US-China Deal on Carbon Emissions to Potentially Impact Climate Talks

In 1997, the world’s first climate change treaty, the Kyoto Protocol, failed to stop the rise of plant-warming pollution. Nearly two decades later, there is new hope for the impending climate change negations that are to occur in Paris next year.

Earlier this month, Obama and Xi Jinping, China’s president, came to an agreement to commit to lowering their nations’ carbon emissions. The ramifications of such a commitment from two of the world’s largest emitters has many environmentalists excited for a shift in global politics.

As David B. Sandalow, Obama’s former assistant secretary for energy policy and international affairs, comments, “For the world’s biggest emitters to be coming together and announcing concrete numbers, serious numbers, sends a signal to the world.” One of the many reasons the Kyoto Protocol is not considered a success is due to a standoff between the two nations who refused to sign the deal in 1997.

The Kyoto plan was meant to force developed countries, such as the United States, to cut fossil fuel emissions, while developing countries like China were exempt. Due to these conditions, the United States refused to ratify the treaty. Since 1997, China has grown to become one of the world’s largest carbon polluters. The standoff between two of the world’s superpowers caused many other governments to refuse to cut emissions as well.

Despite these negotiations, many experts claim that these emissions reductions are not enough to reduce the global atmospheric temperatures. Scientists expect the atmospheric temperature to increase by at least 2 degrees Celsius, tipping the planet into a trend of dangerous warming. Such conditions will result in the loss of large areas of arable land, melting Arctic sea ice and rapidly increasing sea levels, among many other dreadful climate changes.

These Scientists have concluded that in order to avoid such catastrophic conditions, the world’s largest economies must commit to a much more extreme plan of emission reduction, in a much shorter amount of time. Additionally, many Paris deal-negotiating experts claim that in order for significant change to occur, the final deal must include a tax on industries for their carbon emissions.

Although many are hopeful for the upcoming Paris negotiations, others are taking a more pragmatic stance. Laurence Tubiana, France’s climate change ambassador to the United Nations, states that she does not believe the Paris deal will result in a traditional treaty. Tubiana envisions a “Paris Alliance” which she anticipated will resemble a collection of targets pledge by individual countries, as well as governmental pledges to follow through with domestic action.

The opinions on how the Paris deal will pan out are varied; many are not convinced how the agreement between the United States and China will influence other major emitters. Despite these concerns, negotiators can all agree that if the treaty fails to stave off a 2-degree temperature increase, the 2015 deal must include provisions to assist poor countries deal with the resulting climate change.  Rich countries will meet in Berlin to formally announce their pledges for such provisions, with hopes of reaching their $100 billion goal.

Internet of Things and the Climate Change

The future of climate change management lies in the ability to use a holistic approach to environmental data and monitoring information. This merging of technological advances, such as real-time sensors, big data technologies, and Internet of Things (IoT), gives industries and governments the ability to effectively predict and manage climate change.

In any industry, when all incoming data is connected and centrally accessible through a SaaS application, the flow of information is much more efficient and effective. For example, instead of having a separate file and procedure for energy management, waste management, environmental compliance and incident management, a company can have all emissions-related records environmental and H&S compliance data in one system. From this single system, they would have the ability to manage compliance activity, data monitoring, and resource management at the same time. Adopting such a structure offers any entity the ability to converge all incoming sources of information to create a much more integrated enterprise platform for EH&S+S management.

At the crux of this method of centralized information is the Internet of Things. The IoT is the interconnection of uniquely identifiable embedded computing devices within the existing internet infrastructure. The proliferation of IoT is expected to usher in an age of automation in the environmental field, while enabling advanced applications like a smart grid or real time water quality measurement and management. IoT is able to offer connectivity beyond machine-to-machine communications and cover a variety of protocols, domains and applications.

In relation to environmental management, a “Thing” in the IoT could refer to flow monitoring sensors, a groundwater monitoring well, emission monitoring stations, Gas Chromatography (GC) instruments  used in analytical chemistry for  testing the purity of a particular substance, or separating the different components of a mixture or  identifying a compound. Ultimately, any natural or man-made object that can be assigned an IP address and provided with the ability to transfer data over a network can become a thing in the IoT. The expanded use of this system is expected to create a plethora of new areas of application for internet connected automation. And, in turn, the IoT is also expected to generate a large amount of data from a huge variety of environmental monitoring devices, thereby increasing the need for better indexing, processing, and storing of incoming data.

The IoT is considered one of the fastest growing trends in technology. When applied to the environmental monitoring industry, there will be an overwhelming influx of information that will have to be dealt with. Many companies are concerned that the sheer volume of data will render the information useless. Environmental companies must invest in smart software and intelligent databases to deal with this new trend, hopefully changing the face of the environmental monitoring industry.

