the seas come, sometimes the best option is to pick up and move, the tribe’s plan determined: “In some areas, managed retreat, wherein inland migration is facilitated, is likely to be the most viable long-term option to protect human life and reduce property damages.”

A Mighty Girl – Born February 17, 1909

Miep Gies — who is pictured here by the movable bookcase that hid Anne Frank’s secret annex — risked her life to hide Anne, her family, and four other Jews for over two years. After the Frank family was arrested, it was Gies who saved Anne’s diary and kept it safe until after the war. Now published in more than 60 languages, Eleanor Roosevelt called Anne’s diary “one of the wisest and most moving commentaries on war and its impact on human beings that I have ever read.”

Born on this day in Vienna in 1909, Gies moved in with a foster family in the Netherlands to escape food shortages in Austria following WWI. In 1933, she began working for Anne’s father, Otto Frank, as a secretary and soon became close friends with the family. After Anne’s older sister, Margot, received a summons to report to a Nazi work camp in Germany, the Frank family went into hiding. Gies, along with a few other employees, concealed them in secret rooms in the office building where they worked — a hiding place now famously known as the Secret Annex. Gies and her husband also hid an anti-Nazi university student in their own apartment. As she didn’t dare tell anyone, not even her foster parents, of her activities, Gies developed a system for acquiring food and other supplies surreptitiously, so that no one would suspect she was shopping for more than just her own family.

Over the two years the Franks were in hiding, Gies developed a close friendship with the teenage Anne. The hiding place was discovered after the German police received a tip about the existence of the Secret Annex and everyone hiding there was arrested. Gies went to the police station and attempted to buy their freedom but sadly without success. The effort could have cost her more than money: Gies could have been executed for hiding Jews — in fact two others, Victor Kugler and Johannes Kleiman, who helped hide the Franks were arrested and sent to work camps. Fortunately, the police officer who interrogated Gies discovered she was from his home town in Austria and let her go.

Before the Secret Annex was emptied by the police, Gies retrieved Anne’s diaries and hid them in her desk drawer. When the war was over, Gies turned the diaries over to the family’s only survivor, Otto Frank. She didn’t read them until the second printing and remarked that if she had read them during the war, she would have had to destroy them as they included the names of those who hid the Franks and of their black market suppliers.

Gies, who is pictured here with her husband Jan during a visit to the Anne Frank House in 1987, died in 2010 at the age of 100. While she has been widely honored for her actions during the war, including by the Netherlands, Germany, Israel, and Austria, Gies didn’t consider what she did extraordinary; rather she hoped that her actions showed that “even an ordinary secretary or a housewife or a teenager can, within their own small ways, turn on a small light in a dark room.”

To introduce children to Miep Gies’ heroic story, we highly recommend the inspiring picture book “Miep and the Most Famous Diary” for ages 6 to 9 at https://www.amightygirl.com/miep-and-the-most-famous-diaryFor adult readers, Gies’ story is told in her excellent autobiography: “Anne Frank Remembered: The Story of the Woman Who Helped to Hide the Frank Family” at https://www.amightygirl.com/anne-frank-rememberedFor many books for children and teens about girls and women who lived during the Holocaust period, including stories of other heroic resisters and rescuers, visit our blog post, “60 Mighty Girl Books About The Holocaust” at https://www.amightygirl.com/blog?p=11586To introduce children and teens to Anne Frank’s story, you can find numerous books about her for all ages in our blog post “Hope in a Hidden Room: 15 Books About Anne Frank” at https://www.amightygirl.com/blog?p=12110For several books for young readers about more heroic Holocaust rescuers, we recommend “The Butterfly” for ages 5 to 8 (https://www.amightygirl.com/the-butterfly), “The Whispering Town” for ages 6 to 9 (https://www.amightygirl.com/the-whispering-town), “Irena’s Children: A True Story of Courage” for ages 10 to 14 (https://www.amightygirl.com/irena-s-children-young-readers), and “The Light in Hidden Places” for ages 13 and up (https://www.amightygirl.com/the-light-in-hidden-places)

Kamila Valieva’s coach harshly criticized the 15-year-old skater right after she fell at the Olympics: ‘Why did you stop fighting?’

Rebecca Cohen and Meridith Cash – February 17, 2022

• Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva placed 4th in the women’s free skate at the Beijing Olympics.
• The gold-medal favorite fell twice during her routine and was visibly upset as she left the ice.
• The 15-year-old’s coach, Eteri Tutberidze, was caught harshly criticizing her on the broadcast.

Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva, the teen skating sensation embroiled in a doping scandal, left the ice in dispair after falling twice during her free skate program at the 2022 Beijing Olympics on Thursday.

