ML14304A704
| ML14304A704 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 09/10/2013 |
| From: | Ecology & Environment, State of NY, Dept of Public Service |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, State of NY, Public Service Commission |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14304A441 | List: |
| References | |
| F-2012-1028 | |
| Download: ML14304A704 (90) | |
Text
/76< '1 £ /' ~ -<
2>
K 9
~t t
- t H
%ZL~ >>
1
~<
V N-
- G
(
-- I 4.-
it nJ ~0 74 A
Lj
U.S. Average Temperaure Chw"g (*F) 4Zt
-~~
-151-IJ
-m 41.0D-05 45bOb m
OObAh 0~5101 m =~m Abi IODI L5 U
Online at:
nca2014.globalchange.gov This report was produced by an advisory committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, for the Subcommittee on Global Change Research, and at the request of the U.S. Government. Therefore, the report is in the public domain. Some materials used in the report are copyrighted and permission was granted to the U.S. government for their publication in this report. For subsequent uses that include such copyrighted materials, permission for reproduction must be sought from the copyright holder. In all cases, credit must be given for copyrighted materials.
First published 2014 Printed in the United States of America ISBN 9780160924026 Recommended Citation Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts in the United States:
The Third National Climate Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, 841 pp. doi:10.7930/J0Z31WJ2.
Published by the U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov; Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402-0001 U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM ii CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
May 2014 Members of Congress:
On behalf of the National Science and Technology Council and the U.S. Global Change Research Program, we are pleased to transmit the report of the Third National Climate Assessment- Climate Change Impacts in the United States. As required by the Global Change Research Act of 1990, thiis report has collected, evaluated, and integrated observations and research on climate change in the United States. It focuses both on changes that are happening now and further changes that we can expect to see throughout this century.
This report is the result of a three-year analytical effort by a team of over 300 experts, overseen by a broadly constituted Federal Advisory Committee of 60 members. It was developed from information and analyses gathered in over 70 workshops and listening sessions held across the country. It was subjected to extensive review by the public and by scientific experts in and out of government, including a special panel of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences. This process of unprecedented rigor and transparency was undertaken so that the findings of the National Climate Assessment would rest on the firmest possible base of expert judgment.
We gratefully acknowledge the authors, reviewers, and staff who have helped prepare this Third National Climate Assessment. Their work in assessing the rapid advances in our knowledge of climate science over the past several years has been outstanding. Their findings and key messages not only describe the current state of that science but also the current and future impacts of climate change on major U.S. regions and key sectors of the U.S. economy. This information establishes a strong base that government at all levels of U.S. society can use in responding to the twin challenges of changing our policies to mitigate further climate change and preparing for the consequences of the climate changes that can no longer be avoided. It is also an important scientific resource to empower communities, businesses, citizens, and decision makers with information they need to prepare for and build resilience to the impacts of climate change.
When President Obama launched his Climate Action Plan last year, he made clear that the essential information contained in this report would be used by the Executive Branch to underpin future policies and decisions to better understand and manage the risks of climate change. We strongly and respectfully urge others to do the same.
Sincerely, Dr. John P. Holdren Dr. Kathryn D. Sullivan Assistant to the President for Science and Technology Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy NOAA Administrator Executive Office of the President U.S. Department of Commerce
.U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM iii CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
The National Climate Assessment assesses the science of climate change m and its impacts across the United States, now and throughout this century.i It documents climate change related impacts and responses for various sectors and regions, with the goal of better informing public and private decision-making at all levels.
A team of more than 300 experts (see page 98), guided by a 60-member National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee (listed on page vi) produced the full report - the largest and most diverse team to produce a U.S. climate assessment. Stakeholders involved in the development of the assessment included decision-makers from the public ,n and private sectors, resource and environmental managers, researchers, representatives from businesses and non-governmental organizations, and the general public. More than 70 workshops and listening sessions were held, and thousands of public and expert comments on the draft report provided additional input to the process. Online at:
The assessment draws from a large body of scientific peer-reviewed nca2014.globalchange.gov research, technical input reports, and other publicly available sources; all sources meet the standards of the Information Quality Act. The report was extensively reviewed by the public and experts, including a panel of the National Academy of Sciences, the 13 Federal agencies of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, and the Federal Committee on Environment, Natural Resources, and Sustainability.
r'FA The Highlights presents the major findings and selected highlights from Climate Change Impacts in the United States, the third National Climate Assessment.
The Highlights report is organized around the National Climate Assessment's 12 Report Findings, which take an overarching view of the entire report and its 30 chapters. All material in the Highlights report is drawn from the full report. The Key Messages from each of the 30 report chapters appear in boxes throughout this document.
A 20-page Overview booklet is available online.
i~R
- Online at:
nca20l4.globalchange.gov/highlights U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM iv CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
Federal National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee (NCADAC)
Chair Jerry Melillo, Marine Biological Laboratory Susanne C. Moser, Susanne Moser Research &Consulting and Stanford University Vice-Chairs Richard Moss, University of Maryland and PNNL Terese (T.C.) Richmond, Van Ness Feldman, LLP Philip Mote, Oregon State University Gary Yohe, Wesleyan University Jayantha Obeysekera, South Florida Water Management District Marie O'Neill, University of Michigan Committee Members Lindene Patton, Zurich Financial Services Daniel Abbasi, GameChange Capital, LLC John Posey, East-West Gateway Council of Governments E. Virginia Armbrust, University of Washington Sara Pryor, Indiana University Timothy (Bull) Bennett, Kiksapa Consulting, LLC Andrew Rosenberg, University of New Hampshire and Union of Rosina Bierbaum, University of Michigan and PCAST Concerned Scientists Maria Blair, Independent Richard Schmalensee, Massachusetts Institute of Technology James Buizer, University of Arizona Henry Schwartz, HGS Consultants, LLC Lynne M.Carter, Louisiana State University Joel Smith, Stratus Consulting F Stuart Chapin Ill, University of Alaska Donald Wuebbles, University of Illinois Camille Coley, Florida Atlantic University Jan Dell, ConocoPhillips Ex Officio Committee Members Placido dos Santos, WestLand Resources, Inc. Ko Barrett, U.S. Department of Commerce Paul Fleming, Seattle Public Utilities Katharine Batten, U.S. Agency for International Development Guido Franco, California Energy Commission Virginia Burkett, U.S. Department of the Interior Mary Gade, Gade Environmental Group Patricia Cogswell, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Aris Georgakakos, Georgia Institute of Technology Gerald Geemaert, U.S. Department of Energy David Gustafson, Monsanto Company John Hall, U.S. Department of Defense David Hales, Second Nature Leonard Hirsch, Smithsonian Institution Sharon Hays, Computer Sciences Corporation William Hohenstein, U.S. Department of Agriculture Mark Howden, CSIRO Patricia Jacobberger-Jellison, National Aeronautics and Space Anthony Janetos, Boston University Administration Peter Kareiva, The Nature Conservancy Thomas R. Karl, Subcommittee on Global Change Research, U.S.
Rattan Lal, Ohio State University Department of Commerce Arthur Lee, Chevron Corporation George Luber, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Jo-Ann Leong, Hawai'i Institute of Marine Biology C.Andrew Miller, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Diana Liverman, University of Arizona and Oxford University Robert O'Connor, National Science Foundation Rezaul Mahmood, Western Kentucky University Susan Ruffo, White House Council on Environmental Quality Edward Maibach, George Mason University Arthur Rypinski, U.S. Department of Transportation Michael McGeehin, RTI International Trigg Talley, U.S. Department of State Federal Executive Team John Holdren, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology Tamara Dickinson, Principal Assistant Director for Environment and and Director, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Energy, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Katharine Jacobs, Director, National Climate Assessment, White House Fabien Laurier, Director, Third National Climate Assessment, White Office of Science and Technology Policy (through December 2013) House Office of Science and Technology Policy Thomas Armstrong, Director, U.S. Global Change Research Program Glynis C. Lough, NCA Chief of Staff, U.S. Global Change Research National Coordination Office, White House Office of Science and Program Technology Policy David Easterling, NCA Technical Support Unit Director, NOAA NCDC Thomas R. Karl, Chair, Subcommittee on Global Change Research, U.S. Department of Commerce U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM V CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
NKAI*OAL CL.,1M-TE ASSEF-SMENT STAFF USGCRP National Climate Assessment Coordination Technical Support Unit, National Climatic Data Office Center, NOAA/NESDIS Katharine Jacobs, Director, National Climate Assessment, White House Office of David Easterling, NCA Technical Support Unit Director, NOAA National Climatic Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) (through December 2013) / University Data Center (from March 2013) of Arizona Anne Waple, NCA Technical Support Unit Director, NOAA NCDC / UCAR Fabien Laurier, Director, Third National Climate Assessment, White House (through February 2013)
OSTP (previously Deputy Director, USGCRP) (from December 2013) Susan Joy Hassol, Senior Science Writer, Climate Communication, LLC /
Glynis Lough, NCA Chief of Staff, USGCRP / UCAR (from June 2012) Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites, North Carolina State University Sheila O'Brien, NCA Chief of Staff, USGCRP / UCAR (through May 2012) (CICS-NC)
Susan Aragon-Long, NCA Senior Scientist and Sector Coordinator, U.S. Paula Ann Hennon, NCA Technical Support Unit Deputy Director, CICS-NC Geological Survey Kenneth Kunkel, Chief Scientist, CICS-NC Ralph Cantral, NCA Senior Scientist and Sector Coordinator, NOAA Sara W.Veasey, Creative Director, NOAA NCDC (through November 2012) Andrew Buddenberg, Software Engineer/Scientific Programmer, CICS-NC Tess Carter, Student Assistant, Brown University Fred Burnett, Administrative Assistant, Jamison Professional Services, Inc.
Emily Therese Cloyd, NCA Public Participation and Engagement Coordinator, Sarah Champion, Scientific Data Curator and Process Analyst, CICS-NC USGCRP/ UCAR Doreen DiCarlo, Program Coordinator, CICS-NC (August 2011-April 2012)
Chelsea Combest-Friedman, NCA International Coordinator, Knauss Marine Daniel Glick, Editor, CICS-NC Policy Fellow, NOAA (February 2011-February 2012) Jessicca Griffin, Lead Graphic Designer, CICS-NC Alison Delgado, NCA Scientist and Sector Coordinator, Pacific Northwest John Keck, Web Consultant, LMI, Inc. (August 2010- September 2011)
National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute, University of Angel Li, Web Developer, CICS-NC Maryland (from October 2012) Clark Lind, Administrative Assistant, The Baldwin Group, Inc.
William Emanuel, NCA Senior Scientist and Sector Coordinator, Pacific (January-September 2012)
Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute, Liz Love-Brotak, Graphic Designer, NOAA NCDC University of Maryland (June 2011-September 2012) Tom Maycock, Technical Editor, CICS-NC Matt Erickson, Student Assistant, Washington State University Janice Mills, Business Manager, CICS-NC (July-October 2012) Deb Misch, Graphic Designer, Jamison Professional Services, Inc.
Ilya Fischhoff, NCA Program Coordinator, USGCRP / UCAR Julie Moore, Administrative Assistant, The Baldwin Group, Inc.
Elizabeth Fly, NCA Coastal Coordinator, Knauss Marine Policy Fellow, NOAA (June 2010-January 2012)
(February 2013-January 2014) Ana Pinheiro-Privette, Data Coordinator, CICS-NC (January 2012-July 2013)
Chelcy Ford, NCA Sector Coordinator, USFS (August-November 2011) Deborah B. Riddle, Graphic Designer, NOAA NCDC Wyatt Freeman, Student Assistant, George Mason University/ UCAR April Sides, Web Developer, ERT, Inc.
(May-September 2012) Laura E.Stevens, Research Scientist, CICS-NC Bryce Golden-Chen, NCA Program Coordinator, USGCRP / UCAR Scott Stevens, Support Scientist, CICS-NC Nancy Grimm, NCA Senior Scientist and Sector Coordinator, NSF / Arizona Brooke Stewart, Science Editor/Production Coordinator, CICS-NC State University (July 2011-September 2012) Liqiang Sun, Research Scientist/Modeling Support, CICS-NC Tess Hart, NCA Communications Assistant, USGCRP / UCAR (June-July 2011) Robert Taylor, Student Assistant, UNC Asheville, CICS-NC Melissa Kenney, NCA Indicators Coordinator, NOAA / University of Maryland Devin Thomas, Metadata Specialist, ERT, Inc.
Fredric Lipschultz, NCA Senior Scientist and Regional Coordinator, NASA/ Teresa Young, Print Specialist, Team ERT/STG, Inc.
Bermuda Institute of Ocean Sciences Stuart Luther, Student Assistant, Arizona State University / UCAR Review Editors (June-August 2011) Joseph Arvai, University of Calgary Julie Maldonado, NCA Engagement Assistant and Tribal Coordinator, Peter Backlund, University Corporation for Atmospheric Research USGCRP / UCAR Lawrence Band, University of North Carolina Krista Mantsch, Student Assistant, Indiana University / UCAR Jill S. Baron, U.S. Geological Survey / Colorado State University (May-September 2013) Michelle L.Bell, Yale University Rebecca Martin, Student Assistant, Washington State University Donald Boesch, University of Maryland (June-August 2012) Joel R. Brown, New Mexico State University Paul Schramm, NCA Sector Coordinator, Centers for Disease Control and Ingrid C. (Indy) Burke, University of Wyoming Prevention (June-November 2010) Gina Campoli, Vermont Agency of Transportation U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM Vi CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
Mary Anne Carroll, University of Michigan Leonard Hirsch, Smithsonian Institution Scott L.Collins, University of New Mexico William Hohenstein, U.S. Department of Agriculture John Daigle, University of Maine Jack Kaye, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ruth DeFries, Columbia University Michael Kuperberg, U.S. Department of Energy Lisa Dilling, University of Colorado C. Andrew Miller, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Otto C. Doering Ill, Purdue University Arthur Rypinski, U.S. Department of Transportation Hadi Dowlatabadi, University of British Columbia Joann Roskoski, National Science Foundation Charles T.Driscoll, Syracuse University Trigg Talley, U.S. Department of State Hallie C. Eakin, Arizona State University John Farrington, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Interagency National Climate Assessment Chris E. Forest, Pennsylvania State University Working Group EftiFoufoula-Georgiou, University of Minnesota Chair Adam Freed, The Nature Conservancy Katharine Jacobs, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Robert Fri, Resources for the Future (through December 2013)
Stephen T.Gray, U.S. Geological Survey Fabien Laurier, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Jay Gulledge, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (from December 2013)
Terrie Klinger, University of Washington Vice-Chair Ian Kraucunas, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Virginia Burkett, U.S. Department of the Interior - U.S. Geological Larissa Larsen, University of Michigan Survey (from March 2013)
William J. Massman, U.S. Forest Service Anne Waple, NOAA NCDC I UCAR (through February 2013)
Michael D.Mastrandrea, Stanford University Pamela Matson, Stanford University National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ronald G. Prinn, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Allison Leidner, Earth Science Division / Universities Space Research J.C. Randolph, Indiana University Association G. Philip Robertson, Michigan State University David Robinson, Rutgers University National Science Foundation Dork Sahagian, Lehigh University Anjuli Bamzai, Directorate for Geosciences (through May 2011)
Christopher A. Scott, University of Arizona Eve Gruntfest, Directorate for Geosciences (January-November 2013)
Peter Vitousek, Stanford University Rita Teutonico, Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences Andrew C. Wood, NOAA (through January 2011)
United States Global Change Research Program Smithsonian Institution Thomas Armstrong (OSTP), Executive Director, USGCRP Leonard Hirsch, Office of the Undersecretary for Science Chris Weaver (OSTP / EPA), Deputy Executive Director, USGCRP U.S. Department of Agriculture Subcommittee on Global Change Research Linda Langner, U.S. Forest Service (through January 2011)
Chair Carolyn Olson, Office of the Chief Economist Thomas Karl, U.S. Department of Commerce Toral Patel-Weynand, U.S. Forest Service Vice Chairs Louie Tupas, National Institute of Food and Agriculture Ann Bartuska, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Vice Chair, Adaptation Science Margaret Walsh, Office of the Chief Economist Gerald Geernaert, U.S. Department of Energy, Vice Chair, Integrated Modeling Mike Freilich, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Vice Chair, U.S. Department of Commerce Integrated Observations Ko Barrett, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Roger Wakimoto, National Science Foundation, Vice-Chair (from February 2013)
Principals David Easterling, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - National John Balbus, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Climatic Data Center (from March 2013)
Katharine Batten, U.S. Agency for International Development Nancy McNabb, National Institute of Standards and Technology Joel Clement, U.S. Department of the Interior (from February 2013)
Robert Detrick, U.S. Department of Commerce Adam Parris, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Scott L.Harper, U.S. Department of Defense Anne Waple, NOAA NCDC I UCAR (through February 2013)
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM Vii CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
U.S. Department of Defense U.S. Department of Transportation William Goran, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Arthur Rypinski, Office of the Secretary John Hall, Office of the Secretary of Defense Mike Savonis, Federal Highway Administration (through March 2011)
Katherine Nixon, Navy Task Force Climate Change (from May 2013) AJ Singletary, Office of the Secretary (through August 2010)
Courtney St. John, Navy Task Force Climate Change (through August 2012)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Department of Energy Rona Birnbaum, Office of Air and Radiation Robert Vallario, Office of Science Anne Grambsch, Office of Research and Development Lesley Jantarasami, Office of Air and Radiation U.S. Department of Health and Human Services John Balbus, National Institutes of Health White House Council on Environmental Quality Paul Schramm, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (through July 2011) Jeff Peterson (through July 2013)
Jamie Pool (from February 2013)
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Mike Kangior, Office of Policy (from November 2011) White House Office of Management and Budget John Laws, National Protection and Programs Directorate (from May 2013) Stuart Levenbach (through May 2012)
U.S. Department of the Interior White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Susan Aragon-Long, U.S. Geological Survey Katharine Jacobs, Environment and Energy Division (through December 2013)
Virginia Burkett, U.S. Geological Survey Fabien Lauder, Environment and Energy Division (from December 2013)
Leigh Welling, National Park Service (through May 2011)
With special thanks to former NOAA Administrator, Jane Lubchenco and former U.S. Department of State Associate Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Shere Abbott David Reidmiller, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental
&Scientific Affairs Kenli Kim, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental
&Scientific Affairs (from February 2013)
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM Viii CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
C producers limate change, onceoyster in Iowa, considered growersan inissue for a distant Washington future, State, has moved and maple syrup firmly into the producers present. are in Vermont Corn all observing climate-related changes that are outside of recent experience. So, too, are coastal planners in Florida, water managers in the arid Southwest, city dwellers from Phoenix to New York, and Native Peoples on tribal lands from Louisiana to Alaska. This National Climate Assessment concludes that the evidence of human-induced climate change continues to strengthen and that impacts are increasing across the country.
Americans are noticing changes all around them. Summers are longer and hotter, and extended periods of unusual heat last longer than any living American has ever experienced. Winters are generally shorter and warmer. Rain comes in heavier downpours. People are seeing changes in the length and severity of seasonal allergies, the plant varieties that thrive in their gardens, and the kinds of birds they see in any particular month in their neighborhoods.
Other changes are even more dramatic. Residents of some coastal cities see their streets flood more regularly during storms and high tides. Inland cities near large rivers also experience more flooding, especially in the Midwest and Northeast. Insurance rates are rising in some vulnerable locations, and insurance is no longer available in others. Hotter and drier weather and earlier snowmelt mean that wildfires in the West start earlier in the spring, last later into the fall, and burn more acreage. In Arctic Alaska, the, summer sea ice that once protected the coasts has receded, and autumn storms now cause more erosion, threatening many communities with relocation.
Scientists who study climate change confirm that these observations are consistent with significant changes in Earth's climatic trends. Long-term, independent records from weather stations, satellites, ocean buoys, tide gauges, and many other data sources all confirm that our nation, like the rest of the world, is warming. Precipitation patterns are changing, sea level is rising, the oceans are becoming more acidic, and the frequency and intensity of some extreme weather events are increasing. Many lines of independent evidence demonstrate that the rapid warming of the past half-century is due primarily to human activities.
The observed warming and other climatic changes are triggering wide-ranging impacts in every region of our country and throughout our economy. Some of these changes can be beneficial over the short run, such as a longer growing season in some regions and a longer shipping season on the Great Lakes. But many more are detrimental, largely because our society and its infrastructure were designed for the climate that we have had, not the rapidly changing climate we now have and can expect in the future. In addition, climate change does not occur in isolation. Rather, it is superimposed on other stresses, which combine to create new challenges.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 1 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
C.LIMATE CHANGE AND THE AMERCIAN PEOPLE This National Climate Assessment collects, integrates, and assesses observations and research from around the country, helping us to see what is actually happening and understand what it means for our lives, our livelihoods, and our future. This report includes analyses of impacts on seven sectors - human health, water, energy, transportation, agriculture, forests, and ecosystems - and the interactions among sectors at the national level. This report also assesses key impacts on all U.S. regions:
Northeast, Southeast and Caribbean, Midwest, Great Plains, Southwest, Northwest, Alaska, Hawai'i and the Pacific Islands, as.well as the country's coastal areas, oceans, and marine resources.
Over recent decades, climate science has advanced significantly. Increased scrutiny has led to. increased certainty that we are now seeing impacts associated with human-induced climate change. With each passing year, the accumulating evidence further expands our understanding and extends the record of observed trends in temperature, precipitation, sea level, ice mass, and many other variables recorded by a variety of measuring systems and analyzed by independent research groups from around the world. It is notable that as these data records have grown longer and climate models have become more comprehensive, earlier predictions have largely been confirmed. The only real surprises have been that some changes, such as sea level:rise and Arctic sea ice decline, have outpaced earlier projections.
What is new over the last decade is that we know with increasing certainty that climate change is happening now. While scientists continue to refine projections of the future, observations unequivocally show that climate is changing and that the warming of the past 50 years is primarily due to human-inducedemissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from. burning coal, oil, and gas, with additional contributions from forest clearing and some agricultural practices.
Global climate is projected to continue to change over this century and beyond,. but.there is still time to act to limit the amount of change and the extent of damaging impacts.
This report. documents the changes already - - - .........-..........
observed and those projected for the future. It is important that these findings and response options be shared broadly to inform citizens and communities across our nation. Climate change presents a major challenge for society. This report advances our understanding of that challenge and the need for the American people to prepare for and respond to its far-reaching implications.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 2 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
This report assesses the science of climate change and its im- U.S. National Research Council. This report documents climate pacts across the United States, now and throughout this century. change related impacts and responses for various sectors and It integrates findings of the U.S. Global Change Research Program regions, with the goal of better informing public and private de-(USGCRP)4 with the results of research and observations from cision-making at all levels.
across the U.S. and around the world, including reports from the R1 EPOR-T FZEQUýEMENTS-, PFRODUCTfQN, AND APPROVAL The Global Change Research Act 1 requires that, every four years, visory committee assembled for the purpose of conducting this the USGCRP prepare and submit to the President and Congress assessment. The report was extensively reviewed and revised an assessment of the effects of global change in the United based on comments from the public and experts, including a States. As part of this assessment, more than 70 workshops were panel of the National Academy of Sciences. The report was re-held involving a wide range of stakeholders who identified issues viewed and approved by the USGCRP agencies and the federal and information for inclusion (see Appendix 1: Process). A team Committee on Environment, Natural Resources, and Sustainabili-of more than 300 experts was involved in writing this report. Au- ty (CENRS). This report meets all federal requirements associated thors were appointed by the National Climate Assessment and with the Information Quality Act (see Appendix 2: IQA), including Development Advisory Committee (NCADAC),b the federal ad- those pertaining to public comment and transparency.
REPORZT SOURCES The report draws from a large body of scientific, peer-reviewed er peer-reviewed scientific assessments (including those of the research, as well as a number of other publicly available sources. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change); the U.S. National Author teams carefully reviewed these sources to ensure a re- Climate Assessment's 2009 report titled Global Climate Change liable assessment of the state of scientific understanding. Each Impacts in the United States; the National Academy of Science's source of information was determined to meet the four parts of America's Climate Choices reports;4 a variety of regional climate the IQA Guidance .provided to authors: 1) utility, 2) transparency impact assessments, conference proceedings, and government and traceability, 3) objectivity, and 4) integrity and security (see statistics (such as population census and energy usage); and ob-Appendix 2: IQA). Report authors made use of technical input re- servational data. Case studies were also provided as illustrations ports produced by federal agencies and other interested parties of climate impacts and adaptation programs.
in response to a request for information by the NCADAC;2 oth-IThe USGCRP is made up of 13 Federal departments and agencies that carry out research and support the nation's response to global change The USGCRP is overseen by the Subcommittee on Global Change Research (SGCR) of the National Science and Technology Council's Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Sustainability (CENRS), which in turn is overseen by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). The agencies within USGCRP are: the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce (NOAA), the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of the Interior, the Department of State, the Department of Transportation, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, the Smithsonian Institution, and the U.S. Agency for International Development.
bThe NCADAC is a federal advisory committee sponsored by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 3 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
ABOUT THIS REPORT 0_55 - * * . . .
The report has eight major sections, outlined below:.
- Overview and Report Findings: gives a high-level perspective on the full National Climate Assessment and sets out the report's 12 key findings. The Overview synthesizes and summarizes the ideas that the authors consider to be of greatest importance to the American people.
- Our Changing Climate: presents recent advances in climate change science, which includes discussions of extreme weather events, observed and projected changes in temperature and precipitation, and the uncertainties associated with these projections. Substantial additional material related to this chapter can be found in the Appendices.
- Sectors: focuses on climate change impacts for seven societal and environmental sectors: human health, water, energy, transportation, agriculture, forests, and ecosystems and biodiversity; six additional chapters consider the interactions among sectors (such as energy, water, and land use) in the context of a changing climate..
" Regions: assesses key impacts on U.S. regions - Northeast, Southeast and Caribbean, Midwest, Great Plains, Southwest, Northwest, Alaska, and Hawai'i and the U.S. affiliated Pacific Islands - as well as coastal areas, oceans, and marine resources.
- Responses: assesses the current state of responses to climate change, including adaptation, mitigation, and decision support activities.
" Research Needs: highlights major gaps in science and research to improve future assessments. New research is called for in climate science in support of assessments, climate impacts in regions and sectors, and adaptation, mitigation, and decision support.
- Sustained Assessment Process: describes an initial vision for and components of an ongoing, long-term assessment process.
" Appendices: Appendix 1 describes key aspects of the report process, with a focus on engagement; Appendix 2 describes the guidelines used in meeting the terms of the Federal Information Quality Act; Appendix 3 supplements the chapter on Our Changing Climate with an extended treatment of selected science issues; Appendix 4 provides answers to Frequently Asked Questions about climate change; Appendix 5 describes scenarios and models used in this assessment; and Appendix 6 describes possible topics.for consideration in future assessments.
0V'VER AG-R. N PERSPECTIVES Four overarching perspectives, derived from decades of ob- abilities, and opportunities in the U.S. are linked to impacts servations, analysis, and experience, have helped to shape and changes outside the United States, and vice versa; and 4) this report: 1) climate change is happening in the context of climate change can lead to dramatic tipping points in natural other ongoing changes across the U.S. and the globe; 2) cli- and social systems. These overarching perspectives are briefly mate change impacts can either be amplified or reduced by discussed below.
societal decisions; 3) climate change related impacts, vulner-(-icbal Change Context.
Climate change is one of a number of global changes affecting ters: Energy, Water, and Land Use; Biogeochemical Cycles; In-society, the environment, and the economy; others include digenous Peoples, Lands, and Resources; Urban Systems, Infra-population growth, land-use change, air and water pollution, structure, and Vulnerability; Land Use and Land Cover Change; and rising consumption of resources by a growing and wealthier and Rural Communities. The assessment also includes discus-global population. This perspective has implications for assess- sions of how climate change impacts cascade through different ments of climate change impacts and the design of research sectors such as water and energy, and affect and are affected questions at the national, regional, and local scales. This assess- by land-use decisions. These and other interconnections great-ment explores some of the consequences of interacting factors ly stress society's capacity to respond to climate-related crises by focusing on sets of crosscutting issues in a series of six chap- that occur simultaneously or in rapid sequence.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 4 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
ABOUT THIS REPOIRT Societal Choices Because environmental, cultural, and socioeconomic systems change. For example, rapid population growth and develop-are tightly coupled, climate change impacts can either be am- ment in coastal areas tends to amplify climate change related plified or reduced by cultural and socioeconomic decisions. In impacts. Recognition of these couplings, together with recog-many arenas, it is clear that societal decisions have substantial nition of multiple sources of vulnerability, helps identify what influence on the vulnerability of valued resources to climate information decision-makers need as they manage risks.
International Context Climate change is a global phenomenon; the causes and the considered. Foreign assistance, health, environmental quality impacts involve energy-use, economic, and risk-management objectives, and economic interests are all affected by climate decisions across the globe. Impacts, vulnerabilities, and op- changes experienced in other parts of the world. Although portunities in the U.S. are related in complex and interactive there is significantly more work to be done in this area, this ways with changes outside the United States, and vice versa. report identifies some initial implications of global and inter-In order for U.S. concerns related to climate change to be ad- national trends that can be more fully investigated in future dressed comprehensively, the international context must be assessments.
Thresholds, Tipping Points, and Surprises While some climate changes will occur slowly and relatively the interactions of multiple stresses, incomplete understand-gradually, others could be rapid and dramatic, leading to unex- ing of physical climate mechanisms related to tipping points, pected breaking points in natural and social systems. Although and a multitude of issues associated with human behavior, they have potentially large impacts, these breaking points or risk management, and decision-making. Improving our ability tipping points are difficult to predict, as there are many un- to anticipate thresholds and tipping points can be helpful in certainties about future conditions. These uncertainties and developing effective climate change mitigation and adapta-potential surprises come from a number of sources, including tion strategies (Ch. 2: Our Changing Climate; Ch. 29: Research insufficient data associated with low probability/high conse- Needs; and Appendices 3 and 4).
quence events, models that are not yet able to represent all Mh'SK MANAGCEMENT FFRAMEh[ )RK Authors were asked to consider the science and information stakeholders are facing. The criteria provided for identifying needs of decision-makers facing climate change risks to infra- key vulnerabilities in each sector or region included magni-structure, natural ecosystems, resources, communities, and tude, timing, persistence/reversibility, scale, and distribution other things of societal value. They were also asked to consid- of impacts, likelihood whenever possible, importance of im-er opportunities that climate change might present. For each pacts (based on the perceptions of relevant parties), and the region and sector, they were asked to assess a small number potential for adaptation. Authors were encouraged to think of key climate-related vulnerabilities of concern based on about these topics from both a quantitative and qualitative the risk (considering likelihood and consequence) of impacts. perspective and to consider the influence of multiple stresses They were also asked to address the most important infor- whenever possible.
mation needs of stakeholders, and to consider the decisions RESPONDINC TO CUIMATE 0HAPGE-While the primary focus of this report is on the impacts of cli- The second involves "adaptation" measures to improve soci-mate change in the United States, it also documents some of ety's ability to cope with or avoid harmful impacts and take the actions society is taking or can take to respond. Responses advantage of beneficial ones, now and in the future. At this to climate change fall into two broad categories. The first in- point, both of these response activities are necessary to limit volves "mitigation" measures to reduce future climate change the magnitude and impacts of global climate change on the by reducing emissions of heat-trapping gases and particles, or United States.
increasing removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 5 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
AF3OUT -HIS REPOf-RT More effective mitigation measures can reduce the amount ficient production and use of energy, increased use of non-car-of climate change, and therefore reduce the need for future bon-emitting energy sources such as wind and solar power, adaptation. This report underscores the effects of mitigation and carbon capture and storage.
measures by comparing impacts resulting from higher ver-Adaptation actions are complementary to mitigation actions.
sus lower emissions scenarios. This shows that choices made They are focused on moderating harmful impacts of current about emissions in the next few decades will have far-reach- and future climate variability and change and taking advantage ing consequences for climate change impacts throughout this of possible opportunities. While this report assesses the cur-century. Lower emissions will reduce the rate and lessen the rent state of adaptation actions and planning across the coun-magnitude of climate change and its impacts. Higher emissions try in a general way, the implementation of adaptive actions will do the opposite.
is still nascent. A comprehensive assessment of actions taken, While the report demonstrates the importance of mitigation and of their effectiveness, is not yet possible. This report docu-as an essential part of the nation's climate change strategy, it ments some of the actions currently being pursued to address does not evaluate mitigation technologies or policies or under- impacts such as increased urban heat extremes and air pol-take an analysis of the effectiveness of various approaches. lution, and describes the challenges decision-makers face in The range of mitigation responses being studied includes, but planning for and implementing adaptation responses.
is not limited to, policies and technologies that lead to more ef-TR. ."6 A 03L ACCOUNTS: PFOCESS ANDF C:O'NFIDFENCE The "traceable accounts" that accompany each chapter: 1) When it is considered scientifically justified to report the document the process the authors used to reach the conclu- likelihood of particular impacts within the range of possible sions in their key messages; 2) provide additional information outcomes, this report takes a plain-language approach to ex-to reviewers and other readers about the quality of the infor- pressing the expert judgment of the author team based on mation used; 3) allow traceability to resources; and 4) provide the best available evidence. For example, an outcome termed the level of confidence the authors have in the main findings "likely" has at least a two-thirds chance of occurring; an out-of the chapters. The authors have assessed a wide range of come termed "very likely" has more than a 90% chance. Key information in the scientific literature and various technical sources of information used to develop these characterizations reports. In assessing confidence, they have considered the are referenced.
strength and consistency of the observed evidence, the skill, range, and consistency of model projections, and insights from peer-reviewed sources.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 6 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
N" Md MT410a ILA a" Nd0WA IIINLJIINUZIý Climate change is already affecting the American people in far-reaching ways. Certain types of extreme weather events with links to climate change have become more frequent and/or in-tense, including prolonged periods of heat, heavy downpours, and, in some regions, floods and droughts. In addition, warm-ing is causing sea level to rise and glaciers and Arctic sea ice to melt, and oceans are becoming more acidic as they absorb carbon dioxide. These and other aspects of climate change are disrupting people's lives and damaging some sectors of our economy.
Climate C ange:
Pres ard Fut e Coal-fired power plants emit heat-trapping carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
Evidence for climate change abounds, from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the oceans. Scientists and engi- Multiple lines of independent evidence confirm that human neers from around the world have meticulously collected this activities are the primary cause of the global warming of the evidence, using satellites and networks of weather balloons,- past 50 years. The burning of coal, oil, and gas, and clearing of thermometers, buoys, and other observing systems. Evidence forests have increased the concentration of carbon dioxide in of climate change is also visible in the observed and measured the atmosphere by more than 40% since the Industrial Revolu-changes in location and behavior of species and functioning of tion, and it has been known for almost two centuries that this ecosystems. Taken together, this evidence tells an unambigu- carbon dioxide traps heat. Methane and nitrous oxide emis-ous story: the planet is warming, and over the last half century, sions from agriculture and other human activities add to the this warming has been driven primarily by human activity. atmospheric burden of heat-trapping gases. Data show that natural factors like the sun and volcanoes cannot have caused the warming observed over the past 50 years. Sensors on sat-ellites have measured the sun's output with great accuracy and found no overall increase dur-ing the past half century. Large volcanic eruptions during this period, such as Mount Pinatubo in 1991, have exerted a short-term cooling influence. In fact, if not for human activities, glob-al climate would actually have cooled slightly over the past 50 years. The pattern of tempera-ture change through the layers of the atmosphere, with warm-ing near the surface and cooling higher up in the stratosphere, further confirms that it is the buildup of heat-trapping gases (also known as "greenhouse gases") that has caused most of the Earth's warming over the past half century.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 7 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTYE UNITED STATES N
OVE -R\/ICW P\ýJE) PEP-OPT FINC)JNGý5-ý Because human-induced warming is superimposed on a background of natural variations in climate, warm-ing is not uniform over time. Short-term fluctuations in the long-term upward trend are thus natural and 20 expected. For example, a recent slowing in the rate of surface air temperature rise appears to be related to 1.5 cyclic changes in the oceans and in the sun's energy output, as well as a series of small volcanic eruptions 1.0 and other factors. Nonetheless, global temperatures are still on the rise and are expected to rise further.