Hydrofracking Wastewater Treatment Market to Triple

Hydrofracking wastewater treatment market to triple

The U.S. market for treating produced water and flowback water generated during the process of hydrologic fracturing, or “fracking,” in oil and gas production will increase substantially from $138 million in 2014 to $357 million in 2020, according to a recent report by Bluefield Research (Boston, MA).

The report finds that, overall, the U.S. oil and gas industry will spend $6.38 billion in 2014 on water management, including water supply, transport, storage, treatment, and disposal. The transport and disposal components will account for 66% of the total costs, while treatment will only constitute 2% of that expenditure this year, but treatment will gain as the industry requires more reuse of its wastewater. The “fracking” industry has been a kind of “wild west” for the U.S. water industry, according to Bluefield analyst Reese Tisdale, because of the explosive build-out of fracking wells, the lack of clear regulation of water management in key markets, and the absence to date of a consistent method for treating the wastewater.

California’s Water Shortage

A new paper published in Nature Climate Change, by NASA water scientist James Famiglietti, presents the chilling reality of California’s ongoing drought crisis. “The Global Groundwater Crisis,” uses satellite data to measure the depletion of the world’s aquifers, and summarizes the effects this has on the environment.

These aquifers contain groundwater that more than 2 billion individuals rely on as their primary source of water. Groundwater is also essential, as it is one of the main sources we rely on to irrigate food crops. In times of drought, the lack of rain and snow results in less surface water (the water that settles in lakes, streams, and rivers). Thus, farmers must rely on available groundwater to irrigate their crops, leading to rapid depletion in areas of high farming concentration.

California’s Central Valley has been one of the most effected regions in the state. The map below depicts groundwater withdrawals in California during the first three years of the state’s ongoing drought.

According to James Famiglietti, “California’s Sacramento and San Joaquin river basins have lost roughly 15 cubic kilometers of total water per year since 2011.”  That means “more water than all 38 million Californians use for domestic and municipal supplies annually—over half of which is due to groundwater pumping in the Central Valley.”

As more water is pumped from the aquifers, things can only get worse. As this trend continues, wells will have to be dug deeper, resulting in increased pumping costs. This, in turn, will lead to a higher salt contents, which inhibits crop yields and can eventually cause soil to lose productivity altogether. Over time, Famiglietti writes, “inequity issues arise because only the relatively wealthy can bear the expense of digging deeper wells, paying greater energy costs to pump groundwater from increased depths and treating the lower-quality water that is often found deeper within aquifers.” This problem is already apparent in California’s Central Valley.  Some low-income residents are forced to let their wells go dry, while many other farmers are forced to irrigate with salty water pumped from deep in the aquifer.

The lesson we can learn from Famiglietti’s research is that “Groundwater is being pumped at far greater rates than it can be naturally replenished, so that many of the largest aquifers on most continents are being mined, their precious contents never to be returned.”  This problem of diminishing groundwater is perpetuated, due the lack of forethought, regulation, or research concerning this water source. Famiglietti contends that if current trends hold, “groundwater supplies in some major aquifers will be depleted in a matter of decades.”

Without any change of practices, we can expect steeper droughts and more demand for water. Famiglietti suggests that if we ever plan on getting the situation under control, we must start carefully measuring groundwater and treat it like the precious resource that it is. However, if the globe continues on this path without any adjustment, it will most likely result in civil uprising and international violent conflict in the water-stressed regions of the world.

UN report: Irreversible climate change deadline

The latest United Nations’ world climate report states that greenhouse gas emissions will need to stop by 2100 or the world will face irreversible change.

The final report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) includes the findings from the three previous reports, and includes more than 30,000 independent studies about climate. The bottom line conclusion is a 95 percent accurate assessment that climate change is both real and almost entirely man-made. It also states that if greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated, the results will be irreversible. Effects will include even hotter years than the recent record setting ones, rising sea levels, agricultural disruption, and even potential changes in the male-female population ratios.

The physical changes outlined in the report won’t be the limit to the secondary societal changes. Famine and drought have already exasperated issues in parts of Africa, and rising human migration from areas affected by climate change will cause even more conflicts between nation states. The rise in heat will also cause increases in health issues.

2014 may be the hottest year on record, and if the heat trends continue, growing regions will change, causing untold potential economic disruption to traditional agricultural areas. Coastal towns and resort communities could find themselves underwater and forced to move inland to higher elevations or forcing never-ending construction of offshore breakwaters.

The primary conclusion from the IPCC report is that all countries will need to reduce, and eventually halt, use of fossil fuels and move to renewable and environmentally friendly sources of energy. And while twenty-eight European nations have agreed to reduce emissions to almost half of their 1990 levels in the next fifteen years, the United States still hasn’t even come to a political agreement between Republican and Democrats if climate change is even real.

Decisions made in the next couple of decades by politicians and citizens around the world will determine if this “irreversible” deadline in going to be met with change or if we’ll be walking into 2100 different world than we are now.