But rather than offering the 15-year-old skating star some words of encouragement or comfort following her shocking flame-out, Valieva’s coach — Eteri Tutberidze — could only muster criticism.

“Why did you let it go?” Tutberidze was heard asking Valieva in Russian during the live broadcast of the women’s figure skating event.

“Why did you stop fighting? Explain it to me, why?” Tutberidze continued as the distraught teenager stepped off the ice. “You let it go after that axel. Why?”

A tearful Valieva — who finished in fourth place — did not respond to her coach. As her scores were announced, the star buried her head in her hands and sobbed.

Tutberidze laid her hand on Valieva’s back as the teen broke down and cried.

It was a stunning collapse for the highly-rated Valieva, whose eligibility to compete at the games came under question last week after news emerged that she’d failed a drug test in December. She tested positive for trimetazidine, a drug the World Anti-Doping Agency categorizes as a “hormone and metabolic modulator,” according to The Associated Press.

When taken without proper cause, the drug can bolster endurance and improve circulation. Both effects could give a high-level figure skater a competitive advantage.

Valieva was initially slapped with a provisional suspension from the Russian Anti-Doping Agency after the positive test surfaced. But following a swift appeal, the ban was overturned on February 9.

The International Olympic Committee then challenged that decision in the Court of Arbitration for Sport. On Monday, the court issued a ruling that lifted Valieva’s provisional suspension and paved the way for the teen to compete in the individual competition.

Many close to the sport slammed the decision to allow Valieva to compete, especially after multiple outlets reported on Tuesday that Valieva had tested positive for two additional heart drugs in the December 25 sample she provided.

Only trimetazidine has been banned from the Olympics, but the other two — hypoxen and L-Carnatine — have raised concerns from anti-doping officials and called into question Valieva’s excuse that she’d mixed up her medications

Valieva’s mother and coach insisted she was taking the drugs for “heart variations, but anti-doping officials have said that it is highly unlikely such a young, elite athlete would be taking this combination of drugs. The pair of “legal” medications found in Valieva’s system could also be used to boost endurance.

But major figures in the skating world haven’t placed blame for the scandal on Valieva’s shoulders. Retired Team USA skater Polina Edmunds argued that the entire situation was “very traumatizing” for the 15-year-old and that the adults in her life should have been responsible for protecting her.

“She should not have been allowed to compete,” Edmunds wrote on Twitter. “It’s devastating that she was put in this situation, on all levels.”

Tutberidze has been scrutinized for years over her training methods with young Russian skaters, Gabrielle Paluch previously reported for Insider. Prominent coaches have gone so far as to refer to Tutberidze’s athletes as “disposable” or “perishable goods.”

Some have referred to the “Eteri expiration date” — the time when, around age 17, her athletes are often forced to retire due to injury or diminishing results.

Critics have accused the 47-year-old of trading her athletes’ health for medals for their country.

For most of the last decade, Tutberidze’s rink in Moscow has churned out countless young female champions. Her athletes win by performing difficult jumps such as quads — which are worth roughly double the points of a triple, making skaters who land them nearly impossible to beat — but burn out dramatically as they go through puberty.

Valieva will be 19 years old by the time the next games roll around in 2026: past the “expiration date” fans have grown to lament.

The Nation

Extreme Drought Is Crashing Food Production Whether Russia Invades or Not

In a world increasingly feeling the effects of climate change, the media must examine the role climate can play in igniting and inflaming conflicts.

By Mark Hertsgaard – February 17, 2022

The North Crimean Canal in Kalanchak, Ukraine, is seen with a low level of water on September 29, 2020. Crimea at the time was facing drought as Ukrainian authorities blocked the irrigation canal following the annexation of Crimea by Russia. (Pierre Crom / Getty Images)

This story is part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration cofounded by Columbia Journalism Review and The Nation strengthening coverage of the climate story. The author is CCNow’s executive director and co-founder.

Last Friday, as speculation that Russia was preparing to invade Ukraine mounted, ABC News reported that “the specter of a military confrontation” was “pumping fresh life into the debate over whether president Joe Biden’s climate agenda is brushing up against difficult geopolitical realities.” The story, which was produced by the network’s newly formed climate unit and ABC’s investigative team, was perhaps the first in the US media to examine the climate angle of the Ukraine conflict. It should not be the last. Even as newsrooms provide steady updates on the most immediate elements concerning Ukraine, from military maneuvers to diplomatic negotiations, they must help audiences understand the Ukraine conflict in its broader context.

Energy—especially the supply and price of methane gas—is an intrinsic part of the international tensions at the Ukrainian border. Russia has long supplied much of the gas used to heat homes and power factories in Europe, especially in Germany. There has been abundant coverage of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which runs between Russia and Germany and could double the former’s gas exports to Europe, and which Biden and German Chancellor Olaf Schulz have pledged to block if Russia does invade Ukraine. However, such coverage has rarely explored the climate issues at hand.

