46th Edition – Water – Pike & Hurricane

Let It Flow: The Netherlands Under Water

Diego Annys — Fri, 12 Apr 2019 13:29:15 +0000

Don’t hold it back anymore

A land of water

The Netherlands and water are an inseparable combination. In a corner of the European continent, water is everywhere, around and within. Besides its long North Sea coast line, the country is basically a large river delta. Belgium’s largest rivers, the Scheldt and the Meuse, do not reach the sea in its own territory. They go on to the Netherlands, and reach the North Sea there. Same for the Rhine, once one of the northern border rivers of the Roman Empire. The Netherlands is the place where the water goes.

A lot of the country used to be a swamp area. Its name, Netherlands, literally means low lands. With 26 percent of its land below sea level and 60 percent of the land vulnerable to flooding , an appropriate name . Its stereotypical windmills are not just a pretty sight. They were used to pump out the water, and create land for farming and living. The Dutch have been fighting the water for a thousand years. Water is what makes the country what it is.

The Dutch are quite effective in managing their water situation. They learned through experience. In 1953, a devastating storm hit. They call it the Water Disaster. Hitting the southwest of the country and the province of Zeeland, literally mean Sea-land, many dikes broke. Over 1,800 people died, in one night. The Dutch decided to lock out the water.

Keeping it out

Because if the disaster was able to happen due to the dikes being weak and old, what would be the first response? Make bigger, higher, stronger dikes. They called it the Delta Works. Instead of heightening over a thousand kilometres of dikes, they dammed the mouths of major rivers. Except not all river mouths can simply be closed shut. Some were left open, so ships could reach the massive harbours of Rotterdam and Antwerp. Nor does the water always come from the sea. It comes from the rivers, or the sky.

While the Dutch learned from 1953, more lessons were still to come. Because of the unwillingness to demolish houses in flood prone areas, new water disasters in the 90s caused large economic damage, and hundreds of farm animals died. If keeping the water out does not always work, how about letting it in?

Letting it in

Living with the water rather than battling it. Being safe from the water by letting it in. A counter-intuitive and at first strange approach to many Dutch who know their history of dikes and water well.

Reminiscent of the children’s book “Niemand Houdt Mij Tegen”, taking place in a future where Amsterdam is flooded and Rotterdam surrounded by huge walls keeping out the water, building larger and larger dikes is not a solution. Unless you want to build 10 meter high walls along the entire coast line and at every river bank, other solutions will have to do. A solution called controlled flooding.

The concept is simple: if places will flood anyway due to storms or sudden rises of the rivers, the Dutch would rather have farm land and parks flood, than city centres and neighbourhoods. The new project, called Room for the River, does not take land from the water. It gives the water space.

Yet in a land as densely populated as the Netherlands, all the land belongs to someone – and when the government decides your land will be re-purposed as an area to be flooded, the predictable outcome are uprooted farmers.

Flood the land

Yet the benefits are clear. In a country where 60 percent of the GDP is produced below sea level, defence against water is a priority. One example is the Overdiepse Polder.

The area, farmland by the Bergse Maas canal, lays lower than the canal and was surrounded by dikes. By lowering the dike just a bit, the area would be flooded when heavy storms occur, and by such lowering the water level of the canal – leaving the upstream city safe from flooding. By sacrificing the farmland, the city is safe. Yet of course the farmers were not cheering.

They were however given no choice. The government decided this was what is going to happen, and that was final. A politically difficult decision, especially if the results are not immediately visible. Yet, the Dutch have a responsibility to make these difficult choices. So they do not once again have to learn their lessons the hard way.

After negotiations with the farmers, through dialogue and honesty, they understood they could not stay – yet they made a compromise. All farms were demolished, half of them left, and half stayed. Their new farm is now on a man-made hill. Their farmland, available for use, and likely to flood once every 25 years.

As time flows, so does water

With half of the population, 8 million people, living below sea level, water is a constant thought for the Netherlands. With too many disasters in the past that could have been prevented if it were for some political courage and foresight, the Dutch do not want to make the same mistakes again. The process of coping with water is everlasting. At least if the Dutch want to continue living in their country, the evolution must never end.

by Diego Annys

Photo Credits

Water – floating houses

Water – a high farm

Water – Flood plan

Water – Netherlands height level

The post Let It Flow: The Netherlands Under Water appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

The Nile: River Wars

Nikhil Gupta — Fri, 12 Apr 2019 13:28:21 +0000

It’s weird to imagine human beings as walking, talking sacs of water. After all, 70% of our body consists of it. Water is just as important to the individual as it is to the whole- it facilitates life on this planet. In 2010, the UN recognized water as a basic human right and called for countries and International Organizations to provide financial resources, help with capacity building and share technologies in order to grow together.