U.S. average temperature has increased by 1.3F to 0 1.9°F since 1895, and most of this increase has oc-curred since 1970. The most recent decade was the _U nation's and the world's hottest on record, and 2012 was the hottest year on record in the continental United States. All U.S. regions have experienced warm-ing in recent decades, but the extent of warming has not been uniform. In general, temperatures are rising more quickly in the north. Alaskans have experienced some of the largest increases in temperature between the Southeast 1970 and the present. People living in have experienced some of the smallest temperature increases over this period.
Temperatures are projected to rise another 2°F to 4F in most areas of the United States over the next few decades. The a mount of warming projected beyond the next few de-Reductions in some short-lived human-induced emissions that cades is directly linked to the cumulative global emissions of contribute to warming, such as black carbon (soot) and meth- heat-i:rapping gases and particles. By the end of this century, ane, could reduce some of the projected warming over the a rou ghly 3=F to 5SF rise is projected under a lower emissions next couple of decades, because, unlike carbon dioxide, these scena rio, which would require substantial reductions in emis-gases and particles have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes. sions (referred to as the "B1 scenario"), and a S°F to 10F rise for a higher emissions scenario assuming continued incre*ases in em issions, predominantly from fossil fuel combustion (re-ferred to as the "A2 scenario"). These projections are based on results from Projected Global Temperature Change 16 climate models that used the two Different amounts of heat-trap; )ing gases re- emissions scenarios in a formal inter-leased into the atmosphere by human activi- model comparison study. The range of rical ties produce different projected increases in model projections for each emissions Earth's temperature. The lines on the graph scenario is the result of the differences represent a central estimate of global aver- in the ways the models represent key age temperature rise (relative to the 1901- factors such as water vapor, ice and 1960 average) for the two mainSscenarios snow reflectivity, and clouds, which can used inthis report. A2 assume s continued either dampen or amplify the initial ef-increases inemissions through out this cen- fect of human influences on tempera-a4 tury, and Bi assumes signifgcapnt emissions ture. The net effect of these feedbacks reductions, though not due exp licitlyto cli- is expected to amplify warming. More mate change policies. Shading indicates the information about the models and sce-range (5 11to 9 5 11percentile) of results from narios used in this report can be found a suite of climate models. Inbo ith cases, in Appendix 5 of the full report.'
temperatures are expected to rise, although
. the difference between lower a nd higher
-21 1900 1950 2000 2060 2100 emissions pathways is substan tial. (Figure Year source: NOAA NCDC / ClCS-0 IC).
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 8 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
Prolonged periods of high temperatures and the persistence location can contribute to poor air quality in faraway regions, of high nighttime temperatures have increased in many loca- and evidence suggests that particulate matter can affect at-tions (especially in urban areas) over the past half century. High mospheric properties and therefore weather patterns. Major nighttime temperatures have widespread impacts because storms and the higher storm surges exacerbated by sea level people, livestock, and wildlife get no respite from the heat. In rise that hit the Gulf Coast affect the entire country through some regions, prolonged periods of high temperatures associ- their cascading effects on oil and gas production and distribu-ated with droughts contribute to conditions that lead to larger tion.s wildfires and longer fire seasons. As expected in a warming climate, recent trends show that extreme heat is becoming Water expands as it warms, causing global sea levels to rise; more common, while extreme cold is becoming less common. melting of land-based ice also raises sea level by adding water Evidence indicates that the human influence on climate has al- to the oceans. Over the past century, global average sea level ready roughly doubled the probability of extreme heat events has risen by about 8 inches. Since 1992, the rate of global sea such as the record-breaking summer heat experienced in 2011 level rise measured by satellites has been roughly twice the in Texas and Oklahoma. The incidence of record-breaking high rate observed over the last century, providing evidence of ac-2 temperatures is projected to rise. celeration. Sea level rise, combined with coastal storms, has increased the risk of erosion, storm surge damage, and flood-Human-induced climate change means much more than just ing for coastal communities, especially along the Gulf Coast, hotter weather. Increases in ocean and freshwater tempera- the Atlantic seaboard, and in Alaska. Coastal infrastructure, tures, frost-free days, and heavy downpours have all been including roads, rail lines, energy infrastructure, airports, port documented. Global sea level has risen, and there have been facilities, and military bases, are increasingly at risk from sea large reductions in snow-cover extent, glaciers, and sea ice. level rise and damaging storm surges. Sea level is projected to These changes and other climatic changes have affected and rise by another 1 to 4 feet in this century, although the rise in will continue to affect human health, water supply, agriculture, sea level in specific regions is expected to vary from this global transportation, energy, coastal areas, and many other sectors average for a number of reasons. A wider range of scenarios, of society, with increasingly adverse impacts on the American economy and quality of life.
Some of the changes discussed in this report are common to many re-gions. For example, large increases in heavy precipitation have occurred in the Northeast, Midwest, and Great Plains, where heavy downpours have frequently led to runoff that exceeded the capacity of storm drains and le-vees, and caused flooding events and accelerated erosion. Other impacts, such as those associated with the rapid thawing of permafrost in Alaska, are unique to a particular U.S. region.
Permafrost thawing is causing exten-sive damage to infrastructure in our 4
nation's largest state.
Some impacts that occur in one region ripple beyond that region. For exam-ple, the dramatic decline of summer sea ice in the Arctic- a loss of ice cover roughly equal to half the area of the <
continental United States - exacer-bates global warming by reducing the reflectivity of Earth's surface and in-creasing the amount of heat absorbed.
Similarly, smoke from wildfires in one U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 9 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
- 1. )VERVk\!EW PND PEPCYR7Tvri~3 from 8 inches to more than 6 feet by 2100, has been used in risk-based analyses in this report. l- Dislei Acdfe Oc.@ea Wae In general, higher emissions scenarios that lead to more warming would be expected to lead to higher amounts of sea level rise. The stakes are high, as nearly five million Americans and hundreds of billions of dollars of property are located in areas that are less than four feet above the local high-tide level.6 In addition to causing changes in climate, in-creasing levels of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels and other human activi-ties have a direct effect on the world's oceans. *r* o Vsea butterflies,' are eaten by a variety of marine species ranging from Carbon dioxide interacts with ocean water to iny k il 6on to whales, The photos show what happens to a pteropod's shell form carbonic acid, increasing the ocean's acid- in swe at is too acidic. On the left is a shell from a live pteropod from a region ity. Ocean surface waters have become 30% int Ocean where acidity is not too high. The shell on the right is from a more acidic over the last 250 years as they have -- ... t region where the water is more acidic. (Figure source: (left) Bednarýek absorbed large amounts of carbon dioxide ight) Nina Bednarýek).
from the atmosphere. This ocean acidification makes water more corrosive, reducing the capacity of marine (such as corals, krill, oysters, clams, and crabs) to survive, grow, organisms with shells or skeletons made of calcium carbonate and reproduce, which in turn will affect the marine food chain.7 Widespread Impacts Impacts related to climate change are already evident in many yond. Climate changes interact with other environmental and regions and sectors and are expected to become increasingly societal factors in ways that can either moderate or intensify disruptive across the nation throughout this century and be- these impacts.
As Oceans Absorb CO2 They Become More Acidic 400 &40
- Mum Los AbnosphtCO,(ppm)
- Akoha Ocean pCOw in Au (matm)8 37- _Aloft Ocea pH (In siu) 8.10 8.05 275. 0a.00 1958 1964 1970 1976 1982 1988 1994 2000 2006 2012 Year The correlation between rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (red) with rising carbon dioxide levels (blue) and falling pH in the ocean (green). As carbon dioxide accumulates inthe ocean, the water becomes more acidic (the pH declines).
(Figure source: modified from Feely et al. 20091.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 10 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
.1-"'1RV!.EW AND P-OEP RT FINJDtfNGS Observed and projected climate change impacts vary across the regions of the United States. Selected impacts emphasized in the
ýegional chapters are shown below, and many more are explored in detail in this report.
t . *
- l Communities r - ".:: %"*
are affectedl by heat waves,
-:. . "; -I ' -." -. .. .. . . . ...
more extreme precipitation events,
.. I.
and .
coastalflooding due to sea level rise"and str urge.
S. - ._............. - . .-.- . ... ....
.- Southeast Decreased water availability, exacerbated by population growth and land-use change, and. causes increased compettion for water. There are increased risks associated with,
- . ".. " , 'h"
-Caribbean
- t .*.* " '. * * * . " i" ;::: :." .*. ">!*= ..] .., "* - " ',
exrme events'such as huriae
. . " .. . . I* * "..*."..* ' '.* .'..
Longr grwingseasns ind nising carbon dioxide levels increase yields!fsmecos Midwest-. afthough these,b"'ifit hae ardy been offset insome instances by occrrence' of extreme events such as heat waves, doh and floods. . ".,.
- ... 1.: ! ... ":.;.."..::, .... . ...... *_.. .",.....:.!.".L":-:.. "..". . .___.___
z". *A. . ... ..* . . .. Rising ='*"" temperatures
"": "* "* ": ".lead.. to increased
. ...... ......... =- demand I.. ....
' "** for water
..... ::-.'*and" .*"energy
- ' :* .- .and impacts
°' F' *on= : .
Great la~ns agricultural practices.
Dloat& aaincr~asd warming foster wildfiresaand increased c6me tofrcre Nortwes resciurcesf people and ecosystems.
Changes inthe timing of streamnfiow related to earlier snowmelt reduce the supply of
.Is-"*and( orthwes.. water .. in summer, prcie. causing.ifarieaci .e cogical .. and socioeconomic consequences..
J
,, .id reedng',summe sea ice,.shrihkingglAciets,and* dthawing permafrost c
~~ ~ Alaska daaet nrsrcueadmjor cange to ecosystemns. impacts to Alaska Native N ~~~Communte nrae
.7.
Hawa'i Increasingly comtrateshwater suppliesdoupled with inrease temperatures, andPcific stress both.people an ebsystem and decreas~e food and water security.
Coasl IIfelines, such swaetspl inf rastructure and evacuation moutes, are J>1T Coast' increasingly vulnerable to ~higiher sea: levels and storm surges, inland flooding,.and S.J otc.lirna.te.re.ated chages. "
The oceans are currently absorbing about aquarter of human-caused carbon dioxide
.,.~ -Oceans emissions to the atmosphere-and over 90% of the heat associated with global warming, leading to ocean acidification and the alterationfof marine ecosystems.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 11CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
1: OVERVIEW ,-AND REPORT F!NDINGS Some climate changes currently have beneficial effects for specific sectors or regions. For example, current benefits of warming include longer growing seasons for agriculture and longer ice-free periods for shipping on the Great Lakes. At the same time, however, longer growing seasons, along with high-er temperatures and carbon dioxide levels, can increase pollen production, intensifying and lengthening the allergy season.
Longer ice-free periods on the Great Lakes can result in more lake-effect snowfalls.
Sectors affected by climate changes include agriculture, water, human health, energy, transportation, forests, and ecosystems.
Climate change poses a major challenge to U.S. agriculture because of the critical dependence of agricultural systems on climate. Climate change has the potential to both positively Climate change can exacerbate respiratory and asthma-related and negatively affect the location, timing, and productivity of conditions through increases in pollen, ground-level ozone, and crop, livestock, and fishery systems at local, national, and global wildfire smoke.
scales. The United States produces nearly $330 billion per year Water quality and quantity are being affected by climate in agricultural commodities. This productivity is vulnerable to change. Changes in precipitation and runoff, combined with direct impacts on crops and livestock from changing climate changes in consumption and withdrawal, have reduced sur-conditions and extreme weather events face and groundwater supplies in many and indirect impacts through increasing areas. These trends are expected to pressures from pests and pathogens. continue, increasing the likelihood of Climate change will also alter the stabil- water shortages for many uses. Wa-Certain groups of people are ity of food supplies and create new food ter quality is also diminishing in many more vulnerable to the range of security challenges for the United States areas, particularly due to sediment
. as the world seeks to feed nine billion people by 2050. While the agriculture sector has proven to be adaptable to a climate change related health impacts, including the elderly, children, the poor, and the sick.
and contaminant concentrations af-ter heavy downpours. Sea level rise, storms and storm surges, and changes range of stresses, as evidenced by con- in surface and groundwater use pat-tinued growth in production and effi- terns are expected to compromise the ciency across the United States, climate sustainability of coastal freshwater change poses a new set of challenges.' aquifers and wetlands. In most U.S. re-gions, water resources managers and planners will encounter new risks, vulnerabilities, and opportunities that may not be properly managed with existing practices.'
Climate change affects human health in many ways. For ex-ample, increasingly frequent and intense heat events lead to more heat-related illnesses and deaths and, overtime, worsen drought and wildfire risks, and intensify air pollution. Increas-ingly frequent extreme precipitation and associated flooding can lead to injuries and increases in waterborne disease. Ris-ing sea surface temperatures have been linked with increasing levels and ranges of diseases. Rising sea levels intensify coastal flooding and storm surge, and thus exacerbate threats to pub-lic safety during storms. Certain groups of people are more vul-nerable to the range of climate change related health impacts, including the elderly, children, the poor, and the sick. Others are vulnerable because of where they live, including those in floodplains, coastal zones, and some urban areas. Improving and properly supporting the public health infrastructure will Increasing air and water temperatures, more intense precipitation be critical to managing the potential health impacts of climate and runoff, and intensifying droughts can decrease water quality in many ways. Here, middle school students in Colorado test change.' 0 water quality.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 12 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
Climate change also affects the living world, including people, es, reefs, mangrove forests, and barrier islands defend coastal through changes in ecosystems and biodiversity. Ecosystems ecosystems and infrastructure, such as roads and buildings, provide a rich array of benefits and services to humanity, in- against storm surges. The loss of these natural buffers due to cluding habitat for fish and wildlife, drinking water storage coastal development, erosion, and sea level rise increases the and filtration, fertile soils for growing crops, buffering against risk of catastrophic damage during or after extreme weather a range of stressors including climate change impacts, and events. Although floodplain wetlands are greatly reduced aesthetic and cultural values. These from their historical extent, those that benefits are not always easy to quan- remain still absorb floodwaters and tify, but they support jobs, economic reduce the effects of high flows on growth, health, and human well-being. The amount c f future climate river-margin lands. Extreme weather Climate change driven disruptions to change will still largely be deter- events that produce sudden increases ecosystems have direct and indirect mined by choic es society makes in water flow, often carrying debris human impacts, including reduced wa- about e missions. and pollutants, can decrease the natu-ter supply and quality, the loss of iconic ral capacity of ecosystems to cleanse species and landscapes, effects on food contaminants."2 chains and the timing and success of species migrations, and the potential for extreme weather and The climate change impacts being felt in the regions and sec-climate events to destroy or degrade the ability of ecosystems tors of the United States are affected ,by global trends and to provide societal benefits." economic decisions. In an increasingly interconnected world, U.S. vulnerability is linked to impacts in other nations. It is thus Human modifications of ecosystems and landscapes often difficult to fully evaluate the impacts of climate change on the increase their vulnerability to damage from extreme weather United States without considering consequences of climate events, while simultaneously reducing their natural capacity to change elsewhere.
moderate the impacts of such events. For example, salt marsh-Response Options As the impacts of climate change are becoming more preva- tribal governments, as well as businesses, organizations, and lent, Americans face choices. Especially because of past emis- individuals begin to respond to climate change. These chap-sions of long-lived heat-trapping gases, some additional cli- ters conclude that while response actions are under develop-mate change and related impacts are now unavoidable. This ment, current implementation efforts are insufficient to avoid is due to the long-lived nature of many of these gases, as well increasingly negative social, environmental, and economic as the amount of heat absorbed and retained by the oceans consequences."4 and other responses within the climate system. The amount of future climate change, however, will still largely be determined Large reductions in global emissions of heat-trapping gases, by choices society makes about emissions. Lower emissions of similar to the lower emissions scenario (B1) analyzed in this heat-trapping gases and particles mean less future warming assessment, would reduce the risks of some of the worst im-and less-severe impacts; higher emissions mean more warming pacts of climate change. Some targets called for in interna-and more severe impacts. Efforts to limit emissions or increase tional climate negotiations to date would require even larger carbon uptake fall into a category of response options known reductions than those outlined in the BI scenario. Meanwhile, as "mitigation," which refers to reducing the amount and speed global emissions are still rising and are on a path to be even of future climate change by reducing emissions of heat-trap- higher than the high emissions scenario (A2) analyzed in this ping gases or removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.' 3 report. The recent U.S. contribution to annual global emissions is about 18%, but the U.S. contribution to cumulative global The other major category of response options is known as "ad- emissions over the last century is much higher. Carbon dioxide aptation," and refers to actions to prepare for and adjust to lasts for a long time in the atmosphere, and it is the cumu-new conditions, thereby reducing harm or taking advantage lative carbon emissions that determine the amount of global of new opportunities. Mitigation and adaptation actions are climate change. After decades of increases, U.S. CO2 emissions linked in multiple ways, including that effective mitigation re- from energy use (which account for 97% of total U.S. emissions) duces the need for adaptation in the future. Both are essential declined by around 9% between 2008 and 2012, largely due to parts of a comprehensive climate change response strategy. a shift from coal to less C02-intensive natural gas for electricity The threat of irreversible impacts makes the timing of mitiga- production. Governmental actions in city, state, regional, and tion efforts particularly critical. This report includes chapters federal programs to promote energy efficiency have also con-on Mitigation, Adaptation, and Decision Support that offer tributed to reducing U.S. carbon emissions. Many, if not most an overview of the options and activities being planned or of these programs are motivated by other policy objectives, implemented around the country as local, state, federal, and but some are directed specifically at greenhouse gas emissions.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 13 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
These U.S. actions and others that might be undertaken in the Proactively preparing for climate change can reduce impacts future are described in the Mitigation chapter of this report. while also facilitating a more rapid and efficient response to Over the remainder of this century, aggressive and sustained changes as they happen. Such efforts are beginning at the fed-greenhouse gas emission reductions by the United States and eral, regional, state, tribal, and local levels, and in the corpo-by other nations would be needed to reduce global emissions rate and non-governmental sectors, to build adaptive capacity to a level consistent with the lower scenario (B1) analyzed in and resilience to climate change impacts. Using scientific infor-this assessment.' 5 mation to prepare for climate changes in advance can provide economic opportunities, and proactively managing the risks With regard to adaptation, the pace and magnitude of ob- can reduce impacts and costs over time. 8 served and projected changes emphasize the need to be pre-pared for a wide variety and intensity of impacts. Because of There are a number of areas where improved scientific infor-the growing influence of human activities, the climate of the mation or understanding would enhance the capacity to esti-past is not a good basis for future planning. For example, build- mate future climate change impacts. For example, knowledge ing codes and landscaping ordinances could be updated to of the mechanisms controlling the rate of ice loss in Greenland improve energy efficiency, conserve water supplies, protect and Antarctica is limited, making it difficult for scientists to against insects that spread disease (such as dengue fever), narrow the range of expected future sea level rise. Improved reduce susceptibility to heat stress, and improve protection understanding of ecological and social responses to climate against extreme events. The fact that climate change impacts change is needed, as is understanding of how ecological and are increasing points to the urgent need to develop and refine social responses will interact."9 approaches that enable decision-making and increase flexibil-ity and resilience in the face of ongoing and future impacts. A sustained climate assessment process could more efficiently Reducing non-climate-related stresses that contribute to exist- collect and synthesize the rapidly evolving science and help ing vulnerabilities can also be an effective approach to climate supply timely and relevant information to decision-makers.
change adaptation." Results from all of these efforts could continue to deepen our understanding of the interactions of human and natural sys-Adaptation can involve considering local, state, regional, na- tems in the context of a changing climate, enabling society to tional, and international jurisdictional objectives. For example, effectively respond and prepare for our future."
in managing water supplies to adapt to a changing climate, the implications of international treaties should be considered in The cumulative weight of the scientific evidence contained in the context of managing the Great Lakes, the Columbia River, this report confirms that climate change is affecting the Ameri-and the Colorado River to deal with increased drought risk. Both can people now, and that choices we make will affect our fu-
"bottom up" community planning and "top down" national ture and that of future generations.
strategies may help regions deal with impacts such as increases in electrical brownouts, heat stress, floods, and wildfires."
Cities providing transportation options including bike lanes, buildings designed with energy saving features such as green roofs, and houses elevated to allow storm surges to pass underneath are among the many response options being pursued around the country.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 14 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
I1 LA! N U R-EPO PT_ FJIND! NGE.ý
.OVERW\!E Report Findings These findings distill important results that arise from this National Climate Assessment. They do not represent a full summary of all of the chapters' findings, but rather a synthesis of particularly noteworthy conclusions.
- 1. Global climate is changing and this is apparent across the United States in a wide range of observations. The global warming of the past 50 years is primarily due to human activities, predominantly the burning of fossil fuels.
Many independent lines of evidence confirm that human activities are affecting climate in unprecedented ways. U.S. average temperature has increased by 1.3 0 F to 1.9°F since record keeping began in 1895; most of this increase has occurred since about 1970. The most recent decade was the warmest on record. Because human-induced warming is superimposed on a naturally varying climate, rising temperatures are not evenly distributed across the country or over time.21 See page 18.
- 2. Some extreme weather and climate events have increased in recent decades, and new and stronger evidence confirms that some of these increases are related to human activities.
Changes in extreme weather events are the primary way that most people experience climate change. Human-induced climate change has already increased the number and strength of some of these extreme events. Over the last 50 years, much of the United States has seen an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, and in some regions, more severe droughts.22 See page 24.
= 3. Human-induced climate change is projected to continue, and it will accelerate significantly if global emissions of heat-trapping gases continue to increase.
Heat-trapping gases already in the atmosphere have committed us to a hotter future with more climate-related impacts over the next few decades. The magnitude of climate change beyond the next few decades depends primarily on the amount of heat-trapping gases that human activities emit globally, now and in the future. 23See page 28.
- 4. Impacts related to climate change are already evident in many sectors and are expected to become increasingly disruptive across the nation throughout this century and beyond.
64-44 Climate change is already affecting societies and the natural world. Climate change interacts with other environmental and societal factors in ways that can either moderate or intensify these impacts. The types and magnitudes of impacts vary across the nation and through time. Children, the elderly, the sick, and the poor are especially vulnerable. There is mounting evidence that harm to the nation will increase substantially in the future unless global emissions of heat-trapping gases are greatly reduced.24 See page 32.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 15 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
1:OVERV1 EW AND REPORT F! N D IN
= 5. Climate change threatens human health and well-being in many ways, including through more extreme weather events and wildfire, decreased air quality, and diseases transmitted by insects, food, and water.
Climate change is increasing the risks of heat stress, respiratory stress from poor air quality, and the spread of waterborne diseases. Extreme weather events often lead to fatalities and a variety of health impacts on vulnerable populations, including impacts on mental health, such as anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. Large-scale changes in the environment due to climate change and extreme weather events are increasing the risk of the emergence or reemergence of health threats that are currently uncommon in the United States, such as dengue fever. 25 See page 34.
- 6. Infrastructure is being damaged by sea level rise, heavy downpours, and extreme heat; damages are projected to increase with continued climate change.
Sea level rise, storm surge, and heavy downpours, in combination with the pattern of continued development in coastal areas, are increasing damage to U.S. infrastructure including roads, buildings, and industrial facilities, and are also increasing risks to ports and coastal military installations. Flooding along rivers, lakes, and in cities following heavy downpours, prolonged rains, and rapid melting of snowpack is exceeding the limits of flood protection infrastructure designed for historical conditions. Extreme heat is damaging transportation infrastructure such as roads, rail lines, and airport runways.26 See page 38.
- 7. Water quality and water supply reliability are jeopardized by climate change in a variety of ways that affect ecosystems and livelihoods.
Surface and groundwater supplies in some regions are already stressed by increasing demand for water as well as declining runoff and groundwater recharge. In some regions, particularly the southern part of the country and the Caribbean and Pacific Islands, climate change is increasing the likelihood of water shortages and competition for water among its many uses. Water quality is diminishing in many areas, particularly due to increasing sediment and contaminant concentrations after heavy downpou rs.27 See page 42.
- 8. Climate disruptions to agriculture have been increasing and are projected to become more severe over this century.
Some areas are already experiencing climate-related disruptions, particularly due to extreme weather events. While some U.S. regions and some types of agricultural production will be relatively resilient to climate change over the next 25 years or so, others will increasingly suffer from stresses due to extreme heat, drought, disease, and heavy downpours. From mid-century 9
IFý on, climate change is projected to have more negative impacts on crops and livestock across the country - a trend that could diminish the security of our food supply. 28 See page 46.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 16 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
1: OVERVIEW AND REPORT FIrN,,,i'\GS
- 9. Climate change poses particular threats to Indigenous Peoples' health, well-being, and ways of life.
Chronic stresses such as extreme poverty are being exacerbated by climate change impacts such as reduced access to traditional foods, decreased water quality, and increasing exposure to health and safety hazards. In parts of Alaska, Louisiana, the Pacific Islands, and other coastal locations, climate change impacts (through erosion and inundation) are so severe that some communities are already relocating from historical homelands to which their traditions and cultural identities are tied. Particularly in Alaska, the rapid pace of temperature rise, ice and snow melt, and permafrost thaw are significantly affecting critical infrastructure and traditional livelihoods. 29 See page 48.
- 10. Ecosystems and the benefits they provide to society are being affected by climate change. The capacity of ecosystems to buffer the impacts of extreme events like fires, floods, and severe storms is being overwhelmed.
Climate change impacts on biodiversity are already being observed in alteration of the timing of critical biological events such as spring bud burst and substantial range shifts of many species. In the longer term, there is an increased risk of species extinction. These changes have social, cultural, and economic effects. Events such as droughts, floods, wildfires, and pest outbreaks associated with climate change (for example, bark beetles in the West) are already disrupting ecosystems. These changes limit the capacity of ecosystems, such as forests, barrier beaches, and wetlands, to continue to play important roles in reducing the impacts of these extreme events on infrastructure, human communities, and other valued resources. 30 See page 50.
- 11. Ocean waters are becoming warmer and more acidic, broadly affecting ocean circulation, chemistry, ecosystems, and marine life.
More acidic waters inhibit the formation of shells, skeletons, and coral reefs. Warmer waters harm coral reefs and alter the distribution, abundance, and productivity of many marine species. The rising temperature and changing chemistry of ocean water combine with other stresses, such as overfishing and coastal and marine pollution, to alter marine-based food production and harm fishing communities.3 1 See page 58.
- 12. Planning for adaptation (to address and prepare for impacts) and mitigation (to reduce future climate change, for example by cutting emissions) is becoming more widespread, but current implementation efforts are insufficient to avoid increasingly negative social, environmental, and economic consequences.
Actions to reduce emissions, increase carbon uptake, adapt to a changing climate, and increase resilience to impacts that are unavoidable can improve public health, economic development, ecosystem protection, and quality of life. 32 See page 62.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 17 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
.OVERVOEW AND REPORT FINDnNGS R EF--RPENCES-.
Numbered references for the Overview indicate the chapters that online at http://joutrals.at-etsoc.org/doi/abs/10.11175/BAMS-provide supporting evidence for the reported conclusions. 91-7-Stateofthclimatc]
- 1. Ch. 2.
- 2. Ch. 2, 3, 6, 9, 20. b. Huber, M., and R. Knutti, 2012: Anthropogenic and natural warming inferred from changes in Earth's energy balance. Nature
- 3. Ch. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 25.
Geoscience, 5, 31-36, doi:10.1038/ngeol327. [Available online at
- 4. Ch. 2, 12, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23.
http:/iwww.narurc.com/ngeoi-urnal/v5/nl ,/pdf/ngcol327.pdfl]
- 5. Ch. 2, 4, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 25.
- 6. Ch. 2, 4, 5, 10, 12, 16, 17, 20, 22, 25. c. Karl, T. R., J. T. Melillo, and T. C. Peterson, Eds., 2009: Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States. Cambridge University
- 7. Ch. 2, 12, 23, 24, 25.
Press, 189 pp. [Available online at http://downloaids.globalchangc.
- 8. Ch. 2, 12, 13, 14, 18, 19.
gov/usimpacts/ipdfs/climate-iinpacts-rcport.pdf]
- 9. Ch. 2, 3,12, 16, 17,18, 19, 20, 21, 23.
- d. Feely, R. A., S. C. Doney, and S. R. Cooley, 2009: Ocean
- 10. Ch. 2, 9,11, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 25. acidification: Present conditions and future changes in a high-CO2 world. Oceanography, 22, 36-47, doi:10.5670/oceanog.2009.95.
- 11. Ch. 3, 6,8, 12, 14, 23, 24, 25.
[Available online at http://www.tos.org/oceanograpli/
- 12. Ch. 3, 7, 8, 25. archive/22-4_feely.pdf]
- 13. Ch. 2, 26, 27. e. Bednarqek, N., G. A. Tarling, D. C. E. Bakker, S. Fielding, E. M.
- 14. Ch. 26, 27, 28. Jones, H. J. Venables, P. Ward, A. Kuzirian, B. Lz6, R. A. Feely, and E. J. Murphy, 2012: Extensive dissolution of live pteropods
- 15. Ch. 2, 4, 27.
in the Southern Ocean. Nature Geoscience, 5, 881-885, doi:10.1038/
- 16. Ch. 2, 3, 5, 9,11, 12,13, 25, 26, 27,28. ngeo1635
- 17. Ch. 3, 7, 9, 10, 12, 18, 20, 21, 26, 28.
- 18. Ch. 28.
- 19. Ch. 29, Appendix 6. PHOTO CREDITS
- 20. Ch. 30. pg. 23-Person pumpinggas: Charles Minshew/KOM U; People cooling off during heatwave: ©JulieJacobson/AP/Corbis; Smog over city:
- 21. Ch. 2, Appendices 3 and 4. ©iStockPhoto.comDanielStein;Childblowingnose: ©Stockbyte/
- 22. Ch. 2, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, Appendices 3 and 4. Getty Images
- 23. Ch. 2, 27, Appendices 3 and 4. pg. 24-Mosquito: ©James Gathany, CDC; Road washed out due to flooding: PJohn Wark/AP/Corbis; Mountain stream: ©Dan
- 24. Ch. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, Sherwood/Design Pics/Corbis; Farmer with corn: ©iStockPhoto.
22, 23, 24, 25. com/ValentinRussanov
- 25. Ch. 2, 6, 9, 11, 12, 16, 19, 20, 22, 23. pg. 25-Person building house: ©Aaron Huey/National Geographic
- 26. Ch. 2, 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25. Society/Corbis; Bear: ©Chase Swift/Corbis; Manatee: US Fish and Wildlife Service; Person with solar panels: ©Dennis
- 27. Ch. 2, 3, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23.
Schroeder, NREL
- 28. Ch. 2, 6, 12, 13, 14, 18, 19.
- 29. Ch. 12, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25.
- 30. Ch. 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, 19, 25.
- 31. Ch. 2, 12, 23, 24, 25.
- 32. Ch. 6,7,8,9, 10, 13, 15, 25, 26, 27, 28.
Letter references refer to external sources
- a. Kennedy, j. J., P. W. Thorne, T. C. Peterson, R. A. Reudy, P.
A. Stott, D. E. Parker, S. A. Good, H. A. Titchner, and K. M.
Willett, 2010: How do we know the world has warmed? State of the Climate in 2009. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 91, S26-27, doi:10.1175/BA MS-91-7-StateoftheClimate. [Available U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 18 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
Climate Change and the American People ........................... 1 VT-* .,
77ý 7 About This Report ....................... 3
- 1. OVERVIEW ............................. 7
- 2. OUR CHANGING C L IM AT E .................................... 19 SECTO RS ...................... 68
- 3. W ater ....................................... 69
- 4. E nergy ........................................ 1 13
- 5. Transportation ............................. 130
- 6. A griculture ................................... 150
- 7. Forests ........................................ 175 RESPONSE
- 8. Ecosystem s ................................ 195
- 9. Human Health ............................. 220 STRATEGIES ........................ 619
- 10. Energy, Water, and Land .............. 257 26. Decision Support ........................... 620 1 1. U rban ......................................... 2 8 2 27 . M itigation ....................................... 648
- 12. Indigenous Peoples ...................... 297 28. Adaptation ..................................... 670
- 13. Land Use and 29. Research Needs ............................ 707 Land Cover Change ..................... 318 30. Sustained Assessment ................... 719
- 14. Rural Communities ....................... 333
- 15. Biogeochemical Cycles ......... 350 APPENDICIES Appendix 1: Process ............................ 727 REG IO N S ............................... 369 Appendix 2: Information Quality ........... 733
- 16. N ortheast ..................................... 371 Appendix 3: Climate Science ................ 735
- 17. Southeast ..................................... 396 Appendix 4: FAQs ................................ 790 18 . M idw est ........................................ 4 18 Appendix 5: Scenarios and Models ....... 821
- 19. G reat Plains .................................. 44 1 Appendix 6: Future Assessment
- 20. Southw est .................................... 462 Topics .............................. 826 2 1. N orthw est .................................... 487 Abbreviations and Acronyms ............... 828 22 . A laska .......................................... 5 14
- 23. Hawaii and Pacific Islands ............. 537 24 . O ceans ......................................... 557 25 . C oasts .......................................... 579
- 401%wi .
4 U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM xi CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
People make choices every day about risks and. benefits, in their lives, weighing experience, information, and judgment as they consider the impacts of their decisions on themselves and the people around them. Similarly, people make choices that alter the magnitude of impacts resulting from current and future climate change. Using science-based information to anticipate future changes can help society, make better decisions about how to reduce risks and protect people, places, and ecosystems from climate change impacts. Decisions made now and in the future will. influence society's resilience to impacts.of future climate change.
In recognition of the significance of these decisions, the National Climate Assessment presents information that is useful for a wide variety of decisions across regions and sectors, at multiple scales, and over multiple time frames. For the first time, the National Climate Assessment includes chapters on Decision .
Support, Mitigation, and Adaptation, in addition to identifying research needs associated with these topics.
As with other sections of this report, the linkages across and among these chapters are extremely important. There are direct connections between mitigation decisions (about whether and how to manage emissions of heat-trapping gases) and how much climate will change in the future. The amount of change that occurs will in turn dictate the amount of adaptation that will be required.
In the Decision Support chapter, a variety of approaches to bridge the gap between scientific understanding and decision-making are discussed, leading to
_ the conclusion that there are many opportunities to help scientists understand the needs of decision-makers, and also to help decision-makers use available.tools and information to reduce the risks of climate change. The Mitigation chapter describes, emissions trajectories and assesses the state of mitigation activities.
Policies already enacted and otherfactors lowered U.S. emissions in recent. years, but achievement:of a global emissions path consistent with the lower scenario (B11) analyzed in this assessment will require strenuous action by. all major emitters. The Adaptation chapter assesses. current adaptation activities across the United States in the public and private sectors, and concludes that although a lot of adaptation planning is beingdone, implementation.:lags:significantly behind,.he scale of anticipated changes.
This report concludes with chapters on Research Needs to improve future climate and global change assessments and on the Sustained Assessment Process, which describes the rationale for ongoing assessment activitylto achieve greater efficiency and better scientific and societal outcomes.
I -
. YBus.
- . . * ... m
jr-t _Ui Ji iilmi IU U E. EýI U Climate Change Impacts in the United States CHAPTER 27 MITIGATION Convening Lead Authors..
HenryD.o Jacoby, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Anthony C. Janetos, Boston University Lead Authors Richard Birdsey, U.S. Forest Service.
James Buizer, University of-Arizona Katherine Calvin, Pacific Northwest National, Laboratory, University of Maryland Francisco de la Chesnaye, Electric Power Research Institute David Schimel, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory lan: Sue Wing, Boston University Contributing Authors Reid Detchon, United Nations Foundation Jae Edmonds,, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Uni..ersity of Maryland Lynn Russell, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University ofCalifornia, San Diego Jason West, University of North Carolina(
Recommended Citation for Chapter Jacoby, H. D., A. C: Janetos, R. Birdsey, J. Buizer, K. Calvin, F. de la Chesnaye, D. Schimel, 1. Sue Wing, R. Detchon, J.