Military officials and security analysts in numerous countries have been incorporating climate change into their planning and proposals for decades. Even under former US President George W. Bush, who downplayed climate science and shunned climate action, the Pentagon was studying how drought and other forms of extreme weather might trigger military conflict, including nuclear war, between India and Pakistan. Journalists need to catch up.

ABC’s February 11 story by Lucien Bruggeman admirably pulled together both the energy and climate dimensions of the Ukraine conflict. Bruggeman briefly touched on recent arguments from “oil interests and Republican lawmakers,” including an American Petroleum Institute spokesman and US Senator Lisa Murkowski, that President Biden had inadvertently strengthened Russia’s hand in the Ukraine conflict by cutting US fossil-fuel production in the name of combating climate change, but it then brought in comments from experts across the ideological spectrum to call out that red herring. Erin Sikorsky, a former intelligence official who directs the Center for Climate and Security, advised administration critics and conflict spectators not to conflate “the short-term crisis and the long-term strategy.” The global economy is increasingly leaving fossil fuels behind in favor of renewable energy. The United States should hasten that transition, experts reasoned, precisely to avoid the dependence on imported gas that makes Europe vulnerable to Russian pressure in the current crisis.

Ukraine, a major grain exporter, has also been walloped by droughts in recent years—another climate story with international consequences that has been relatively under-covered. The country has long ranked among the most productive agricultural areas on Earth—under the old Soviet Union, it was the nation’s breadbasket—but climate change is dramatically decreasing output and, by extension, threatening the stability of food prices around the world. A report from the Atlantic Council last year emphasized the impacts of drought on Ukraine’s grain exports, noting that they had “fallen sharply year-on-year during the current season due to smaller harvests caused by severe drought conditions.” When an agricultural power as important as Ukraine suddenly starts producing and exporting much less food, it is a recipe for social dislocation, human suffering, and political unrest, both inside the country and beyond. Less production translates into higher prices. The price of food is something people everywhere care about, which makes it something journalists need to be talking about.

In 2013, Thomas Friedman reported for The New York Times on how a severe drought fueled by climate change helped trigger the popular uprising that evolved into one of the most vicious civil wars of modern times. Samir Aita, a Syrian economist, told Friedman that, while the drought did not directly bring about the war, the failure of Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad to support the people imperiled by the drought politicized “a lot of very simple farmers and their kids.” A subsequent report from the Center for American Progress, the Center for Climate and Security, and the Stimson Center likewise argued that drought had hastened the Arab Spring uprisings. The Middle East and North Africa were “already dealing with internal sociopolitical, economic and climatic tensions,” Scientific American wrote, drawing on that report. “The 2010 global food crisis helped drive it over the edge.”

“Drought is the overriding danger as climate change intensifies,” I wrote in my book HOT: Living Through the Next Fifty Years on Earth. “Floods may attract more media coverage, but historically droughts have killed far more people.” A peer-reviewed article published in Nature this week concluded that the extreme drought gripping the Southwestern United States has made for the driest two decades the region has seen for the last 1,300 years. With heat-trapping emissions and global temperatures both continuing to rise, drought is bound to keep afflicting the US, Ukraine, and many other regions of the world. The consequences—for food production, social stability, and war and peace—are immense. News coverage should treat them accordingly.

Mark Hertsgaard is the executive director of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism initiative committed to more and better coverage of the climate story. He is also the environment correspondent for The Nation and author of books including HOT: Living Through the Next Fifty Years on Earth.

Yahoo! Finance

U.S. choices on climate change could cost $14.5 trillion — or generate $3 trillion: Deloitte report

Grace O’Donnell, Assistant Editor – February 16, 2022

Delaying the net-zero transition could cost the U.S. economy $14.5 trillion in the next 50 years, according to a recent report by Deloitte, while bold action on climate change could actually boost GDP and jobs.

The report gauged the macroeconomic consequences of two climate scenarios. In the first scenario, the U.S. takes no further steps to address climate change. In the second, the U.S. and other nations follow the pathways outlined in the Paris and Glasgow Agreements to draw down greenhouse gas emissions.

In that latter scenario of decarbonization, the U.S. economy could grow by $3 trillion over 50 years, according to the report. In the year 2070 alone, that amounts to an additional 2.5% increase of GDP.

The estimates demonstrate that “unchecked climate change, or insufficient action, that action in scenario A, is a costly choice for the U.S.,” Deloitte Deputy CEO Alicia Rose said on Yahoo Finance Live (video above). “And our analysis shows that a rapid transition to net-zero could truly drive a new Industrial Revolution and jump-start growth in the U.S. economy in the long term.”