That’s fantastic right? Well, one thing studying political science teaches you is that it’s always complicated. Let’s try to break down the logistics of the idealistic goal of providing safe drinking water for the entire planet.

Water the tensions?

Fires require friction. And in this story, the friction is fundamental. Everyone needs water. However, clean water is scarce. How does one hydrate an exponentially growing population with the added complication of an imminent, irreversible, change of climate? Langford highlights that there are two dominant approaches to answer this question. The economic approach sees water as a commodity. This means that the delivery of water depends on market mechanisms and is regulated by price. Conversely, the social approach advocates for a top-priority universal access to water.

No prizes for guessing–the former is the dominant and widely practised approach.

In fact, several reports indicate that the implications of climate change would be droughts and mass water shortages. Researchers from the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre conducted a study wherein they identified areas in the world where the likelihood of a water war is more likely to occur. The most volatile of these areas are transboundary waters i.e water bodies that transcend political borders and are shared by neighbouring countries. The likelihood of water-related friction amongst these countries is expected to increase by 74.9 to 95 percent. The lead author of this study, Fabio Farinosi, said in a statement that the key factor that would equip countries to avoid conflict is cooperation.

And there’s the catch! Countries sharing rivers as part of their main fresh water supply find themselves in a zero sum game situation. Ideally, they need to balance domestic needs with the needs of every party involved. But the reality is far from this, as there exist a multitude of factors influencing a country’s stance on a foreign policy situation.

And the situation surrounding the world’s longest river is turning out to be quite the conundrum.

11 Recipes for War

The Nile river basin encompasses 11 countries, and over 300 million people depend on it. Its resources, however, are distributed unequally and some countries are more vulnerable than others. In order to devise a win-win scenario, one needs to choose between equality and equity. Domestic and international needs must be shared instead of seen as a trade off.

Easier said than done. In particular, the geopolitical situation between Egypt and Ethiopia is quite concerning. The problem stems from the flow of river and the relative geography of the countries. For centuries, Egypt has had the lion’s share of the river, mainly due to historical treaties. It is also the most dependent on it. In 1979, the Egyptian president Anwar Sadat made the bold claim that the only thing that could make Egypt go to war is water. This status quo has been put to the test when Ethiopia decided on the creation of the largest dam in Africa by the blue Nile river.

How exactly is this a problem? Well, dams are like taps–they control the flow of the water. Moreover, Egypt happens to be at the bottom of this pyramid i.e. there are 10 other nations that are further upstream and would receive water from the Nile before Egypt. This concern was noted by Mohamed Abdel Aty–Egypt’s minister of water resources and irrigation. He estimates that if the water that’s coming to Egypt is reduced by 2% , one million people will be without a job.

From an Ethiopian perspective, the project to build the dam was seen as an initiative to fight their own poverty, and transition into a middle income country. Egypt’s claim to Nile’s waters can be traced back to the Nile Waters Agreement that was signed between Egypt and Sudan during the British colonial rule. This agreement assigned no water to Ethiopia and the other 8 countries that are based around the river. Thus, although Egypt might need the water most, the upstream states would not recognize its legal and historical claim.

The Ethiopian government claims that the dam would do no harm to Egypt because it is solely meant for hydroelectric purposes. The country has no plans to divert water for irrigation. This may be true in theory, but if the reservoir behind the dam is being filled, it could hold back water supply to Egypt for an entire year. This is especially worrisome for them because water passing through each upstream country comes with a unique set of complications. For instance, water passing through Ethiopian highlands would provide a year-long flow for Sudanese farmers that would be very pleased with this development. Alex de Waal of the World Peace Foundation states that the Sudanese government is already handing out leases for farmlands that will be irrigated once the dam in Ethiopia is built. While this is a boon for Sudan, it could be disastrous for Egypt.