Edmonds, L. Russell, and J. West, 2014: Ch. 27: Mitigation. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 648-669. doi.1*.7930/J0C8276J.
On the Web: http://nca2 0l4.globalchange.gov/report/response-strategies/mitigation 648
[Cy,A Li]i KEY MESSAGES
- 1. Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphereg by. natural processes at a rate that is roughly half of the current rate of emissions from human activities. Therefore, mitigation efforts that only stabilize global emissions will not reduce atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide,,,
but will only limit. their rate of increase. The same is true for other long-lived greenhouse.
gases.
- 2. To meet the lower emissions scenario (BU) used, in this assessment, global. mitigation actions would .need to limit global carbon dioxide emissions to a peak of around 44 billion tons per year within the next 25 years and decline thereafter. In 2011, global emissions were around 34 billion tons, and have been rising by about 0.9 billion tons per year for the past decade. Therefore, the.
world is on a path to exceed 44 billion tons per year within a decade.
- 3. Over recent decades, the U.S. economy has-emitted a decreasing amount of carbon dioxide per dollar. of gross domestic product. Between 2008 and 2012, there was also a decline in the total amount of carbon dioxide emitted annually from energy use in the United States as a result of a variety of factors, including changes in the economy, the development of new energy production technologies,. and various government policies.
- 4. Carbon storage in land ecosystems, especially forests, has. offset around 17% of annual U.S-..
fossil fuel emissions of greenhouse gases over the past several decades, but this carbon "sink" may not be sustainable.
- 5. Both voluntary activities and a variety of policies and measures that lower emissions are currently in place at federal, state, and local levels in the United States, even though there is no comprehensive national climate legislation. Over the remainder of this century, aggressive and sustained greenhouse gas emission:reductions by the United States and by other nations would be needed to reduce global emissions to a:level consistent with the lower scenario (B1) analyzed in this assessment.
Mitigation refers to actions that reduce the human contribu- increased carbon dioxide by the oceans is leading to increased tion to the planetary greenhouse effect. Mitigation actions ocean acidity with adverse effects on marine ecosystems.
include lowering emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon di-oxide and methane, and particles like black carbon (soot) that Four mitigation-related topics are assessed in this chapter.
have a warming effect. Increasing the net uptake of carbon First, it presents an overview of greenhouse gas emissions and dioxide through land-use change and forestry can make a con- their climate influence to provide a context for discussion of tribution as well. As a whole, human activities result in higher mitigation efforts. Second, the chapter provides a survey of global concentrations of greenhouse gases and to a warming activities contributing to U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide and of the planet - and the effect is increased by various self-re- other greenhouse gases. Third, it provides a summary of cur-inforcing cycles in the Earth system (such as the way melting rent government and voluntary efforts to manage these emis-sea ice results in more dark ocean water, which absorbs more sions. Finally, there is an assessment of the adequacy of these heat, and leads to more sea ice loss). Also, the absorption of efforts relative to the magnitude of the climate change threat
-and a discussion of preparation for potential future action.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 649 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION While the chapter presents a brief overview of mitigation is- throughout this report (see Ch. 4: Energy, Key Message 5; Ch.
sues, it does not provide a comprehensive discussion of policy 5: Transportation, Key Message 4; Ch. 7: Forests, Key Message options, nor does it attempt to review or analyze the range of 4; Ch. 9: Human Health, Key Message 4; Ch. 10: Energy, Water, technologies available to reduce emissions. and Land, Key Messages 1, 2, 3; Ch. 13: Land Use & Land Cover Change, Key Messages 2, 4; Ch. 15: Biogeochemical Cycles, Key These topics have also been the subject of other assessments, Message 3; Ch. 26: Decision Support, Key Messages 1, 2, 3; Ap-including those by the National Academy of Sciences' and the pendix 3: Climate Science Supplemental Message 5; Appendix U.S. Department of Energy.2 Mitigation topics are addressed 4: FAQs N, S, X, Y,Z).
Emissions, Concentrations, and Climate Forcing Setting mitigation objectives requires knowledge of the Earth after which it continues to circulate in the land-atmosphere-system processes that determine the relationship among ocean system until it is finally converted into stable forms in emissions, atmospheric concentrations and, ultimately, cli- soils, deep ocean sediments, or other geological repositories mate. Human-caused climate change results mainly from the3 (Figure 27.1).
increasing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases.
These gases cause radiative "forcing" - an imbalance of heat Of the carbon dioxide emitted from human activities in a year, trapped by the atmosphere compared to an equilibrium state. about half is removed from the atmosphere by natural pro-Atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases are the re- cesses within a century, but around 20% continues to circu-sult of the history of emissions and of processes that remove them from the atmosphere; for exam-4 ple, by "sinks" like growing forests. The fraction of Human Activities and the Global Carbon, emissions that remains in the atmosphere, which is Dioxide Budiget different for each greenhouse gas, also varies over 40 time as a result of Earth system processes.
35 The impact of greenhouse gases depends partly on how long each one persists in the atmosphere.' 30 Reactive gases like methane and nitrous oxide are 25 destroyed chemically in the atmosphere, so the relationships between emissions and atmospheric 20 concentrations are determined by the rate of those reactions. The term "lifetime" is often used to de- 15 scribe the speed with which a given gas is removed 10 from the atmosphere. Methane has a relatively short lifetime (largely removed within a decade or so, depending on conditions), so reductions in emis-sions can lead to a fairly rapid decrease in concen- 15 0 6
trations as the gas is oxidized in the atmosphere.
Nitrous oxide has a much longer lifetime, taking 7
more than 100 years to be substantially removed. -10 Other gases in this category include industrial gases,
-15 like those used as solvents and in air conditioning, some of which persist in the atmosphere for hun- -20 dreds or thousands of years.
Carbon dioxide (C0 2) does not react chemically with other gases in the atmosphere, so it does not, 8
strictly speaking, have a "lifetime." Instead, the re- 430 lationship between emissions and concentrations -35' from year to year is determined by patterns of re-Year lease (for example, through burning of fossil fuels) and uptake (for example, by vegetation and by the Figure 27.1. Figure shows human-induced changes in the global carbon ocean).' Once C0 2 is emitted from any source, a dioxide budget roughly since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
portion of it is removed from the atmosphere over Emissions from fossil fuel burning are the dominant cause of the steep rise shown here from 1850 to 2012. (Global Carbon Project 2010, 201210).
time by plant growth and absorption by the oceans, U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 650 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION late and to affect atmospheric concentrations for thousands referenced to carbon dioxide - which is defined as having a of years." Stabilizing or reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide GWP of 1.0 - and the combined effect of multiple gases is de-concentrations, therefore, requires very deep reductions in fu- noted in carbon dioxide equivalents, or C02-e.
ture emissions - ultimately approaching zero - to compensate for past emissions that are still circulating in the Earth system. The relationship between emissions and concentrations of Avoiding future emissions, or capturing and storing them in gases can be modeled using Earth System Models. 4 Such mod-stable geological storage, would prevent carbon dioxide from els apply our understanding of biogeochemical processes that entering the atmosphere, and would have very long-lasting ef- remove greenhouse gas from the atmosphere to predict their fects on atmospheric concentrations. future concentrations. These models show that stabilizing CO2 emissions would not stabilize its atmospheric concentrations In addition to greenhouse gases, there can be climate effects but instead result in a concentration that would increase at a from fine particles in the atmosphere. An example is black car- relatively steady rate. Stabilizing atmospheric concentrations bon (soot), which is released from coal burning, diesel engines, of CO2 would require reducing emissions far below present-cooking fires, wood stoves, wildfires, and other combustion day levels. Concentration and emissions scenarios, such as the sources. These particles have a warming influence, especially recently developed Representative Concentration Pathways when they absorb solar energy low in the atmosphere."2 Other (RCPs) and scenarios developed earlier by the Intergovern-particles, such as those formed from sulfur dioxide released mental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Special Report on during coal burning, have a cooling effect by reflecting some Emissions Scenarios (SRES), are used in Earth System Models of the sun's energy back to space or by increasing the bright- to study potential future climates. The RCPs span a range of ness of clouds (see: Ch. 2: Our Changing Climate; Appendix 3: atmospheric targets for use by climate modelers,", 4 as do the Climate Science Supplement; and Appendix 4: FAQs). SRES cases. These global analyses form a framework within which the climate contribution of U.S. mitigation efforts can be The effect of each gas is related to both how long it lasts in the assessed. In this report, special attention is given to the SRES atmosphere (the longer it lasts, the greater its influence) and A2 scenario (similar to RCP 8.5), which assumes continued in-its potency in trapping heat. The warming influence of differ- creases in emissions, and the SRES B1 scenario (close to RCP ent gases can be compared using "global warming potentials" 4.5), which assumes a substantial reduction of emissions (Ch.
(GWP), which combine these two effects, usually added up 2: Our Changing Climate; Appendix 5: Scenarios and Models).
over a 100-year time period. Global warming potentials are r'"- E ,GNERN I I r mitigation and adaptation. Geoengineering refers to intentional modifications of the Earth system as a means to ad-Geoengineering has been proposed as a third option for addressing climate change in addition to,or alongside, dress climate change. Three types of activities have been proposed: 1) carbon dioxide removal (CDR), which boosts C02 removal from the atmosphere by various means,. such as fertilizing ocean processes and promoting land-use practices that help take up carbon, 2) solar radiation management (SRM), which reflects a small percentage of sunlight back into space to offset warming from greenhouse gases,' 5 and.3) direct capture and storage of C0 2 from the atmosphere.'16 Current research suggests that SRM or CDR could diminish the impacts of climate change. However, once under-:
taken, sudden cessation of SRM would exacerbate the climate effects on. human populations and ecosystems, and some CDR might interfere with oceanic and terrestrial ecosystem processes..' 7 S.RM undertaken by itself. would not slow increases in atmospheric C02 concentrations, and would therefore also fail to address ocean acidification.
Furthermore, existing international institutions are not adequate to manage such global interventions. The risks as-sociated with such purposeful perturbations to the Earth system are thus poorly understood, suggesting the need for 8
caution and comprehensive research, including consideration of the implicit moral hazards.'
Section 1: U.S. Emissions and Land-Use Change Industrial, Commercial, and Household Emissions U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, not accounting for uptake by decline, including the reduction in energy use in response to land use and agriculture (see Figure 27.3), rose to as high as the 2008-2010 recession, the displacement of coal in electric 7,260 million tons C02-e in 2007, and then fell by about 9% generation by lower-priced natural gas, and the effect of fed-20 between 2008 and 2012.19 Several factors contributed to the eral and state energy and environmental policies.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 651 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION Carbon dioxide made up 84% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions position of the capital stock, and both autonomous and price-in 2011. Forty-one percent of these emissions were attribut- induced technological change, 3) changes in the structure of able to liquid fuels (petroleum), followed closely by solid fuels the economy, such as a decline in energy-intensive industries (principally coal in electric generation), and to a lesser extent and an increase in services that use less energy, 4) growth in by natural gas. 20 The two dominant production sectors respon- per capita GDP, and 5) rising population.
sible for these emissions are electric power generation (coal and gas) and transportation (petroleum). Flaring and cement Over the period 1963-2008, annual U.S. carbon dioxide emis-manufacture together account for less than 1% of the total. If sions slightly more than doubled, because growth in emissions emissions from electric generation are allocated to their vari- potential attributable to increases in population and GDP per ous end-uses, transportation is the largest CO2 source, contrib- person outweighed reductions contributed by lowered energy uting a bit over one-third of the total, followed by industry at and carbon intensity and changes in economic structure (Fig-slightly over a quarter, and residential use and the commercial ure 27.2). Each series in the figure illustrates the quantity of sector at around one-fifth each. cumulative emissions since 1963 that would have been gener-ated by the effect of the associated driver. By 2008, fossil fuel A useful picture of historical patterns of carbon dioxide emis- burning had increased CO2 emissions by 2.7 billion tons over sions can be constructed by decomposing the cumulative 1963 levels. However, by itself the observed decline in energy change in emissions from a base year into the contributions of would have reduced emissions by 1.8 billion tons, while the five driving forces: 1) decline in the CO2 content of energy use, observed increase in per capita GDP would have increased as with a shift from coal to natural gas in electric generation, 2) emissions by more than 5 billion tons.
reduction in energy intensity - the energy needed to produce each unit of gross domestic product (GDP) - which results from After decades of increases, CO2 emissions from energy use substitution responses to energy prices, changes in the com- (which account for 97% of total U.S. emissions) declined by around 9% between 2008 and 2012, largely due to a shift from coal to less C02-intensive natural gas for electricity Drivers of U.S. Fossil Emissions production. 19 Trends in driving forces shown in Figure WOO - 27.2 are expected to continue in the future, though their
-Co.In~onft relative contributions are subject to significant uncer-tainty. The reference case projection by the U.S. Energy
-Per Capft Inome Information Administration (EIA) shows their net effect
-Sum of Fackor being a slower rate of CO 2 emissions growth than in the past, with roughly constant energy sector emissions to 2040.22 It must be recognized, however, that emissions from energy use rise and fall from year to year, as the aforementioned driving forces vary.
The primary non-C02 gas emissions in 2011 were meth-120001 ane (9% of total C02-e emissions), nitrous oxide (5%),
and a set of industrial gases (2%). U.S. emissions of each of these gases have been roughly constant over the past half-dozen years.2 2 Emissions of methane and nitrous ox-ide have been roughly constant over the past couple of
-I000~ decades, but there has been an increase in the industrial gases as some are substituted for ozone-destroying sub-23 stances controlled by the Montreal Protocol.
1963 1968 1973 1978 1983 198I 1993 1996 2003 2008 Year Yet another warming influence on the climate system Figure 27.2. This graph depicts the changes in carbon dioxid e is black carbon (soot), which consists of fine particles (C0 2 ) emissions over time as a function of five driving forces: 1) th e that result mainly from incomplete combustion of fossil amount of C02 produced per unit of energy (C02 intensity); 2) th e fuels and biomass. Long a public health concern, black amount of energy used per unit of gross domestic product (enerc lY carbon particles absorb solar radiation during their short intensity); 3) structural changes in e economy 4)per capita incom4 Y'e life in the atmosphere (days to weeks). When deposited and 5) population. Although C02 intensity and especially ener ie: on snow and ice, these particles darken the surface and intensity have decreased significantly and the structure of the U.S. economy has changed, total C2O emissions have continued reduce the reflection of incoming solar radiation back to to rise as a result of the growth in both population and per capil a space. These particles also2influence cloud formation in 4
income. (Baldwin and Sue Wing, 20132). ways yet poorly quantified.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 652 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION Land Use, Forestry, and Agriculture The main stocks of carbon in its various biological forms (plants and trees, dead Sources and Sinks in U.S. Agriculture and Forests wood, litter, soil, and harvested products) 400 are estimated periodically and their rate of change, or flux, is calculated as the average 2O0 annual difference between two time peri- S0 0 ods. Estimates of carbon stocks and fluxes for U.S. lands are based on land invento- ' -200 ries augmented with data from ecosystem 2 26 studies and production reports. -' 2 400 A
U.S. lands were estimated to be a net sink of between approximately 640 and 1,074 26 -800 million tons C02-e in the late 2000s. 7 Estimates vary depending on choice of -1000 datasets, models, and methodologies (see ,Lvestock Crops Grassland Forests Urban Trees Wetlands Ch. 15: Biogeochemical Cycles, "Estimat-ing the U.S. Carbon Sink," for more discus- Figure 27.3 Graph shows annual average greenhouse gas emissions from land use sion). This net land sink effect is the result including livestock and crop production, but doesnot include fossil fuels used in of sources (from crop production, livestock agricultural production. Forests are a significant-%ink" that absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. All values shown are for 2008, except wetlands, which'are production, and grasslands) and sinks (in shown for 2003. (Pacala et al. 2007277 USDA 20112*).
forests, urban trees, and wetlands). Sourc-es of carbon have been relatively stable over the last two de- about 1.71 million acres (268,000 square miles) annually.29 cades, but sinks have been more variable. Long-term trends Since most of the new forest is on relatively low-productivity suggest significant emissions from forest clearing in the early lands of the Intermountain West, and much of the deforesta-1900s followed by a sustained period of net uptake from for- tion occurs on high-productivity lands in the East, recent land-est regrowth over the last 70 years.2 8 The amount of carbon use changes have decreased the potential for future carbon taken up by U.S. land sinks is dominated by forests, which have storage.30 The positive effects of increasing carbon dioxide annually absorbed 7% to 24% (with a best estimate of about concentration and nitrogen deposition on carbon storage are 16%) of fossil fuel C02 emissions in the U.S. over the past two not likely to be as large as the negative effects of land-use 20 decades. change and disturbances. 31 In some regions, longer growing seasons associated with climate change may increase annual The persistence of the land sink depends on the relative ef- productivity.32 Droughts and other disturbances, such as fire fects of several interacting factors: recovery from historical and insect infestations, have already turned some U.S. land re-land-use change, atmospheric CO2 and nitrogen deposition, gions from carbon sinks into carbon sources (see Ch. 13: Land natural disturbances, and the effects of climate variability Use & Land Cover Change and Ch. 15: Biogeochemical Cycles).3 and change - particularly drought, wildfires, and changes in The current land sink may not be sustainable for more than a the length of the growing season. Deforestation continues to few more decades, 3' though there is a lack of consistency in cause an annual loss of 877,000 acres (137,000 square miles) published results about the relative effects of disturbance and of forested land, offset by a larger area gain of new forest of other factors on net land-use emissions.34 Section 2: Activities Affecting Emissions Early and large reductions in global emissions would be nec- and trade systems are in place in California and in the North-essary to achieve the lower emissions scenarios (such as the east's Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Moreover, a wide lower 81 scenario; see Ch. 2: Our Changing Climate) analyzed range of governmental actions are underway at federal, state, in this assessment. The principal types of national actions that regional, and city levels using other measures, and voluntary could effect such changes include putting a price on emissions, efforts, that can reduce the U.S. contribution to total global setting regulations and standards for activities that cause emissions. Many, if not most of these programs are motivated emissions, changing subsidy programs, and direct federal ex- by other policy objectives - energy, transportation, and air pol-penditures. Market-based approaches include cap and trade lution - but some are directed specifically at greenhouse gas programs that establish markets for trading emissions permits, emissions, including:
analogous to the Clean Air Act provisions for sulfur dioxide re-ductions. None of these price-based measures has been imple-
- reduction in CO2 emissions from energy end-use and mented at the national level in the United States, though cap infrastructure through the adoption of energy-efficient U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 653 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION components and systems -
including buildings, vehicles, manufacturing processes, appliances, and electric grid systems;
- reduction of CO 2 emissions from energy supply through the promotion of renewables (such as wind, solar, and bio-energy), nuclear energy, and coal and natural gas electric generation with carbon cap-ture and storage; and
- reduction of emissions of non-C02 greenhouse gases and black carbon; for ex-ample, by lowering meth-ane emissions from energy and waste, transitioning to climate-friendly alterna-tives to hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), cutting methane and nitrous oxide emissions from Programs underway that reduce carbon dioxide emissions include the promotion of solar, nuclear, and wind power and efficient vehicles agriculture, and improving combustion efficiency and means of particulate capture.
Federal Actions The Federal Government has implemented a number of mea- criteria pollutants (six common air pollutants that affect hu-sures.that promote energy efficiency, clean technologies, and man health). A 2012 Supreme Court decision upheld the EPA's alternative fuels. 3 - A sample of these actions is provided in finding that greenhouse gases "endanger public health and Table 27.1 and they include greenhouse gas regulations, other welfare."36 This ruling added the regulation of greenhouse gas rules and regulations with climate co-benefits, various stan- emissions to the Agency's authority under the Clean Air Act.
dards and subsidies, research and development, and federal Actions taken and proposed under the new authority have fo-procurement practices. cused on road transport and electric power generation.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a 40- The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) provides most of the year history of regulating the concentration and deposition of funding for a broad range of programs for energy research, U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 654 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION development, and demonstration. DOE also has the authority work Convention on Climate Change to reduce U.S. emissions to regulate the efficiency of appliances and building codes for of greenhouse gases by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. Ac-manufactured housing. In addition, most of the other federal tions proposed in the Plan include: 1) limiting carbon emissions agencies - including the Departments of Defense, Housing and from both new and existing power plants, 2) continuing to Urban Development, Transportation, and Agriculture - have increase the stringency of fuel economy standards for auto-programs related to greenhouse gas mitigation. mobiles and trucks, 3) continuing to improve energy efficiency in the buildings sector, 4) reducing the emissions of non-CO 2 The Administration's Climate Action Plan 37 builds on these ac- greenhouse gases through a variety of measures, 5) increasing tivities with a broad range of mitigation, adaptation, and pre- federal investments in cleaner, more efficient energy sources paredness measures. The mitigation elements of the plan are for both power and transportation, and 6) identifying new ap-in part a response to the commitment made during the 2010 proaches to protect and restore our forests and other critical Cancun Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Frame- landscapes, in the presence of a changing climate.
City, State, and Regional Actions Jurisdiction for greenhouse gases and energy policies is shared greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The state between the federal government and the states.' For example, program caps emissions and uses a market-based system of states regulate the distribution of electricity and natural gas to trading in emissions credits (cap and trade), as well as a num-consumers, while the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ber of regulatory actions. The most well-known, multi-state regulates wholesale sales and transportation of natural gas effort has been the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI),
and electricity. In addition, many states have adopted climate formed by ten northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states (though initiatives as well as energy policies that reduce greenhouse New Jersey exited in 2011). RGGI is a cap and trade system gas emissions. For a survey of many of these state activities, applied to the power sector with revenue from allowance see Table 27.2. Many cities are taking similar actions. auctions directed to investments in efficiency and renewable energy.
The most ambitious state activity is California's Global Warm-ing Solutions Act (AB 32), a law that sets a state goal to reduce Voluntary Actions Corporations, individuals, and non-profit organizations have Climate Protection Agreement, 9 and many of these com-initiated a host of voluntary actions. The following examples munities are actively implementing strategies to reduce give the flavor of the range of efforts: their greenhouse gas footprint.
The Carbon Disclosure Project has the largest global col-
- Under the American College and University Presidents' lection of self-reported climate change and water-use Climate Commitment (ACUPCC), 679 institutions have information. The system enables companies to measure, pledged to develop plans to achieve net-neutral climate disclose, manage, and share climate change and water- emissions through a combination of on-campus changes use information. Some 650 U.S. signatories include banks, and purchases of emissions reductions elsewhere.
pension funds, asset managers, insurance companies, and foundations. " Voluntary compliance with efficiency standards devel-oped by industry and professional associations, such as
- Many local governments are undertaking initiatives to re- the building codes of the American Society of Heating, duce greenhouse gas emissions within and outside of their Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), is organizational boundaries.3 8 For example, over 1,055 mu- widespread.
nicipalities from all 50 states have signed the U.S. Mayors U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 655 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION Federal voluntary programs include Energy STAR, a label- ing methane emissions from fossil fuel production and ing program that identifies energy efficient products for landfill sources and high GWP emissions from industrial use in residential homes and commercial buildings and activities and agricultural conservation programs.
plants, and programs and partnerships devoted to reduc-Costs of Emissions Reductions The national cost of achieving U.S. emissions reductions over because of differences in analysis method, and in assumptions time depends on the level of reduction sought and the par- about economic growth and technology change, cost projec-ticular measures employed. Studies of price-based policies, tions vary considerably even for a policy applying price pen-such as a cap and trade system, indicate that a 50% reduction alties. 41 Comparisons of emissions reduction by prices versus in emissions by 2050 could be achieved at a cost of a year or regulations show that a regulatory approach can cost substan-42 two of projected growth in gross domestic product over the tially more than a price-based policy.
period (for example, Paltsev et al. 2009; EIA 200940). However, rI-B:ENT FO POLTO AI N HMNHAT I Actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions can yield co-benefits for objectives apart from climate change, such I as energy security, health, ecosystem services,. and biodiversity. 43,44 The co-benefits for reductions in air pollution have received particular attention. Because air pollutants and greenhouse *gases share common sources, particularly from fossil fuel combustion, actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions also reduce air pollutants. While some greenhouse gas reduction measures might increase other *emissions, broad programs to reduce greenhouse gases across an economy or a sector can reduce air pol-lutants, markedly.'4, 45 (Unfortunately for.climate mitigation, cutting sulfur dioxide pollution. from.
coal burning also reduces the cooling influence of reflective particles formed from these emissions in .i.*
46 the atmosphere. ) .
There is. significant interest in quantifying the air pollution and human health co-benefits of green-house gas mitigation, particularly from the public
.health community, 44 ,47 as the human health ben-efits can be immediate and local, in contrast to the long-term and. widespread effects of climate change. 48 Many studies have found that monetized health. and pollution control. benefits can be of similar magnitude to. abatement costs (for exam-ple, Nemet et al'. 2010; Burtraw et al. 200348.49).
Methane reductions have also been shown to gen-erate health benefits from reduced ozone. 50 Similarly, in developing nations, reducing black carbon from household cook stoves substantially reduces air pollution-related illness and death. 51 Ancillary health benefits in developing countries typically exceed those in developed countries for a variety of reasons..4 8 But only in very few cases are these ancillary benefits considered in analyses of climate mitigation policies. .
Section 3: Preparation for Potential Future Mitigation Action To meet the emissions reduction in the lower (B1) scenario of a global emissions path consistent with the B1 scenario will used in this assessment (Ch. 2: Our Changing Climate) under require strenuous action by all major emitters.
reasonable assumptions about managing costs, annual global CO2 emissions would need to peak at around 44 billion tons Policies already enacted and other factors lowered U.S. emis-within the next 25 years or so and decline steadily for the rest sions in recent years. The Annual Energy Outlook prepared by of the century. At the current rate of emissions growth, the the EIA, which previously forecasted sustained growth in emis-world is on a path to exceed the 44 billion ton level within a de- sions, projected in 2013 that energy-related U.S. CO2 emis-22 cade (see "Emissions Scenarios and RCPs"). Thus achievement sions would remain roughly constant for the next 25 years.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 656 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION Moreover, through the President's Climate Action Plan, the goals."4'-' A study of the climate change threat and potential Administration has committed to additional measures not yet responses by the U.S. National Academies therefore concludes reflected in the EIA's projections, with the goal of reducing that there is "an urgent need for U.S. action to reduce green-emissions about 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. Still, addition- house emissions.""7 The National Research Council (NRC) goes al and stronger U.S. action, as well as strong action by other on to suggest alternative national-level strategies that might major emitters, will be needed to meet the long-term global be followed, including an economy-wide system of prices on emission reductions reflected in the B1 scenario. greenhouse gas emissions and a portfolio of possible regula-tory measures and subsidies. Deciding these matters will be a Achieving the B1 emissions path would require substantial de- continuing task, and U.S. Administrations and Congress face a carbonization of the global economy by the end of this century, long series of choices about whether to take additional miti-implying a fundamental transformation of the global energy gation actions and how best to do it. Two supporting activi-system. Details of the energy mix along the way differ among ties will help guide this process: opening future technological analyses, but the implied involvement by the U.S. can be seen options and development of ever-more-useful assessments of in studies carried out under the U.S. Climate Change Science the cost effectiveness and benefits of policy choices.
Program"4 and the Energy Modeling Forum."5 ,'6 In these stud-ies, direct burning of coal without carbon capture is essentially Many technologies are potentially available to accomplish excluded from the power system, and the same holds for natu- emissions reduction. They include ways to increase the effi-ral gas toward the end of the century - to be replaced by some ciency of fossil energy use and facilitate a shift to low-carbon combination of coal or gas with carbon capture and storage, energy sources, sources of improvement in the cost and per-nuclear generation, and renewables. Biofuels and electricity formance of renewables (for example, wind, solar, and bioen-are projected to substitute for oil in the transport sector. A sub- ergy) and nuclear energy, ways to reduce the cost of carbon stantial component of the task is accomplished with demand capture and storage, means to expand terrestrial sinks through reduction, through efficiency improvement, conservation, and management of forests and soils and increased agricultural shifting to an economy less dependent on energy services. productivity,' and phasing down HFCs. In addition to the re-search and development carried out by private sector firms The challenge is great enough even starting today, but delay by with their own funds, the Federal Government traditionally any of the major emitters makes meeting any such target even supports major programs to advance these technologies. This more difficult and may rule out some of the more ambitious support is accomplished in part by credits and deductions in the tax code, and in part by federal expenditure. For example, the 2012 federal budget devoted approximately $6 billion to EmISSIONS SCENARIOS AND RCPs clean energy technologies.58 Success in these ventures, lower-ing the cost of greenhouse gas reduction, can make a crucial I
contribution to future policy choices.'
r The . Representative specify Concentration alternative limits to human Pathways influence, (RCPs) on the Earth's energy balance, stated in wafts per square meter Because they are in various stages of market maturity, the (W/m 2 ) of the Earth's surface.13'5 2 The A2 emissions sce- costs and effectiveness of many of these technologies remain nario implies atmospheric concentrations with.radiative uncertain: continuing study of their performance is important forcing slightly lower than the highest RCP, which is 8.5 to understanding their role in future mitigation decisions.5 9 In W/m 2 . The lower limits, at 6.0, 4.5 and 2.6 W/m 2 , imply addition, evaluation of broad policies and particular mitigation ever-greater mitigation efforts. The B1 scenario (rapid measures requires frameworks that combine information from emissions reduction) is close to the 4.5 W/m2 RCP 53 and a range of disciplines. Study of mitigation in the near future to a similar case (Level 2) analyzed in a previous federal can be done with energy-economic models that do not as-
- study.5 4 Those assessments find that, to limit the eco- sume large changes in the mix of technologies or changes in the structure of the economy. Analysis over the time spans rel-nomic costs, annual global C0 2 emissions from fossil evant to stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations, how-fuels and industrial sources like cement, manufacture, ever, requires Integrated Assessment Models, which consider need to peak by 2035 to 2040 at around 44 billion all emissions drivers and policy measures that affect them,
- tons of C0 2, and decline thereafter. The scale of the and that take account of how they are related to the larger task can be seen in the fact that these global emissions economy and features of the climate system.5 4,ss'60 This type were already at 34 billion tons C0 2 in 2011, and.over of analysis is also useful for exploring the relations between the previous decade they. rose at around 0.92 billion mitigation and measures to adapt to a changing climate.
tons of. C0 2 per year.' 0 The lowest RCPwould require an even more rapid turnaround and negative net emis- Continued development of these analytical capabilities can sions- that is, removing more C0 2 from the air than is help support decisions about national mitigation and the U.S.
52
- emitted globally - in this century. position in international negotiations. In addition, as shown U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 657 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION above, mitigation is being undertaken by individuals and firms and institutional research on how such choices are made and as well as by city, state, and regional governments. The capac- the results evaluated would be extremely beneficial. For many ity for mitigation from individual and household behavioral of these efforts, understanding of cost and effectiveness is changes, such as increasing energy end-use efficiency with limited, as is understanding of aspects of public support and available technology, is known to be large.63 Although there institutional performance; so additional support for studies is capacity, there is not always broad acceptance of those be- of these activities is needed to ensure that resources are ef-havioral changes, nor is there sufficient understanding of how ficiently employed.
to design programs to encourage such changes.64 Behavioral I.NTERACTIONS BETWEEN ADAPTATION AND MITIGATION II There are various ways in which mitigation efforts and adaptation .measures are interdependent (see Ch. 28: Adapta- I tion). For example, the use of plant material asa substitute for petroleum-based transportation fuels or directly as a sub-stitute for burning coal or gas for electricity generation has received substantial attention. 61 But land used for mitigation purposes is potentially not available for food production, even as the global demand for agricultural products continues to rise..6 2 Conversely, land required for adaptation strategies, like setting aside wildlife corridors or expanding. the extent of conservation areas, is potentially not available foe mitigation involving the use of plant material, or active manage-ment practices to enhance carbon storage in vegetation or soils. These possible interactions are poorly understood but potentially important, especially as climate change itself affects vegetation and ecosystem productivity and carbon stor-age. Increasing agricultural productivity to adapt to climate change can also serve to mitigate climate change.
Section 4: Research Needs
- Engineering and scientific research is needed on the de- " Uncertainties in model-based projections of greenhouse velopment of cost-effective energy use technologies (de- gas emissions and of the effectiveness and costs of policy vices, systems, and control strategies) and energy supply measures need to be better quantified. Exploration is technologies that produce little or no C02 or other green- needed of the effects of different model structures, as-house gases. sumptions about model parameter values, and uncertain-ties in input data.
" Better understanding of the relationship between emis-sions and atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations is
- Social and behavioral science research is needed to inform needed to more accurately predict how the atmosphere the design of mitigation measures for maximum participa-and climate system -will respond to mitigation measures. tion and to prepare a consistent framework for assessing cost effectiveness and benefits of both voluntary mitiga-
" The processes controlling the land sink of carbon in the tion efforts and regulatory and subsidy programs.
U.S. require additional research, including better monitor-ing and analysis of economic decision-making about the fate of land and how it is managed, as well as the inherent ecological processes and how they respond to the climate system.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 658 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION Table 27.1. A number of existing federal laws and regulations target ways to reduce future climate change by decreasing greenhouse gas emissions emitted by human activities.
Saml Feea Miiato Measures Emissions Standards for Vehicles and Engines'.
-- For/ight-duty vehicles, rules establishing standards .for 2012-2016 model years and 2017-2025 model years.
- Fodr heavy- and medium-duty trucks, a.rule establishing standards for 2014-2018 model yearis.
Carbon PollutionStandardfor New Power Plants...
-- A proposed rdle ,etting limitson b02!em~ipsio.ns.fr~imfutdre p6wer plants.'.-,:'
StationarySource Permitting
--A rule setting greenhouse gas. emissions thresholds to define When permits under the New Source Review Prevention of
" 'Significant. Deterioration and Title V Operating Permit programs .are required, fornew and modified industrial facilities.. ..
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
-- A program requiring annual reporting of greenhouse gas data from large emission sources and suppliers of products that emit greenhouse gases when. released or com~busted.
Oil and Natural Gas Air Pollution Standards A rule revising New Source Performance Standards and National Emission' Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for certain components of the oil and natural gas industry.
Mobile Source 'Conirol Pro..grams
-- Particle control regulations affecting mobile sources (especially. diesel engines) that reduce black carbon by controlling direct particle emissions.
-7Therequirement to blendincreasing:
e -to.. b-1...n : olumes ........of renewable- fuels.,'
- ~~~~~r~ ' . ...... . .........
Forest Planning .Nationa
-- Identific.tion and evaluation of information relevant to a baseline assessment of carbon stocks.
Reporting of net carbon-stock changes on forestland.
Applianceand Building Efficiency.Standards ..
-- Energy efficiency standards and test procedures for residential, commercial, industrial, lighting, and plumbing products.,
-- Model residential. and commercial building energy codes, and technical assistance to state and local governments, and non-governmenital 6rganizations.
Financial Incentives for Efficiency and Alternative Fuels and Technology Weatherization assistance for low-income households, tax incentives for commercial and residential buildings. and efficient appliances, and suppoit for state and local efficiency programs. ". -.. ' .
Tax credits for biodiesel and advanced. biofuel'praduction, alternative fuel infraistructure, and purchase of electric vehicles.
-- Loan guarantees for innovative energy or advanced technology vehicle production and manufacturing; investment and production tax credits for renewable energy.
--. Programs' on clean fuels, energy end-use and infrastructure, C02 capture and storage, and agricultural practices.
- f.... .. . ... .. . . ... . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ., . .. ... . . .. . . .
-- Executive orders and federal statutes requiring federal agencies to reduce building energy and resource consumption intensity and to procure alternative fuel vehicles. .
--Agency-initiated Programs inmost departments_ orented tolowering energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 659 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION Table 27.2. Most states and Native communities haveimplemented programs to reduce greenhouse gases or adopt increased" energy efficiency goals.
Greenhouse Gas Reporting and Registries 65 http://www.c2es.org/us-states-regionslpolicy-maps/ghg-reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions Targets 6 http://Www.c2es.org/us-states-regions/policy-map.s/femissions-tbargetS 6 C.02 Controls on Electric Power plants.