A transition to net-zero would be transformational, touching every sector and region in the United States. It would also require historic investment, with estimates ranging from about $5 trillion to $9.2 trillion globally every year until 2050.

Despite this hefty investment, the cost of climate-related losses still dwarfs the cost of the transition, according to Deloitte’s model, which echoed similar findings from McKinsey and an Oxford Martin School working paper. Furthermore, that research has shown that a fast transition would be cheaper than a slower one.

“Economics is on the side of a low-emissions future,” the report’s authors stated. “Opportunely, the U.S. has the technology, capital, infrastructure, and skilled labor needed not only to make this transition possible, but to do so at the lowest possible cost.”

A downside to this, however, is that investment in a low-carbon future is front-loaded. As the U.S. economy shifts away from fossil fuels, the costs mount in the near term while the benefits accumulate later on. Assuming the U.S. adopts immediate climate measures, it would take until 2048 for the benefits to GDP and job growth outweigh the costs, meaning the process would defy short-term horizons and be subject to political and economic pressures until then.

‘Cascading effect’ of climate-related costs

Climate change is already disrupting businesses across the country that have already been impacted by climate-related costs.

From Hurricane Ida in the South to a rash of wildfires in the West amid a historic drought, an alarming number of extreme weather events and disasters struck the United States in 2021.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) registered 20 billion-dollar disaster events last year, which was also the fourth-warmest year in the NOAA’s 127-year record for the country. Scientists have linked each incremental degree of global warming to increases in the frequency and intensity of weather and climate events, resulting in new extremes.

“What we’ve continued to see over the course of years, decades at this point, is an acceleration of disaster losses from these larger-scale, more impactful events,” Steve Bowen, a meteorologist and head of Catastrophe Insights at Aon, said on Yahoo Finance Live. “And what we’re really seeing from a business standpoint is that it’s not just the physical location as to where events are occurring that’s leading to disruption to businesses and their outputs. It’s that it’s having this sort of domino effect, this cascading effect around the world, where it’s affecting supply chain, it’s affecting any type of manufacturing deliverables.”

Physical damage has already made a major financial impact. The U.S. suffered an estimated $169 billion in economic losses in 2021 due to damages associated with climate change, according to a report from Aon, which was 93% above average since 2000, and $92 billion in insured loss, 105% above average since 2000.

“We have a lot of areas that are what we call repetitive loss locations,” Bowen said. “So this is really causing a real reanalysis of the overall level of risk that companies are able to withstand, what they’re comfortable facing.”

Repetitive loss locations mean places with an increased prevalence of climate calamities. Those in the Northeast, for instance, face greater sea-level rise, whereas the energy sector concentrated in the Southeast and West would be particularly hard hit by extreme weather.

Moreover, impacts to business have been more far-reaching than isolated disaster incidents: Heat stress reduces productivity, sea-level rise sacrifices productive urban and agricultural land, damaged capital stalls productivity, overall health deteriorates under increased incidence of disease and mortality, tourism is disrupted, and agricultural yields can fall from changing climate patterns.

Businesses will need to navigate both kinds of risks and communicate their climate strategy to investors. And while climate risk disclosures are currently voluntary, pressure is mounting for federal regulatory bodies to require mandatory climate disclosures for U.S. companies.

As of now, most companies have not set needed climate targets, and those with targets have set weaker goals than are needed to reach net-zero.

“This is something that’s not going to go away as we continue to see more of these regulatory bodies, not just internationally, but here as well in the United States, really force companies to put some type of mandate together to highlight what they’re doing to diversify their portfolio, to wean off fossil fuels, or more importantly, just take climate change into account and have a plan,” Bowen said. “I think we’re going to see more and more of that in the future.”

Another area of the economy particularly susceptible to both climate and transition risks is labor.

Without making significant changes, around 900,000 jobs will disappear annually due to climate change, according to Deloitte. (At the same time, the Biden administration and environmental justice advocates have emphasized the need for a just transition that includes workers of all industries, including high-emitting ones.)

Four phases of the green transition

In its ideal second scenario, Deloitte mapped out the green transition and its effects on the U.S. economy in four phases.

Phase one is marked by bold climate policy plays that create the foundation for future decarbonization. From 2021 to 2025, that would take the form of huge government investments in climate tech and renewable electricity infrastructure. The impact of these shifts results in an average annual GDP loss of just 0.5% during this period.

In phase two, from 2026 to 2040, clean energy would increasingly displace hydrocarbons resulting in more transition pain points for the industrials and energy sectors. During this phase, GDP would fall just 0.2% annually as a result. At the same time, the clean energy sector would become the fastest-growing sector, adding 320,000 jobs each year.

