Adaptation to Global Warming

Adaptation to globalwarming covers all actions aimed at reducing the negative effects of global warming. This in contrast to Mitigation of global warming which involves actions meant to avoid or delay the occurrence of climate change due to global warming.

Effects of globalwarming
Projected climate changes due to global warming have the potential to lead to future large-scale and possibly irreversible changes in climate resulting in impacts at continental and global scales.

Examples of projected climate changes include:
significant slowing of the ocean circulation that transports warm water to the North Atlantic,
large reductions in the Greenland and West Antarctic Ice Sheets,
accelerated globalwarming due to carbon cycle feedbacks in the terrestrial biosphere, and
releases of terrestrial carbon from permafrost regions and methane from hydrates in coastal sediments.

The likelihood of many of these changes is not well-known, however, the probability of one or more of these changes occurring is likely to increase with the rate, magnitude, and duration of climate change.

Most of the consequences of global warming would result from one of three physical changes: sea level rise, higher local temperatures, and changes in rainfall patterns. Sea level is generally expected to rise 50-200 cm in the next century (Dean et al. 1987); such a rise would inundate 7,000 square miles of dry land in the United States (an area the size of Massachusetts) and a similar amount of coastal wetlands; erode recreational beaches 100-200 meters, exacerbate coastal flooding; and increase the salinity of aquifers and estuaries (Titus 1989).
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)

The argument for adaptation
The argument for adaptation is that even if all emissions were stopped today, the greenhouse gases which are already in the air would be enough to cause some climate change. CO2 in particular is long-lived atmospheric gas, and it would take a long time for CO2 levels to stabilize to pre-industrial levels, due to the limited rate at which the earth absorbs CO2, as is highlighted in studies of the carbon flux. Total CO2 emissions are likely to rise in the coming decades. Climate change is already happening: glaciers are melting, sea levels have risen, and hurricanes are getting more intense. With rising CO2 levels, climate change is likely to get worse before it gets better. For these reasons, the world must prepare and adapt to the effects of globalwarming.
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)


National Academy of Sciences
One prominent attempt to broach adaptation was a 1991 report by the National Academy of Sciences, “Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming.” The National Academy report cautioned that agricultural adaptation will be essential in a greenhouse world.

IPCC Working Group II
IPCC Working Group II argues that mitigation and adaptation should be complementary components of a response strategy to global warming. Their report makes the following observations:
1. Adaptation is a necessary strategy at all scales to complement climate change mitigation efforts.
2. Those with the least resources have the least capacity to adapt and are the most vulnerable
3. Adaptation, sustainable development, and enhancement of equity can be mutually reinforcing
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)


Adaptation is a necessary strategy
Adaptation is a necessary strategy at all scales to complement climate change mitigation efforts because we cannot be sure that all climate change can be mitigated. And indeed the odds are quite high that in the long run more warming is inevitable, given the geologic evidence of the past's most similar glacial / interglacial cycle which happened about 400,000 years ago. That similarity being determined by degree of the elliptic shape of the earth's orbit and how close the Sun is when the most land, that is the northern hemisphere, is being warmed by it.

Adaptation has the potential to reduce adverse impacts of climate change and to enhance beneficial impacts, but will incur costs and will not prevent all damages. Extremes, variability, and rates of change are all key features in addressing vulnerability and adaptation to climate change, not simply changes in average climate conditions. [citation needed]
Human and natural systems will to some degree adapt autonomously to climate change. [citation needed] Planned adaptation can supplement autonomous adaptation, though there are more options and greater possibility for offering incentives in the case of adaptation of human systems than in the case of adaptation to protect natural systems.
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)