7 http:/lwww.edf.org/sites/defaiultlfiles/state-ghg-standards-03132012.pdf6 Low-Carbon Fuel Standards htt-p:/Iwww.c2es.org/us-states-regions/policy-maps/low-carbon-fuel-standard6 :
Climate Action Plans.
htip://www.c2es6org/us-states-regions/policy-maps/action-planc 9 Cap and Trade Programs 70 http://arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/capandtrade.htM7 Regional Agreements http://www.c2es.org/us-states-regionslregional-climate-initiatives#WC7.1 Tribal Communities 72 http:llww.wepa.gov/statelocalclimate/tribal
- States have also taken a number of energy measures, motivated in part by greenhiouse gas con6erns. For example:
Renewable Portfolio Standards htto:/wwwwdsireusa.org/doduments/summarymaps/RPS_map.pdf 7_
Energy Efficiency Resource Standards http://www.dsireusa.org/documents/summarymaps/EERSrmap~pdf4 Property Tax Incentives for Renewables 7
, httpýllwww.dsireusa.org/docUmertsi/summarymapsi '
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 660 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION REFERENCES NRC, 2010: Limiting the Magnitude of Future Climate Change. 8. Moore, B., 111, and B. H. Braswell, 1994: The lifetime of excess America's Climate Choices. Panel on Limiting the Magnitude of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 8, 23-38, Future Climate Change. National Research Council, Board on doi:10.1029/93GB03392.
Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, Division of Earth and Life Studies. The National Academies Press, 276 pp. [Available online at 9. Schimel, D. S., 1995: Terrestrial ecosystems and the carbon cycle.
htt p://wvww.nap.cdu/catalog.fphp?recordid= 12785] GlobalChangeBiology, 1, 77-91, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.1995.tbO0008.x.
- 2. DOE, 2011: Report of the First Quadrennial Technology Review, 168 10. GCP, 2010: Ten Years of Advancing Knowledge on the Global Carbon pp., U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. [Available online Cycle and its Management. L. Poruschi, S. Dhakal, and J. Canadel, at http://cncrgy.gov,/sites/prod/files/QlT-rcport.pdq Eds., Global Carbon Project, Tsukuba, Japan. [Available online at h ttp:/'/www.globalcarbonprojcct.org/global/pdf/!G CP_10yca rs_
- 3. IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007.- The PhysicalScience Basis. Contribution med_res.pdt]
of Wlorking Group I to the FourthAssessment Report of the Intergovernmental Pane/on Climate Change. S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. -- : Carbon Budget 2012: An Annual Update of the Global Carbon Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor, and H. L. Miller, Eds. Cambridge Budget and Trends. Global Carbon Project. [Available online at University Press, 996 pp. [Available online at http://www.ipcc.ch/ http://www.globalcarbonproject.-rg/carbonbudget/`]
publications and _ data/publication s-ipccfourth __assessment_
report.-wgl _report.-tthephysical-science basis.htm] 11. Archer, D., 2010: The GlobalCarbon Cycle. Princeton University Press, 205 pp.
- 4. Plattner, G. K., R. Knutti, F. Joos, T. F. Stocker, W. von Bloh, V.
Brovkin, D. Cameron, E. Driesschaert, S. Dutkiewicz, M. Eby, N. 12. Grieshop, A. P., C. C. 0. Reynolds, M. Kandlikar, and H. Dowlatabadi, R. Edwards, T. Fichefet, J. C. Hargreaves, C. D. Jones, M. F. Loutre, 2009: A black-carbon mitigation wedge. Nature Geoscience, 2, 533-534, H. D. Matthews, A. Mouchet, S. A. Miller, S. Nawrath, A. Price, A. doi:10.1038/ngeo595.
Sokolov, K. M. Strassmann, and A. J. Weaver, 2008: Long-term climate commitments projected with climate-carbon cycle models. Journalof 13. Moss, R. H.,J. A. Edmonds, K. A. Hibbard, M. R. Manning, S. K.
Climate,21, 2721-2751, doi:l0.1175/2007jcli1905.1. [Available online at Rose, D. P. van Vuuren, T. R. Carter, S. Emoei, M. Kainuma, T. Kram, http://journals.arietsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2007JC111905.1] G. A. Meehl, J. F. B. Mitchell, N. Nakicenovic, K. Riahi, S.J. Smith, R.J. Stouffer, A. M. Thomson,J. P. Weyant, and T.J. Willbanks, 2010:
- 5. Denman, K. L., G. Brasseur, A. Chidthaisong, P. Ciais, P. M. Cox, The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and R. E. Dickinson, D. Hauglustaine, C. Heinze, E. Holland, D. Jacob, assessment. Nature, 463, 747-756, doi:10.1038/nature08823.
U. Lohmann, S. Ramachandran, P. L. da Silva Dias, S. C. Wofsy, and X. Zhang, 2007: Ch. 7: Couplings between changes in the climate 14. van Vuuren, D. P., J. Cofala, H. E. Eerens, R. Oostenrijk, C. Heyes, system and biogeochemistry. Climate Change 2007: The PhysicalScience Z. Klimont, M. G. J. Den Elzen, and M. Amann, 2006: Exploring the Basis, Contribution of Wlbrking Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of ancillary benefits of the Kyoto Protocol for air pollution in Europe.
the IntergovernmentalPanel on Climate Change, S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Energy Polio,, 34, 444-460, doi:10.1016/j.enpol. 2004.06.012.
Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor, and H. L.
Miller, Eds., Cambridge University Press, 499-587. [Available online 15. Shepherd, J. G., 2009: Geoengineering the Climate: Science, Governance and at http:/iwww.ipcc.ch/pdf/asscssmenr-report/ai4/wgl/ar4-wgl- Uncertainty. Royal Society, 82 pp. [Available online at http://eprtins.
chapter7.pdf] soton .ac.uk/t 56647/1 /Geoengineering-th c-climate.pdt]
- 6. Cicerone, R. J., and R. S. Oremland, 1988: Biogeochemical aspects 16. American Physical Society, 2011: Direct Air Capture of CO 2 with of atmospheric methane. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2, 299-327, Chemicals: A Technology Assessment for the APS Panel on Public doi:10.1029/GB002i004p00299. Affairs, 100 pp., American Physical Society. [Available online at http://www.aps.org/policy/reports/asscssmncts/upload/dac20l1.
- 7. IPCC, 1995: The Science of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group pdf]
I to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Summao, for Policymakers and Technical Summar. Cambridge University Press.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 661 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: M1ITIG.ATION REFERE, CE,
- 17. Russell, L. M., P. J. Rasch, G. M. Mace, R. B. Jackson, J. Shepherd, 26. USDA, 2011: U.S. Agriculture and Forestry Greenhouse Gas P. Liss, M. Leinen, D. Schimel, N. E. Vaughan, A. C. Janetos, P. W. Inventory: 1990-2008. Technical Bulletin No. 1930., 159 pp., U.S.
Boyd, R. J. Norby, K. Caldeira, J. Merikanto, P. Artaxo, J. Melillo, Department of Agriculture, Climate Change Program Office, and M. G. Morgan, 2012: Ecosystem impacts of geoengineering: A Office of the Chief Economist, Washington, D.C. [Available online review for developing a science plan. AMBIO: A Journalof the Human at http://ww\w.usda.gov/oc-l/climate-change/AFG_((I.nvcntor/i Environment, 41, 350-369, doi:10.1007/s13280-012-0258-5. [Available USDA GIIG Inv..1990-2008-June2011.pdf]
online at http://www.bz.dulkc.cdu/jackson/atibio2012.pd F]
- 27. Pacala, S., R. A. Birdsey, S. D. Bridgham, R. T. Conant, K. Davis, B.
- 18. Parson, E. A., and D. W. Keith, 2013: End the deadlock on governance Hales, R. A. Houghton, J. C. Jenkins, M. Johnston, G. Marland, and of geoengineering research. Science, 339, 1278-1279, doi:10.1126/ K. Paustian, 2007: Ch. 3: The North American carbon budget past science.1232527. and present. The First State of the Carbon Cycle Report (SOCCR): The North American CarbonBudget and Implicationsfor the GlobalCarbon Cycle,
- 19. EIA, 2013: June 2013 Monthly Energy Review. DOE/EIA- A. W. King, L. Dillling, G. P. Zimmerman, D. M. Fairman, R. A.
0035(2013/06), 201 pp., U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Energy Houghton, G. Marland, A. Z. Rose, and T. J. Wilbanks, Eds.,29-170.
Information Administration, Washington, D.C. [Available online at [Available online at http://nrs.f.f.fed.us/pubs/irnl/2007/nrs_2007_
t ttp:/ww'/w.eCia.goV/totalcficrgy/data/iMonthly,/arcliivc/00351306. pacala_00l.pdf]
pdf]
- 28. Birdsey, R., K. Pregitzer, and A. Lucier, 2006: Forest carbon
- 20. EPA, 2013: Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: management in the United States: 1600-2100. Journalof Environmental 1990-2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. ,Quality, 35, 1461-1469, doi:10.2134/jeq2005.01 6 2 .
[Available online at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/
ghgemissions/US-G FHG-Invcntory-2013-Main-Text.pdf] 29. Masek, J. G., W. B. Cohen, D. Leckie, M. A. Wulder, R. Vargas, B. de Jong, S. Healey, B. Law, R. Birdsey, R. A. Houghton, D. Mildrexler,
- 21. Baldwin, J. G., and I. Sue Wing, 2013: The spatiotemporal evolution S. Goward, and W. B. Smit, 2011: Recent rates of forest harvest and of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions: Stylized facts and implications conversion in North America. Journal of Geophysical Research, 116, for climate policy. Journal of Regional Science, in press, doi:10.1111/ GOOK03, doi:10.1029/2010JG001471. [Available online at http://
jors.12028. on linelibrary.wiley.crn/ doi/ 0.1029/201 0.C 001471/pdf]
- 22. EIA, 2013: Annual Energy Outlook 2013 with Projections to 30. Zheng, D., L. S. Heath, M. J. Ducey, and J. E. Smith, 2011: Carbon 2040. DOE/EIA-0383(2013), 244 pp., U.S. Energy Information changes in conterminous US forests associated with growth and Administration, Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://www. major disturbances: 1992-2001. Environmental Research Letters, 6, eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pd f/0383(2013).pdf] 014012, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/6/1/014012.
- 23. UNEP, 2009: The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Oz-one 31. Zhang, F., J. M. Chen, Y. Pan, R. A. Birdsey, S. Shen, W. Ju, and L.
Layer. United Nations Environment Programme Ozone Secretariat, He, 2012: Attributing carbon changes in conterminous US forests to 572 pp. [Available online at http://ozone.inep.org/Publications/ disturbance and non-disturbance factors from 1901 to 2010.Journalof NMll -landbook/M/i'--Handbook-2009.pdf] GeophysicalResearch, 117, doi:10.1029/2011JG001930.
- 24. EPA, 2012: Report to Congress on Black Carbon. EPA-450/R-1 2-001, 32. Richardson, A. D., T. Andy Black, P. Ciais, N. Delbart, M. A. Friedl, 388 pp., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. N. Gobron, D. Y. Hollinger, W. L. Kutsch, B. Longdoz, S. Luyssaert,
[Available online at http:i//www.epa.gov/blackcarbon/2012rcporti M. Migliavacca, L. Montagnani, J. William Munger, E. Moors, S.
fullreport.pdt] Piao, C. Rebmann, M. Reichstein, N. Saigusa, E. Tomelleri, R. Vargas, and A. Varlagin, 2010: Influence of spring and autumn phenological
- 25. -- , 2010: Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and transitions on forest ecosystem productivity. PhilosophicalTransactions Sinks: 1990-2008, 407 pp., U.S. Environmental Protection of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 365, 3227-3246, doi:10.1098/
Agency, Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://www.cpa. rstb. 2010.0102. [Available online at http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.
gov/climatecha nge/ Down loads/ghgemissions/508 Complete org/content/365/1555/3227. fulI.pdf+html]
GHG_1990_2008.pdf]
- 33. Pan, Y., J. M. Chen, R. Birdsey, K. McCullough, L. He, and F. Deng, 2011: Age structure and disturbance legacy of North American forests.
Biogeosciences,8, 715-732, doi:10.5194/bg-8-715-2011. [Available online at htrtlp://www.Miogcoscicnces.ncti8!/715/20/11/g-8-715-2011.pd f]
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 662 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITKATIC/VrlJ Williams, C. A., G. J. Collatz, J. Masek, and S. N. Goward, 2012: Pitt, D. R., 2010: Harnessing community energy: The keys to climate Carbon consequences of forest disturbance and recovery across the mitigation policy adoption in US municipalities. LocalEnvironment,15, conterminous United States. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 26, GB1 005, 717-729, doi:10.1080/13549839.2010.509388.
doi:10.1029/2010gb003947.
- 39. U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, cited 2012: List of
- 34. Caspersen, J. P., S. W. Pacala, J. C. Jenkins, G. C. Hurtt, P. R. Participating Mayors. U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Center, Moorcroft, and R. A. Birdsey, 2000: Contributions of land-use The U.S. Conference of Mayors. [Available online at http://www.
history to carbon accumulation in U.S. forests. Science, 290,1148-1151, usmayors.org/clima teprotection/list.ast)j doi:10.1126/science.290.5494.1148.
- 40. Paltsev, S.,J. M. Reilly, H. D.Jacoby, and J. F. Morris, 2009: The cost Pan, Y., R. Birdsey, J. Hom, and K. McCullough, 2009: Separating of climate policy in the United States. Energy Economics, 31, S235-S243, effects of changes in atmospheric composition, climate and land-use doi:10.1016/j.eneco. 2009.06.005.
on carbon sequestration of US Mid-Atlantic temperate forests. Forest Ecology andManagement,259, 151-164, doi:10.1016/i.foreco.2009.09.049. EIA, 2009: Energy Market and Economic Impacts of H.R. 2454,
[Available online at htt)://treesearch.fs.fcd.us/lubs/34188] the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, 82 pp., U.S.
Energy Information Administration, Washington, D.C. [Available
- 35. The White House, 2010: Economic Report of the President, Council online at http://www.cia.gov/oiafi/serNricerpt/hr2454/pdf/
of Economic Advisors, 462 pp., The White House, Washington, D.C. sroiaf%282009%2905.pdf]
[Available online at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
microsites/economic-report-president.pd f] 41. CBO, 2009: The Costs of Reducing Greenhouse-Gas Emissions, 12 pp., Congressional Budget Office, Washington, D.C. [Available online
, 2010: Federal Climate Change Expenditures: Report to at http://www.cho.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/'l04xx/
Congress. Office of Management and Budget, 34 pp. doc 0458/11-23-green housega sumissions lbricf.pd f]
, 2012: A Secure Energy Future: Progress Report. The White 42. Fischer, C., and R. G. Newell, 2008: Environmental and technology House. [Available online at http://www.whitchouse.gov/sitcs/ policies for climate mitigation. Journalof Environmental Economics and (l efault/files/email-files/t heblueprintfor-a secureenergy_ Management, 55, 142-162, doi:10.1016/i.jeem.2007.11.001.
futureoneyear..progress-repott.pdf Karplus, V. J., S. Paltsev, M. Babiker, and J. M. Reilly, 2013: Should CCCSTI, 2009: Strategies of the Commercialization and Deployment a vehicle fuel economy standard be combined with an economy-wide of Greenhouse Gas Intensity-Reducing Technologies and Practices. greenhouse gas emissions constraint? Implications for energy and DOE/PI-000, 190 pp., The Committee on Climate Change Science climate policy in the United States. Energy Economics, 36, 322-333, and Technology Integration [Available online at http://wvw. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2012.09.001.
clim atetech nol(ogy.gov/Straregy-hlten sity-Reducing-Tcchnologies.
p-df] 43. Janetos, A., and A. Wagener, 2002: Understanding the Ancillary Effects of Climate Change Policies: A Research Agenda. World GAO, 2011: Climate Change: Improvements Needed to Clarify Resources Institute Policy Brief, Washington, D.C. [Available online National Priorities and Better Align Them with Federal Funding at http://pdf.wri.otg/climate.janetos-..ancillary.pdf]
Decisions. GAO-11-317, 95 pp., U.S. Government Accountability Office. [Available online at http://www.gao.gov/assets/320/318556. 44. Haines, A., K. R. Smith, D. Anderson, P. R. Epstein, A.J. McMichael, pdf] I. Roberts, P. Wilkinson, J. Woodcock, and J. Woods, 2007: Policies for accelerating access to clean energy, improving health, advancing
- 36. Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007: 549 development, and mitigating climate change. The Lancet, 370, 1264-U.S. 497. [Available online at http://www.supremecourt.gov/ 1281, doi:10.1016/$0140-6736(07)61257-4.
opinions/06pdf/05f- 120.pdf]
- 45. Bell, M., D. Davis, L. Cifuentes, A. Krupnick, R. Morgenstern, and
- 37. The White House, cited 2013: The President's Climate Action Plan. G. Thurston, 2008: Ancillary human health benefits of improved air The White House. [Available online at Ihttp://www.whitehousc.gov/ quality resulting from climate change mitigation. EnvironmentalHealth, share/clinmate-acti'n -plan] 7, 1-18, doi:10.1186/1476-069x-7-41.
- 38. Krause, R. M., 2011: Symbolic or substantive policy? Measuring the 46. Charlson, R.J., and T. M. L. Wigley, 1994: Sulfate aerosol and climatic extent of local commitment to climate protection. Environment and change. ScientificAmerican, 270, 48-57.
Planning C: Government and Poliy, 29, 46-62, doi:10.1068/c09185.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 663 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: M7TIGATION
- 47. Davis, D. L., 1997: Short-term improvements in public health from 54. Clarke, L.,J. Edmonds, H.Jacoby, H. PitcherJ. Reilly, and R. Richels, global-climate policies on fossil-fuel combustion: An interim report. 2007: Scenarios of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Atmospheric The Lancet, 350, 1341-1349, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)10209-4. Concentrations-US Climate Change Science Program Synthesis and Assessment Product 2.1a. Sub-report 2.1A of Synthesis and
- 48. Nemet, G. F., T. Holloway, and P. Meier, 2010: Implications of Assessment Product 2.1, 154 pp., U.S. Department of Energy, incorporatingaic-quality co-benefits into climate change policymaking. Office of Biological & Environmental Research, Washington, D.C.
Environmental Research Letters, 5, 014007, doi:10.1088/1748- [Available online at http://downloads.globalchanige.gov/sapisap2-1a/
9326/5/1/014007. [Available online at http://iopscicncc.iop.orgi1748- sap2-1a-final-all.pdl]
9326/5/Il/014007!/pf/1748-9326-5 1 014007.pdf]
- 55. Clarke, L., J. Edmonds, V. Krey, R. Richels, S. Rose, and M. Tavoni,
- 49. Burtraw, D., A. Krupnick, K. Palmer, A. Paul, M. Toman, and C. 2009: International climate policy architectures: Overview of the Bloyd, 2003: Ancillary benefits of reduced air pollution in the US EMF 22 International Scenarios. Energy Economics, 31, S64-S81, from moderate greenhouse gas mitigation policies in the electricity doi:1 0.1016/j.eneco.2009.10.013.
sector. Journalof Environmental Economics and AManagement, 45, 650-673, doi:l 0.1016/S0095-0696(02)00022-0. 56. Clarke, L., A. Fawcett, J. McFarland, J. Weyant, Y. Zhou, and V.
Chaturvedi, 2013: Technology and US emissions reductions goals:
- 50. West, J. J., A. M. Fiore, L. W. Horowitz, and D. L. Mauzerall, 2006: Results of the EMF 24 modeling exercise. The EnergyJournal,In press.
Global health benefits of mitigating ozone pollution with methane emission controls. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences, 103, Fawcett, A., L. Clarke, S. Rausch, and J. Weyant, 2013: Overview of 3998-3993, doi:10.1073/pnas.0600201103. [Available online at http:// EMF 24 policy scenarios. The Energy Journal,In press.
www.pn as.org/content/1 03/11/3988.full.pdf+htnml]
Fawcett, A. A., K. V. Calvin, F. C. de la Chesnaye, J. M. Reilly, and
- 51. Shindell, D., J. C. I. Kuylenstierna, E. Vignati, R. van Dingenen, J. P. Weyant, 2009: Overview of EMF 22 U.S. transition scenarios.
M. Amann, Z. Klimont, S. C. Anenberg, N. Muller, G. Janssens- Energy Economics, 31, Supplement 2, S198-S211, doi:10.1016/j.
Maenhout, F. Raes,J. Schwartz, G. Faluvegi, L. Pozzoli, K. Kupiainen, eneco.2009.10.015.
L. Hoglund-lsaksson, L. Emberson, D. Streets, V. Ramanathan, K.
Hicks, N. T. K. Oanh, G. Milly, M. Williams, V. Demkine, and D. 57. NRC, 2010: Adapting to Impacts of Climate Change. Americas Climate Fowler, 2012: Simultaneously mitigating near-term climate change Choices: Report of the Panel on Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change.
and improving human health and food security. Science, 335, 183-189, National Research Council. The National Academies Press, 292 doi:10.1126/science.1210026. pp. [Available online at http://wwwx.nap.edu/catalog.php?rccord-id= 12783]
Wang, X., and K. R. Smith, 1999: Secondary benefits of greenhouse gas control: Health impacts in China. Environmental Science &" 58. OMB, 2012: Fiscal Year 2013 Budget of the U.S. Government, 256 Technology, 33, 3056-3061, doi:10.1021/es981360d. [Available online at pp., Office of Management and Budget, Washington, D.C. [Available http:,//pubs.acs..rg/doi/abs/ls/10.1021/es981360d] online at http://www.whitehousc.go(/oites/dcfahlt/files/omb/
budget/fy2013/assets/budgcr.pdq Ramanathan, V., H. Rodhe, M. Agrawal, H. Akimoto, M. Auffhammer, U. K. Chopra, L. Emberson, S. I. Hasnain, M. lyngararasan, A. 59. Edmonds, J. A., T. Wilson, R. Rosenzweig, R. Benedick, E. L.
Jayaraman, M. Lawrence, T. Nakajima, M. Ruchirawat, A. K. Singh, Malone, J. F. ClarkeJ. J. Dooley, and S. H. Kim, 2000: Global Energy J. R. Vincent, and Y. Zhang, 2008: Atmospheric Brown Clouds: Technology Strategy: Addressing Climate Change. Initial Findings Regional Assessment Report with Focus on Asia, 367 pp., United from an International Public-Private Collaboration. The Global Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya. Energy Technology Strategy Program, Washington, D.C. [Available online at littp://www.globalchangc.umd.cdu'/data/gtsp/docs/(.;TSI-
- 52. van Vuuren, D. P., S. Deetman, M. G. J. den Elzen, A. Hof, M. Isaac, indfind.pdt]
K. Klein Goldewijk, T. Kram, A. Mendoza Beltran, E. Stehfest, and J. van Vliet, 2011: RCP2.6: Exploring the possibility to keep global Edmonds, J. A., M. A. Wise, J. J. Dooley, S. H. Kim, S. J. Smith, P.
mean temperature increase below 2' C. Cl'matic Change, 109,95-116, J. Runci, L. E. Clarke, E. L. Malone, and G. M. Stokes, 2007: Global doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0152-3. [Available online at http://Iink. Energy Technology Strategy: Addressing Climate Change. Phase 2 springcr.com/contcnt/pd f/1 0.10077%2Fs1O584-011-015 2-3.pdf] Findings from an International Public-Private Sponsored Research Program. The Global Energy Technology Strategy Program,
- 53. Thomson, A. M., K. V. Calvin, S. J. Smith, G. P. Kyle, A. Volke, P. Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://wxvw.globalchange.
Patel, S. Delgado-Arias, B. Bond-Lamberty, M. A. Wise, and L. E. umd.cdu/cdata/gtsp/docs/gtsp_-20(17?final.pd]
Clarke, 2011: RCP4.5: A pathway for stabilization of radiative forcing by 2100. Climatic Change, 109, 77-94, doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0151-4.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 664 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION R EF r-NE -, EN
_7
- 60. DOE, 2009: The National Energy Modeling System: An Overview 65. C2ES, cited 2013: Greenhouse Gas Reporting and Registries. Center 2009, 83 pp., Energy Information Administration, Office of for Climate and Energy Solutions. [Available online at http://www.
Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, Washington, D.C. [Available c2es.org/us-states-regionis/policy-maps/ghg-reporting]
online at http://www.cia.dce.gov/oiaf/aco/ovcrview/]
- 66. -- , cited 2013: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Targets. Center for Janetos, A. C., L. Clarke, B. Collins, K. Ebi, J. Edmonds, I. Foster, J. Climate and Energy Solutions. [Available online at http://www.c2es.
Jacoby, K. Judd, R. Leung, and R. Newell, 2009: Science Challenges org/us-statcs-rcgions/policy-m aps/cmissions-targets]
and Future Directions: Climate Change Integrated Assessment Research. Report PNNL-18417, 80 pp., U.S. Department of Energy, 67. EDF, 2012: States Have Led the Way in Curbing Carbon Pollution Office of Science. [Available online at http://scicnce.cnergy.gov/-/ from New Power Plants, 1 pp., Environmental Defense Fund.
mcdia/bcr/pdf/ia'worlkshopt.low-res...06-25-09.pdf] [Available online at http://www.cdf.()rg/sites/default./filcs/statc-glig-standards-03132012.pdf]
Prinn, R. G., 2013: Development and application of earth system models. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences, 110, 3673-3680, 68. C2ES, cited 2013: Low Carbon Fuel Standard. Center for Climate doi:10.1073/pnas.1107470109. [Available online at http://www.pnas. and Energy Solutions. [Available online at http://wwvw.c2cs.org/us-org/content!/110/supp1.1/3673, fu 1.pd f+html] states-rcgionsipolicy-maps/low-carbon-fuel-standard]
61, EIA, 2012: Annual Energy Outlook 2012 with Projections to 69. -- , cited 2013: Climate Action Plans. Center for Climate and 2035. DOE/EIA-0383(2012), 239 pp., U.S. Energy Information Energy Solutions. [Available online at http://www.c2cs.org/us-Administration, Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://www. states-regions/policy-maps/action-plan]
cia.gov/forccastsiaeo/pd f/0383(2012).pdf]
- 70. CEPA, cited 2013: Cap-and-Trade Program. California Environmental
- 62. DeFries, R., and C. Rosenzweig, 2010: Toward a whole-landscape Protection Agency. [Available online at http://arh.ca.gov/cc-approach for sustainable land use in the tropics. Proceedingsofthe National capandtrade/capandtradc.htm]
Academy of Sciences, 107, 19627-19632, doi:10.1073/pnas.1011163107.
[Available online at http://www.pnas.org/contcnt/107/46/19627. full. 71. C2ES, cited 2013: Multi-State Climate Initiatives. Center for Climate pdf+html] and Energy Solutions. [Available online at http:,i/www.c2es.org,/us-states-regionsiregional-cliniaae-initiatives#'XWC I ]
Melillo, J. M., J. M. Reilly, D. W. Kicklighter, A. C. Gurgel, T. W.
Cronin, S. Paltsev, B. S. Felzer, X. Wang, A. P. Sokolov, and C. A. 72. EPA, cited 2013: Tribal Climate and Energy Information. U.S.
Schlosser, 2009: Indirect emissions from biofuels: How important? Environmental Protection Agency. [Available online at http://www.
Science, 326, 1397-1399, doi:10.1126/science.1180251. [Available online epa.gov/statelocalclimate/tribal]
at hrtp://globalchange.niit.edu/hold /resrricted/M ll'] PSPG(_
Reprint09-20.d Pn1 73. DOE, 2013: Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency.
Renewable Portfolio Standard Policies, 1 pp., U.S. Department of Thomson, A. M., K. V. Calvin, L. P. Chini, G. Hurtt,J. A. Edmonds, Energy. [Available online at http://www.dsireusa.org/docuiucnts/
B. Bond-Lamberty, S. Frolking, M. A. Wise, and A. C. Janetos, 2010: summarymaps,/IlPS-.m ap.pd f]
Climate mitigation and the future of tropical landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 19633-19638, doi:10.1073/ 74. -- , 2013: Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency.
pnas.0910467107. [Available online at http://www.pnas.org/ Energy Efficiency Resource Standards., 1 pp., U.S. Department of c()ntent/107/'46/19633.shocr] Energy. [Available online at http://www.dsireusa.org,/documcnts,/
sum marymaps/EERS-map.pd f]
- 63. Dietz, T., G. T. Gardner, J. Gilligan, P. C. Stern, and M. P.
Vandenbergh, 2009: Household actions can provide a behavioral 75. - , 2013: Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency.
wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. Proceedingsof the National Property Tax Incentives for Renewables, 1 pp., U.S. Department of Academy of Sciences, 106, 18452-18456, doi:10.1073/pnas.0908738106. Energy. [Available online at http://www.dsireusa.org/docuimlnts/
[Available online at http://www.pnas.org/content/106/44/18452. summar ymaps/PropCrtyXax _.1.map.pd f]
full.pdf+htnfl]
- 76. NRC, 2011: Climate Stabilization Targets: Emissions, Concentrations, and
- 64. Vandenbergh, M. P., P. C. Stern, G. T. Gardner, T. Dietz, and J. M. Impacts over Decades to Millennia. National Research Council. The Gilligan, 2010: Implementing the behavioral wedge: Designing and National Academies Press, 298 pp. [Available online at http://wwArw.
adopting effective carbon emissions reduction programs. Vanderbilt nap.edu/catalog.phprecorcjdzid=12877]
public law research paper no. 10-26. Environmental Law Reporter, 40, 10547.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 665 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION',
REF.RENIC--S
- 77. van Vuuren, D. P., J. Edmonds, M. Kainuma, K. Riahi, A. Thomson, K. Hibbard, G. C. Hurtt, T. Kram, V.Krey, andJ. F. Lamarque, 2011:
The representative concentration pathways: An overview. Climatic Change, 109, 5-31, doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z. [Available online at hrtp://link.springcr.coin/content/pdf/10.1007%2FsI0584-011-0"148-z.pdf]
- 78. EIA, 2011: International Energy Outlook 2011. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://www.eia.gov/forccasts,'arcliivc/ieoll/]
- 79. Metcalf, G. E., 2008: An empirical analysis of energy intensity and its determinants at the state level. The Energy Journal, 29, 1-26, doi:10.5547/ISSNO195-6574-EJ-Vol29-No3-1. [Available online at http://wvorks.bcpress.c()m/cgi/viewcontcnt.cgiarticlc= 1005&contex t-=gilber t-metcalfj Sue Wing, 1., 2008: Explaining the declining energy intensity of the US economy. Resource and Energy Economics, 30, 21-49, doi:10.1016/j.
reseneeco.2007.03.001.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 666 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATION Process for Developing Key Messages:
Evaluation of literature by Coordinating Lead Authors Confidence Level KEY MESSAGE #1TRACEABLE ACCOUNT Strong evidence (established Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere theory, multiple sources, con-by natural processes at a rate that is roughly half sistent results, well documented and accepted methods, etc.),
of the current rate of emissions from human activi- high consensus ties. Therefore, mitigation efforts that only stabi-lize global emissions will not reduce atmospheric Moderate evidence (several concentrations of carbon dioxide, but will only limit sources, some consistency, their rate of increase. The same is true for other methods vary and/or documen-long-lived greenhouse gases. tation limited, etc.), medium consensus Descriptionof evidence base The message is a restatement of conclusions derived from the Suggestive evidence (a few peer-reviewed literature over nearly the past 20 years (see Section sources, limited consistency, 1 of chapter). Publications have documented the long lifetime of models incomplete, methods C02 in the atmosphere, resulting in long time lags between action emerging, etc.), competing and reduction, 9 .117 6 and Earth System Models have shown that schools of thought stabilizing emissions will not immediately stabilize atmospheric 4
concentrations, which will continue to increase. Inconclusive evidence (lim-ited sources, extrapolations, New information and remaining uncertainties inconsistent findings, poor docu-There are several important uncertainties in the current carbon mentation andlor methods not tested, etc.), disagreement or cycle, especially the overall size, location, and dynamics of the lack of opinions among experts land-use sink 9," and technological development and performance.
Simulating future atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases KEY MESSAGE #2 TRACEABLE ACCOUNT requires both assumptions about economic activity, stringency of To meet the lower emissions scenario (B1) used any greenhouse gas emissions control, and availability of technolo- in this assessment, global mitigation actions would gies, as well as a number of assumptions about how the changing need to limit global carbon dioxide emissions to a climate system affects both natural and anthropogenic sources. peak of around 44 billion tons per year within the next 25 years and decline thereafter. In 2011, glob-Assessment of confidence based on evidence al emissions were around 34 billion tons, and have Very High. Observations of changes in the concentrations of green- been rising by about 0.9 billion tons per year for house gases are consistent with our understanding of the broad the past decade. Therefore, the world is on a path relationships between emissions and concentrations.
to exceed 44 billion tons per year within a decade.
Descriptionof evidence base A large number of emissions scenarios have been modeled, with a number of publications showing what would be required to limit C02 13,53.54,77 to any predetermined limit. At current concentrations and rate of rise, the emissions of C02 would need to peak around U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 667 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
M11 .,DkN.
\__ 1lTh 44 billion tons within the next 25 years in order to stabilize con- the Mitigation Chapter. Studies have shown that there is a large centrations as in the BE scenario. Given the rate of increase in land-use carbon sink in the United States. 2 2, 7 .28 Many publica-recent years,"0 this limit is expected to be surpassed.7 8 tions attribute this sink to forest re-growth, and the sink is pro-jected to decline as a result of forest aging 30 . 313. 3 and factors like New information and remaininguncertainties drought, fire, and insect infestations 3 1 reducing the carbon sink of Uncertainties about the carbon cycle could affect these calcu- these regions.
lations, but the largest uncertainties are the assumptions made about the strength and cost of greenhouse gas emissions policies. New information and remaining uncertainties FIA plots are measured extremely carefully over long time periods, Assessment of confidence based on evidence but do not cover all U.S. forested land. Other U.S. land types The confidence in the conclusion is high. This is a contingent must have carbon content estimated from other sources. Modeling conclusion, though - we do not have high confidence that the relationships between growth and carbon content, and taking C02 current emission rate will be sustained. However, we do have high and climate change into account have large scientific uncertain-confidence that if we do choose to limit concentrations as in the ties associated with them.
Bl scenario, emissions will need to peak soon and then decline.
Assessment of confidence based on evidence KEY MESSAGE #3 TRACEABLE ACCOUNT High. Evidence of past trends is based primarily on government Over recent decades, the U.S. economy has emit- data sources, but these also have to be augmented by other data ted a decreasing amount of carbon dioxide per dol- and models in order to incorporate additional land-use types. Pro-lar of gross domestic product. Between 2008 and jecting future carbon content is consistent with published models, 2012, there was also a decline in the total amount but these have intrinsic uncertainties associated with them.
of carbon dioxide emitted annually from energy use in the United States as a result of a variety of KEY MESSAGE #5 TRACEABLE ACCOUNT factors, including changes in the economy, the de- Both voluntary activities and a variety of policies velopment of new energy production technologies, and measures that lower emissions are currently in and various government policies. place at federal, state, and local levels in the Unit-ed States, even though there is no comprehensive Descriptionof evidence base national climate legislation. Over the remainder of Trends in greenhouse gas emissions intensity are analyzed and this century, aggressive and sustained greenhouse published by governmental reporting agencies.20 ,23,26 Published, gas emission reductions by the United States and peer-reviewed literature cited in Section 2 of the Mitigation Chap- by other nations would be needed to reduce global ter supports the conclusions about why these trends have oc- emissions to a level consistent with the lower sce-curred.7 9 nario (B1) analyzed in this assessment.