Between 2041 and 2050, phase three would bring about the turning point in which the U.S. climate policies begin to pay off in the form of an additional 0.2% annually in GDP. However, regions reliant on fossil fuel industries could have a longer and more costly transition. The West and Southwest regional economies may not reach their turning points until after 2050.

Phase four would commence by 2050 should the U.S. achieve net-zero emissions. The Southeast would experience the most net-positive economic outcomes due to avoided climate disasters while a transformed energy sector would remain robust in the Southwest and potentially even add $500 billion annually to GDP by 2070.

While this optimistic scenario illustrates the stark choice ahead of the U.S. and other nations, other less-optimistic scenarios also abound, especially when factoring in the geopolitics surrounding the unequal distribution of climate risks and resources.

For instance, insurance company Lloyd’s and the Cambridge Centre for Risk Studies presented three alternative scenarios: green globalization (most similar to Deloitte’s green transition scenario), climate anarchy, and a green cold war. In the latter two, the consequences for international markets include protectionist or polarized trade blocs.

Today, corporations do list obstacles to transitioning their business models, Rose explained. “Some of it is actually the difficulty in measuring the environmental impact of their own organizations,” she said. “Some of it’s the insufficient supply of sustainable and low emissions inputs in their own value chain.”

“But listing those does not change the need to actually push forward in order to achieve really the turning point that we highlight in the report of 2048. We really need to take action and start now,” she added.

As for economic risks and pressures, “we’re going to have to manage both,” Rose continued. “And again, any delay really increases the overall cost of the transition and pushes out the timing of that turning point where the gains actually exceed the cost.”

Grace is an assistant editor for Yahoo Finance.

USA Today

A Russian invasion could reach farther than Ukraine. How a cyberattack could affect you.

Josh Meyer and Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY – February 17, 2022

WASHINGTON – Russian President Vladimir Putin’s track record of unleashing destructive “hybrid warfare” cyberattacks has U.S. security officials fearing he could once again reach across continents and wreak havoc on unwitting Americans as worries about a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine persist.

They call it the “spillover effect.” And they say the temporary takedown of some prominent Ukrainian military and financial sector websites Tuesday resembled the kind of prelude to more significant Russian cyberwarfare attacks that could get out of hand.

Russia has a long and demonstrated history of unleashing such powerful cyberweapons against its adversaries, former top Pentagon cybersecurity official Lucian Niemeyer told USA TODAY.

And once that happens, they can spread virtually anywhere – and potentially everywhere – without the ability to control them he said.

“Anytime we see that cyber is involved in an attack around the world, there’s always the potential that it can spread quickly and have unintended consequences,” said Niemeyer, who served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations and Environment from 2017 to 2021.

White House and U.S. intelligence officials had no comment on whether they believe the so-called Dedicated Denial of Services attacks on the websites of two large Ukrainian banks and the country’s defense ministry and Army were the work of state-sponsored Russian cyber warriors.

Such cyber ops are notoriously hard to attribute, especially given that nation states like Russia often use proxy criminal hacking groups to do their bidding, according to Niemeyer and other current and former U.S. cybersecurity officials.

More: Local governments are more vulnerable to cyberattacks than ever before. DHS wants mayors to step up.

But Putin, a former KGB officer, has a demonstrated history of using destabilizing cyberattacks – often much more destructive than Tuesday’s – in advance of sending in conventional military forces. That’s what happened in 2008, when low-grade attacks against Georgia’s Internet infrastructure preceded an all-out cyberwar that coincided with Russia’s invasion of its neighbor.

Cybersecurity experts say that marked the first time a known cyberattack coincided with a shooting war.

More: Homeland Security warns that Russia could launch cyberattack against US

Russia’s previous cyberattacks on Ukraine

Since then, the Kremlin also has used cyberattacks as an alternative to conventional warfare when trying to destabilize its enemies and undermine citizens’ confidence in their government and private institutions, experts and current and former U.S. officials say.

That’s especially the case with Ukraine, where Moscow is believed to be behind numerous cyberattacks for nearly a decade. In 2015 and 2016, the Kremlin planted malware in the neighboring country’s electric grid, disrupting power for hundreds of thousands of residents in the dead of winter.

By Wednesday morning, officials with Ukraine’s cybersecurity agency said in a briefing that some of their systems were still recovering from a digital assault that likely came from the sophisticated and well-funded adversary.

“The website of the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine was disconnected from the external network to prevent the spread of cyberattacks. The site is not damaged, its full-fledged work will be restored in the near future,” official Victor Zhora said in tweet posted by Ukraine’s State Service of Special Communications and Information Protection.