Zero Sum Game

In addition to all the technicalities, there’s an emotional connection between Egyptians and the Nile. They’ve had an entire ancient civilization built around it. It’s their history- written in books and songs. If some sort of agreement isn’t reached, the chances for armed conflict are less abstract. It seems as though there’s trade offs to be made everywhere. One country’s misfortunes are another’s chance to grow and develop.

In such a stalemate, I’m reminded of the movie Saw–the one where a group of strangers play a sick game against their will that involves cutting off their own legs and other gory things for seven movies. It is later revealed that in every game, the strangers had to make a choice–similar to a zero sum situation wherein they either choose to win everything, or cooperate with each other. The idea was that in every situation, it was possible for every participant to survive through communication and trust.

This is the real world though. And unlike the Saw, the countries involved can get help from outside. If anything, the potential volatility in this region must be acknowledged by the African Union and the United Nations. War can always be prevented.

by Nikhil Gupta

Photo Credits:

On_The_Nile, pixelsniper CC BY 2.0

City of Aswan and the Nile river, Christian Junker CC BY NC NC 2.0

Nile Sudan, Stefan Gara CC BY NC ND

Nile at night, Bora S. Kamel CC BY NC SA

The post The Nile: River Wars appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

France and the Sorrows of Organic Agriculture

Merle Emrich — Fri, 12 Apr 2019 13:27:15 +0000

We live in a time, in which climate change and environmental protection are one of the most important challenges that need to be overcome. Organic farming can be a factor that contributes positively to this aim. However, interests of private companies and counterproductive government policies increase the difficulty of making this possibility reality – the situation in France being only one example.

Vittel without Water

In Vittel, France – where more than two million bottles of water a produced daily – about thirty farmers have signed a contract with Nestlé’s subsidiary company Agrivair. These farmers are allowed to use the land agreed upon in the contract for free, provided they comply with a number of regulations that are supposed to keep the groundwater clean. So far, so good. Yet, this deal is part of a development that sees Nestlé privatising more and more water sources in the region making it impossible for anyone but the company to use them. Not only is there a plan to cut off the whole population of Vittel from local water sources and instead pump water through a pipeline from a region fifteen kilometres away into the homes of the people, but it also makes life difficult for the farmers that have signed Nestlé’s contract.

During summer, water supplies are already low, especially with groundwater levels sinking due to Nestlé’s presence in the region. Since the company has – legally – closed wells to prevent nitrate from polluting the water, the farmers are forced to drive around for up to five hours a day to organise water for their animals. And that even though Nestlé has built a new well and thus, there would be enough water for the company as well as the farmers that help keeping the groundwater clean. One of these farmers is Benoît Gille who combines growing apples with keeping a breed of sheep that does not eat bark. That way the sheep naturally maintain and fertilise the meadow which the apple trees grow on. It could be success story of organic farming if it wasn’t for the water issue.

Guns before Butter

Vittel, however, is not the only place in France where farmers – especially organic farmers – are facing troubles. Despite a growing awareness of and interest in organic agriculture, the French government decided to discontinue state support for organic farmers (2018). Macron has broken with France’s traditional stance on EU agricultural subsidies by accepting a reduction of these funds. The plan combines a reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) with increased spending in other sectors, especially defense which illustrates what POLITICO calls a policy of ‘guns before butter’. And despite assurances that there will not be a CAP reduction, most experts on farm policy predict a general fall in farm funding.

Macron is already facing a severe image problem due to accusations of him being ‘president of the rich’ and not of the ordinary people. His take on reforming the agricultural sector is more than unlikely to change this for the better and could offer a chance to more right-leaning politicians to win some extra points in the coming European elections. And that is beside severely harming the organic agricultural sector.

What Organic Agriculture is and what it should be

With 58% of the French people being convinced that organic farming is beneficial for environmental protection both the number of consumers and organic farmers is growing. Yet, organic agriculture only accounts for a small percentage (7.3%) of all farmed land. It is a sector that, despite gathering strength, still needs support – not to increase consumption but for technical development. The abolition of CAP funds for sustainable agriculture thus present a serious challenge to organic farming as has already become evident in the cases of the UK and the Netherlands.