New informationand remaining uncertainties Description of evidence base Economic and technological forecasts are highly uncertain. The identification of state, local, regional, federal, and voluntary programs that will have an effect of reducing greenhouse gas emis-Assessment of confidence based on evidence sions is a straightforward accounting of both legislative action and High. The statement is a summary restatement of published analy- announcements of the implementation of such programs. Some ses by government agencies and interpretation from the reviewed of the programs include the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), the literature. American College and University Presidents' Climate Commitment (ACUPCC), U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, 39 and KEY MESSAGE #4 TRACEABLE ACCOUNT many other local government initiatives. 38 Several states have also Carbon storage in land ecosystems, especially adapted climate policies including California's Global Warming forests, has offset around 17% of annual U.S. fos- Solutions Act (AB 32) and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative sil fuel emissions of greenhouse gases over the (RGGI). The assertion that they will not lead to a reduction of US past several decades, but this carbon "sink" may C02 emissions is supported by calculations from the U.S. Energy not be sustainable. Information Administration.
Descriptionof evidence base New information and remaining uncertainties Underlying data come primarily from U.S. Forest Service Forest The major uncertainty in the calculation about future emissions Inventory and Analysis (FIA) plots, supplemented by additional levels is whether a comprehensive national policy will be imple-ecological data collection efforts. Modeling conclusions come mented.
from peer-reviewed literature. All references are in Section 2 of U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM. 668 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
27: MITIGATiO(DNJ Assessment of confidence based on evidence Very High. There is recognition that the implementation of volun-tary programs may differ from how they are originally planned, and that institutions can always choose to leave voluntary pro-grams (as is happening with RGGI, noted in the chapter). The statement about the future of U.S. C02 emissions cannot be taken as a prediction of what will happen - it is a conditional statement based on an assumption of no comprehensive national legislation or regulation.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 669 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
Climate Change Impacts in the United States CHAPTER 28 ADAPTATION Convening Lead Authors Rosina Bierbaum, University of Michigan Arthur Lee, Chevron Corporation Joel Smith, Stratus Consulting Lead Authors Maria Blair, Independent Lynne.,M. Carter,; Louisiana State University F.: Stuart Chapin IlIf, University of. Alaska Fairbanks Paul Fleming, Seattle Public Utilities:
Susan Ruffo, The Nature Conservancy.
Contributing Authors Shannon McNeeley, Colorado State University Missy: Stu'lt', Uiesiyo Michigan; Laura Verduzco, Chevron Corporation Emily Seyller, University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Recommended Citation for Chapter Bierbaum, R., A. Lee, J. Smith, M. Blair, L. M. Carter, F.S. Chapin, 1ll, P.Fleming, S. Ruffo, S. McNeeley, M. Stults, L.
Verduzco, and E. Seyller, 2014: Ch. 28: Adaptation. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Cli-mate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W.Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 670-706. doi:10.7930/J7H .GGT.
On the Web http://nca20l4.globalchange .gov/report/response-strategies/adaptation 670
.KEY MESSAGES
- 1. Substantial adaptation planning is occurring in the public and private sectors and at all levels of government; however, few measures have been implemented and those that have appear to be incremental changes.
.2. Barriers to implementation of adaptation include limited funding,' policy and legal impediments, and difficulty in anticipating climate-related changes at local scales.
- 3. There is no "one-size fits all"! adaptation., but there are similarities in approaches across regions and sectors. Sharing best practices, learning by doing, and iterative and collaborative processes-including stakeholder involvement, can help support progress..
- 4. Climate change adaptation actions often fulfill other societal goals, such as sustainable development, disaster risk reduction, or improvements in quality of life, and can therefore be incorporated into existing decision-making processes..
- 5. Vulnerability to climate change is exacerbated by other stresses such.as pollution, habitat .
- fragmentation, and poverty."Adaptation to multiple stresses requires assessment of the composite threats as well as tradeoffs among costs, benefits, and risks of available options.
- 6. The effectiveness of climate change adaptation has seldom been evaluated, because actions have only recently been initiated and comprehensive evaluation metrics do not yet exist.,
Over the past few years, the focus moved from the question ordinances will likely need to be updated not only for energy "Is climate changing?" to the equally important question: "Can efficiency but also to conserve water supplies, protect against society manage unavoidable changes and avoid unmanageable disease vectors, reduce susceptibility to heat stress, and changes?"" 2 Research demonstrates that both mitigation improve protection against extreme events."' Although there (efforts to reduce future climate changes) and adaptation is uncertainty about future conditions, research indicates that (efforts to reduce the vulnerability of society to climate change intelligent adaptive actions can still be taken now.""' Climate impacts) are needed in order to minimize the damages from change projections have inherent uncertainties, but it is still human-caused climate change and to adapt 3to4 5the pace and important to develop, refine, and deploy tools and approaches ultimate magnitude of changes that will occur. ', that enable iterative decision-making and increase flexibility and robustness of climate change responses (Ch. 2: Our Adaptation and mitigation are closely linked; adaptation Changing Climate).12 efforts will be more difficult, more costly, and less likely to succeed if significant mitigation actions are not taken.' The Climate change affects human health, natural ecosystems, study and application of adaptation in the climate change built environments, and existing social, institutional, and realm is nascent compared to the many analyses of mitigation legal arrangements. Adaptation considerations include policies and practices to reduce emissions. Uncertainties local, state, regional, national, and international issues. For about future socioeconomic conditions as well as future example, the implications of international arrangements climate changes can make it difficult to arrive at adaptation need to be considered in the context of managing the Great decisions now. However, the pace and magnitude of projected Lakes, the Columbia River, and the Colorado River to deal change emphasize the need to be prepared for a wide range with drought.1 3" 4 Both "bottom up" community planning and
. and intensity of climate impacts in the future. Planning and managing based on the climate of the last century means that tolerances of some infrastructure and species will be "top down" national strategies"1 may help regions deal with impacts such as increases in electrical brownouts, heat stress, floods, and wildfires. Such a mix of approaches will require exceeded.5 ' 7 For example, building codes and landscaping U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 671 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION cross-boundary coordination at multiple levels as operational efforts at the federal, regional, state, tribal, and local levels, agencies integrate adaptation planning into their programs. as well as initiatives in the corporate and non-governmental sectors to build adaptive capacity and resilience in response to Adaptation actions can be implemented reactively, after climate change. While societal adaptation to climate variability changes in climate occur, or proactively, to prepare for projected is as old as civilization itself,15 the focus of this chapter is on changes."1 Proactively preparing can reduce the harm from preparing for unprecedented human-induced climate change certain climate change impacts, such as increasingly intense through adaptation. A map of illustrative adaptation activities extreme events, shifting zones for agricultural crops, and rising and four detailed case examples that highlight ongoing sea levels, while also facilitating a more rapid and efficient adaptation activity across the U.S. are provided in Section 4 of response to changes as they happen. This chapter highlights this chapter.
AAPT1 . ATiION KEY~i4 TERM ]~ i DEINhITIONS[
r II Adapt, Adaptation: Adjustment in natural or human systems to a new or changing environment that.exploits beneficial opportunities or moderates negative effects, I
Adaptive Capacity: The potential of a system to adjust to climate change (including climate variability and extremes) to moderate potential damages, take advantage of opportunities, and cope with the consequences.
Mitigation: Technological change and substitutions that reduce resource. inputs and emissions per unit of output.
Although several social, economic, and technological actions would reduce emissions, with respect to climate change, mitigation means implementing actions to reduce greenhouse gas.emissions or increase the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed and stored by naturaland man-made carbon sinks (see Ch. 27: Mitigation)..
Multiple Stressors: Stress that originates from different sources that affect natural, managed, and socioeconomic systems and can cause impacts that are compounded and sometimes unexpected. An. example would be when economic or market stress combines with drought to negatively impact farmers.:
Resilience: A capability to anticipate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from significant multi-hazard threats with
- minimum damage to social well-being, the economy, and the environment.
Risk:-A combination of the magnitude of the potential consequence(s) of climate change impact(s) and the likelihood that the consequence(s).will occur.
Vulnerability: .The degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, includingclimate variability and extremes. Vulnerability.is a function of the character, magnitude,and rate of climate variation to which a system is exposed, itssensitivity, and its.adaptive capacity.
16
- Definitions adapted from (IPCC 2007; NRC 2007, 17 2010 11 )
Adaptation Activities in the United States Federal Government Federal leadership, guidance, information, and support are
- the release of President Obama's Climate Action Plan inJune vital to planning for and implementing adaptation actions at all 2013, which has as one of its three major pillars, preparing scales and in all affected sectors of society (Table 28.1). 1118,1920 the United States for the impacts of climate change, including Several new federal climate adaptation initiatives and building stronger and safer communities and infrastructure, strategies have been developed in recent years, including: protecting the economy and natural resources, 22 and using I sound science to manage climate impacts;
- Executive Order (EO) 13514, requiring federal agencies to develop recommendations for strengthening policies and the creation of an Interagency Climate Change Adaptation programs to adapt to the impacts of climate change; 2' Task Force (ICCATF) (now the Council on Climate Prepared-ness and Resilience, per Executive Order 13653") that led to the development of national principles for adaptation and U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 672 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION is leading to crosscutting and government-wide adaptation practice" for federal agencies that are developing and imple-policies; menting adaptation plans, an Adaptation Science Workgroup inside the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP),
" the development of three crosscutting national adaptation and several agency specific climate change and adaptation strategies focused on integrating federal, and often state, task forces; and local, and tribal efforts on adaptation in key sectors: 1) the National Action Plan: Priorities for Managing Freshwater Re- a November 2013 Executive Order entitled "Preparing the sources in a Changing Climate;2 4 2) the National Fish, Wildlife United States for the Impacts of Climate Change" that, among and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy;zs and 3) a priority other things, calls for the modernizing of federal programs to objective on resilience and adaptation in the National Ocean support climate resilient investments, managing lands and Policy Implementation Plan;26 waters for climate preparedness and resilience, the creation of a Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, and the
" a new decadal National Global Change Research Plan (2012- creation of a State, Local, and Tribal2 3Leaders Task Force on 2021) that includes elements related to climate adaptation, Climate Preparedness and Resilience.
such as improving basic science, informing decisions, improv-ing assessments, and communicating with and educating the Federal agencies are all required to plan for adaptation. Actions 27 public; include coordinated efforts at the White House, regional and cross-sector efforts, agency-specific adaptation plans, as well
" the development of several interagency and agency-specific as support for local-level adaptation planning and action. Table groups focused on adaptation, including a "community of 28.1 lists examples, but is not intended as a comprehensive list.
TableI 28..w~u E :~ ampile[suU of In 1 A iviul Fedra[to-iEI~Agnc i[IE!.IIl~ Acton Prmoe Impeet and Suppr Adapatio at Mutil Scaes Agency Component Action Description The 2012. Strategic Sustainability Performance Plans for Federal agencies contain specific Drteveloped.S ionuPlan as -:aan sections on adaptation, Agencies are required All Federal Agencies .t . " tiepannUal
- part Strategclimate risks and vulnerabilities to ta..nabit..y Performance Plas manage. both short- and long-term effects on 7missions and operations.
Through their first climate change cooperative Department of Health' and'Human Centers for Disease Climate-Ready statesand cities
- agreements in 2010, CDC awarded. $5.25 mi1-.
Control ad Prevention ' Initiative lion to ten state and local health departments Services (HHS) (COC) to assess risks and develop programs to address
- climate change related challenges.
J USDA is using existing networks such as the
- '. Cooperative Extension Service, the Natural.
Integrating climate, change obje-.. Resourc6 Coohservation Districts, and the Forest Department of Agriculture (USDA) i tives into plans and networks Service's Climate Change Resource Center to
' . i provide climate services to rural and agricultural stakeholders.
. : ., 'The National Roadmap was developed in 2010 Developed a National Roadmap.. to idenfy short-and long-term actions to reduce
- .or Respondng o Cimate Change *:climate change risks to the nation's forests and USDA Forest S*ervice
- and a Guideboook Adaptation Options, foramong Developing***
many grasslands. The Guidebook builds on, this previ-**
Arapion s aous work and provides science-based strategic resources "and tactical approaches to adaptation.
. .. .. . *. . . . _ ... ..Through
. . . the. Regional
. . . . .Integrated
.. . . . .ciences
... " . *: and.Assessments (RISAs) program, develop
.. S..upporngres..earchteamsand. collaboration between researchers and manag-local communities on adaptation- ; -
Department of Commerce (DOC) NOAA ,related issues and develops to ers to better manage climate risks. Through and resources "0* , the Regional Climate Centers (RCCs) and the Digital Coast partnership, deliver science to support decision-making.
DoD released its initial Department-level Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap in 2012.
Developed_a"oCl e The Roadmap identifies four goals that serve Adaa DoD Climate as the foundation for guiding the Department's Department of Defense (DoD) S-Change Adaptation RoadmaP response to climate change that include using
.-a robust decision making approach based on the best available science.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 673 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION Po t Implement, and S t Ap a ateic o n. at Mutil ptm S.. *n*
~;De' .. The USACEtivll Wfrks Programn iiiitial climate
- " . . .dc... *chang .ate . change adaptation plan in 2011 has a goal to U.S . Army Corps of aaptation plan;imaking progress reduce vulnerabilities and improve resilience
- oD * .- , Engineers(USACE), i .Plriority areasincdg d of water resources infrastructure impacted by,.
Civil Works Program vulnerbltaSseSSmentsand climaitechange. Vulnerability assessments and deeloment.....of "pil pocy an 'iot projects are in progress. Other guidance is
- ,guiance . underway.
The Navy Arctic Roadmap (November 2009)
Developed road maps for ** promotes maritime in a.changing Arctic.security and naval The Climate readiness Change BoD Department of the Navy adaptation in the Arctic and across.i a (May exate Chade The
- *. .i ".the globethe :ma'lobeRoadmap ". (May 2010) examines broader issues of climate change impactson Navy missions
- .. and capabilities globally.:
.Develop higherspatial and. Develops community-based, high-resolution temporal scales of climate: (temporal and.spatial) models for climate projections and, integrate.
,projectionSand i.. and integrated i .assessment models Department of Energy (DOE)." adaptation ard climate "that Increasingly reflect multi-sectoral processes considerations into integrated and interactions, multiple stressors, coupled assessments . "
- impacts, i and adaptation potential. - .
Developed climate change* : The 2013 DOE.Report "U.S.-Energy Sector S ap nl m...adaptativnplan .. *Vulnerabilities to Climate' Change and Extreme and completed Weather" examines current and potential future DOE * . " impacts of climate trends and identifies activities vulnerabilities to the energy sector underwayand potential opportunities to Department ofomelande of climate change and extreme .. enhance energy system climate preparedness weatherare
~~~~~~
,~~~~~ ,~ :.. * . ....
. ". . ... ' * . an.oresi once . . . .,
FEMA released a Climate*Change Adaptation'
" Policy Statement establishing the Agency's
- Federal Emergency, roach to supporting the Department n OePartme~nt of Homeland,'SecU..... U{ Manageoeramergnt y. * .Works with communities across aproc to supring th Department in
- AgManagement Age - the Nationto heeputhem prioritize dasters inathe face of.
esieE t*isaenunng (DHS)' ' " (EMA)
... .: their activities to redue risks- ",i.a c ga .FEMA's action areas focus
- - " -. ' on developing actionable "future risk" tools,
- Ienabling state and local adaptation' and building
- .. - resilience capabilities.
Established a framework to help ensure the Developed a FWS climate sustainability of fish, wildlife; plants, and Fish and Wildlife service change strategic plan (2010) habitats in the face of climate change. Created Department of the Interior (DO Fis a*S) and established a network a network of 22 LCCs to promote shared of Landscape Conservation conservation goals, approaches, and resource
- " - Cooperatives (LCCs)* management planning and implementation across the United States.
. , 'DOI operates a National Climate Change and USv E e aWildlife Center and eight regional CSCs, which DOI U.S. Geological Survey Estabshed a network of Climate provide scientific information and, tools that land, (USGS) . Science Centers (CSCs) , .- water, wildlife, and cultural resource managers
- - and other stakeholders can apply to anticlpate,
.- monitor, and adapt to climate change.
NPS actions span climate change science, Climate Char nge Response .: adaptation, mitigation, and communication National Park Service Strategy (20110), Climate Change across nationalparks, including exhibits for park DOI (NPS) Action plan( 2012), and Green . visitors, providing climate trend information for 012) " all national parks, risk screening and adaptation Parks Plan'(2 for coastal park units, and implementing.
. -. , - scenario planning tools.
REAs synthesize information about resource conditions and trends within an ecoregion; Bureau of Land - lional Assessments Cassess impacts of climate change and DO[ Rapid Ecoreg Management (BLM) other stressors; map areas best-suited for
- (REAs) F,future development; and establish baseline t.i: " .' .
envitonmental conditions, against which to
-: gauge management effectiveness.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 674 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION DOT worked with five local, and state transportation authorities to develop a Federal Highway Developed Risk Assessment conceptual Risk Assessment Model to identify.
Department of Transportation (DOT) which assets are: a) most exposed to climate Administration, (FHWA) Model for transportation decisions change threats and/or b) associated with the most serious potential consequences of climate change threats. Completed November 2011.
P,ýhase 'I of the 2008 study assessed~'
Comprehensive studý.y fclimiate%: tranisportationinfrastrdutue vulnerability to
~risks to Gulf Coast trin'sportation ý climate change.imp~acti across the Gulf. Phase:
DOT infrast~~ructure followed by ndph12t be coped in 2013, focuses -on Mobile,
- study of Mobile'-AL. 1AL. This effort will develop transferable tools for Itransportation planners. -
Established the Climate Ready
- These selected.EPA initiatives provide Estuaries program, theClimate Environmental Protection Agency resources and tools to build the capacity of Ready Water Utilities initiative, (EPA) coastal managers, water utilities, and tribal and a tribal climate change environmenta! professionals to plan for and adaptationplanning training implement adaptation strategies.
program . .
The CASl team builds capacity to address Initiated NAS, X"sClimate. e " climate change at NASA facilities by enc Investigator clance Invea tor.......
- downscaling
.. faility-specific climate *hazard National Aeronautics and Space 2 Adaptation Sc to pa rtner information-and projections; conducting Administration (NASA) (CASI) Workg roup customized climate research for each location; NASA icientisStS, engineersao
...en.i.ds. an 1iand leading resilience and adaptation
. Institutional st workshops that spur,community-based responses... " -. ,. .- ,. ..
- Material provided intable isderived directly from Agency representatives and Agency websites. These are select examples and should not be considered all-inclusive.
Federal agencies can be particularly helpful in facilitating " dealing with and anticipating impacts that cross geopolitical climate adaptation by: boundaries, assisting in disaster response, and supporting flexible regulatory frameworks;?,3
- fostering the stewardship of public resources and mainte-nance of federal facilities, services, and operations such as
- ensuring the establishment of federal policies that allow for defense, emergency management, transportation, and eco- "flexible" adaptation efforts and take steps to avoid unin-system conservation in the face of a changing climate; '1,',s9,3 tended consequences; 30' 32 and
" providing usable 20 30 information and financial support for adap- " building public awareness. 33 tation;1, ,
- facilitating the dissemination of best practices and support-ing a clearinghouse to share data, resources, and lessons 1 20 31 learned; , ,
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 675 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION States States have become important actors in national climate process of writing their plans; and seven states had made change related efforts. State governments can create policies recommendations to create state-wide adaptation plans.37 and programs that encourage or discourage adaptation at other governance scales (such as counties or regions)4 through In addition to formal adaptation plans, numerous states 35 36 regulation and by serving as laboratories for innovation. ' have created sector-specific plans that consider long-term Although many of these actions are not specifically designed to climate change (Figure 28.1), For example, at least 16 states address climate change, they often include climate adaptation have biodiversity conservation plans that focus on preparing components. for long-term changes in climate." In addition to planning, some states have created legislation and/or programs that Many state-level climate change-specific adaptation are either directly or indirectly targeted at reducing climate actions focus on planning. As of 2013, fifteen states had vulnerabilities (Table 28.2).
completed climate adaptation plans; four states were in the U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 676 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION State Aatatidn:iAction,<tii91.:1IJ1 .LI Alaska Alaska Climate Change Impact Mitigation Program
. .39 provides funds for hazard impact assessments to evaluate climate change related impacts, such as coastal erosion and thawing permafrost;..
.allfor!.a."Building stahdards manndatin energy and: Water effici enc*y sings, advancing both adaptation and mitigation; Stat6 Adaptatio .plan 91 40-
.,calls for 2%reduction in per capita: water use..
Florida Law supporting low water use landscaping techniques.,"
Hawaii Water code that calls f-.orintegrated management, preslervation and. enhahncement of natural. systems. 4 Kentucky Action Plan to Respond to Climate
" 43 Change in Kentucky: 4 Strategy of Resilience, which identifies six goals to protect ecosystems.and species in a changing climate. -.
ouislana :C .omprehensive Master Plan for a: Sustainable-Coast 2012 includes both -protection and restoration activities addressing land loss from sea. level rise, subsidence, and:other.factors over the next 50 years.:
Maine The Maine Sand Dune Rules require that structures greater than 2,500 square feet . be set . back
. . .. at 45a distance that is calculated based
.
- on the.future shoreline position and considering two feet of sea level rise over the next 100 years..
Maryland... Passed Living Shorelines Actto'reduc*e harden'ed shorelines passed '
4iouuhilo:tfe:!*tate iBUIlding Resilience t ClimateC'Change",.:
,:..,poiy Which establishespractesand procedtues related to facility.siting.and design new land investments, habitat restoration, goernentopertmn reearh admonitormng;resource.,planfnhg*-,-and ad ocacy.,,* > ;-,: .. i,' r.o,,,&,-,,:-.v=
Montana Maintains a statewide climate change.website to help stakeholders access relevant and timely climate information, tools, and re-sources.
Mexico ' The Active Water Resource Management program allows for temporary.wate* rights changes in.real time in case of.drought.4 .
Pennsylva- . Enacted polices to encourage the use of green infrastructure and ecosystem-based approaches-for managing storm water and floodl nia 9' "- g a os apohsf m s w ing.
Rhode Island i Requires public agencies considering larnd-use applications to accommodate a 3- to 5.foot rise in sealevel.
Texas - Coordinated response to drought through National Integrated .Drought Information System (NIDIS); RISAs (Southern Climate Impacts Planning Program [SCIPP], Climate Assessment for the Southwest [CLIMAS]); and state and private sector partners through anticipa-tory planning and preparedness:(for example, implemented in2011 drought). 48
- This list contains selected examples of state-level adaptation activities and should not be considered all-inclusive.
Tribal Governments Tribal governments have been particularly active in assessing " The Tulalip Tribes in Washington State are using traditional and preparing for the impacts of climate change (see Ch. 12: knowledge gleaned from elders, stories, and songs and Indigenous Peoples). For example: combining this knowledge with downscaled climate data to inform decision-making.51 Also in Washington State, the
" Adaptation planning in Point Hope, Alaska, emphasizes strat- Swinomish Indian Tribal Community integrated climate egies for enhancing community health.4 change into decision-making in major sectors of the Swinom-ish Community, such as education, fisheries, social services,
" In Newtok, Alaska, the village council is leading a land-acquisi- and human health .
tion and planning effort to relocate the community, because climate change induced coastal erosion has destroyed essen- " The Haudenosaunee Confederacy in the northeastern U.S. is tial infrastructure, making the current village site unsafe.50 addressing climate impacts by preserving a native food base through seed-banking (Ch. 12:. Indigenous Peoples)."
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 677 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION Local and Regional Governments Most adaptation efforts to date have occurred at local and planning.59 Local adaptation planning and actions are unfolding regional levels. 5,54,55',5657 Primary mechanisms that local in municipalities of varying sizes and in diverse geographical governments are using to prepare for climate change include areas. Communities such as Keene, New Hampshire; New land-use planning; provisions to protect infrastructure and York City, New York; King County, Washington; and Chicago, ecosystems; regulations related to the design and construction Illinois are vanguards in the creation of climate adaptation of buildings, roads, and bridges; and emergency preparation, strategies."11 6' 0 In addition to local government action, response, and recovery (Table 28.3). 9,45,56,58 regional agencies and regional aggregations of governments 8 5
'7 are becoming significant climate change adaptation actors.
According to a recent survey of 298 U.S. local governments, 59% indicated they are engaged in some form of adaptation Localor Regiona.l"vernment Adap:tation Action Satellite Beach, FL Collaboration with the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program .led to efforts to try to incorporate plan.54 sea level rise projections and policies into. the city's comprehensive growth management Portland, OR ' Updated the city. code to require on-site stormwatiar mranagement for 'new development and re-development. Provides a downspoudtisconnection program to helppromhote orinite.
Stormwat-r rran-agement 6 Lewes, GE In partnership with Delaware Sea Grant, ICLEI-Locai Governments for Sustainability, the University of Delaware, and state and regional partners, the City of Lewes undertook a stakeholder-driven process to understand how climate adaptation could be integrated into the hazard mitigation planning process.
Recommendations for integration and operational changes were adopted by the City Council and are cur-rently being implemented.
Groton,CT..' ' " rtnered ith federal, sta.te, regional, local, non-g-overnmental, and academic partners through the, EPA's Climate:Ready Estiiaries program to assess vulnerability to and devise solutions for sea level
... - -* "*
- r e .63. . :* :.:. '.
San Diego Bay, CA . Five municipalities partnered with the port, the.airport, and more than 30 organizations with direct inter-
. ests in the Bay's future to develop the San Diego Bay Sea Level Rise Adaptation- Strategy. The strategy identified key vulnerabilities for the Bay and adaptation actions that can be taken by individual agencies, as well as through regional collaboratioh. "
Chicago, IL - - . ' Through 'a number of development pfoje'bSthe city has addedl55 acres of'perriieable surfaces since, S,2008 andhasmore than fou, millionsquarefeet- of green roofs planned or completed. .
King County, WA Created:King County Flood Control District in 2007 to address increased impacts from flooding through activities such as maintaining and repairin& levees and revetments, acquiring reoetitive loss properties, and improving countywide flood .warnings.. . .... .... ... ...
New York City, NY'- e.V~ri :':(FEMA';
C iy~iYManagement Through a partnership with. the.Federal Ernergepcy MaaeetAec.-'A) Agency the h.ctity iupdating' sudtn ..
FEMA'Flood Insurance Rate. Maps based on more precise elevation data. The newma ps will help stake-holdeirsbetter understand their current flood risks and allow.thee city to more effectively plan for climate
- change. *"'
Southeast Florida Climate Change Compact Joint commitment among Broward, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Monroe Counties to partner in reduc-ing heat-trapping gas emissions ahd adapting to climate impacts, including adaptation in transportation, water resources, natural resources, agriculture, and disaster risk reduction. Notable policies emerging from the Compact include regional collaboration to revise building codes and land development regula-
- tions to discourage new development or post-disaster redevelopment in vulnerable areas.
Phoenix, AZ; Boston, MA; Philadelphia, PA; ;,Climate change impacts are being integrated into public health planning and im-pleraentation activities and New York, NY that include creating more community cooling centers, neighborhood watch programs, and reductions in the urban heat island effect.' 6 ' 6 .
Boulder, CO; New York, NY; and Seattle, WA Water utilities in these communities are, using climate information to assess vulnerability and inform
- 61 decision-making. ,
City of Philadelphia In 2006, the Philadelphia Water Department began a program to develop a green stormwater infrastruc-
. ture, intended to convert mote than one-third of the city's impervious land cover to "Greened Acres":.
green facilities, green streets, greenOpen spaces green homes, etc.; along with stream corridor restora-
. tion and preseivation.
- This table includes select examples of local and regional adaptation activities and should not be considered all-inclusive.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 678 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION There is no one-size-fits-all adaptation solution to the chal-lenges of adapting to climate change impacts, as solutions will differ depending on context, local circumstance, and scale as well as on local culture and internal capacity.9' 31 Non-governmental and Private Sector Many non-governmental entities have been significant actors in the national effort to prepare for climate change by providing assistance that includes planning guidance, implementation tools, contextualized climate information, best practice exchange, and help with bridging the science-policy divide to a wide array of stakeholders (Table 28.4)7.71"I The Nature Conservancy, for example, established the Canyonlands Research Center in Monticello, Utah, to facilitate research and develop conservation applications for resource issues under the multi-stresses of climate change 72 and land-use demands in the Colorado Plateau region.
This one-acre stormwater wetland was constructed in Philadelphia to ti reat stormwater runoff in an effort to improve drinking water quality while With regard to the private sector, evidence from rninimizing the impacts of storm-related flows on natural ecosystems.
organizations such as the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) and the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Climate Change 10-K Disclosure indicate that a growing number the climate will impact issues such as feedstock, water supply of companies are beginning to actively address risks from and quality, infrastructure, core operations, supply chains, and 73 climate change (Table 28.5).7' The World Business Council for customers' ability to use (and their need for) services.
Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES) have identified three types of Some companies are taking action to not only avoid risk, but to risks driving private sector adaptation efforts, including risks explore potential opportunities that may emerge in a changing to core operations, the value chain, and broader changes in the climate, such as developing new products and services, devel-economy and infrastructure (see Figure 28.2 ).7'17,71 oping or expanding existing consulting services, expanding into new operational territories, extending growing seasons and This analysis is supported by responses to the 2011 CDP, and hours of operation, and responding 7 3 7 5 77 to increased demand for existing products and services e . , , ,78 suggests that companies are concerned about how changes in Tal 2. Exmpe
. of No-oermna Adpato Efforts a n Sevcs I
, pesbf.Adaptation.Efforts andServic esc L"*0h"IapIeof Organii0zationsUProrid n..l VlerUcns.
Adaptation. planning assistance, including cre-Center for Climate Strategies, ICLEl-Local Governments for Sustainability, International Institute ation of guides, toolsi and templates for Sustainable Development, Natural Resources Defense Council, The Nature Conservancy, World Resources Institute, World Wildlife Fund Networking and best practice exchange C40 Cities Climate Leadership Groupd,AdaptationNetwork, Center for Clean Air. Policy, Clima.te Adaptation Knowledge Exchange, ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability, Institute for Sustain-able Communities, Urban Sustainability Directors Netw'ork, WorldIBusiness Coudncil for Sustainable Development Climate information providers Union of Concerned Scientists, Urban Climate Change Research Network, Stockholm Environment Institute-U.S. Center Center for Climate and.:Energy Solutions (formerly Pew Center on Global Climate Change), *George Policy, legal, and institutional support town Climate Center Aggregation of adaptation-pertinent information Carbon Disclosure Project, Climate Adaptation Knowledge Exchange, Georgetown Climate Center
- This list contains examples of non-governmental organizations providing the identified services and should not be considered all-inclusive or a validation of actions claimed by the organizations.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 679 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION C a S Tabi'.Cle 28.5.mateE i. 'iva. Seitrm Actiins to Adapt - to Cm Risks Company Sector Climate Risk. :Exampoles o Actions Undertaken Coca-Cola is working around the world to replenish'the water used in finished beverages by participating in locally relevant water projects that support com-Changes in physical climate munities and nature. Since 2005, the Coca-Cola system has engaged in more parameters; Changes in other an 320 projects in 86 countries. The range of community projects includes Company Staples climate-related Chang ents. watershed protection; expanding community drinking water and sanitation access; developments,. water for productive use .such as agriculturalwater efficiency; and education and awareness programs. (http:/:www.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/conserva-.
tion-partnershiprhtml)
Company weather-related experienced souircing' As 'part of' ts busines.Cont nulty planning, onAgra FoodJs flg~5~~us pl itsk businsv~ c Iihupls hais analyzed its sup-evelop strategic partnersh ips Wimsunim zessesourced ConAgra Consumer tomato harvestirng due to iingrýdients,.a'.ndidiintifyfalternateisuppliers-arnd contracttimanLifacturersto mini-Foods, Inc. Staples unseasonably'cool weather, mize production disruptions in the instaneiý of an unexpected disru'ption in*supply.
and difficulty sourcing other (http://compahy.conagrafoods.com/phoenix.zhtmr?c=202310&p=Polic e 'Environ.
vegetables due t above ment) normal precipitation. .. , .
Constellation has already taken adaptation actions, particularly in California where Constellation Consumer Changes in,physical climate water availability is an. issue, to manage or adapt to these risks. Constellation is work-Brands Staples ' parameters;'eChanges in other ing with numerous organizations to help fund industrybased research to determine climaterelate de t .potential climate change impacts on vineyard production.
. ... 2007a Group-wideclimatb change strategy covering~a aspects of climate Since Changes in regulation;.., change,* for example weathet-reiated" mpats; '61ats reguIatory itigation and
- i. . .-. enu Changesin p-ysicalcmate. .hea thrisks etc¢-'has supportedteiercore corp,,.rate strategy"Tlihe strategy is..
Re nce~i~ in pbyicicimae S arametersoChanges
.. inother based eathrskbonifive t& pillars mitiio;ni;daptation, red i.ch, eg:i e..,iuscbodioxide.
.. ',climate-related'd dvi ets reditin anddvocacy, (hh C PG&E's adaptation strategies for potential increased electricity demand. include expanded customer energy efficiency and demand response programs. and
" improvements to its electric grid. PG&E is proactively tracking and evaluating the potential impacts of reductions to Sierra Nevada snowpack on its hydroelectric Pacific Gas:
Pasa:Ci f c h a n g e s in r eg u la t io n ; . ... system' and has developed adaptation strategies to minimize .. them. Strategies .
Changes in .include maintaining higher winter carryover reservoir storage levels, reducing and Electric changes in physical climate conveyance...o .
Company oiayparameters; Utilities .pa Changes in other conveyance ... flows in canals and flumes. in response . to anincreased portion of pre-(PB&
(PG&E):..limt.,.' ) .. .. * .. chimate~related e developments :dcipitation . . falling
, .as .rain,
... and.. reducing discretionary
... .... reservoir
- , . water. releases
.. during
.. :,.,. * . '.. *the late spring and summer. PG&Eis also working with both the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the.California Department of Water Resources to. begin using the USGS Precipitation-Runoff Modeling. Systemr(PRMS) watershed model, to help manage reservoirs on watersheds experiencing mountain snowpack loss.
- (http://www.pge.com/about/environment/commitfrent/)
i SC Johnson is a'djusting-to the various physical risks that climate change imposes
" through a diversified supiplier and global manufacturing base. In March 2009, SC Johnson announced abroad ingredient communication program. SC Johnson SC ohn....on & ,, .Household C--hanges ..n. ph l c ,e assesses risks along each ingedient's supplycchain to ensure that the company Son Inc P": roducts- pnramet" -. ISsourcing from a geographically diversesupphier base. In additionno evaluating
.
- product ingredients, SC Johnson has also diversified its operations around the
-. world, allowing itto maintain business continuity in the face of a regionalclimate.
- ".. '." * * .. . ' ..... change related'disruption (http://www.scjohnson com/en/comi-ntment/overview aspx) . . ' . " .
Spectra Energy. uses a corporate-wide risk analysis framework to ensure the
- Changes in regulation; oversight and management of its four major risk categories: financial, strategic, op-Spectra Changes in physical climate erational, and legal risks. Physical risks posed by climate change fall within these Energy, Inc. Energy parameters; Changes in other. icategories and the company uses risk management.committees to ensure that all climate-related developments material risks'are identified, evaluated, and managed prior to financial approvals of
,'..... . .. ..... . " . ... major projects. (http://www.spectraenergy.com/Sustainability/) .
This list contains examples of private sector actions to adapt to climate risks as reported to the Carbon Disclosure Project and should not be considered all-inclusive or a validation of actions claimed by the organizations.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 680 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION Section 1: Adaptation Process General patterns in adaptation processes are beginning to This is not a stepwise or linear process; various stages can be emerge, with similarities discernible across sectors, systems, occurring simultaneously, in a different order, or be omitted and scales.53 ' 78 ' 79 completely. However, as shown clockwise in Figure 28.3, the process generally involves characterizing vulnerability, Adaptation Poe developing options, implementing actions, monitoring outcomes, and reevaluating strategies. Each of these is described in more detail below.