And while Ukrainian officials did not blame Russia specifically, the cyber agency tweeted, “We see a trace of foreign intelligence services. There are some similarities between this attack and those of January 14.”

In last month’s massive cyberattack, a warning popped up on numerous Kyiv government websites to “be afraid and expect the worst,” adding to an already tense situation. At the time, U.S. officials said they feared that Russia was preparing to create a false pretext to invade Ukraine if it didn’t get its way through diplomacy.

Whoever was responsible for Tuesday’s takedowns was trying to destabilize Ukraine at the height of its crisis with Russia, another Ukrainian official, Natalia Tkachuk, suggested during the briefing.

“We are witnessing a critical change in the mechanisms and purpose of cyberattacks,” Tkachuk was quoted as saying in the official Twitter feed of the briefing. “Previously, this was to obtain specific information for intelligence purposes or to disable them. Today it is a destabilization, a discrediting of the authorities.”

More: Dam releases, bank failures and poisoned water: Cyber pros warn worst cases are possible

Russian threat looms large

As President Joe Biden said in his Tuesday afternoon address, the looming threat of a full-scale Russian military invasion of Ukraine remains a very real possibility. “And if Russia attacks the United States or our allies through asymmetric means, like disruptive cyberattacks against our companies or critical infrastructure, we are prepared to respond,” he said.

“We’re moving in lockstep with our NATO Allies and partners to deepen our collective defense against threats in cyberspace,” Biden added.

Most cybersecurity experts and current and former U.S. officials interviewed by USA TODAY say Russia is unlikely to directly attack U.S. critical infrastructure, given the threat of countermeasures by Washington.

But it could launch a stealth cyberattack, perhaps through third-party hackers, as retaliation for the Biden administration’s hard line against any attack on Ukraine – and then deny that it played any role in it.

Former top U.S. officials from the White House, Pentagon and National Security Agency warned of just such a scenario in 2014, when Russia was enraged by the Obama administration’s sanctions over its aggressiveness toward Ukraine.

What’s far more likely, they say, is that such cyber weapons will be unleashed on targets in Ukraine.

Cloaking Russian cyberattacks

In some previous cyberattacks on Ukraine, including NotPetya, Russia has hidden extremely powerful “wiper” viruses that can delete entire networks in the form of far more routine-looking malware intrusions and ransomware attempts, Niemeyer said.

“They’ve got some of the best engineers in the world working on that perfect attack that can cloak itself and move laterally” from one computer network to another, said Niemeyer, CEO of Building Cyber Security, a non-profit international cybersecurity organization.

That’s just what happened in June 2017, when Russia’s military cyber-warfare specialists at its military intelligence agency, known as the GRU, targeted government agencies, banks and private companies doing business in Ukraine in an effort to destabilize them and undermine confidence, current and former U.S. officials say.

But the virus, later dubbed NotPetya, jumped the tracks and caused over $10 billion in damage worldwide in what has been described as the most destructive cyberattack ever. As many as 2,000 systems were affected, including the operations of some of the biggest multinational corporations in Europe and North America.

Danish shipping behemoth A.P. Moller-Maersk, the world’s biggest overseas cargo carrier, and even Russia’s own oil giant, Rosneft, were hit.

More: The next big cyberthreat isn’t ransomware. It’s killware. And it’s just as bad as it sounds.

One international pharmaceutical company, Merck, suffered $1.5 billion in U.S. damages in the NotPetya attack, even though its business was far removed from anything to do with Ukraine.

So far, there is no evidence that Russia is preparing to mount destructive cyberattacks even as it continues to negotiate a potential pullback of its forces from attack positions along the border with Ukraine.

More: Congress has tough words on Putin and Russia’s aggression in Ukraine but can’t agree on sanctions

But U.S. officials confirmed that they were on edge, and monitoring the situation for any developments. That includes intentional efforts by Russia to target U.S. critical infrastructure, and the spillover of cyberattacks on Ukrainian targets.

“We’ve known for years that Russia presages its military activities by conducting cyber operations in targeted countries,” said Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “While these cyber attacks (Tuesday) are not destructive in nature, I worry that Russia could soon escalate, which could lead to spillover effects into American or NATO entities, like the NotPetya attack did in 2017.”

A ‘Shields Up’ warning from US

In recent days, the Department of Homeland Security has been warning local, state and federal law enforcement and government officials – and private sector leaders – to be on high alert for the possibility of cyberattacks in connection with a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine.

“Notably, the Russian government has used cyber as a key component of their force projection over the last decade, including previously in Ukraine in the 2015 timeframe,” DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency said in a “Shields Up” warning. “The Russian government understands that disabling or destroying critical infrastructure – including power and communications – can augment pressure on a country’s government, military and population and accelerate their acceding to Russian objectives.”