Poorer nations
The ability of human systems to adapt to and cope with climate change depends on such factors as wealth, technology, education, information, skills, infrastructure, access to resources, and management capabilities. There is potential for developed and developing countries to enhance and/or acquire adaptive capabilities. Populations and communities are highly variable in their endowments with these attributes, and the developing countries, particularly the least developed countries, are generally poorest in this regard. As a result, they have lesser capacity to adapt and are more vulnerable to climate change damages, just as they are more vulnerable to other stresses. This condition is most extreme among the poorest people.
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)

Mutual reinforcement
Many communities and regions that are vulnerable to climate change are also under pressure from forces such as population growth, resource depletion, and poverty. Policies that lessen pressures on resources, improve management of environmental risks, and increase the welfare of the poorest members of society can simultaneously advance sustainable development and equity, enhance adaptive capacity, and reduce vulnerability to climate and other stresses. Inclusion of climatic risks in the design and implementation of national and international development initiatives can promote equity and development that is more sustainable and that reduces vulnerability to climate change.
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)

National Center for Policy Analysis
A study by the National Center for Policy Analysis argues that adaptation is more cost-effective than mitigation. Their report makes the following observations:

1. By 2085, the contribution of (unmitigated) warming to the above listed problems is generally smaller than other factors unrelated to climate change.

2.More important, these risks would be lowered much more effectively and economically by reducing current and future vulnerability to climate change rather than through its mitigation.

3. Finally, adaptation would help developing countries cope with major problems now, and through 2085 and beyond, whereas generations would pass before anything less than draconian mitigation would have a discernible effect.
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)

The Kyoto Protocol
Under the Kyoto Protocol, the United States would have agreed to cut greenhouse emissions by about 400 million tons per year by 2012; in the same period, Chinese emissions are expected to rise almost 2 billion tons annually[citation needed]. In 2003 the world net output of anthropogenic carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas, was about 25 billion metric tons annually.

Even with the Kyoto Protocol, global emissions by 2015 will rise to perhaps 9 billion tons[citation needed], 50 percent higher than today's level. Such nearly-inevitable carbon buildup ought to tell us is that if greenhouse theory is right, a warming world is now unavoidable: at least through the next generation, until a renewable-fuels energy economy can be created.
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)

Historic adaptation
Some of those who argue for adaptation to globalwarming awareness2007 do so with the perspective that human civilization has proven to be highly adaptable to climate change in the past and therefore will likely be able to adapt to climate change in the future.
The counterargument to this perspective is that the costs of adaptation are much higher than in the past due to the greater investment in urban and industrial infrastructure.

In the past, cities could be relocated largely by having the populace pack up their possessions on their backs, on pack animals or wagons and relocate. [citation needed] Modern cities the size of Bristol or Liverpool cannot be relocated easily even with the use of truck, air and rail transport.
The damage suffered by New Orleans by hurricane Katrina provides some perspective as to the potential damage that can be caused by a rise in sea level. Far more technology and resources are available today. Our organizational and communication systems are far more advanced than than were available in the time of the Romans. At the same time, there is far more infrastructure to protect or relocate. The relative costs of relocation could be higher.
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)

Adaptation versus Mitigation
Some orthodox environmentalists consider mere mention of adaptation to be offensive because they believe that mitigation should be the critical focus and that adaptation is a "red herring" that distracts from the focus on mitigation. Others resist discussion of adaptation because they believe that the concept has been so abused by those who seek to avoid making any changes to the so called "fossil fuel society" that to speak of adaptation at all runs the risk of having their words dismissed by allies and distorted by opponents. [citation needed] There's also the deeper philosophical issue that a focus on adaptation can easily undercut more productive -- but more difficult -- efforts to halt and reverse disastrous changes.

Adaptation measures directly benefit the country investing in them, this further disadvantages poorer nations, possibly undermining international collaborative mitigation efforts.