In the case of the UK the land used for organic farming has been diminished by 29% within five years (2010-2015) once subsidies for the sector had been cut. With environmental protection being more urgent than ever, it is counterproductive to weaken the organic farming industry, especially when there is the necessary consumer demand that helps the sector grow until it is stable enough to function on its own. From rising food prices due to increased production costs to increased water pollution due to nitrate in fertilisers that are used in conventional farming, the reduction of support for organic agriculture has a number of negative impacts on environmental as well as social justice. Thus, as French MEP Eric Andrieu (S&D) states: ‘Organic agriculture should be the primary beneficiary of future CAP reform, but we are still far from such agricultural revolution.’

by Merle Emrich

Photo Credits

Fauno in the fields, Damanhur Spiritual EcoCommunity, CC BY-ND 2.0

Shropshire Sheep, Amanda Slater, CC BY-SA 2.0

Agriculture, StateofIsrael, CC BY 2.0

The post France and the Sorrows of Organic Agriculture appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Photo Essay: A Nation Sees Yellow

Merle Emrich — Fri, 12 Apr 2019 13:23:24 +0000

‘When it is pressed or attacked, it changes form and repositions itself. It exerts constant counter force to search for weakness.’ This is a quote from the website The Taoism for the Modern World describing an aspect of the Tao of water. But the quote could also be easily applied to both the Gilets Jaunes and to the French government.

The Gilets Jaunes movement that had started in mid-November 2018 is still going strong. And the government – unwilling to give into demands for more direct democracy, the re-introduction of the wealth tax and higher salaries combined with lower taxes for the working and middle class – appears, in a seemingly helpless manner, to rely on the use of force. Its most recent strategy has been revealed on March 18 by Prime Minister Édouard Philippe introducing new, stricter measures including more autonomy for the police forces employed, the use of drones, declaring certain areas such as the Champs Elysée (Paris) or the Place du Capitole (Toulouse) out of bounds for protests and banning the full or partial covering of faces.

The atmosphere at the protests, however, leaves to conclude that the Gilets Jaunes are as unwilling to give in as the government. As the protesters march through to Toulouse on one of the first warm days of March they shout ‘We are not tired’. And a woman wearing a yellow high-visibility vest – the source of the movement’s name – on which she has written ‘I am scared but I am here’ joins the other protesters in their singing: ‘We are here! We are here! Even if Macron doesn’t want it, we are here. For the honour of the workers, and for a better world, even if Macron doesn’t want it, we are here.’ A few steps away some protesters are collecting donations to pay the defence lawyers of imprisoned Gilets Jaunes – it is only one of many instances in which the solidarity between the protesters becomes evident.

While the French government is trying to staunch what some, more or less in jest, refer to as a revival of the French Revolution, and only seems to even more dam up the anger of the people that is already overflowing, it is no also criticised for excessive use of police force by human rights organisations and international political bodies alike. Criticism and accusations which it refutes or seeks to play down.

In early December 2018 the French human rights organisation Ligue des Droits de l’Homme (LDH) pointed out the disproportional and at time illegitimate use of GLI-F4 and LBD 40. GLI-F4 is a tear gas grenade that contains 25g of TNT which has caused several people to lose a hand. LBD stands for lanceur de balle de défense (defence ball launcher) and is a rubber projectile of about 4 cm size (diameter). It is classified as a ‘less-lethal’ weapon and can cause bone fractures and has cost a number of Gilets Jaunes an eye.

Around the same time as LDH, Amnesty International (AI) issued a report on police violence linked to the Gilets Jaunes protests and urged French authorities to ‘exercise restraint when policing demonstrations.’ West Europe researcher for AI, Rym Khadhraoui stated that ‘[a]s the clouds of tear gas lift, a clearer picture has emerged which shows police have used excessive force against largely peaceful protesters, journalists and even children. […] Whilst policing demonstrations is a difficult task and some protesters have committed unlawful and violent acts, it is essential that both French law and international human rights law is respected.’

On February 14, 2019, the EU Parliament was the first international political institution to criticise the manner in which force had been used against protesters by French authorities. The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatović, issued a memorandum on the situation. She noted a lack of respect for human rights in the attempts to maintain public order and criticised the, then planned and now introduced, measures including ‘excessive restrictions to freedom of peaceful assembly’, as well as the methods used, particularly the use of LBD.

