How better lose reader than with a headline like that? (I know: a going nowhere leading text like this one.) Well, while writing up this blog in report format a couple of links have piled up.
First: more of the two obvious ones
From Population growth, climate change raising odds of war over water, forum hears:
“Water resources in themselves have rarely been the sole source of conflict or war. Unfortunately, our global water situation is changing rapidly and may soon no longer resemble anything that has existed on earth before. The tensions and conflicts over water of the kind that have typically occurred in the past will soon represent only one of many emerging explosive hydro-climatic issues that are likely to bring sovereign nations into internal and external discord that could erupt in violence. Humanity’s numbers appear to be the greatest threat to water security globally. We have created a hydroclimatic bomb, and that bomb has started to tick. But we don’t know how big the bomb is or where or when it will go off.”
– Bob Sandford, Canadian water-policy expert
Random fact from the article: 25% of water conflicts of the last five millennium occurred with the last decade.
Next: sweeping ones own doorstep, shipping off the dirt
Center for American Progress asks the hard question in Coal-Fired Conflict: Enabling Exports Clouds Environmental and Economic Goals:
if [a country] is serious about combating the perils of climate change through economic and environmental transformation, should [that country] really be encouraging the export of [home extracted] coal to [foreign] markets?
While it may improve carbon credit accounting exported coal will pollute the same atmosphere exactly as much and even more due to the transportation.
“Coal is a dead man walkin’. Banks won’t finance them. Insurance companies won’t insure them. The EPA is coming after them…and the economics to make it clean don’t work.”
– Kevin Parker, Deutsche Bank
If the United States is to assume a position of world leadership in the effort to reduce global warming pollution, and if it is to commit more fully to a clean energy future with its attendant economic, health, and environmental benefits, it makes little sense for policymakers to facilitate significant increases in coal exports.
Finally: Environmental laws to trigger trade wars
If you can stomach it, read Reuters / Canada warns EU of trade conflict over oil sands. Truly depressing testimony to the obstacles environmentalism and common sense is facing.
According to a leaked letter from the Canadian government to the EU, a proposed European tax on dirty energy is in their eyes an “unnecessary barrier”. The fact that tar sand oils are one of the most polluting energy resources available is to the Canadians “not supported by the science”.
The Canadians are already suing Europe at World Trade Organization level on issues like hormone-treated beef, genetically modified foods, seal products and more – their free trade “right” to spam the world with tar sand oil would simply add another to the list. Shame on Canada.
Extra, extra: The interesting one!
Check out this interesting discussion at reddit / The storms that hit the US this weekend killed more American civilians in a single day than terrorists have in the last 9 years.
Most comments are either simply about the tornadoes, about surviving a tornado, about possible lack of warning systems in the US… and then some are quite funny and on our topic:
Hair dryers have killed more American civilians than terrorists have in the last 9 years, what’s your point?
His point is that we need to start a WAR ON TORNADOES!
Tornados hate us for our freedoms!!!!
They are a threat to national security!
They did target 3 military bases and yet no response yet???