Identifying and Understanding Risk, M Vulnerabilities, and Opportunities SMost adaptation actions are currently in the initial phase, with many actors focusing on identifying the relevant climate risks and conducting current and future risk and vulnerability assessments of their assets and resources." 8 1' 82 In 2011, only 13% of 298 U.S. municipalities surveyed had completed vulnerability or risk assessments, but 42% expected to complete an assessment in the future.s9 At least 21 state fish and wildlife agencies have undertaken climate vulnerability assessments or recently completed an assessment of a particular species, habitat, or both.3 Multiple qualitative and quantitative methods are used to understand climate vulnerability and risk, including case studies and analogue analyses, scenario analyses, sensitivity analyses, monitoring of key species, and peer information sharing."'""'"'"
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 681 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION Planning, Assessing, and Selecting Options Once risks and vulnerabilities are understood, the next stage existing management plans (for example, hazard mitigation, typically involves identifying, evaluating, and selecting options ecosystem conservation, water management, public health, for responding to and managing existing and future changes risk contingency, and energy) or developing stand-alone 68 82 89 ,'90 in the climate.2 8 Decision support planning methods and adaptation plans. ' '
associated tools help to identify flexible and context-relevant adaptation activities for implementation.11.79 Participatory Many frameworks, tools, and approaches have emerged to help approaches support the integration of stakeholder perspectives decision-makers make decisions in light of both uncertainty and and context-specific information into decision-making.85 ' 86 the need to achieve multiple societal goals. 7 7 9 Some of these, This approach can include having community members and however, are specific to particular localities or resources, are governing institutions work collectively to define the problem not easy to use by the intended audiences, do not adequately and design adaptation strategies that are robust while being evaluate tradeoffs, and require sophisticated knowledge sensitive to stakeholder values.88 ' 87 Moreover, regional of climate change. 1 In general, these approaches promote collaboration has emerged as an effective strategy for defining options that allow reversibility, preserve future options, can common approaches to reducing potential threats, selecting tolerate a variety of impacts, and are flexible, such that mid-metrics for tracking purposes, and creating governance course adjustments are possible.2,92 Among these approaches structures to help navigate political challenges.67 '88 As discussed are Robust Decision Making (RDM), Iterative Risk Management above, a number of government and other organizations have (IRM), Adaptive Management or Co-Management, Portfolio developed plans with identified adaptation options. Management, and Scenario Planning (see Ch. 26: Decision Support for more on decision frameworks, processes, and Common approaches to adaptation planning include tools). 7,21,2,54,93,94,95,96,97 "mainstreaming" or integrating climate adaptation into Implementation There is little peer-reviewed literature on adaptation actions, forest thinning and fuel treatments that reduce fire hazards in or evaluations of their successes and failures. "'3"8198 Many national forests or through the diversification of supply chain of the documents submitted as part of this Third National sourcing in the private sector.72' 73 Additionally, an increasing Climate Assessment (NCA) process indicate that adaptation movement toward mainstreaming climate adaptation concerns actions are being implemented for a variety of reasons. Often, into existing processes means that discerning unique climate these are undertaken with an aim toward reducing current adaptation activities will be a challenge.82' 99 vulnerabilities to hazards or extreme weather events, such as Monitoring and Evaluation There is little literature evaluating the effectiveness of and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.1 "1 Part of adaptation actions. 979'86 Evaluation and monitoring efforts, monitoring should include accounting for costs of adaptation.
to date, have focused on the creation of process-based rather To be sure, this may be difficult to account for because of than outcome-based indicators.8 'go A number of efforts are challenges in attribution of climate events to climate change underway to create indicators related to climate adaptation,2 7 versus climate variability. A few studies summarize projected including work by the National Climate Assessment and future costs of adaptation.01 21' 0 3 Development Advisory Committee Indicators Working Group'°° Revise Strategies/Processes and Information Sharing Uncertainty about future climate as well as population growth, networks, such as regional climate initiatives, are illustrations economic development, response strategies, and other of the types of networks that have supported stakeholder social and demographic issues can stymie climate adaptation adaptation activity to-date.' 76 ' 79' 86 activity.9' °4' 105 Through iterative processes, however, stakeholders can regularly evaluate the appropriateness of planned and implemented activities and revise them as new information becomes available.2 28 ' ' 84 Additionally, the sharing of best practices and lessons learned can be pivotal means to advancing understanding and uptake of climate adaptation activity.82 ' 86 The use of established information-sharing U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 682 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION Section 2: Barriers to Adaptation and Examples of Overcoming Barriers Despite emerging recognition of the necessity of climate distinguished from physical or ecological limits to adaptation, change adaptation, many barriers still impede efforts to such as physiological tolerance of species to changing climatic build local, regional, and national-level resilience. Barriers conditions that cannot be overcome (except with technology are obstacles that can delay, divert, or temporarily block or some other physical intervention).8,54"108 the adaptation process,'°6 and include difficulties in using climate change projections for decision-making; lack of Despite barriers, individuals within and across sectors and resources to begin and sustain adaptation efforts; lack of regions are organizing to collectively overcome barriers and coordination and collaboration within and across political and adapt to climate change. In many cases, lessons learned from natural system boundaries as well as within organizations; initial programs help inform future adaptation strategies.
institutional constraints; lack of leadership; and divergent risk Figure 28.4 highlights ongoing climate adaptation activities that 11s.2107 perceptions/cultures and values (Table 28.6). . Barriers are have overcome some of these barriers in different regions led Table 28.6. Summary of Adaptation Barriers Barrier .Specific Examples
- Uncertainty about future.climate impacts and difficulty in interpreting the cause of individual. weather events.
.Disconnect between information providers and information users Climate Change Information and Decision-Making
References:
'
- Fragmented,' complex, and often confusing information 7,8,10,11,14,17.31, 32,42, 596,68,72.82,90,93,104,109,110,111,112
- Lack of climate education for professionals and the public
- Lack of usability and accessibility of existing information
" Mismatch of decision-making timescales and future climate projections
"- 7 d. d.
. . t d,"
..- i- ..
,. Lack.financia
. .resource'sl.no ded icated funding:. . i .
Lack of Riesources to'Begin and Su.staln Adaptation Efforts
- safn
- Und~rinvestment in humanf dimensiohs research
' Lack of coordination within and across agencies, private companies, and non-governmental organizations Fragmentation of Decision-Making Refencs .1,,4,31,32,51,68,115,216
. . . * *
- Uncoordinated and fragmented research efforts
References:
. Disjointed climate related information
- Fragmented ecosystem and jurisdictional boundaries Lack of institutional flexibility -
. Rigid laws and regulations,,
Institutional Constraints... . " No legal manidate to act ,'.
8'13,42,51,54,97,113,117,118,119
References:
I e. Useof historical data.to inform future decisions -
' . RestriCtive management procedOres .
- . *Lack of operational control or influence Lack of political leadership L
Lack of Leadership
References:
" e 30,96,112,113,119,120,1Z1
. .:.. .. Rigid andrentrenched political structures..
" Polarization .
.:*. Conflicting.values/risk perceptions Divergent Risk Percepiions, Cultures, and Vae . . .. Little integration of local knowledge, context, and needs with traditional scientific information a
References:
51,71,82,116,117,120,122
. Cultural taboos and conflict with cultural beliefs
" . Resistance to change due to issue~s such as risk perception U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARC H PROGRAM 683 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED Si'ATES
28: ADAPTATION by state, local, and private actors in the United States. It is not " In the Colorado River Basin, water resource managers, gov-a comprehensive compilation of national adaptation activity, ernment leaders, federal agencies, tribes, universities, non-but is intended to identify some of the variety of adaptation governmental organizations (NGOs), and the private sector efforts taking place across the country. are collaborating on strategies for managing water under a changing climate through partnerships like the Western Gov-In addition, Section 4 of this chapter provides four in-depth ernors' Association (WGA) and WestFAST (Western Federal case studies of climate adaptation strategies at different Agency Support Team).
scales, with multiple stakeholders, and tackling different challenges. Each of these case studies highlights the different " In Wisconsin, the Northern Institute of Applied Climate Sci-ways stakeholders are approaching adaptation. ence and the U.S. Forest Service, working with multiple part-ners, initiated a "Climate Change Response Framework" in-Through the creation of the National Integrated Drought In- tegrating climate-impacts science with forest management.
formation System (NIDIS), the Federal Government, in part-nership with the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC), " In Cape Cod, Massachusetts, the U.S. Department of Trans-states, tribes, universities, and others, has improved capacity portation's Volpe Center worked with federal, regional, state, to proactively manage and respond to drought-related risks and local stakeholders to integrate climate change mitiga-and impacts through: 1) the provision of drought early warn- tion and adaptation considerations into existing and future ing information systems with local/regional input on extent, transportation, land-use, coastal, and hazard-mitigation pro-onset, and severity; 2) a web-based drought portal featuring cesses.
the U.S. Drought Monitor and other visualization tools; 3) co-ordination of research in support and use of these systems; and 4) leveraging of existing partnerships, forecasting, and assessment programs.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 684 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION Figure 28.4. Adaptation Activity 1... The State of Hawai'i,.Office of Planning, in cooperation with university, private, state, and federal scientists and others, has drafted a framework for climate change adaptation that identifies sectors'affected.by climate change, and outlines a process for coordinated statewide adaptation planning.,23
- 2. One of the priorities of the Hawai'i State Plan is preserving water sources through forest conservation, as indicated in their"Rain Follows The Forest"*report. 12 ' .
- 3. New England Federal Partners is a multi-agency group formed to.support the needs of the states, tribes, and communities of the New England*Region and to facilitate and. enable informed decision-making on issues pertaining to coastal and marine spatial planning, climate mitigation, and climate adaptation throughout the region.
- 4. Philadelphia is greening its combined sewer infrastructure 12 to protect rivers,.reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve air quality, .
and enhance adaptation to a changing climate:.
- 5. Keene, NH, developed a Comprehensive.Master Plan that emphasizes fosteringwalkable, mixed-use neighborhoods by putting services, jobs, homes, arts and'culture 'and other community amenities within, walking distance of each other. The plan also calls for sustainable site and building designs that use resources efficiently. These strategies were identified in the city!s 2007 Adaptation Plan as ways to build resilience While reducing greenhouse gas emissi'ons.1.27 .
- 6. New York City has created a Green Infrastructure Plan and is committed to goals that include the construction of enough green infrastructure throughout the city to manage 10%. of the runoff from impervious surfaces by 20301128
- 7. Lewes, DE, undertook an intensive stakeholder process to integrate climate .change into the city's updated hazard mitigation plan.62
- 8. Local governments and tribes throughout Alaska, such-as those in Homer, are planting native vegetation and changing the coastal surface, moving inland or away from rivers,.'and building riprap walls, seawalls or groins, which are'shore-protection structures built perpendicular to the shoreline (see alsp: Ch. 22:Alaska;. Ch. 12: Indigenous Peoples).1 2 '
- 9. Alaskan Villages are physically being relocated because of climate impacts such as sea level rise and erosion, these include :
Newtok,,Shishmaref, Kivalina,. and dozens of other villages.1 '
.10. Cedar Falls, Iowa, passed legislation in 2009 that includes a new.floodplain.ordinance that expands zoning restrictions from the 100-year floodplain to the 500-year floodplain, because this expanded floodplain zone better reflects the flood risks experienced
.by the city during the 2008 floods..2 . . .
- 11. In January.2011, the Michigan Department of Community Health (MDCH) released the Michigan Climate andHealth Adaptation Plan, which has a goal of "preparing the public health system in Michigan to address the public health consequences of climate change in a coordinated manner." In.September.2010, MDCH received three years' funding to implement this plan as'part of the Climate-Ready States and Cities Initiative. of,CD.C.132.
- 12. Chicagowas one of the first cities to officially Iinte6grate climate adap'tation into a citywide climate adaptation plan.S:since its release, a number of strategies have been implemented to help the city manage heat, protect forests, and enhance green design, such
.as their work on green roofs.. 64 2
- 13. Grand Rapids, MI, recently released.a sustainability plan that integrates future climate projections 133 to ensure that the economic, environmental, and social strategies embraced are appropriate for today as well as the future.
- 14. Tulsa, OK, has a three-pronged approach. to reducing flooding and managing stormwater: a) prevent new problems by looking ahead and avoiding future downstream problems from new development (for example, requiring on-site stormwater detention);
.b) correct existing problems and learn from disasters to reduce future disasters(for example, through watershed management and the acquisition and relocation of buildings in! flood-prone areas); and c). act toenhance the safety, environment, and quality of life of the.ommunity through public awareness, an .increase in stormwater quality, and emergency management:. 4
- 15. Firewise Communities USA is a nationwide program of the National Fire Protection Association and is co-sponsored by USDA Forest Service, DOI, and the National Association of StateForesters. According to the Texas Forest Service;there are more than 20 recognized Texas Firewise Communities. The Texas Forest Service works closely with communities to help them to reach Firewise Community status and offers a variety of awareness, educational, informational, and capacity-building efforts, such as Texas Wildscapes, a program that assistsin .choosing less fire-friendly plants.13 '
U..GOA*HNERSAC RGA Continued 68.LMT CHNG I T .. INTEUITDSAE U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 685 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION
- 16. After the heavy rainfall events of 2004 that.re.sulted in significant erosion.on his farms, Dan Gillespie, a farmerwith the.Natural Resources Conservation Service in Norfolk, NE, began experimenting.with adding cover crops to the no-ti-, process. It worked so well in..reducing erosion and increasing cropyields-that he is now sharing his experience with other farmers. (http://www.lenrd.
org/projects-programs/; http;liwww.notill.orgl). .
- 17. Point Reyes National Seashore is preparing for climate change by removing two dams that are barriers to water flow and fish migration. This change restores ecological continuity for anadromous fish (those that migrate from the sea to fresh water to 137 spawn), creating a more resilient ecosystem. -.
- 18. Western Adaptation Alliance is a group. of eleven cities in five states in the Intermountain West that share lessons learned in adaptation planning, develop.strategic thinkingthat can be applied to specific community plans, and join together to generate funds to support capacity building, adaptation.planning, and vulnerability.assessment . - *
- 19. Navajo Nation used information on likely changes i.nfuture climate to help inform their drought contingency plan. *3 *
- 20. California Department of Health. and the Natural Resources Defense Council collaborated to create the Public Health Impacts of Climate Change'in California:Community VulnerabilitrAssessment and Adaptation Strategies report, which is: being used to inform public health.preparedness activities in the.,state.
- 21. State of Idaho successfully integrated climate adaptation into the state's, Wildlife Management Plan. (http://fishandgame.idaho..
gov/pdblic/wildlife/cwcs/).
- 22. The Rising Tides Competition was held in 2009 by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission to elicit 141 ideas for how the Bay could.respondto sea level-rise.
- 23. Flagstaff, Arizona, created a resilience strategy and passed- a resilience policy, as opposed to a formal adaptation plan, as a
- means totinstitutionalize adaptation efforts in city government operations..
- 24. The Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park were sites of case studies looking at how to adapt.management of federal lands to climate change. Sensitivity assessments, review of management activities and constraints, and adaptation workshops of the case study process.143 in the areas. of hydrology and roads, fish, vegetation, and wildlife were allcomponents
- 25. King County Flood Control District was reformed to merge multipleflood management zones into a single county entity for funding refomed mulipleflod ito sngl co144
- and policy oversight for projects and programs -. partly in anticipation of increased stormwater flows due to climate change.
- 26. The Water Utilities Climate Alliance has been working with member water utilities to ensure that future weather and climate considerations are integrated into short- and long-term water management planning. (http:/lwww.wucaonline.orglhtml/)"
- 27. Seattle's RainWatch program uses an. early warning precipitation forecasting tool to help inform decisions about issues such as drainage operations. (http:/lwww.atmos.washingtOn.edulSPU/)",
- 28. City of Portland and Multnoah County created a Clima~te Action Plan that includes indicators to.elP them gaugelrogressin planning, andimplementing. adaptationacti6ns. 1 " r hgr
- 29. In 2010, the state of Louisiana launched a $10 million program.to assist communities that had been affected byHurricanes Gustav and Ike in becoming more resilient to future environmental problems. Twenty.nine communities from around the state.
were awarded resiliency development funds. The Coastal Sustainability Studio at Louisiana State University started workingin 2012 with all 29 funded communities, as'well as many that did not receive funds, to develop peer-learning networks, develop best practices, build capacity to implement plans; and develop planning tools and a User-inspired and useful website to increase community resiliency in the state.
- 30. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and The Nature Conservancy are cooperating in a pilot adaptation project to address erosion
".and saltwater* intrusion, among other issues, ".in the Alligator River Refuge. 147"project incorporates multiple
- . This " agencies,
- "" native knowledge, community involvement, local economics, and.technical precision. 147 82
- 31. North and South Carolina are actively working to revise their state wildlife'strategies to include climate adaptation.e
- 32. The Southeast Florida Climate Change Compact is a collaboration of the four southernmost counties in Florida (Monroe, Broward, Palm Springs, and. Miami-Dade) focusing on enhancing regional resilience to climate change and reducing regional greenhouse
- . . 67 gas emissions. i U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 686 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION Section 3: Next Steps Adaptation to climate change is in a nascent stage. The decision-making in light of uncertainty about climate change Federal Government is beginning to develop institutions and other considerations will be equally important. In addition and practices necessary to cope with climate change, to these areas, emerging areas of emphasis include:
including efforts such as regional climate centers within the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the National Oceanic and " Costs and Benefits of Adaptation: Methodologies to evaluate Atmospheric Administration (a division of the U.S. Department the relevant costs of adaptation options, as well as the costs of Commerce), and the U.S. Department of the Interior. While of inaction, need to be developed.6 " 02 the Federal Government provides financial assistance in federally-declared disasters, it is also enabling and facilitating " A Compendium of Adaptation Practices: A central and early adaptation within states, regions, local communities, streamlined database of adaptation options implemented at and the public and private sectors.11 The approaches include different scales in space and time is needed. Information on working to limit current institutional constraints to effective the adaptation actions, how effective they were, what they adaptation, funding pilot projects, providing useful and cost, and how monitoring and evaluation were conducted usable adaptation information - including disseminating best should be part of the aggregated information.""'"' 3" practices and helping develop tools and techniques to evaluate successful adaptation. " Adaptation and Mitigation Interactions: Research and analy-sis on the growing and competing demands for land, water, Despite emerging efforts, the pace and extent of adaptation and energy and how mitigation actions could affect adapta-activities are not proportional to the risks to people, property, tion options, and vice versa. 4 "27 '"' 46 infrastructure, and ecosystems from climate change; important opportunities available during the normal course " Critical Adaptation Thresholds: Research to identify critical of planning and management of resources are also being thresholds beyond which social and/or ecological systems overlooked. A number of state and local governments are are unable to adapt to climate change. This should include engaging in adaptation planning, but most have not taken analyzing historical31and 49 geological records to develop models 2
action to implement the plans.'07 Some companies in the of "breakpoints". ' ",
private sector and numerous non-governmental organizations have also taken early action, particularly in capitalizing on the " Adaptation to Extreme Events: Research on preparedness opportunities associated with facilitating adaptive actions. and response to extreme events such as droughts, floods, Actions and collaborations have occurred across all scales. At intense storms, and heat waves in order to protect people, the same time, barriers to effective implementation continue ecosystems, and infrastructure. Increased attention must be to exist (see Section 2). paid to how extreme events and variability may change as climate change proceeds, and how that affects adaptation One of the overarching key areas of focus for global change actions.""....
research is enabling research and development to advance adaptation across scales, sectors, and disciplines. This includes Effective adaptation will require ongoing, flexible, transpar-social science research for overcoming the barriers identified ent, inclusive, and iterative decision-making processes, col-in Section 2, such as strategies that foster coordination, better laboration across scales of government and sectors, and the communication, and knowledge sharing amongst fragmented continual exchange of best practices and lessons learned. All governing structures and stakeholders. Research on the stakeholders have a critical role to play in ensuring the pre-kinds of information that users desire and how to deliver that paredness of our society to extreme events and long-term information in contextually appropriate ways and research on changes in climate.
Section 4: Case Studies Illustrative Case One: National Integrated Drought Information System NIDIS (National Integrated Drought Information System), and research organizations to advance a warning system for originally proposed by the Western Governors' Association drought-sensitive areas.
(WGA) and established by Congress in 2006,"' is a federally-created entity that improves the nation's capacity to The creation of NIDIS involved many years of development and proactively manage drought-related risks across sectors, coordination among federal, state, local, regional, and tribal regions, and jurisdictions. It was created by Congress to partners with the help of Governors' associations and Senate "enable the Nation to move from a reactive to a more and Congressional leaders. NIDIS provides: 1) drought early proactive approach to managing drought risks and impacts." warning information systems with regional detail concerning NIDIS has successfully brought together government partners onset and severity; 2) a web-based portal (www.drought.gov);
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 687 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION
- 3) coordination of federal research in support of and use of impact assessments for decision support. A key aspect of NI-these systems; and 4) leveraging of existing partnerships and of DIS is the development of an ongoing regional outlook forum forecasting and assessment programs. NIDIS currently supports based on the above information to build awareness of the work on water supply and demand, wildfire risk assessment drought hazard and to embed information in planning and and management, and agriculture. Regional drought early practice (in partnership with the National Drought Mitigation warning system pilot projects have been established to Center, the Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments illustrate the benefits of improved knowledge management, (RISA), and other research-based boundary organizations) to improved use of existing and new information products, and reduce risks and impacts associated with drought.
coordination and capacity development for early warning systems. These prototype systems are in the Upper Colorado Leadership and Champions: NIDIS supporters worked at all Basin, the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin in levels over more than two decades (1990s and 2000s) to es-the Southeast, the Four Corners region in the Southwest, and tablish the NIDIS Act, including political groups (WGA, South-California. The NIDIS Outlook in the Upper Colorado Basin ern Governors' Association, National Governors Association, provides early warning information every week, for example, and U.S. Senators and Representatives), scientific leaders, that is utilized by a variety of users from federal agencies, and federal agencies (NOAA, USDA, DOI).
water resource management, and the recreation industry.
Risk Perceptions: Whereas drought had been considered pri-The Western Governors' Association, the U.S. Congress, marily a western issue in previous decades, drought is now and others have formally acknowledged that NIDIS provides regularly affecting the southern, southeastern, and north-a successful example of achieving effective federal-state eastern parts of the country and response strategies are partnerships by engaging both leadership and the public, and needed. During the 2012 drought, more than 63% of the con-establishing an authoritative basis for integrating monitoring tiguous U.S. by the end of July was classified as experiencing and research to support risk management. Some of NIDIS's moderate to exceptional drought, and more than 3,200 heat keys to success include: records were broken in June 2012 alone.1s2
" Usable Technology and Information for Decision Support: The production of the U.S. Drought U.S. Drought Monitor Monitor map, which integrates multiple indica- August 14, 2012 tors and indices from many data sources, was developed before NIDIS was established and has become a useful visual decision support tool for monitoring and characterizing drought onset, severity, and persistence. NIDIS has engaged re-gional and local experts in refining the regional details of this national product and in "ground truthing" maps via email discussions and webi-nars (Figure 28.5).
" Financial Assistance: Federal funding was allo-cated to NOAA specifically for NIDIS, but lever-aged in kind by other agencies and partners.
" Institutional/Partnerships: Effective collabo-rations, partnerships, and coordination with NOAA, WGA, USDA, DOI, and USGS as well as intensity. Drought Impet Types:
local, regional, state, and tribal partners and M-DO Mmmniy Dry ZI D1 NwOutAModota $a Sofl-T"erm typlcAd 4 mo<6hs with the National Drought Mitigation Center at 10D2 0Oro*i-Severe (e;g. ag~ubm. Vrass&d) the University of Nebraska, Lincoln, have led to = 03 Oou~Arste L= LoTuerm.* ticiy4 mnohs multi-institutional "buy-in." M 04 N**W.Ewep~onW (e9.hdogy., 8o)0 SL= Short-Tenn and LO-bTeim
- Institutional/Policy: The NIDIS Act was oriented toward the improvement of coordination across The U. 28.6. U.S. Drought Monitor Map accessed on August 20, 2012.
S. Drought Monitor is produced in partnership between the national federal agencies and with regional organizations, Droug ht Mitigation Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, the universities, and states. It focused on the applica- United States Department of Agriculture, and the National Oceanic and tion of technology, including the Internet, and on Atmos pheric Administration. Map courtesy of NDMC-UNL.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 688 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION Illustrative Case Two: Adaptive Governance in the Colorado River Basin The Colorado River supplies water and valuable ecosystem Agency Support Team (WestFAST), which was established services to 33 million people and is vulnerable to climate in 2008, created a partnership between the Western States change because of decreases in mountain snowpack and water Water Council (WSWC) and 11 federal agencies with water availability, increased competition among water users, fires, management responsibilities in the western United States.
drought, invasive species, and extended extreme heat events, The agencies created a work plan in 2011 to address three key among other threats....... The 1922 Colorado River Compact, areas: 1) climate change; 2) water availability, water use, and which allocates water among seven U.S. states and Mexico, water reuse; and 3) water quality. To date they have produced was agreed upon in a particularly wet time period;1 54 thus the the WestFAST Water-Climate Change Program Inventory, the river water is already over-allocated for current conditions. Federal Agency Summary, and a Water Availability Studies Given the likelihood of having less water because of climate Inventory (http://www.westgov.org/wswc/WestFAST.htm).
change, resource managers and government leaders are increasingly recognizing that water must be managed with The WSWC and the USACE produced the Western States flexibility to respond to the projected impacts and the range Watershed Study (WSWS), which demonstrated how federal of possible future climates (see Ch. 2: Our Changing Climate; agencies could work collaboratively with western states Ch. 3: Water).1 3" 5 5 Multiple actors across multiple disciplines, on planning activities."" In 2009, the WGA also adopted a scales of governance (including tribal, local, state, and federal), policy resolution titled "Supporting the Integration of Climate non-governmental organizations, and the private sector are Change Adaptation Science in the West" that created a Climate organizing and working together to address these concerns Adaptation Work Group composed of western state experts in and the relationship between climate and other stresses in the air quality, forest management, water resources, and wildlife basin. management. Other important adaptation actions were the SECURE Water Act in 2009, the Reclamation Colorado River The Western Governors' Association (WGA) spearheaded Basin water supply and demand study, and the creation 51 5 8 of adaptation efforts to enable federal, state, tribal, local, and NIDIS to support stakeholders in coping with drought.' ,
private sector partners to address a range of issues, including climate change. 3'3,1 55
,1 For example, the Western Federal Illustrative Case Three: Climate Change Adaptation in Forests Northern Wisconsin's climate has warmed over the past 50 across eight states in the Midwest and Northeast. The years, and windstorms, wildfires, insect outbreaks, and floods Framework uses a collaborative and iterative approach to are projected to become more frequent in this century.6° The provide information and resources to forest owners and resulting impacts on forests, combined with fragmented and managers across a variety of private and public organizations.
complex forest ownership, create management challenges Several products were developed through the Framework in that extend across ownership boundaries, creating the need northern Wisconsin:
for a multi-stakeholder planning process.61
- 1. Vulnerability and mitigation assessments summarized the To address these concerns, the Northern Institute of Applied observed and projected changes in the northern Wisconsin Climate Science, the USDA's Forest Service, and many other climate, projected changes in forest composition and carbon partners initiated the Climate Change Response Framework stocks across a range of potential climates, and assessed to incorporate scientific research on climate change impacts related vulnerabilities of forest ecosystems in northern Wis-into on-the-ground management. Originally developed as a consin.1 60 pilot project for all-lands conservation in northern Wisconsin, it has expanded to cover three ecological regions (Northwoods 2. Forest Adaptation Resources: Climate Change Tools and Ap-
[Figure 28.6], Central Hardwoods, and Central Appalachians) proaches for Land Managers 62 was developed to help man-agers identify management tactics that facilitate adaptation.
A "menu" of adaptation strategies and approaches for plan-Figure 28.6. ning, implementing, and monitoring adaptation activities Northwoods..Climate,:
Change Resp0nse was synthesized into an adaptation workbook from a broad Framework Region set of literature and refined based on feedback from regional 163 (Figure Source:. scientists and managers .
USDA Forest Service 2012)19 3. A series of adaptation demonstrations was initiated to show-case ground-level implementation. The Framework and adaptation workbook provide a common process shared by diverse landowners and a formal network that supports U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 689 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION cross-boundary discussion about different management ob- " Acknowledge and work with uncertainty, rather than submit jectives, ecosystems, and associated adaptation tactics. to "uncertainty paralysis."
From the beginning, the Framework has taken an adaptive " Recognize the necessity of effective communication among management approach in its adaptation planning and projects. people with different goals, disciplinary backgrounds, vo-Lessons learned include: cabulary, and perspectives on uncertainty.
" Define the purpose and scope of the Framework and its com- " Integrate the ecological and socioeconomic dimensions early ponents early, but allow for refinement to take advantage of by emphasizing the many ways that communities value and new opportunities. depend on forests.
" Begin projects with a synthesis of existing information to " Use technology to increase efficiency of internal communica-avoid duplicating efforts. tion and collaboration, as well as outreach.
" Plan for the extra time necessary to implement true collabo-ration. The Framework brings scientists and land managers together to assess the vulnerability of ecosystems based on scientific
" Carefully match the skills, commitment, and capacity of peo- information and experience in order to plan adaptation actions ple and organizations to project tasks. that meet management goals. On-the-ground implementation has just begun, and an increased focus on demonstrations,
" Maintain an atmosphere of trust, positivity, and sense of ad- monitoring, and evaluation will inform future adaptation venture, rather than dwelling on failures. efforts.
Illustrative Case Four: Transportation, Land Use, and Climate Change - Integrating Climate Adaptation and Mitigation in Cape Cod, Massachusetts Cape Cod, Massachusetts, a region of scenic beauty and Once the preliminary scenarios were developed, a workshop environmental significance, is currently affected by sea level was convened in which community and transportation rise, coastal erosion, and localized flooding - impacts that are planners, environmental managers, and Cape Cod National likely to be exacerbated by climate change. 164 165 To address Seashore stakeholders selected areas for development and these concernsand help meet the state's greenhouse gas (GHG) transit improvements to accommodate new growth while reduction target (25% reduction based on 1990 levels by 2020), meeting the goals of reduced heat-trapping gas emissions, the U.S. Department of Transportation's Volpe Center worked increased resilience to climate change, and the conservation with federal, regional, state, and local stakeholdersto integrate of natural systems. Through interactive visualization tools, climate change into existing and future transportation, land- participants were able to see in real-time the impacts of use, coastal zone, and hazard mitigation planning through an their siting decisions, allowing them to evaluate synergies initiative called the Transportation, 16 Land Use, and Climate and potential tradeoffs of their choices and to highlight areas Change Pilot Project. where conflict could or already does exist, such as increasing density of development in areas already or likely to be The process was initiated through an expert elicitation held vulnerable to climate change."58 As a result, the stakeholders in mid-2010 to identify areas on Cape Cod that are or could developed a refined transportation and land-use scenario potentially be vulnerable to sea level rise, flooding, and that will support the region's long-range transportation erosion. The Volpe Center then used a geographic information planning as well as other local, regional, and state plans.
system (GIS) software tool to develop and evaluate a series of This updated scenario identifies strategies that have climate transportation and land-use
- . 165scenarios 167 for the Cape underfuture adaptation and mitigation value, helping to ensure that the development projections." All scenarios were evaluated region simultaneously reduces its heat-trapping gas footprint against a series of criteria that included: 1) reduction in vehicle while building resilience to existing and future changes in miles traveled; 2) reduced heat-trapping gas emissions; 3) climate."""" The overall success of the pilot project stemmed reduction in transportation energy use; 4) preservation of from the intensive stakeholder interaction at each phase of the natural/existing ecosystems; 5) reduction in percentage of project (design, implementation, and evaluation).
new population in areas identified as vulnerable to climate change impacts; and 6) increased regional accessibility to 164 transportation.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 690 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION REFERENCES
- 1. Bierbaum, R. M., D. G. Brown, and J. L. McAlpine, 2008: Coping 7. Kareiva, P., C. Enquist, A. Johnson, S. H. Julius, J. Lawler, B.
with Climate Change: National Summit Proceedings. University of Petersen, L. Pitelka, R. Shaw, andJ. M. West, 2008: Ch. 9: Synthesis Michigan Press, 256 pp. and conclusions. Preliminary Review of-Adaptation Optionsfor Climate-Sensitive Ecosystems and Resources. A Report by the U.S. Climate Change
- 2. SEGCC, 2007: Confronting Climate Change: Avoiding the Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research, S. H.
Unmanageable and Managing the Unavoidable. Report Prepared for Julius, andJ. M. West Eds., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. R. 9-1 to 9-66. [Available online at http://library.globalchange.gov/
Bierbaum,J. P. Holdren, M. MacCracken, R. H. Moss, P. H. Raven, products/sap-4-4-prcliminary-rcvicw-of-adaptatinn-options-for-and H. J. Schellnhuber, Eds., 144 pp., Scientific Expert Group on climate-sensitive-ecosystems-and-resources]
Climate Change, Sigma Xi and the United Nations Foundation, Research Triangle Park, NC and Washington, D.C. [Available 8. Staudinger, M. D., N. B. Grimm, A. Staudt, S. L. Carter, F. S. Chapin, online at hrtp://www.globalprobleims-globalsolutions-filcs.org/ Ill, P. Kareiva, M. Ruckelshaus, and B. A. Stein, 2012: Impacts un f_website/PDF/climatc%/o20_change avoid-u.unma nagablec of Climate Change on Biodiversity, Ecosystems, and Ecosystem manageunavoidablc.pd fJ Services. Technical Input to the 2013 National Climate Assessment 296 pp., U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. [Available online
- 3. McMullen, C. P., and J. R. Jabbour, 2009: Climate Change Science at http://downloads.u.gcrp.gov/NCA!/Activities/Biodivcrsity-Compendium 2009. United Nations Environment Programme. 1.7.cosystcms-and-l'cosy stem-Scrviccs-Technical-I nput.pd f]
- 4. Skaggs, R., T. C. Janetos, K. A. Hibbard, and J. S. Rice, 2012: 9. Solecki, W., and C. Rosenzweig, Eds., 2012: U.S. Cities and Climate Climate and Energy-Water-Land System Interactions Technical Change: Urban, Infrastructure, and Vulnerabilio Issues, Technical Input Report to the U.S. Department of Energy in Support of the Report Series, U.S. National Climate Assessment. U.S. Global Change National Climate Assessment, 152 pp., Pacific Northwest National Research Program.
Laboratory, Richland, Washington. [Available online at http:!/
climatemodeling.sciencc.energy.gov/f/PNNI,-21185_,'I NA_,--_ 10. Kerr, R. A., 2011: Time to adapt to a warming world, but where's the R ["POR'.pdf] science? Science, 334, 1052-1053, doi:10.1126/science.334.6059.1052.
Wilbanks, T., D. Bilello, D. Schmalzer, and M. Scott, 2012: 11. NRC, 2010: Adapting to Impacts of Climate Change. America's Climate Climate Change and Energy Supply and Use. Technical Report Choices.: Report of the Panel on Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change.
to the U.S. Department of Energy in Support of the National National Research Council. The National Academies Press, 292 Climate Assessment, 79 pp., Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. pp. [Available online at htrp://www.nap.edu/c.atalog.lphp?rCcord_
Department of Energy, Office of Science, Oak Ridge, TN. [Available id= 12783]
online at lttp:i/wwv.csl.ornl.gov/ecssilEnergySupplyl.sc.pdf]
- 12. PCAST, 2011: Report to the President: Sustainability Environmental
- 5. Wilbanks, T., S. Fernandez, G. Backus, P. Garcia, K. Jonietz, Capital: Protecting Society and the Economy 145 pp., President's P. Kirshen, M. Savonis, B. Solecki, and L. Toole, 2012: Climate Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Executive Office Change and Infrastructure, Urban Systems, and Vulnerabilities. of the President, Washington, D.C. [Available online at http:/!
Technical Report to the U.S. Department of Energy in Support www.whitchouse.gov/sites/dcfault/filcs/n icrosites/ostp/pcast_
of the National Climate Assessment, 119 pp., Oak Ridge National sulstaining-environ mental _ capitalvrepo rt.pdcf]
Laboratory. U.S Department of Energy, Office of Science, Oak Ridge, TN. [Available online at http://www.esd.onil.gov/cess/ Wilby, R. L., and S. Dessai, 2010: Robust adaptation to climate 1n ftastructure.pdt1] change. Weather, 65, 180-185, doi:10.1002/wea.543.