On the other hand, those who argue for adaptation over mitigation assert that the requirement of holding global greenhouse gas emissions constant is unrealistic, especially when one takes account of the growth rate of developing countries such as India and China. At their stage of economic development, increasing standards of living and economic activities directly translate into near proportionate increase in greenhouse gass emission. This is not the case with developed countries where emissions level tend to be constant. Those who advocate adaptation over mitigation are not hostile to energy saving technologies or even energy taxes, which are economically efficient. [citation needed] However, they are generally hostile to the idea of capping greenhouse emissions. They argue that, for such a policy to have any meaningful effect, the caps have to be applied to emerging developing countries. Because of their stage of economic development, caps on energy consumption mean caps on their living standard and economic growth, which would reduce the benefits caused by growth in living standards such as reduced infant mortality, increased life expectancy, and better medical care. Moreover, half hearted measures of mitigation and the resulting stunting of economic growth would impact these developing countries' ability to adapt to the effect of global warming. Hence, they argue that any meaningful mitigation policy is politically, economically and morally impractical. Academic support for this argument usually comes from the field of economics. [citation needed] In general, the advocates of this position accept that human activities are the likely cause of global warming and support such policies as energy taxes, while at the same time, oppose emission caps often supported by the green movement. (See Copenhagen Consensus as an example)
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)

Criteria for assessing responses
James Titus identifies the following criteria that policy makers should use in assessing responses to globalwarming:

Economic Efficiency: Will the initiative yield benefits substantially greater than if the resources were applied elsewhere?

Flexibility: Is the strategy reasonable for the entire range of possible changes in temperatures, precipita- tion, and sea level?

Urgency: Would the strategy be successful if implementation were delayed ten or twenty years?
Low Cost: Does the strategy require minimal resources?

Equity: Does the strategy unfairly benefit some at the expense of other regions, generations, or economic classes?

Institutional feasibility: Is the strategy acceptable to the public? Can it be implemented with existing institutions under existing laws?

Unique or Critical Resources: Would the strategy decrease the risk of losing unique environmental or cultural resources?

Health and Safety: Would the proposed strategy increase or decrease the risk of disease or injury?

Consistency: Does the policy support other national state, community, or private goals?
Private v. Public Sector: Does the strategy minimize governmental interference with decisions best made by the private sector?
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)

Adaptation mechanisms
Scheraga and Grambsch [11] identify 9 fundamental principles to be considered when designing adaptation policy.

1.The effects of climate change vary by region.
2.The effects of climate change may vary across demographic groups.
3.Climate change poses both risks and opportunities.
The effects of climate change must be considered in the context of multiple stressors and factors, which may be as important to the design of adaptive responses as the sensitivity of the change.
5.Adaptation comes at a cost.
6.Adaptive responses vary in effectiveness, as demonstrated by current efforts to cope with climate variability.
7.The systemic nature of climate impacts complicates the development of adaptation policy.
8.Maladaptation can result in negative effects that are as serious as the climate-induced effects that are being avoided.
9.Many opportunities for adaptation make sense whether or not the effects of climate change are realized.
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)

Methods of adaptation
Examples of adaptation include defending against rising sea levels through better flood defences, and changing patterns of land use (avoiding more vulnerable areas for housing).

Adapting to changes in weather

Water management

Agricultural production
Agriculture of any kind is strongly influenced by the availability of water. Climate change will modify rainfall, evaporation, runoff, and soil moisture storage. Changes in total seasonal precipitation or in its pattern of variability are both important. The occurrence of moisture stress during flowering, pollination, and grain-filling is harmful to most crops and particularly so to corn, soybeans, and wheat. Increased evaporation from the soil and accelerated transpiration in the plants themselves will cause moisture stress; as a result there will be a need to develop crop varieties with greater drought tolerance.

The demand for water for irrigation is projected to rise in a warmer climate, bringing increased competition between agriculture--already the largest consumer of water resources in semiarid regions--and urban as well as industrial users. Falling water tables and the resulting increase in the energy needed to pump water will make the practice of irrigation more expensive, particularly when with drier conditions more water will be required per acre.
(GlobalWarming Awareness2007)