In March, the United Nations (UN) placed France on its police violence list on which it now is the only developed country joining ranks with states such as Venezuela, Sudan and Zimbabwe. Yet, the French government is refuting all criticism of international organisations and human rights institutions, as well as calls from the Council of Europe, AI and the independent French human rights authority le Défenseur des Droits to put an end to the use of LBD. Interior Minister Castaner objected by stating that ‘French people [are allowed] to express themselves every day in our Grand Débat. We are already investigating the issue of police violence.’ And Secretary of State to PM Philippe, Benjamin Griveaux, responded to the UN’s decision: ‘I must say, I am surprised to find ourselves on a list between Venezuela and Haiti, where there have been death [due to force].’

Contributing to tensions are accusations of the police using illegitimate force against journalists and children. In early December 2018, parallel to the Gilets Jaunes protests, high school demonstrations against a planned school reforms, were taking place. In a Parisian suburb a peacefully protesting student was, according to AI, hit in the face by a LBD rubber projectile. Around the same time, a video went viral showing students being forced by riot police to kneel with their hands behind their heads or handcuffed behind their backs. According to lawyer Mourad Battikh, some of the students might have been kept in this position for up to four hours which would constitute a form of cruel and degrading treatment prohibited under international law. In addition to that, a number of journalists were injured. Some of the claim they had been deliberately targeted and repeatedly shot with LBD rubber bullets despite being clearly identifiable as press.

The task of the French police is undoubtedly a difficult one, especially given their already bad working conditions with the result of a worrying wave of suicides among the ranks of the police nationale. The EU Commissioner for Human Rights took note of them ‘working in the context of high tensions and fatigue’ and stressed the importance of adequate salaries, sufficient time off work, as well as psychological support and human rights training throughout the police officers’ careers.

The post Photo Essay: A Nation Sees Yellow appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

“The Sea Level Is Rising and So Are We!”

Nina Kolarzik — Tue, 02 Apr 2019 14:03:48 +0000

Water pollution and contamination, overfishing, floods, rising water temperatures and sea levels, lack of fresh water… Our planet, whose surface is covered by more oceans than continents, is threatened by a rapid change of climate and environmental degradation. In mid-March, thousands of young students all over the globe stood up and fought for the acknowledgement of these threats to our life basis and demanded of world leaders to take action–for the sake of our future.

“1-2-3-4 climate is what we are fighting for, 5-6-7-8 tell the world it’s not too late!”

FridaysforFuture in the UK (Brighton), …

15th of February at 10:40 am, at the clock tower in Brighton, UK. The sun is shining, perfect demonstration weather, people are walking around in T-shirts, even though it is, according to the calendar, winter. The strike will start in 20 minutes, but already a big group of people is gathering, unpacking their posters, talking, giving interviews to curious journalists. Once in a while they break out in spontaneous chants:

“What do want?–Climate action!

When do we want it?–Now!”

With every green traffic light, more people are coming and are welcomed with loud cheering from the crowd.

“Skolstrejk för Klimatet”

… Germany (Erfurt), …

The by now often told story sounds almost magical, how fast the FridaysforFuture movement gained popularity and support. It began with one girl, at that point 15 year-old Greta Thunberg. She started missing school and instead striked every day in front of the Swedish Parliament in Stockholm, next to her a self-made sign, while informing people with flyers about the dangers of climate change. After the general elections in September she continued striking every Friday until now, planning to continue until Sweden has met the goals of the Paris Agreement. This inspired students in other European countries and beyond to organise their own strikes. The movement quickly picked up speed. Latest, after Greta was holding a speech at the annual UN Climate Conference at the end of 2018 in Katowice the world took notice of her. Through demanding cooperation instead of competition, she is now nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Not that it would have always been easy. Greta answers accusations about being paid, used by others or not writing her speeches herself. Others criticise that students are missing classes. Politicians threaten with penalties for those students who are missing out on their education, arguing that children would not know enough about how the world functions and should leave politics to the adults. Others, like Greta’s headmaster, a range of university professors, scientists, politicians, and a wide public morally support their students.

The movement’s message is not about knowing it better than adults. It is about reacting. To treat it as the crisis it is, even though it has been unfolding over centuries. To make the concerns of the future generations regarding the climate a priority.

Several organisations, protest movements and famous personalities exist that take action for a change in climate politics. What is different about this one?

“Only one climate, only one chance!”

