It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus is starting to evaluate commanders based on their knowledge of how global warming will impact the bases they command. ....how well they communicate the risk of climate change about the base,
Climate change may influence the type, scope, and location of future Navy missions through its effects on the distribution and availability of natural resources (e.g., water, agriculture, fisheries, coastal areas, etc.). Economically unstable regions will be more vulnerable to the effects of climate change, and climate change will be one of several
factors that may increase instability.
Climate change is affecting, and will continue to affect, U.S. military installations world- wide. Melting permafrost is degrading road s, foundations, and structures on DoD and USCG installations in Alaska. Droughts in the southeast and southwest U.S. are challenging water resource management. Sea level rise and storm surge will lead to an increased likelihood of inundation of coastal infrastructure, and may limit the availability of overseas bases.
originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Teikiatsu
Look, it's no secret that most people who are in the military are very dumb, your average officer a bit less so.
Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse recently told people gathered in New York City that global warming “denial” hurts U.S. soldiers in the field and that the “main problem” with the military is its reluctance to join the climate crusade.
“And, for those bases, for Navy bases particularly, it’s a really real risk,” Whitehouse said. “They’re on the sea. Sea level rise is going to swamp what they do. It’s really practical."
Anthropogenic global warming is a hypothesis, a theory – not proven fact supportable by direct observation. All of the projected outcomes exist only as the output of inadequate computer models using flawed assumptions and highly-manipulated data. With most models unable to account for the conditions of the last eighteen years and the continuing rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Not to mention that one of those global carbon dioxide measurements is made next to an active volcano spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.)
Rising sea levels, desertification and shrinking freshwater supplies will create up to 50 million environmental refugees by the end of the decade, experts warn today. Janos Bogardi, director of the Institute for Environment and Human Security at the United Nations University in Bonn, said creeping environmental deterioration already displaced up to 10 million people a year, and the situation would get worse
Six years ago, the United Nations issued a dramatic warning that the world would have to cope with 50 million climate refugees by 2010. But now that those migration flows have failed to materialize, the UN has distanced itself from the forecasts. On the contrary, populations are growing in the regions that had been identified as environmental danger zones
report ...lays out a detailed case for how global warming could destabilize vulnerable states in Africa and Asia and drive a flood of migrants to richer countries. It focuses on how climate change "can act as a threat multiplier for instability in some of the most volatile regions of the world," in part by causing water shortages and damaging food production.
Nowhere is the Earth’s climate changing more dramatically than in the Arctic. The U.S. is an Arctic nation and the Navy must be prepared to respond to the changes in this region. In the coming decades, the Arctic Ocean will be increasingly accessible and more broadly used by Arctic and non-Arctic nations seeking the region’s abundant resources and trade routes.
The Navy views the Arctic as a challenge, not a crisis, and acknowledges that the risk of conflict is low in the region; however, the Navy must consider responses to the changing Arctic environment from many different nations.
Army Technical Bulletin MED 507 spells out various temperature categories and the level of intensity of activity that can safely be performed during those temperature conditions. A "Category IV" temperature condition, for instance, is defined as being between 88-89.9 degrees. A "Category V" temperature condition is above 90 degrees.
Citing a temperature chart for Fort Stewart, Georgia, Kidd said "if you take a middle-road estimate of future climate change, we're going to go from around 80 days a year of Category IV or Category V weather to 130 days a year of Category IV and Category V."....
"Can we really train Soldiers if roughly half of our training days are going to be Category IV or Category V, where we have to curtail or eliminate their outdoor activity?" he asked.
Potential effects of climate change on DOD:
More frequent disaster relief demands
Uptick of military activity in the Arctic
Rising international instability
Increased number of “black flag” suspended outdoor training days
Increased threats to endangered species on DOD installations
Increased erosion and flooding
Greater heating and cooling requirements in buildings
Additional maintenance for runways and roads during hot weather
Greater need for weapons and equipment maintenance or repair
Interrupted shipments of materials and supplies
Not everyone agrees. The topic that in recent years has raised the hackles of conservatives in Congress, some of whom regard global warming as a hoax, and object to the price tag of DOD efforts to develop new, non-petroleum-based fuels. A byproduct of overall energy efficiency efforts, DOD officials say, will be a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
In May 2012, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., criticized then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s support of a Navy biofuels program, saying Panetta “doesn’t need to waste his time trying to perpetrate President Obama’s global warming fantasies or his ongoing war on affordable energy.”