- 6. Karl, T. R., J. T. Melillo, and T. C. Peterson, Eds., 2009: Global 13. Garfin, G., A. Jardine, R. Merideth, M. Black, and S. LeRoy, Eds.,
Climate Change Impacts in the United States. Cambridge University 2013: Assessment of Climate Change in the Southwest United States: A Press, 189 pp. [Available online at htrp://downloads.globalchange. Report Preparedfor the National Climate Assessment. Island press, 528 gov/usimpacts/pd fs/clim ate-impacts-report.pdtf pp. [Available online at http://swccar.o0g/sites/all/thcmes/filcs/
S\V-N('A-color-FINA Lwcb.pdtl U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 691 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION FREF_ýE!1
- -;= ~ S
- 14. Winkler, J.,J. Andresen, andJ. Hatfield, Eds., 2012:Midwest Technical 24. ICATF, 2011: National Action Plan: Priorities for Managing Input Report: Preparedforthe US NationalClimate Assessment. 236 pp. Freshwater Resources in a Changing Climate, 76 pp., U.S.
Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force,. [Available
- 15. Lamb, H. H., 1982: Climate, Histog,, and the Modern IPbrld. Methuen. online at http://www.wliirhousc.gov/sitcs/dcfaulh/files!
microsites/ceq/201 -national-action-plan.pd f-]
- 16. IPCC, 2007: Appendix I: Glossary. Climate Change 2007.: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the 25. National Fish Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Partnership, FourthAssessment Report of the IntergovernmentalPanelon Climate Change, 2012: National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Strategy, 120 pp., Association of Fish and Wildlife agencies, Averyt, M. Tignor, and H. L. Miller, Eds., Cambridge University Council on Environmental Quality, Great Lakes Indian Fish Press. [Available online at http:/iwww.ipcc.ch/pdf/asscsstncnt- and Wildlife Commission, National Oceanic and Atmospheric report/iar4/wg2/ar4-wg2-app.pdf] Administration, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service., Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://www.wildlifcadaptationstratcgy.
- 17. NRC, 2007: Understanding Multiple Environmental Stresses: Report of gov/pdf/N FW\PCAS-1Fi nal.pdf]
a IWorkshop. National Research Council. The National Academy Press, 154 pp. [Available online at http://www.nap.edu/catalog. 26. NOC, 2013: National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan, 32 pp.,
php?rccord_id=11748] National Ocean Council, Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://www.whitchousc.gov//sites/dcfault/filcs/national_ocean_
- 18. C2ES, 2012: Climate Change Adaptation: What Federal Agencies policy implemcntation-plan.pd tf are Doing, February 2012 Update 71 pp., Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, Arlington, VA. [Available online at http:/,/www. 27. USGCRP, 2012: The National Global Change Research Plan c2es.( rg/docL'ploads/fedceral-agcncies-adaptation.pdt] 2012-2021: A Strategic Plan for the U.S. Global Change Research Program. 132 pp., The U.S. Global Change Research Program,
- 19. CEQ, 2011: Federal Actions for a Climate Resilient Nation: Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://downloads.
Progress Report of the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation globalchange.gov/st rategic-plan/2012/!usgcrp-strategic-plan-2012.
Task Force, 32 pp., The White House Council on Environmental pdq Quality, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, Washington, D.C. [Available online 28. NPS, 2010: National Park Service Climate Change Response at http://www.whitchousc.goNr/sites/dcfault/files/micrositcs/i Strategy, 36 pp., U.S. National Park Service Climate Change ceq/2011_adaptationiiprogress-repoirt.pdf] Response Program, Fort Collins, Colorado. [Available online at http://www.nature.nps.gov/climatechangc/docs/N ISCCRS.
- 20. NRC, 2010: Informing an Effective Response to Climate Change.America's pdfl Climate Choices:Panelon Informing Effective Dedsions andActionsRelatedto Climate Change. National Research Council, Board on Atmospheric 29. Rosenzweig, C., R. Horton, I. S. Higuchi, and C. Hudson, 2011:
Sciences and Climate, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National NASA's CASI Building climate-resilient NASA centers. Livebetter Academies Press, 348 pp. [Available online at http://www.nap. Maga-ine, December 22, 2011. [Available online at htrp://
edu/catalog.php?record_id= 12784] Iiivebettcriiiagazin e.com/ar ticle/nasas-casi-buiilding-cliimate-resilient-nasa-centers/]
- 21. U.S. Government, 2009: Executive Order 13514. Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance. 30. Smith,J. B.,J. M. Vogel,T. L. Cruce, S. Seidel, and H. A. Holsinger, Federal Register, 74, 52117-52127. [Available online at htrp://www. 2010: Adapting to Climate Change: A Call for Federal Leadership.
whitehouse.gov/a ssets/documents/2009fedleader-eo-.rcl.pdf] Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, VA. [Available online at http://www.c2es.org/docUploads/adaptation-federal-
- 22. The White House, cited 2013: The President's Climate Action Plan. leadership.pdf]
The White House. [Available online ar http:///www.whitehouse.
gov/sh are/clim ate-action-plan] 31. National Climate Adaptation Summit Committee, 2010: National Climate Adaptation Summit Report, 26 pp., University Corporation
- 23. -- , 2013: Executive Order 13653. Preparing the United States for Atmospheric Research (UCAR), Boulder, CO. [Available online for the Impacts of Climate Change. The White House, Washinigton, at 15cbac88-03de-4015-aa6l-d63a10050686]
D.C. [Available online at http://wwwv.whitchouse.gov/thc-p~ress-officc/20C1 3/11/01 /cxccutive-ordcr-preparing-united-states- 32. OTA, 1993: Preparing for an Uncertain Climate. Volume I and impacts-climatc-change] II (OTA-O-567; OTA-O-568). U. S. Congress, Ed., 365 pp.,
Office of Technology Assessment, US Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. [Available online at www.fas.org/ota/
repcprts/9338.pdf]
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 692 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTA`*TION
- 33. CEQ, 2010: Progress Report of the Interagency Climate Change 42. Keener, V., J. J. Marra, M. L. Finucane, D. Spooner, and M. H.
Adaptation Task Force: Recommended Actions in Support of a Smith, Eds., 2012: Cfimate Change and Pacific Islands: Indicators and National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 72 pp., The White Impacts. Reportfor the 2012 Pacific Islands Regional Climate Assessment House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), Washington, (PIRCA). Island Press, 170 pp. [Available online at http://www.
D.C. [Available online at http://www.whitehlouse.gov/sites/ pacificrisa.org/projects/pirca/]
dcfau lt/files/microsites/ccq/Interagcn cy-Climate-Change-Adaptation -Progress -Pcport.pd f] 43. KDFWR, 2010: Action Plan to Respond to Climate Change in Kentucky: A Strategy of Resilience, 37 pp., Kentucky Department
- 34. Goulder, L. H., and R. N. Stavins, 2011: Challenges from state- of Fish and Wildlife Resources. [Available online at http:'/ifw.ky.
federal interactions in US climate change policy. The American gov/kfwvis/stwg/201OI.pdatc/ClimatcChangeCChaptcr.pd f]
Economic Review, 101, 253-257, doi:10.1257/aer.101.3.253.
- 44. State of Louisiana, 2012: Louisiana's Comprehensive Master Morsch, A., and R. Bartlett, 2011: Policy Brief: State Strategies to Plan for a Sustainable Coast. Coastal Protection and Restoration Plan for and Adapt to Climate Change -NI PB 11-08,11 pp., Nicholas Authority, State of Louisiana, Baton Rouge, LA. [Available online Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions - Duke University, at http://www.coastalmastcrplan.louisiana.gov/2012-master-plan/
Durham, NC. [Available online at http://nicholasinstitutc.duke. final-master-plan/]
cdlu/si tcs/dcfauhI/filecs/publ ications/stat-e-tratcgies-ru-plan- for-and-adapt-to-climate-changc-papcr.pdf] 45. Grannis, J., 2011: Adaptation Tool Kit: Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Land Use. I-low Governments Can Use Land-Use Practices
- 35. Feldman, I. R., and J. H. Kahan, 2007: Preparing for the day after to Adapt to Sea-Level Rise, 100 pp., Georgetown Climate tomorrow: Frameworks for climate change adaptation. Sustainable Center, Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://www.
Development Law & Polit, 8, 31-39, 87-89. [Available online at georgetownclirnmitc.org/sitcs/defatult/files/Adaptation To(ol Kit_
http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent. SLR.pdf]
cgi?articlc =1162&contcxt=sdlp]
- 46. Feifel, K., 2010: Implementation of Maryland's Climate Action
- 36. Moser, S. C., 2009: Good Morning America! The Explosive Plan: Case Study on a Project of the Maryland Department of Awakening of the US to Adaptation, 39 pp., California Energy Natural Resources, 2 pp., EcoAdapt, Island Press. [Available online Commission, NOAA-Coastal Services Center, Sacramento, CA and at http://www.cakex.org/printpdf/case-st udies/2829]
Charleston, SC. [Available online at http://xvww.preventionweb.
net/fi lesi1 1374_MoserG ood Morn ingA merica Adaptation in.pd t] 47. Propst, S. C., cited 2012: Innovative Approaches for Adapting to Water Variability in the West. Georgetown Climate Center.
- 37. C2ES, cited 2013: State and Local Climate Adaptation. Center for [Available online at http://www.georgctownclimate.org/rcsources!
Climate and Energy Solutions. [Available online at http://www. in novativc-approachcs-for-adapting- to-water-variabi Iity-i n-t he-c2es.org/ius-states-reginns/policy-maps,/adaptation] West]
- 38. AFWA, 2011: State Climate Adaptation Summary Report, 90 pp., 48. SCIPP, 2012: Southern Climate Impacts and Planning Program Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Washington, D.C. Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments Program 4th Annual Report: May 1, 2011 - April 30, 2012: Norman, OK and
- 39. Immediate Action Workgroup, 2008: Recommendations Report Baton Rouge, LA, 20 pp., Southern Climate Impacts and Planning to the Governor's Subcabinet on Climate Change. Final Report Program (SCI PP), Oklahoma Climatological Survey, University of from the Immediate Action Workgroup, April 17, 2008, 86 pp., Oklahoma and Louisiana State University, and the National Oceanic Immediate Action Workgroup, State of Alaska Juneau, AK. and Atmospheric Administration. [Available online at http://www.
[Available online at http://www.climatechangc.alaska.gov/docs/ southernclitate.org/publications/SCI PP .2011-2012A.nnual_
iavzrpt_17apr08.pd t] Report.pd f]
- 40. EPA, cited 2012: State and Local Climate and Energy Program. 49. Brubaker, M., J. Berner, J. Bell, J. Warren, and A. Rolin, 2010:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. [Available online at http:// Climate Change in Point Hope, Alaska: Strategies for Community wwvw.epa.gov/starelocalclimate/indcx. html] Health: Anchorage, AK, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, 44 pp., Center for Climate and Health. [Available online at http://
- 41. Salkin, P. E., 2009: Sustainability and land use planning: Greening. www.antihc.oi:g/chls/ces/climate/upload/Climate-(.hainge-and-State and local land use plans and regulations to address climate I-lealth-Effccts-in- Point-I -opc-Alaska.pdtf change challenges and preserve resources for future generations.
William and Maey Environmental Law and Polig Review, 34, 121-170. [Available online at http://scholarship.1aw.wm.cdu/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?acticlc=1003&contcxt=wmclpr]
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 693 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
23': A DA P -ATI0N
- 50. Bronen, R., 2011: Climate-induced community relocations: Kahn, M. E., 2009: Urban growth and climate change. Annual Creating an adaptive governance framework based in human rights Review of Resource Economics, 1, 333-350, doi:10.1146/annurev.
doctrine. NYU Review Law & Social Change, 35, 357-408. [Available resource.050708.144249.
online at http://socialchangcnyuii.files.wordprcss.coml/2012/08/
climatc-induccd-miigation-broocn-35-2.pdtf Selin, H., and S. D. VanDeveer, 2007: Political science and prediction: What's next for U.S. climate change policy? Review
- 51. Simmonds, J., 2011: Resource for Consideration by the NCA of Pol47 Research, 24, 1-27, doi:10.1111/j.1541-1338.2007.00265.x.
Teams Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change on Native [Available online at http://pubpagcs.unh.cdu/- sdv/US-Climatc-Communities. Native Communities and Climate Change Project Policy.pdf]
of the University of Colorado Law School and the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Science. 59. Carmin,J., N. Nadkarni, and C. R hie, 2012: Progress and Challenges in Urban Climate Adaptation Planning: Results of a Global Survey,
- 52. Lamb, R., and M. V. Davis, 2011: Promoting Generations of Self 30 pp., Massachussetts Institute of Technology, ICLEI - Local Reliance: Stories and Examples of Tribal Adaptation to Change, Governments for Sustainability, Cambridge, MA. [Available online 27 pp., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, Seattle, at http:iHweb.mit.edu/jcarmin/www/urbanadapt/Urbano20 WA. [Available online at http://www.cpa.gov/region l0/pd f/tribal/ Adaptation%20Rcport%20FI NA L.pd f]
stories aod.c...xamnples of._tribal_adaptationjto changc.pdf]
- 60. Binder, L. C. W., J. K. Barcelos, D. B. Booth, M. Darzen, M. M.
- 53. Anguelovski, I., and J. Carmin, 2011: Something borrowed, Elsner, R. Fenske, T. F. Graham, A. F. Hamlet,J. Hodges-Howell,J.
everything new: Innovation and institutionalization in urban E. Jackson, C. Karr, P. W. Keys,J. S. Littell, N. Mantua, J. Marlow, climate governance. Current Opinion in EnvironmentalSustainabiligy, 3, D. McKenzie, M. Robinson-Dorn, E. A. Rosenberg, C. 0. Stockle, doi:1 0.1016/J.cosust.2010.12017. and J. A. Vano, 2010: Preparing for climate change in Washington State. ClimaticCbange, 102, 351-376, doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9850-5.
- 54. Gregg, R. M., L.J. Hansen, K. M. Feifel,J. L. Hitt,J. M. Kershner, A. Score, and]. R. Hoffman, 2011: The State of Marine and Coastal 61. EPA, 2010: Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: A Review Adaptation in North America: A Synthesis of Emerging Ideas. A of Water Utility Practices. EPA 800-R-10-001, 32 pp., U.S.
report for the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation: Bainbridge Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. [Available Island, WA, EcoAdapt., 145 pp. [Available online at http:// online at http:/water.epa.gov/scitcch/climatechangciupload/
ecoadapt.org/docume, ts/marine-adaptation-report.pdf] Cl imate-Changc-\Vulnerability-A sscssnicrits-Sept-2010.pdf]
- 55. Rabe, B. G., 2009: Second-generation climate policies in the states: 62. City of Lewes, 2011: The City of Lewes Hazard Mitigation and Cli-Proliferation, diffusion, and regionalization. Changing Climates mate Adaptation Action Plan, 164 pp., Delaware Sea Grant College in North American Politics: Institutions, Polfiymaking. and Multilevel Program, ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability, and Uni-Governance, H. Selin, and S. D. VanDeveer, Eds., MIT Press, 67-86. versity of Delaware Sustainable Coastal Communities Program.
[Available online at littp:!www.descagrant.org/sites/defauit/filcs/
Wheeler, S. M., 2008: State and municipal climate change plans: attachments/lcwes%/20.Hazard%20M itigation%20and%2OCli-The first generation. Journalof the American PlanningAssociation, 74, mate%20Adaptation%20,\Action%2OPlan.pdt]
481-496, doi:10.1080/01944360802377973.
- 63. Stults, M., and J. Pagach, 2011: Preparing for Climate Change
- 56. Tang, Z., S. D. Brody, C. Quinn, L. Chang, and T. Wei, 2010: in Groton, Connecticut: A Model Process for Communities in Moving from agenda to action: Evaluating local climate change the Northeast. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Climate action plans. JournalofEnvironmentalPlanningand Management,53, 41- Ready Estuaries Program and the Long Island Sound Study, 62, doi:1 0.1080/09640560903399772. Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://www.groton-ct.govi dcpts/plandev/docs/ linal%/201*eportG~roton%/20Coastato20
- 57. Colson, M., K. Heery, and A. Wallis, 2011: A Survey Of Regional Clinm atc%20C:hange%2oP,'ojcctJ P.pdf]
Planning For Climate Adaptation, 2 0 pp., The National Association of Regional Councils, Washington, DC. [Available online at http:// 64. City of Chicago, 2008: City of Chicago Climate Action Plan:
iarc.org/wp-contcnt/uplh:ads/NOA A_\X'hitePapcr-FJNA L2. Our City. Our Future, 57 pp. [Available online at http://
pdtl www.chicagoclimatcaction.org/filebin/pdf/finalreporrt/
CCA PR EPORTFINA.Lv2.pd f]
- 58. Dierwechter, Y., 2010: Metropolitan geographies of US climate action: Cities, suburbs, and the local divide in global responsibilities. 65. Wolf, K., 2009: Adapting to climate change: Strategies from King Journalof EnvironmentalPollg & Planning,12, 59-82, doi:l 0.1080/152 County, Washington. PAS Memo, March/April, 11. [Available 39081003625960. online at http://wwvw.plannting.org/pas/mcmo/preN'ious.htn]
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 694 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADA(ýPTA-T iON
- 66. City of New York, 2012: PIaNYC Progress Report 2012. A Greener, 72. Vose,J. M., D. L. Peterson, and T. Patel-Weynand, Eds., 2012: Effects Greater New York, 48 pp., New York. [Available online at http:// of Climatic Variability and Change on Forest Ecosystems: A Comprehensive ny telecom .vo.l Inwd.net/o1 5/agencies/planyc2030/pd f/planvc_ Science Synthesis for the U.S. Forest Sector. General Technical Report progres sreport_2012.pdf] PNIV-GTR-870. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 265 pp. [Available online at
- 67. SFRCCC, 2012: A Region Responds to a Changing Climate. http://www.u sda.gov/oce/cliniate-cha nge/effects-220112/FS_
Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact Counties. Climate ll14%20opt.pdf]
Regional Climate Action Plan, 80 pp., South Florida Regional Climate Change Compact Broward, Miami-Dade, Monroe, 73. CDP, 2011: CDP S&P 500 Report: Strategic Advantage Through and Palm Beach Counties, FL. [Available online at http:// Climate Change Action, 49 pp., Carbon Disclosure Project, New south cast floridacl im a tecompact.org/pd f/Regional%20 York, NY and London, UK. [Available online at https://www.
Climate%20;\ct ion%2OPlan%20F"I N AL%20A DA%20Comnpliant. c(dprojcct.net/CDPResults/CDP-201 I-SP500.pd f]
pdf]
- 74. C2ES, 2008: Adapting to Climate Change: A Business Approach.
- 68. Horton, R., W. Solecki, and C. Rosenzweig, 2012: Climate Change F. G. Sussman, and J. R. Freed, Eds., 41 pp., Center for Climate in the Northeast: A Sourcebook. Draft Technical Input Report and Energy Solutions (C2ES), Arlington, VA. [Available online at prepared for the U.S. National Climate Assessment. [Available http://www.c2cs.org/docUploads/Business-Adaptation.pdt]
online at http://downloads.usgcrp.gov/NCA/Activities/nca ne_
full_rcportv2.pd f] 75. PWC, 2010: Business Leadership on Climate Change Adaptation: Encouraging Engagement and Action, 36 pp.,
- 69. White-Newsome, J. L., B. N. Sinchez, E. A. Parker, J. T. Dvonch, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP London, UK. [Available Z. Zhang, and M. S. O'Neill, 2011: Assessing heat-adaptive online at http://www.ukinediacentre.pwc.com/imagelibrary/
behaviors among older, urban-dwelling adults. Maturitas,70, 85-91, down loadivledia.ashx?Medial)etailsl D= 1837]
doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2011.06.015.
- 76. WBCSD, 2009: Adaptation: An Issue Brief for Business, 24 pp.,
- 70. Agrawal, A., 2008: The Role of Local Institutions in Adaptation World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Geneva, to Climate Change. International Forestry Research and Switzerland and Washington, D.C. [Available online at http:i!
Institutions Program (IFRI) Working Paper # W08I-3, 47 pp., www.prev'entionweb.net/files/7781_ _Adaptation l.pdf]
Natural Resources and Environment, University of Michigan.
[Available online at http://www.worldfishcenter.org/sites/'clefault/ 77. Agrawala, S., M. Carraro, N. Kingsmill, E. Lanzi, M. Mullan, and filIcs!T'he%20role%2 0of%.'201ocai %20in stitution%2/o0 in%'20 G. Prudent-Richard, 2011: Private sector engagement in adaptation adaptation%20to%20climate%20change.pdf] to climate change: Approaches to managing climate risks. OECD Environment IVorking Papers,39, doi:10.1787/5kg221jkflg7-en.
Guston, D. H., W. Clark, T. Keating, D. Cash, S. Moser, C. Miller, and C. Powers, 2000: Report of the Workshop on Boundary Oxfam America, cited 2012: The New Adaptation Marketplace:
Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science. Belfer Center Climate Change and Opportunities for Green Economic for Science and International Affairs (BCSIA) Discussion Paper Growth. Oxfam America. [Available online at http://www.
2000-32. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers iiusclim atentetwork.org/resource- database/the-n ew-adalptation -
University, New Brunswick, NJ, Environmental and Occupational marketpl ace. pd f Health Sciences Institute at Rutgers University and UMDNJ-RWJMS, Global Environmental Assessment Project, Environment 78. Dell, J., and P. Pasteris, 2010: Adaptation in the Oil and Gas and Natural Resources Program, Kennedy School of Government, Industry to Projected Impacts of Climate Change. Society of Harvard University, 41 pp. [Available online at http://www.hks. Petroleum Engineers, 16 pp.
harvard.ecdu/gea/pubs/ihurul .pdf]
- 79. Means, E., III, M. Laugier, J. Daw, L. Kaatz, and M. Waage,
- 71. Van Aalst, M. K., T. Cannon, and I. Burton, 2008: Community level 2010: Decision Support Planning Methods: Incorporating adaptation to climate change: The potential role of participatory Climate Change Uncertainties Into Water Planning. Water Utility community risk assessment. Global Environmental Change, 18, 165- Climate Alliance White Paper, 113 pp., Water Utility Alliance, San 179, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2007.06.002. Francisco, CA. [Available online at http.://www.wucaonlinc., rg,/
asscts/pdf/pubs whitepaper 012110.pd f]
- 80. Glick, P., B. A. Stein, and N. A. Edelson, 2011: Scanning the ConservationHorizon:A Guide to Climate Change IiulnerabilityAssessment.
National Wildlife Federation, 176 pp.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 695 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
26: ADAPTATION R EF vE`
. !'..-S Rowland, E. L., J. E. Davison, and L. J. Graumlich, 2011: Pahl-Wostl, C., P. Jeffrey, N. Isendahl, and M. Brugnach, 2011:
Approaches to evaluating climate change impacts on species: A Maturing the new water management paradigm: Progressing from guide to initiating the adaptation planning process. Environmental aspiration to practice. Water Resources Management, 25, 837-856, Management, 47, 322-337, doi:10.1007/s00267-010-9608-x. doi:10.1007/si1269-010-9729-2. [Available online at http://www.
evcrgladcshub.com/lit/pdfl 1/Pahll lwatRcsMgmt25-837 West, J. M., S. H. Julius, P. Kareiva, C. Enquist, J. J. Lawler, B. WatMgmt.pd f]
Petersen, A. E. Johnson, and M. R. Shaw, 2009: US natural resources and climate change: Concepts and approaches for 84. EPA, 2011: Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments: Four Case management adaptation. EnvironmentalManagement, 44, 1001-1021, Studies of Water Utility Practices. U.S. Environmental Protection doi:10.1007/s00267-009-9345-1. Agency, Washington, DC. [Available online at http://cfptib.cpa.
gov/ncea/global/recordisplav.cfm?dcid=233808]
- 81. Ingram, K., K. Dow, L. Carter, and J. Anderson, Eds., 2013:
Climate of the Southeast United States: I/ariability, Change, Impacts, and 85. Fazey, I., J. G. P. Gamarra, J. Fischer, M. S. Reed, L. C. Stringer, Vulnerabiiy. Island Press, 342 pp. [Available online at http://www. and M. Christie, 2010: Adaptation strategies for reducing seclimatc.org/pdfpubs/2013/SE-NCA-draft8-color.pdt] vulnerability to future environmental change. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 8, 414-422, doi:10.1890/080215.
- 82. Lackstrom, K., K. Dow, B. Haywood, A. Brennan, N. Kettle, and A. Brosius, 2012: Engaging Climate-Sensitive Sectors in Few, R., K. Brown, and E. L. Tompkins, 2007: Public participation the Carolinas. Technical Report: CISA-2012-03: Carolinas and climate change adaptation: Avoiding the illusion of inclusion.
Integrated Sciences and Assessments, 180 pp., Carolinas Integrated Climate Policy, 7, 46-59, doi:10.1080/14693062.2007.9685637.
Sciences and Assessments (CISA), University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC. [Available online at http://www.cisa.sc.edu/l'ubs_ Smit, B., and J. Wandel, 2006: Adaptation, adaptive capacity and Presentations - losters/Rcports/2012_i,ackstrom%20et%/o20 vulnerability. GlobalEnvironmentalChange,16,282-292, doi:10.1016/j.
al.. lilgaging%20Climate- Scnsitive%20Sectors'20in%20the1/420 gloenvcha.2006.03.008.
Carolinas.pdif]
- 86. Preston, B. L., R. M. Westaway, and E. J. Yuen, 2011: Climate
- 83. 13arrett,J.,J. Rose, A. Deonarine, A. Clemetson,J. Pagach, M. Parker, adaptation planning in practice: An evaluation of adaptation plans and M. Tedesco, 2011: Sentinel Monitoring for Climate Change in from three developed nations. MitigationandAdaptationStrategiesfor the Long Island Sound Estuarine and Coastal Ecosystems of New GlobalChange, 16, 407-438, doi:1 0.1007/sl 1027-010-9270-x.
York and Connecticut, 139 pp., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Stamford, CT. 87. Brunner, R. D., T. A. Steelman, L. Coe-Juell, C. M. Cromley, C. M.
Edwards, and D. W. Tucker, 2005: Adaptive Governance: Integrating Ford, J. D., E. C. H. Keskitalo, T. Smith, T. Pearce, L. Berrang- Science, Poligy, and Decision Making. Columbia University Press, 326 Ford, F. Duerden, and B. Smit, 2010: Case study and analogue pP.
methodologies in climate change vulnerability research. IPily Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1, 374-392, doi:10.1002/ Stern, P. C., H. V. Fineberg, and I. Ebrary, 1996: Understanding wcc.48. [Available online at hrtp:/,/onlinelibrary.wilcy.com/ Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. National Academy doi,/ 0.1 002/wcc.48/pdq Press, 250 pp. [Available online at htrp://www.nap.edu/openbook.
phpisbn=030905396X]
Fissel, H. M., 2007: Vulnerability: A generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change research. GlobalEnvironmentalChange, The World Bank, 2008: Climate Resilient Cities:A Primer on Reducing 17, 155-167, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.05.002. VIulnerabities to Disaster.The World Bank 157 pp.
Heller, N. E., and E. S. Zavaleta, 2009: Biodiversity management in 88. ICLEI, 2012: Sea Level Rise Adaptation Strategy for San Diego the face of climate change: A review of 22 years of recommendations. Bay. D. Hirschfeld, and B. Holland, Eds., 133 pp., ICLEI-Local BiologicalConservation, 142, 14-32, doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.10.006. Governments for Sustainability USA San Diego, CA. [Available online at http://www.icieiusa.org/static/SariDiegoBay _SIR_
Hulme, M., and S. Dessai, 2008: Predicting, deciding, learning: AdaptationStrategy_.Ccmplete.pdf]
Can one evaluate the 'success' of national climate scenarios?
Environmental Research Letters, 3, 045013, doi:10.1088/1748- Moser, S. C., and J. A. Ekstrom, 2010: A framework to diagnose 9326/3/4/045013. [Available online at http://iopsciencc.iop. barriers to climate change adaptation. Proceedings of the National org/1748-9326/3/4/045013] Academy of Sdences, 107, 22026-22031, doi:10.1073/pnas.1007887107.
[Available online at http://www.pnas.org/contcnt/107/51t/22026.
full.pdf+htmli]
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 696 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
981'
.(7))1', 1CJ Pyke, C., M. Bennett, M. Johnston, R. Najjar, M. Raub, K. Sellner, 96. Moser, S. C., 2012: Adaptation, mitigation, and their S. Stiles, and D. Wardrop, 2012: Adapting to Climate Change in disharmonious discontents: An essay. Climatic Change, 111, 165-the Chesapeake Bay: A STAC workshop to monitor progress in 175, doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0398-4. [Available online at http://
addressing climate change across the Chesapeake Bay. STAC www.s usa nnnmoser.com/docu mcnts/Moser-essay.a ccei)tcd_
Publication 12-001. Philadelphia, PA, 14 pp. [Available online at clean-I 1-1-2011 _with'lablesFigures.pd f]
http://www.chcsapcakcbay.nctichanncl filcs/18086/(attachment_
vi.b)_adaptingoto.climatcechangein _ the _chesapeakebay.pdF] 97. NRC, 2004: Adaptive Managementfor WVater Resources Project Planning.
National Research Council, Panel on Adaptive Management for
- 89. Sutaria, S., A. Kulungara, K. Wyss, and J. Blumenstock, 2012: Resource Stewardship. The National Academies Press, 113 pp.
3d National Climate Assessment Feedback Report. Reference [Available online at http://www.nat).cdu/catalog.phpirecord_
Number 2011-0059, 7 pp., Association of State and Territorial id=10972]
Health Officials (ASTHO), Arlington, VA.
- 98. Ford, J. D., L. Berrang-Ford, and J. Paterson, 2011: A systematic
- 90. Burkett, V., and M. Davidson, 2012: CoastalImpacts, Adaptation and review of observed climate change adaptation in developed J'ulnerabilities:A TechnicalInput to the 2013 NationalClimateAssessment. nations. Climatic Change, 106, 327-336, doi:10.1007/s10584-011-Island Press, 216 pp. 0045-5. [Available online at http://Iink.springcr.com/contcnt/pdf/
10.1007%2Us10584-011-0045-5]
- 91. Federspiel, S., 2012: Climate Change Adaptation Planning, Implementation, and Evaluation: Needs, Resources, and Lessons 99. Dovers, S. R., and A. A. Hezri, 2010: Institutions and policy for the 2013 National Climate Assessment, 62 pp., University of processes: The means to the ends of adaptation. IilpyInterdiscitlinag, Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment, Ann Reviews: Climate Change, 1, 212-231, doi:10.1002/wcc.29.
Arbor, MI.
100. Janetos, A. C., R. S. Chen, D. Arndt, M. A. Kenney, D. Abbasi, T.
Hammill, A., and T. Tanner, 2011: Harmonising climate risk Armstrong, A. Bartuska, M. Blair,J. Buizer, T. Dietz, D. Easterling, management: Adaptation screening and assessment tools for J. Kaye, M. Kolian, M. McGeehin, R. O'Connor, R. Pulwarty, S.
development co-operation. OECD Environment WIFrking Papers, 36, Running, R. Schmalensee, R. Webb, J. Weltzin, S. Baptista, C.
53, doi:l0.1787/5kg706918zvl-en. A. F. Enquist, J. Hatfield, M. Hayes, K. B. Jones, C. McNutt, W.
Meier, M. D. Schwartz, and M. Svoboda, 2012: National Climate
- 92. Wilby, R. L., and K. Vaughan, 2011: Hallmarks of organisations Assessment Indicators: Background, Development, and Examples.
that are adapting to climate change. Water and Environment Journal, A Technical Input to the 2013 National Climate Assessment 25, 271-281, doi:10.1111/j.1747-6593.2010.00220.x. Report., 59 pp. [Available online at http:!/d/wnioiads.usgcrp.
gov/NCI A/A ctivities/NC\A-I ndicators-TechnicaI-hI put-Report-
- 93. Groves, D. G., and R. J. Lempert, 2007: A new analytic method IINA\ --3-1-12.pdf]
for finding policy-relevant scenarios. Global Environmental Change, 17, 73-85, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.11.006. 101. EPA, 2010: Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool, 2 pp., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
- 94. Lempert, R. J., D. G. Groves, S. W. Popper, and S. C. Bankes, 2006: Water. [Available online at http://watcr.epa.gos/iofrastructurci A general, analytic method for generating robust strategies and wa tersecu rity/climate/uplhad/epa817f12011 .pdf]
narrative scenarios. Management Science, 52, 514-528, doi:10.1287/
mnsc.1050.0472. 2012: National Water program 2012 Strategy: Response to Climate Change, 132 pp., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Williams, B. K., and E. D. Brown, 2012: Adaptive Management: [Available online at http://watei.epa.gov/scitech/climatechiiangel The U.S. Department of the Interior Applications Guide 136 pp., uploadiepa_2012_cliimate_water_strategyfu.ill-report-fi ns l.pdqf U.S. Department of the Interior, Adaptive Management Working Group, Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://www.doi. 102. Parry, M., N. Arnell, P. Berry, D. Dodman, S. Fankhauser, g(vippa/utload!()-Al-Adaptivc-Nianagemcn t-Applications- C. Ilope, S. Kovats, R. Nicholls, D. Satterthwaite, R. Tiffin,
(. uidc-Wcb()tptimizcd.pd f] and T. Wheeler, 2009: Assessing the Costs of Adaptation to Climate Change: A Review of the UNFCCC and Other Recent
- 95. Moore, S., E. Zavaleta, and R. Shaw, 2012: Decision-Making Under Estimates, 116 pp., International Institute for Environment and Uncertainty: An Assessment of Adaptation Strategies and Scenario Development, London, UK. [Available online at http://pubs.iied.
Development for Resource Managers. Publication number: CEC- org/pd fs/ 11501 IIF.D.pdt]
500-2012-027., California Energy Commission. University of California, Santa Cruz, Sacramento, CA. [Available online at hlttip://www.encrgy.ca.gov/201 2publications/CEC-500-2012-027/
CEC-500-2012-027.pdt]
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 697 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
284: ADAPTATION REF F E _E Sussman, F., N. Krishnan, K. Maher, R. Miller, C. Mack, P. Stewart, 109. Barsugli, J. J., J. M. Vogel, L. Kaatz, J. B. Smith, M. Waage, and K. Shouse, and B. Perkins, 2014: Climate change adaptation cost in C. Anderson, 2012: Two faces of uncertainty: Climate science and the US: What do we know? Climate Poliy, 14, 242-282, doi:10.1080/ water utility planning methods. Journalof Water Resources Planning 14693062.2013.777604. and Management 138, 389-395, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000188.
103. Ruth, M., D. Coelho, and D. Karetnikox, 2007: The US Economic Impacts of Climate Change and the Costs of Inaction. A Review and Dilling, L., and M. C. Lemos, 2011: Creating usable science:
Assessment by the Center for Integrative Environmental Research Opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their (CIER) at the University of Maryland, 52 pp., College Park, MD. implications for science policy. GlobalEnvironmentalChange, 21, 680-
[Available online at http://www.cicr.umd.edu/climateadaptation/] 689, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.11.006.
104. McCollum, D. W., J. A. Tanaka, J. A. Morgan, J. E. Mitchell, Fowler, H. J., and R. L. Wilby, 2007: Beyond the downscaling K. A. Maczko, L. Hidinger, W. E. Fox, and C. S. Duke, 2011: comparison study. InternationalJournalof Climatology, 27, 1543-1545, Climate Change Effects on Rangelands: Affirming the Need doi:10.1002/joc.1616. [Available online at http:!/onlinelibrary.
for Monitoring. RMRS Human Dimensions Research Program: wilcy.coni/doi/' 0. 1002/jic. 1616/pdf]
Discussion Paper, 27 pp., USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. [Available online at http://gis. Larsen, L., A. L. Steiner, E. S. Mallen, N. Kahn, S. Kalafatis, M.
fs. fed.usir,/v.alue/drcs/climate change effects~rangelands.pdf] Ryen, P. Sotherland, and A. B. Tawfik, 2011: Climate downscaling and urban planning implications in three Great Lakes cities. Journal 105. Bjerklie, D. M., J. R. Mullaney, J. R. Stone, B. J. Skinner, and M. of the American Planning Association,submitted.