“While there are not currently any specific credible threats to the U.S. homeland,” the agency added, “we are mindful of the potential for the Russian government to consider escalating its destabilizing actions in ways that may impact others outside of Ukraine.”

A Department of Homeland Security official confirmed to USA TODAY that top DHS cybersecurity official Jen Easterly spearheaded that effort, trying to raise awareness of the potential for Americans to get caught in the cyber-crossfire that could come with an escalation of hostilities.

Easterly, the director of DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, also took to Twitter on Saturday to urge U.S. officials to be especially vigilant about possible spillover – and intentional – hacks of critical U.S. infrastructure.

“Every organization in the US is at risk from cyber threats that can disrupt essential services,” Easterly warned in the tweet that included a link for CISA’s “Shields Up” campaign.

Easterly and other federal cybersecurity officials also urged local authorities to significantly lower their threshold for reporting any suspicious activity on their networks, especially power grids and other elements of critical infrastructure that could be especially damaged by a cyber-takedown.

“While there are no specific credible threats to the US homeland at this time, we are mindful of the potential for Russia to consider escalating its destabilizing actions in ways that may affect our critical infrastructure, to include cascading impacts as we saw w/NotPetya,” Easterly wrote. “ALL organizations must adopt a heightened posture of vigilance. The time to act is NOW.”

Russia could also launch a damaging cyberattack against Ukraine even if it ultimately backs down from a military invasion, said retired Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the former director for Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Russia on the White House’s National Security Council during the Trump administration.

Gaming out what Russia has planned

Because such a cyber attack is usually considered “below the threshold of armed conflict,” Russia might view it as a way to continue to undermine the stability of its neighbor without triggering sanctions or other strong reactions from Washington and its NATO allies, said Vindman, who also served as the political-military affairs officer for Russia for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and as an attaché at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow.

“I don’t have any evidence to say that one is coming. But it falls completely within the bounds of the way the Russians would operate in this kind of situation,” he said. “The problem with these types of things, with cyber weapons, is that there are no borders. So a spillover effect on the U.S. is not just possible, it’s likely.”

Former U.S. cybersecurity and national security officials differ as to what Russia might do next – if anything.

More: The next big cyberthreat is something called killware

Brian Murphy, a former top Homeland Security and FBI official, said a possible spillover scenario remains a serious threat.

“The Russians remain reckless and once they take action in cyberspace they lose control of the outcome,” said Murphy, who retired last year after serving as acting undersecretary for Intelligence at the Department of Homeland Security. “Putin will continue to meddle in Ukraine and his hybrid warfare techniques will know no boundaries.”

But Chris Krebs, who was Easterly’s predecessor as director of CISA, said he didn’t believe Tuesday’s cyber attack in Ukraine should immediately be seen as a prelude for a Russian invasion.

“If this was an attack on a random government not involved in a geo-political crisis, I wouldn’t think much of it,” Krebs said. “But the fact that it coincides with a country facing the long specter of war, I think it bears further examination.”

Krebs said Russian hackers could target key U.S. government agencies, including the State and Treasury departments to probe for information about the promised U.S. sanctioning strategy in the event of an invasion.

“It is still not clear what Putin is going to do,” Krebs said. “But we do know from events of the past that the Russian intelligence services have a range of capabilities.”

For American business, Krebs said, officials should be preparing for the prospect that “something could happen.”

“You have to take this seriously; you have to prepare.”

Insider

Russia says it may be ‘forced’ to respond militarily if the US won’t agree to its unacceptable security demands on Ukraine

John Haltiwanger – February 17, 2022

• Russia warned it could be forced to respond militarily if the US doesn’t give in to its security demands.
• Russia has demanded that Ukraine be permanently barred from joining NATO.
• The US and NATO have been adamant that this is a non-starter.

Russia on Thursday warned it could be “forced to respond” militarily if the US doesn’t agree to its demands for binding security guarantees, including permanently barring Ukraine and Georgia from NATO. The US has repeatedly made it clear that this demand is a non-starter.

“In the absence of the readiness of the American side to agree on firm, legally binding guarantees of ensuring our security by the United States and its allies, Russia will be forced to respond, including through the implementation of military-technical measures,” the Kremlin said on Thursday in an 11-page response to written proposals submitted by the US in late January on Moscow’s security demands.

The US and NATO have firmly rejected Russia’s demand that Ukraine be forever banned from the alliance, stating that countries should be free to choose their own allies and defensive partnerships. Though Ukraine has sought to join NATO for years, it’s not on the formal track to become a member at any point in the near future. But with an estimated 150,000 troops surrounding Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin has demanded that the issue be resolved now.