The first particularity that catches the eye is the age of the protesters: it is a demonstration of children. Parents, who are joining their kids raise the average age about years. The majority consists of the youth–from primary school to university age. She is “just a child” was said about Greta Thunberg. World leaders should not forget or underestimate the power of children. And especially in issues as those regarding the environment, where the future counts more than the present, they have to say something, engage in politics and are not the disinterested as sometimes referred to. Politics is oriented towards the interests of ageing societies, while the students standing on the streets these Fridays will have to live with the policies made for a different generation. This is why, beneath climate action, a voting right from the age of 16 is one of the main demands of the crowd.

Even more impressive is the energy of the kids. When you are standing in the crowd of young people, it is hard to believe that the accusation the students would only enjoy a day without school has any solid foundation. They are standing there for a reason; because they are concerned about their future. The effort they put in designing their colourful posters is telling: they want to be able to do something and not only listen the news of hazardous weather catastrophes. It seems like Greta has shown not only world leaders that they have to act, but also the Youth. We need to show that we care about our future, because when we are loud enough about it others will have to listen. One person and her endurance was enough to trigger thousands to raise their voices. These young people are aware of their privileged situation in Europe–and they don’t rest on it but demand from themselves to take action.

… Sweden (Malmö), …

“Many people don’t seem to understand why we are doing this”, says one of the speakers. They value their education, but want to have the right education. The environment and climate change should not be marginalised in schools, where it is only mentioned occasionally in geography lessons. Instead, it should be a priority and an issue addressed in many subjects, move to the centrality it deserves. The strike in Brighton does not only involve noise-making on the streets but also workshops to learn something from this day. Without teaching about the seriousness of climate change and solving approaches, future generations might not be much different from the present ones and will not save the planet.

“My arms are tired”

15th of March, a Friday again. Around seven months after Greta’s first strike, the movement has reached its peak to date with a world wide strike: the girl who started it is now joined by around 1.4 million students in 128 countries around the globe.

The weather is less good than last month, but even more people have been coming. The youngest participants are likely to be less than ten years old but are chanting like everyone else. Some parents are accompanying their children, you can spot teachers and an old lady in support of her grandchildren’s future. People are coming out of their houses and shops to watch and applaud. One man says: “Well done, kids.”

The energy of the children has no limit. When it is too silent for a few seconds, one person starts chanting and the rest responds. Some are angry shouts against certain politicians, others rhymes for climate action. When the crowd reaches the park, you can finally see the true amount of people–and they are getting more.

… and France (Toulouse).

The one or another political group is trying to use the dynamics for their cause. But the movement itself does not belong to any organisation or institution. As an example of mobilising modern activism it arose from nowhere–and might disappear when its purpose is fulfilled. A community for a moment, united to draw attention on the human impact on our environment. And attention is something they certainly attracted as the biggest climate protest ever to take place so far.

One of my favourite signs says at the back that the student is tired of holding it. It is time to act, for children and for adults.

Greta Thunberg became vegan, travels only by train and convinced her family to do the same. But she knows that strong political and economic actions are needed to bring about the necessary change. Not only personal hope or movements like the “FridaysforFuture” are important, but especially action.

And no matter what pessimists say about the usefulness of these students’ actions: when politicians start to get worried because students are now missing one day of school weekly, it means they notice that something needs to happen. Until then, the students might not come back.

by Nina Kolarzik

Photo Credits

The post “The Sea Level Is Rising and So Are We!” appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Geoengineering: Buying Time

Merle Emrich — Sun, 24 Mar 2019 19:05:28 +0000

If Fridays For Future has shown two things, they are that climate change is a serious issue and we are running out of time, and that the demands for change make adults, especially those in power positions, incredibly uncomfortable – perhaps not even because they believe the concerns of the youth to be unfounded but because they now that they are right. Yet, it is not only the youth that politicians try to brush off. For years, scientist who might hold the key, not to solving climate change but, to buying us some time have been – and still are – ignored.

Desperate Times

The Paris Agreement was celebrated as a landmark in the struggle to stop climate change. Yet, Climate Interactive predicts that even if all signatories would adhere to the aims agreed upon in the agreement, we can expect a temperature rise of 3.3 degrees by 2100. And even before that, possibly by 2030, scientists argue, the Arctic sea ice will disappear completely during summer. Already in January 2017, in the middle of winter, the growth of sea ice stopped in the Arctic and in other regions the ice cap even retreated.