Putin has complained about NATO’s eastward expansion for years, ignoring the ways in which his aggressive behavior has pushed countries like Ukraine closer to the alliance and to the West more generally. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 and annexed Crimea, and since that year has supported rebels in a war against Ukrainian forces in the eastern Donbas region. Experts say Putin’s bellicose posture toward Ukraine is linked to his broader ambitions of seeing Russia regain the power and influence it enjoyed across the region and beyond during the Soviet-era.

Russia on Thursday once again denied any plans to invade Ukraine, despite its massive military buildup on the border of its next-door neighbor.

“There is no and is not planned any ‘Russian invasion’ of Ukraine, which the United States and its allies have been declaring at the official level since autumn last year, therefore statements about Russia’s ‘responsibility for the escalation’ cannot be regarded otherwise than as an attempt to put pressure on and devalue Russia’s proposals for security guarantees,” the Kremlin said.

Russia has gathered roughly 150,000 troops on Ukraine’s border, according to the Biden administration, which has warned that a Russian invasion could occur at any moment. On Tuesday, Moscow claimed it was withdrawing some troops from Ukraine’s border, but the US and NATO rejected this and said there have been no signs of Russian de-escalation.

The Biden administration has warned that Russia is looking for a pretext to invade, and could use covert operatives to stage some kind of sabotage to try to justify it.

“Russia says it’s drawing down those forces. We do not see that happening on the ground. Our information indicates clearly that these forces, including ground troops, aircraft, ships, are preparing to launch an attack against Ukraine in the coming days,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said to the United Nations Security Council on Thursday, amid reports of shelling in eastern Ukraine.

CNN

Middle schoolers launched a boat from New Hampshire in 2020. It was found in Norway 462 days later

By Sara Smart, CNN – February 16, 2022

The boat traveled more than 8,000 miles and landed in Norway 462 days after it was launched in 2020.Mariann Nuncic/Educational Passage

Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated the ocean where the boat sailed. It was the Atlantic.CNN —  

A miniboat built by fifth graders took to the seas on October 25, 2020, charging off into the Gulf Stream for its maiden voyage. That voyage would take 5.5-foot-long Rye Riptides over 8,000 miles from home – all the way to the coast of Norway after 462 days at sea.

It began at Rye Junior High School, located about 50 miles east of Concord, through a not-for-profit program to spread ocean and environmental literacy called Educational Passage.

A tiny boat was discovered on a remote beach 27 years after it was launched by teachers

The miniboat program sends kits to students to help them learn things like science, technology, engineering, art, and math skills as well as building connections, Educational Passage’s executive director, Cassie Stymiest, told CNN on Tuesday.

Students build the GPS-tracked boat, fill it with items, decorate it and send it on its way. “It’s like a 21st century message in a bottle,” Stymiest said.

The boat, named Rye Riptides, traveled more than 8,000 miles and landed in Norway 462 days after it was launched in 2020.Sheila Adams/AP/FILE

The boat kit was originally purchased in 2018 by a now-retired teacher and each of her fifth-grade classes worked together to build it since then, according to Stymiest.

When the pandemic prevented this year’s class from finishing the decorating process, Stymiest volunteered to help out. Students sent their decorations to her and she put the finishing touches on the vessel, which they named Rye Riptides. On launch day, the students watched Riptides set off on Facebook Live.A 50-year pen pal friendship that began with a message in a bottle

In the months after the October launch, classes watched Riptides make its way up and across the Atlantic Ocean through data from the GPS tracker. Its last pinged location was on September 30, 2021, and Stymiest said they thought they had lost the boat when they didn’t see another notification for months.

But, on January 31, she noticed the location had changed. Riptides had landed on the coast of Smøla, Norway.

She immediately took to social media to reach out to the local community about retrieving the vessel. Then, on February 1, Mariann Nuncic responded that the boat was on an island near her house.

Karel Nuncic, left, took the vessel to his 6th grade class to open it with his classmates.Mariann Nuncic/Educational Passage

That afternoon, when her son, Karel, got home from school, the Nuncic’s got in their boat and searched the coast to find what was left of the miniboat.

And find it they did – Riptides was covered in Gooseneck barnacles, had lost its mast, and its hull and keel were no longer attached, but its precious cargo was still safe.

Karel, who also happens to be in the sixth grade, took the boat to his own class. They opened it to reveal the items inside, which including leaves, US quarters, and even a face mask with the students’ names on it.

The Rye Junior High students, who were now in sixth and seventh grade, were excited to hear about the recovery, Stymiest said.

The two classes are eager to meet each other and will do so on Thursday through Zoom, Stymiest said.

Going from New Hampshire to Smøla may seem like a lengthy journey for such a small boat, but Stymiest said it isn’t their longest. That award goes to a vessel sent from Massachusetts that landed in Australia.