Whereas the melting ice of Antarctica and Greenland affects sea levels, the melting of sea ice has different impacts. Since ice reflects sunlight and covers part of the sea’s surface, the reduction of sea ice will contributing to the warming of the seas allowing the water to store more heat and resulting in a local rise in temperature. This then causes more glaciers as well as greenhouse gas-storing permafrost to melt, increases general global warming and might even lead to disrupted weather patterns in other parts of the world beside destroying the habitat of many animals such as the Arctic cod and polar bears. To prevent this, Dr Hunt of the University of Cambridge says ‘[w]e have to be carbon zero by 2035. […] That means no flying, no container shipping, electric cars, cutting gas to our homes … All this has to happen worldwide in the next 20 years.’

Desperate Measures

There might be a way, however, to buy us some time: geoengineering. The logic behind this approach is that since we impact the environment in a negative way causing climate change, it should be possible to at least slow down, if not stop or reverse, it by impacting the environment with intention. We have reached a point at which climate concerns require our full attention and we should do our best to move towards a more environmentally friendly society. Especially with many not willing to commit to giving their best, geoengineering might prove a vital tool to delay the almost inevitable.

And yet, there still are sceptics. ‘They think we are playing God with the climate’, Dr Hunt explains, ‘but we have been playing God with the climate for 200 years by burning fossil fuels,” he says. “Just because we have messed it up it doesn’t mean we can’t fix it.’ Important to note is that geoengineering is not a carte blanche to blindly continue on the destructive way we are on. Geoengineering without more fundamental changes in environmental politics is much ‘like a car accelerating towards a brick wall. We are not accelerating as fast as we were, but we are also not putting our foot on the brake.’

Refreezing the Arctic

The melting Arctic ice is only one of many climate change related problems. It is simultaneously one of many problems that scientists try to tackle with geoengineering. Their approach is based on the question: What if we could refreeze the Arctic? At the moment, the ice cap in many places is no thicker than two or three metres with a tendency to become even thinner due to global warming. If it were possible to add a couple of layers to the sea ice during the winter months, it might be possible to prevent them vanishing during the summer.

The suggested method to create an extra metre of Arctic ice is seemingly simple. Giant wind-powered pumps on top of buoys would be placed in the Arctic Sea. There, they would transfer water from the sea to the top of the ice where it freezes and thickens the ice layer. To achieve this in 10% of the Arctic, the minimum of what is needed to make a difference, an estimated number of 10 million water pumps would be needed. In addition, the idea to build large mounds on the sea floor is circulating. These mounds would be constructed out of materials such as sand or rocks with the purpose to prevent warm water from melting glaciers from the bottom up. Yet, it is uncertain if this technique could be applied to an area as large as the Arctic.

Save the Earth, Save Ourselves

From refreezing the Arctic, over sucking carbon over the air to blocking sun rays with big mirrors in space, there is no lack of creative ideas in the field of geoengineering. Another idea to counteract the reduction of sea ice includes artificially whitening the Arctic. The plan entertains the thought of using light-coloured aerosol particles to reflect sun rays. Alternatively, water could potentially be used to create sunlight-reflecting clouds over the Arctic by distributing the water in the atmosphere above.

Yet, whether it is chemically reversing the acidification of the oceans or copying volcanic eruptions by injecting stratospheric sulfate aerosols into the atmosphere to cool down the Earth, most geoengineering approaches share a common problem. Due to potential unanticipated factors that might have a counterproductive effect more research is needed. For instance, if we were to try to reduce the world climate by two degrees and accidentally end up lowering it by four degrees, we might have to deal with a whole new set of environmental crises.

With time running out, what we need is more awareness of the existence of these approaches, especially among politicians, so that there can be more research and an eventual implementation of relatively risk-free geoengineering projects. However, this is not nearly enough. We have to finally start recognising climate change as the threat it is and draw the necessary consequences not only in words but in action – and by ‘we’ I mean not only society in general but especially those in a power position enabling them to enforce change. If not to save the Earth, which will most likely survive us anyway, then for ourselves.

by Merle Emrich

Photo Credits

Global Climate Change, Jas n, CC BY-NC 2.0

Iceberg 6, DorkyMum, CC BY-Nc-ND 2.0

What If Global Temperatures Rose by 4 Degrees Celsius?, klem@s, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

blue ice, mariusz kluzniak, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Climate change protesters march in Paris, Jeanne Menjoulet, CC BY 2.0

The post Geoengineering: Buying Time appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.