A. Ramlow, 2012: Preliminary Investigation of the Effects of Sea-Level Rise on Groundwater Levels in New Haven, Connecticut. McNie, E. C., 2007: Reconciling the supply of scientific information U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2012-1025, 56 pp., U.S. with user demands: An analysis of the problem and review of the Department of the Interior and U.S. Geological Survey. [Available literature. Environmental Science & Polity, 10, 17-38, doi:10.1016/j.
online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/10025/pdf/ofr2O12--1025_ envsci.2006.10.004.
report_508.pdt]
Mitchell,J. E., Ed., 2010: CriteriaandIndicatorsof SustainableRangeland 106. Ekstrom, J. A., S. C. Moser, and M. Torn, 2011: Barriers to Management.University of Wyoming Extension Publication No. SM-Climate Change Adaptation: A Diagnostic Framework. Final 56, 227 pp. [Available online at http:!//www.sustainablerangeland.
Project Report. Publication Number: CEC-500-2011-004, 94 pp., org/pdf/SM56.pdfJ California Energy Commission, Sacramento, CA. [Available online at h ttp://w ww.cn ergy.ca.gov/20"1 lpublications/CI.LC.-500-2011- Romsdahl, R. J., L. Atkinson, and J. Schultz, 2013: Planning for 004/C:.C-500-2011-004.pdq climate change across the US Great Plains: Concerns and insights from government decision-makers. Journal of Environmental Studies 107. Bierbaum, R., J. B. Smith, A. Lee, L. Carter, F. S. Chapin, Ill, andSciences, 3, 1-14, doi:10.1007/s13412-012-0078-8.
P. Fleming, S. Ruffo, S. McNeeley, M. Stults, E. Wasley, and L.
Verduzco, 2013 A comprehensive review of climate adaptation in 110. Hauser, R., and J. Jadin, 2012: Rural Communities Workshop the United States: More than before, but less than needed. Mitigation Technical Report to the 2013 National Climate Assessment, 38 andAdaptationStrategiesfor Global Change, 18, 361-406, doi:10.1007/ pp. (Available online at http://downloads.globalchange.gov/nca/
sl1027-012-9423-1. [Available online at http:f/link.springer.coin/ tech nical..inputs/ru ral-comi mnun ities-workshop-tcch nical-input.
article/10.1007%2Fsl11027-012-9423-1] pdf]
108. Adger, W. N., S. Agrawala, M. M. Q. Mirza, C. Conde, K. O'Brien, Lebow, B., T. Patel-Weynand, T. Loveland, and R. Cantral, 2012:
J. Pulhin, R. Pulwarty, B. Smit, and K. Takahashi, 2007: Ch. 17: Land Use and Land Cover National Stakeholder Workshop Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and Technical Report. Report prepared for 2013 National Climate capacity. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Assessment, 73 pp. [Available online at http://downloads.usgcrp.
Contribution of lIWrking Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the gov/N('A'A/ctivities/final-nca lulcworksholpreport.pdqt IntergovernmentalPanelon Climate Change, M. L. Parry, 0. F. Canziani, J. P. Palutikof, P. J. van der Linden, and C. E. Hanson, Eds., 111. Needham, H. F., L. Carter, and B. D. Keim, 2012: Gulf Coast Cambridge University Press, 717-743. Climate Needs Assessment Interviews, 20 pp., Southern Climate Impacts Planning Program (SCIPP). [Available online Mclgorm, A., S. Hanna, G. Knapp, P. Le Floc'H, F. Millerd, and at http://ww-wv.southerntcliimate.org/publicationis/GiulfCoas t_
M. Pan, 2010: I-low will climate change alter fishery governance? AssessmentFinal.pl I]
Insights from seven international case studies. Marine Polig, 34, 170-177, doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2009.06.004.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 698 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION
~rErc;-S
.F-K 112. Schramm, P. J., 2012: National Climate Assessment Health Sector Folke, C., 2006: Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for Workshop Report: Northwest Region, 28 pp., Seattle, Washington. social-ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change,
[Available online at http://www.joss.ucar.edui/ohhi/nw nca 16, 253-267, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002. [Available health_sector_fcbl2/lIcalth andCCNW_Report.pdf] online at http://xvww.scicncedircct.com/sciencc/article/pii/
S0959378006C00I-0379]
113. Brugger, J., and M. Crimmins, 2011: Weather, Climate, and Rural Arizona: Insights and Assessment Strategies. A Technical Input Jantarasami, L. C., J. J. Lawler, and C. W. Thomas, 2010:
to the U.S. National Climate Assessment, 80 pp., U.S. Global Institutional barriers to climate change adaptation in US national Climate Research Program, Washington, D.C. [Available online at parks and forests. Ecology and Society, 15, 33. [Available online at littp://www.climas.arizona.edu/files/climas/projcct-documents/ http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/volI5/iiss4/art33/]
p)Liblic/ 1400/nca-rcport-final.pd tf Lee, K. N., 1993: Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics 114. GAO, 2009: Alaska Native Villages: Limited Progress Has Been for the Environment. Island Press, 255 pp.
Made on Relocating Villages Threatened By Flooding and Erosion.
Government Accountability Office Report GAO-09-551, 53 pp., Nelson, D. R., W. N. Adger, and K. Brown, 2007: Adaptation U.S. Government Accountability Office. [Available online at to environmental change: Contributions of a resilience http://ww w.gao.gov/ncw.itcesn/d09551 .pdf] framework. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32, 395-419, doi:1 0.1 146/an nurev.energy.32.051807.090348.
115. Levin, S. A., and W. C. Clark, 2010: Toward a Science of [Available online at http://cprints.icrisat.ac.ii/4245/l /
Sustainability: Report from Toward a Science of Sustainability Annual RcvicwofEnvRcsrourccs 32 395-419_2007.pdf]
Con ference Towarda Science ofSustainability,Airlie Center, Warrenton, Virginia Center for International Development Working Papers. 119. Moser, S. C., andJ. A. Ekstrom, 2012: Identifying and Overcoming
[Available online at http://www.nsf.gov/mnps/dms/documents/ Barriers to Climate Change Adaptation in San Francisco Bay:
Sustainabilitv\X'*nrk-shop2009Report.pdtI Results from Case Studies. Publication number: CEC-500-2012-034, 186 pp., California Energy Commission, Sacramento, CA.
116. NRC, 2009: A Transportation Research Program for Mitigation [Available online at http://www.energy.ca.gov/2012publicationsi and Adapting to Climate Change and Conserving Energy. Special CIC-500-201?2-034/CI C-500-2012-034.pdf]
Report 299, 136 pp., National Research Council, Committee for Study on Transportation Research Programs to Address Energy 120. Ding, D., E. W. Maibach, X. Zhao, C. Roser-Renouf, and A.
and Climate Change, Transportation Research Board of the Leiserowitz, 2011: Support for climate policy and societal action National Academies, Washington, D.C. [Available online at http:// are linked to perceptions about scientific agreement. Nature Climate www.nap.edu/cara.Ilog.php?record-id=I12801] Change, doi:10.1038/nclimatel295.
117. Adger, W. N., S. Dessai, M. Goulden, M. Hulme, I. Lorenzoni, D. 121. Leiserowitz, A., E. Maibach, C. Roser-Renouf, and N. Smith, 2012:
R. Nelson, L. 0. Naess, J. Wolf, and A. Wreford, 2009: Are there Climate Change in the American Mind: Public Support for Climate social limits to adaptation to climate change? Climatic Change, 93, & Energy Policies in March 2012. Yale Project on Climate Change 335-354, doi:10.1007/s10584-008-9520-z. Communication., Yale University and George Mason University, New Haven, CT. [Available online at http://cnvironmcnr.yalc.edu/
McNeeley, S. M., 2012: Examining barriers and opportunities climate/files/Policy-Suppor t-March-2012.pdf]
for sustainable adaptation to climate change in Interior Alaska. Climate Change, 111, 835-857, doi:10.1007/si0584-011- Smith, J. B., J. M. Vogel, and J. E. Cromwell, III, 2009: An 0158-x. [Available online at http://ilink. springer.com/contcnt/ architecture for government action on adaptation to climate change.
pdf/l0.1007/,21Hs 10584-011-0158-x] An editorial comment. Climatic Change, 95, 53-61, doi:10.1007/
s10584-009-9623-1.
118. Carpenter, S. R., and W. A. Brock, 2008: Adaptive capacity and traps. Ecology and Society, 13, 40. [Available online at http://www. 122. Doria, M. F., E. Boyd, E. L. Tompkins, and W. N. Adger, 2009:
ecologyandsocicty.oirg/voll13/iss2/art4O/] Using expert elicitation to define successful adaptation to climate change. Environmental Science & Policy, 12, 810-819, doi:10.1016/j.
Craig, R. K., 2008: Climate change, regulatory fragmentation, and envsci.2009.04.001.
water triage. FSU College of Law, PublicLaw Research PaperNo. 288.
Gifford, R., 2011: The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. American Psychologist, 66, 290-302, doi:10.1037/a0023566.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 699 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION
[: Fz -r. ?Er.,.::E Kahan, D. M., H. Jenkins-Smith, and D. Braman, 2011: Cultural 126. PWD, cited 2013: Green City, Clean Waters. Philadelphia Water cognition of scientific consensus. Journal of Risk Research, 14, 147- Department. [Available online at http://www.phiilhwatersheds.
174, doi:10.1080/13669877.2010.511246. org/ltcpu/J Leiserowitz, A., 2006: Climate change risk perception and policy 127. City of Keene, 2010: Keene Comprehensive Master Plan. City preferences: The role of affect, imagery, and values. ClimaticChange, of Keene, Keene, New Hampshire. [Available online at http://
77, 45-72, doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9059-9. www.ci.keen e.tnh.us/sites/dc fault/files/CM Pprin t-final-1027-fullversion_2.pdf]
Renn, 0., 2011: The social amplification/attenuation of risk framework: Application to climate change. Wiley lnterdisciplinagy 128. NYCDEP, cited 2013: Green Infrastructure Plan and Annual Reviews. Climate Change, 2, 154-169, doi:10.1002/wcc.99. [Available Reports. New York City Department of Environmental Protection online at http://onlinclibrary.wilcy.com/doi/1 0.1002/!wcc.99!pd f] [Available online at http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/
stormwatcr/nyc-green _in frastruct ur.plan. shtml]
Renn, 0., A. Klinke, and M. van Asselt, 2011: Coping with complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity in risk governance: A 129. ICLEI, cited 2013: Homer, Alaska's Climate Adaptation Progress synthesis. AMBIO: A Journalof the Human Environment, 40, 231-246, Despite Uncertainties. ICLEI. [Available online at http:,'/www.
doi:1 0.1007/si3280-010-0134-0. cakcx.org/'virrual-library/25551 Verweij, M., M. Douglas, R. Ellis, C. Engel, F. Hendriks, S. Lohmann, 130. State of Alaska Division of Community and Regional Affairs S. Ney, S. Rayner, and M. Thompson, 2006: Clumsy solutions for Planning and Land Management, cited 2012: Newtok Planning a complex world: The case of climate change. PublicAdministration, Group. State of Alaska. [Available online at http://www.commerce.
84, 817-843, doi:10.1111/j.1540-8159.2005.09566.x-il. statc.ak.us/dca/planning/npg/NewtokPlanningG roup.htm]
Weber, E. U., and P. C. Stern, 2011: Public understanding of 131. Maus, E., 2013: Case Studies in Floodplain Regulation, 14 climate change in the United States. American Psychologist, 66, 315- pp. [Available online at http://www.georgetownclimate.org/
328, doi:10.1037/a0023253. sites/default/filei/Case%20Studies%2Oin%201ýloodplain%20 Regulation%206-3-final.pdt]
Kahan, D., D. Braman, P. Slovic, J. Gastil, and G. Cohen, 2007:
The Second National Risk and Culture Study: Making Sense of 132. Cameron, L., M. Stanbury, R. Wahl, and S. Manente, 2011:
- and Making Progress In - The American Culture War of Fact Michigan Climate and Health Adaptation Plan (MICHAP) 2010 (October 3, 2007). GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 370; - 2015 Strategic Plan, 14 pp., Division of Environmental Health:
Yale Law School, Public Law Working Paper No. 154; GWU Michigan Department of Community Health. [Available online at Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 370; Harvard Law http://www.rnichigani.goN'/docuiients/mdch/M DCIH _climate_
School Program on Risk Regulation Research Paper No. 08-26, change-stratcgicPlan-final_1-24-2011. 343856_7.pdf]
23 pp. [Available online at http://papers.ssrn.coii/sol3/papers.
cfmiabstractid=1017189] 133. City of Grand Rapids, cited 2013: The Office of Energy and Sustainability. City of Grand Rapids, Mi. [Available online at http://
123. NOAA, 2010: Adapting to Climate Change: A Planning Guide grcity'us/enterprise-services/officeofenergya ndsus tainability/
for State Coastal Managers, 133 pp., NOAA Office of Ocean and P~agesi/defauhs.aspx/]
Coastal Resource Management, Silver Spring, MD. [Available online at http://coasralmanagcmcnt'noaa'g(v/climate/docs/ 134. City of Tulsa, cited 2013: Rooftop to River. The Tulsa Program. City adaptationguidc.pdf] of Tulsa, OK. [Available online at http://www.smartcomimunitics.
ncat.org/articles/r.oftf.p/pr-ogi-ai.sh tmi]
124. HDLNR, 2011: The Rain Follows The Forest: A Plan to Replenish Hawaii's Source of Water, 24 pp., Department of Land and Natural 135. TFS, cited 2013: Wildland Urban Interface: Texas Firewise Resources, State of Hawai'i. [Available online at http://dlnr.hawaii. Communities. Texas A&M Forest Sevice. [Available online at g1ov/rain/files/2014/02/Thc-Rain -Foltlows-the-Forest.pdt-l http://Itcxasforestservice.tamu.cdu/main/article.aspx?id = 1602]
125. EPA, cited 2013: Adaptation Efforts: EPA New England: New 136. Carter, L., 2012: personal communication.
England Federal Partners. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
[Available online at http://www.cpa.gov/rcgionl/ceo/cnergy/ 137. Gregg, R. M., cited 2013: Estero de Limantour Coastal Watershed adaptaition-efforts-epanec.htinl] Restoration Project [Case Study on a Project of the Point Reyes National Seashore]. Product of EcoAdapt's State of Adaptation Program. [Available online at lttp://www.cakex.org/cssc-studies/1083]
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 700 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION 138. Sustainable Communities Leadership Academy, cited 2013: Front 147. The Nature Conservancy, 2011: Alligator River National Wildlife Range, Intermountain & Desert Southwest Region: A Regional Refuge grows. North Carolina Afield, 12 pp., The North Carolina Climate Leadership Academy For The Western Adaptation Chapter of The Nature Conservancy. [Available online at Alliance. Sustainable Communities Leadership Academy. [Available http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/rcgions/northamnerica/
online at http://sustainablecommunitieslcadershipacademv.org/ unitcdstates/norrhcarolina/aficld-sprimg- 2011.pdf]
workshops/regional-western-ad aptation -alliancc]
148. Bloetscher, F., B. Heimlich, and D. E. Meeroff, 2011: Development 139. Navajo Nation Department of Water Resources, 2003: Navajo of an adaptation toolbox to protect southeast Florida water supplies Nation Drought Contingency Plan, 163 pp., Division of Natural from climate change. EnvironmentalReviews, 19, 397-417, doi:10.1139/
Resources, Department of Water Resources, Water Management all-011. [Available online at http://www.nrcrcsearchpress.com/
Branch, Fort Defiance, AZ, Navajo Nation. [Available online doi/pdf/10.11 39/a 11-011]
at http://www.fronticrict.nct/-nndwr-wmb/PDFi/drought/
drghtcon_.plan 2003_final.pdq 149. NAST, 2000: Climate Change Impacts on the United States: The Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change, Report 140. English, P., K. Fitzsimmons, S. Hoshiko, T. Kim, H. G. Margolis, for the US Global Change Research Program, 163 pp., U.S. Global T, E. McKone, M. Rotkin-Ellman, G. Solomon, R. Trent, and Climate Research Program, National Assessment Synthesis Team, Z. Ross, 2007: Public Health Impacts of Climate Change in Cambridge, UK. [Available online at http://library.globalchange.
California: Community Vulnerability Assessments and Adaptation gov/dowvnloads/download.php?id= 124]
Strategies. Report No. 1: Heat-Related Illness and Mortality.
California Department of Public Health and the Public Health 150. IPCC, 2012: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Institute. [Available online at http://www.ehib.org/papers/ Heat_ Advance Climate Change Adaptation.A Special Report of Wlorking Groups Vulnerability_2007.pdf] I and I1 of the Inteqovernmental Panel on Climate Change. C. B. Field, V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D. J. Dokken, K. L. Ebi, M. D.
141. SFBCDC: An International Competition for Ideas Responding to Mastrandrea, K. J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, Sea Level Rise in San Francisco Bay and Beyond. San Francisco Bay and P. M. Midgley, Eds. Cambridge University Press, 582 pp.
Conservation and Development Commission [Available online at [Available online at http://ipcc-wg2.gov/SRf'.X/images/uploads/
http://www.risingtidesconpctition.com/risin gtides/Home.html] SRFI;X-AIIFIlNAl.pdf]
142. City of Flagstaff, 2012: City of Flagstaff Resiliency and Kates, R. W., W. R. Travis, and T.J. Wilbanks, 2012: Transformational Preparedness Study, 57 pp., City of Flagstaff Climate and adaptation when incremental adaptations to climate change are Adaptation Management. [Available online at http://flagstaff. insufficient. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences, 109, 7156-a,...gv/index.asp-xnid=1732] 7161, doi:10.1073/pnas.1115521109. [Available online at www.pnas.
org/con tent t/109/19/7156. full.pd f+html]
143. USFS, 2011: Adapting to Climate Change at Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park, 144 pp., U.S. Forest Service, 151. McNutt, C. A., M. J. Hayes, L. S. Darby, J. P. Verdin, and R. S.
Pacific Northwest Research Station. [Available online at http:// Pulwarty, 2013: Ch. 10: Developing early warning and drought risk www. fs. fed. us/pnw,/lubs/pnwgt r84 4.pd F] reduction strategies. Drought, Risk Management, and Policy: Decision-Making Under Uncertainty,L. C. Botterill, and G. C. Cockfield, Eds.,
144. Wolf, K., 2009: Adapting to Climate Change: Strategies from King CRC Press, 151-170.
County, Washington, 11 pp., American Planning Association.
[Available online at http://wwwv.nerrs.noaa.gov/doc/pd f/training/ 152. NOAA, 2012: State ofthe climate: DroughtAnnual 2012, December strategies-kingcouunry.pdf] 2012. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
[Available online at hrtp://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/droughlt/I 145. City of Portland, 2009: Climate action plan 2009, 63 pp., City of Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability and Multnomah Schwalm, C. R., C. A. Williams, and K. Schaefer, 2012: Hundred-County Sustainability Program, Portland, Oregon. [Available year forecast: Drought. The New York Times, August 11, 2012.
online at http://wwxv.portlandorcgon..gov/bps,/article/268612] [Available online at http:/Hwww.nvtimes.com/2012/o08/12/2 opinion/sunday/exrrre-wcathcr-snd-drought-are-hcre.- to-st 3a.
146. LRAP, cited 2013: Louisiana Resiliency Assistance Program. The htil?_r=0]
Office of Community Development - Disaster Recovery Unit and Lousiana State University Coastal Sustainability Studio. [Available online at http:/,/'csilicncv.lsu.cdu/]
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 701 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28:11AD/'PT/AT!(7)N1 153. Cayan, D. R., T. Das, D. W. Pierce, T. P. Barnett, M. Tyree, and , 2010: Water Needs and Strategies for a Sustainable Future:
A. Gershunov, 2010: Future dryness in the southwest US and 2010 Progress Report. Western Governors' Association and the hydrology of the early 21st century drought. Proceedings of Western States Water Council, Denver, CO. [Available online the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 21271-21276, doi:10.1073/ at hrtp://www.westgov.org/wswc/wswc_2010_complete%20 pnas.0912391107. [Available online at http://www.pnas.org/ -comprcsscd.pd]
contelntCarly/2010/1 2/06/0912391107. full.pd f+htmnl]
157. USACE, 2009: Western States Watershed Study: Report to Christensen, N., and D. P. Lettenmaier, 2006: A multimodel the Western States Water Council 42 pp., U.S. Army Corps of ensemble approach to assessment of climate change impacts on Engineers. [Available online at http://www.wcstgov.orgi/wwc/
the hydrology and water resources of the Colorado River Basin. wsws0 .o20mainfl%20rcport-jan09.pdt]
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 3, 3727-3770, doi:10.5194/
hessd-3-3727-2006. 158. Reclamation, 2011: Reclamation Managing Water in the West.
SECURE Water Act Section 9503(c) - Reclamation Climate Hidalgo, H. G., T. Das, M. D. Dettinger, D. R. Cayan, D. W. Change and Water 2011. P. Alexander, L. Brekke, G. Davis, S.
Pierce, T. P. Barnett, G. Bala, A. Mirin, A. W. Wood, C. Bonfils, Gangopadhyay, K. Grantz, C. Hennig, C. Jerla, D. Llewellyn, B. D. Santer, and T. Nozawa, 2009: Detection and attribution of P. Miller, T. Pruitt, D. Raff, T. Scott, M. Tansey, and T. Turner, streamflow timing changes to climate change in the western United Eds., 226 pp., U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Bureau of States. Journalof Climate, 22, 3838-3855, doi:10.1175/2009jcli2470.1. Reclamation, Denver, CO. [Available online at http://www.usbr.
[Available online at http://journals.aiiets ic.org/doii/ gov/climaet!SECiREidocs/SECUREWatcrRcport.pdft]
abs/10.1 175,/2009JCL12470.l]
-- , 2011: Reclamation Managing Water in the West: Interim Pierce, D. W., T. P. Barnett, H. G. Hidalgo, T. Das, C. Bonfils, B. Report No, 1, Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand D. Santer, G. Bala, M. D. Dettinger, D. R. Cayan, A. Mirin, A. Study, Status Report. U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of W. Wood, and T. Nozawa, 2008: Attribution of declining western Reclamation, Denver, CO. [Available online at hrrp://www.usbr.
US snowpack to human effects. Journalof Climate, 21, 6425-6444, gov/Ic/region/prograins/crbstudy/Reportlt/SratusRpt.pd ti doi:10.1175/2008JCLI2405.1. [Available online at http://;ournals.
aimetsoc.org/(fIi/abs/10.1175/2008.Cl1,12405.1] 159. USFS, cited 2012: Northern Institute of Applied Climate Science:
Climate Change Response Framework. U.S. Department of Seager, R., and G. A. Vecchi, 2010: Greenhouse warming and Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service. [Available online at http://irs.
the 21st century hydroclimate of southwestern North America. fs. fed. us/n iacs/clima tc/frarnuwork /]
Proceedings qf the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 21277-21282, doi:10.1073/pnas.0910856107. [Available online at http://www. 160. Swanston, C. W., M. Janowiak, L. R. Iverson, L. R. Parker, D.
pnas.org/contcnt/107/50/21 277.full.pdf] J. Mladenoff, L. Brandt, P. Butler, M. St. Pierre, A. M. Prasad, S. Matthews, M. P. Peters, and D. Higgins, 2011: Ecosystem 154. Gray, S. T., J. J. Lukas, and C. A. Woodhouse, 2011: Millennial- Vulnerability Assessment and Synthesis: A Report From the length records of streamflow from three major Upper Colorado Climate Change Response Framework Project in Northern River tributaries. JAAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Wisconsin. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-82, 142 pp., U.S. Department of Association, 47, 702-712, doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.2011.00535.x. Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown
[Available online at http://onI.inelibrat:v.wilcy.com/doi!/10.1111/ Square, PA. [Available online at http://www.fs.fecd.ui/nrs/pubs/
j.1752-1688.201 1.00535.x/pdf] gtr/gtr-nrs82.pdf]
Woodhouse, C. A., S. T. Gray, and D. M. Meko, 2006: Updated '161. Joyce, L. A., G. M. Blate, S. G. McNulty, C. I. Millar, S. Moser, streamflow reconstructions for the Upper Colorado River Basin. R. P. Neilson, and D. L. Peterson, 2009: Managing for multiple W.ater Resources Research, 42, doi:10.1029/2005WR004455. resources under climate change: National forests. Environmental Management,44, 1022-1032, doi:10.1007/s00267-009-9324-6.
155. Brown, C., 2010: The end of reliability. Journal of 97ater Resources Planning and Management, 136, 143-145, doi:10.1061/(ASCE) Miles, P. D., 2010: Forest Inventory EVALIDator web-application WR.1943-5452.65. version 4.01 beta. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station Forest Inventory and Analysis, St. Paul, 156. Western Governors' Association, 2006: Water Needs and Strategies MN. [Available online at http:/Hfiatoos.fs.fed.us/lE',validator4/
for a Sustainable Future 26 pp., Western Governors' Association, tnattributC.jsp]
Western States Water Council, Denver, CO.
WDNR, 2009: Forest Ownership and Parceliziation. Wisconsin
, 2008: Water Needs and Strategies for a Sustainable Future: Next Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI.
Steps. Western Governors' Association, 37 pp.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 702 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTAT7 /N1 162. Swanston, C., and M. Janowiak, Eds., 2012: Forest Adaptation Resources: Climate Change Tools and Approaches for Land Managers. General Technical Report NRS-87, 121 pp., U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Newtown Square, PA.
[Available online at http://wwxv.n rs.fs.fcd.us!pubs/gtr/gtr-tnrsg7.
pdf]
163. Butler, P., M. Janowiak, L. Brandt, and C. Swanston, 2011: Lessons learned from the Climate Change Response Framework Project in Northern Wisconsin: Newtown Square, PA, USDA Forest Service.
24 pp. [Available online at http://www.nirs.fs.ffed.us/iiiacs/local-rcso(urcesidocs/dcl_,lSS()NSl...ýlA\RN 1D_from thc (CCRFP.pdq Janowiak, M. K., P. R. Butler, C. W. Swanston, L. R. Parker, M.
J. St. Pierre, and L. A. Brandt, 2012: Adaptation workbook. Forest Adaptation Resources: Climate Change Tools and Approaches for Land Managers. General Technical Report NRS-87, C. Swanston, and M.
Janowiak, Eds., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 35-56. [Available online at http://www.nrs.fs.fcd.us/pubs/gtr/gtr.
nrs87.pdf]
164. DOT, 2011: Interagency Transportation, Land Use, and Climate Change Cape Cod Pilot Project: Cape Cod Commission Action Plan, 22 pp., U.S. Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. [Available online at http://www.volpe.dot.gov/sites/volpc.
dot.govi/fi les/docs/ccc-action plan.pdt]
165. -- , 2011: Interagency Transportation, Land Use, and Climate Change Cape Cod Pilot Project. One-Pager., 20 pp., U.S.
Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Washington, D.C. [Available online at http://www.volpe.dot.
gov/sires/volpc.dot.gov/files/docs/Caicle'%20Cod%/`201Pilot%20
'rojcct%20()ne'o20?l'aigr-092811 .pdf]
166. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 2004: Massachusetts Climate Protection Plan, 54 pp., Boston, MA.
167. Esri, 2011: Climate Change Scenario Planning for Cape Cod: A Collaborative Exercise in GeoDesign. ArcNews. [Available online at http://www.csri.com/ncws/arcnews/fallllarticles/climate-chan ge-scenario-planining- f(r.. cape-cod.html]
168. Lennertz, B., 2011: High-touch/high-tech charrettes. Planning, American Planning Association, 26 pp. [Available online at http://
www.planning.org/planning/2011//oct/]
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 703 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: ADAPTATION Process for Developing Key Messages Assessment of confidence based on evidence A central component of the process were bi-weekly technical dis- n/a cussions held from October 2011 to June 2012 via teleconference that focused on collaborative review and summary of all technical KEY MESSAGE #2 TRACEABLE ACCOUNT inputs relevant to adaptation (130+) as well as additional pub-Barriers to implementation of adaptation include lished literature, the iterative development of key messages, and limited funding, policy and legal impediments, and the final drafting of the chapter. An in-person meeting was held difficulty in anticipating climate-related changes at in Washington, D.C., in June 2012. Meeting discussions were fol-lowed by expert deliberation of draft key messages by the authors local scales.
and targeted consultation with additional experts by the lead au- Descriptionof evidence base thor of each key message. Consensus was reached on all key mes- The key message and supporting text summarize extensive sages and supporting text. evidence documented in the peer reviewed literature as well as the more than 130 technical inputs received and reviewed as KEY MESSAGE #1 TRACEABLE ACCOUNT part of the Federal Register Notice solicitation for public input.
Substantial adaptation planning is occurring in A significant quantity of reviewed literature profiles barriers or the public and private sectors and at all levels of constraints that are impeding the advancement of adaptation 2 4 government; however, few measures have been activity across sectors, scales, and regions.""' °' "'
implemented and those that have appear to be in-cremental changes. Numerous peer-reviewed documents describe adaptation barriers (see Table 28.6). Moreover, additional citations are used in the Descriptionof evidence base text of the chapter to substantiate this key message.
The key message and supporting text summarize extensive evidence documented in the peer-reviewed literature as well as New information and remaininguncertainties the more than 130 technical inputs received and reviewed as part n/a of the Federal Register Notice solicitation for public input.
Assessment of confidence based on evidence Numerous peer-reviewed publications indicate that a growing n/a number of sectors, governments at all scales, and private and non-governmental actors are starting to undertake adaptation KEY MESSAGE #3 TRACEABLE ACCOUNT activity.9'13 Much of this activity is focused on planning with There is no "one-size fits all" adaptation, but little literature documenting implementation of activities.8 ' 11""" there are similarities in approaches across regions Supporting this statement is also plentiful literature that profiles and sectors. Sharing best practices, learning by barriers or constraints that are impeding the advancement of doing, and iterative and collaborative processes in-adaptation activity across sectors, scales, and regions. 42.68 cluding stakeholder involvement, can help support progress.
Additional citations are used in the text of the chapter to substantiate this key message. Descriptionof evidence base The key message and supporting text summarize extensive New informationand remaining uncertainties evidence documented in the peer-reviewed literature as well as n/a the more than 130 technical inputs received and reviewed as part of the Federal Register Notice solicitation for public input.
U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 704 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: AiDAFTA_1lON-Literature submitted for this assessment, as well as additional New information and remaining uncertainties literature reviewed by the author team, fully supports the concept n/a that adaptations will ultimately need to be selected for their local applicability based on impacts, timing, political structure, Assessment of confidence based on evidence finances, and other criteria." 90 Similarities do exist in the types n/a of adaptation being implemented, although nuanced differences do make most adaptation uniquely appropriate for the specific KEY MESSAGE #5 TRACEABLE ACCOUNT implementer. The selection of locally and context-appropriate Vulnerability to climate change is exacerbated by adaptations is enhanced by iterative and collaborative processes other stresses such as pollution, habitat fragmen-in which stakeholders directly engage with decision-makers and tation, and poverty. Adaptation to multiple stresses information providers." While there are no "one-size fits all" requires assessment of the composite threats as adaptation strategies, evidence to date supports the message that well as tradeoffs amongst costs, benefits, and the sharing of best practices and lessons learned are greatly aiding risks of available options.
in adaptation progress across sectors, systems, and governance systems.82"" Description of evidence base The key message and supporting text summarize extensive Additional citations are used in the text of the chapter to evidence documented in the peer-reviewed literature as well as substantiate this key message. the more than 130 technical inputs received and reviewed as part of the Federal Register Notice solicitation for public input.
NEW INFORMATION ANDREMAINING UNCERTAINTIES n/a Climate change is only one of a multitude of stresses affecting social, environmental, and economic systems. Activity to date and ASSESSMENT OFCONFIDENCE BASED ONEVIDENCE literature profiling those activities support the need for climate n/a adaptation activity to integrate the concerns of multiple stresses in decision-making and planning.' 6 7 32' As evidenced by activities KEY MESSAGE #4 TRACEABLE ACCOUNT to date, integrating multiple stresses into climate adaptation Climate change adaptation actions often fulfill decision-making and vice versa will require the assessment of other societal goals, such as sustainable develop- tradeoffs amongst costs, benefits, the risks of available options, 5 90 111 ment, disaster risk reduction, or improvements in and the potential value of outcomes. ' ,
quality of life, and can therefore be incorporated into existing decision-making processes. Additional citations are used in the text of the chapter to substantiate this key message.
Description of evidence base The key message and supporting text summarize extensive New information and remaininguncertainties evidence documented in the peer-reviewed literature as well as n/a the more than 130 technical inputs received and reviewed as part of the Federal Register Notice solicitation for public input. Assessment of confidence based on evidence n/a Literature submitted for this assessment, as well as additional literature reviewed by the author team, supports the message that KEY MESSAGE #6 TRACEABLE ACCOUNT a significant amount of activity that has climate adaptation value The effectiveness of climate change adaptation is initiated for reasons other than climate preparedness and/or has has seldom been evaluated, because actions have other co-benefits in addition to increasing preparedness to climate only recently been initiated and comprehensive and weather impacts.'1120,82,86,116 In recognition of this and other evaluation metrics do not yet exist.
factors, a movement has emerged encouraging the integration of climate change considerations into existing decision-making and Descriptionof evidence base planning processes (i.e., mainstream ing)."'u The case studies The key message and supporting text summarize extensive discussed in the chapter amplify this point. evidence documented in the peer-reviewed literature as well as the more than 130 technical inputs received and reviewed as part Additional citations are used in the text of the chapter to of the Federal Register Notice solicitation for public input.
substantiate this key message.
Numerous peer-reviewed publications indicate that no comprehensive adaptation evaluation metrics exist, meaning that no substantial body of literature or guidance materials U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 705 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
28: A DAPTATIONJ IRACEAbLE AccO,_JF.:-qs exist on how to thoroughly evaluate the success of adaptation activities. "'81'1 0 This is an emerging area of research. A challenge of creating adaptation evaluation metrics is the growing interest in mainstreaming; this means that separating out adaptation activities from other activities could prove difficult.
Additional citations are used in the text of the chapter to substantiate this key message.
New information and remaining uncertainties n/a Assessment of confidence based on evidence n/a U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM 706 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS INTHE UNITED STATES
FACT SHEET: President Obama's Climate Action Plan I The White House Page 1 of 2 C iwt Email Update'S (tCottt Us fHome
- Briefirn Room
- Statemenrts &-.Releases Search WhiteHouse.gov Search n
The White House Office of the Press Secretary WHCTE HOUSESNAREMELEE For Immediate Release June 25, 2013 FACT SHEET: President Obama's Climate Action Plan President Obama's Plan to Cut Carbon Pollution Taking Action for OurKids We have a moral obligation to leave our children a planet that's not polluted or damaged, and by taking an all- of-the-above approach to develop homegrown energy and steady, responsible steps to cut carbon pollution, we can protect our kids' health and begin to slow the effects of climate change so we leave a cleaner, more stable environment for future generations. Building on efforts underway in states and communities across the country, the President's plan cuts carbon pollution that causes climate change and threatens public health. Today, we have LATEST BLOG POSTS limits in place for arsenic, mercury and lead, but we let power plants release as much carbon pollution as they want May20, 2014 2:22 PM EDT
- pollution that is contributing to higher rates of asthma attacks and more frequent and severe floods and heat Watch: The Bidens Touch Down in waves. Bucharest Watch the highlights from the Vice President and Cutting carbon pollution will help keep our air and water clean and protect our kids. The President's plan will also Dr. Biden's arrival in Bucharest, Romania - the spark innovation across a wide variety of energy technologies, resulting in cleaner forms of American- made energy first stop on their three-day trip to Romania and and cutting our dependence on foreign oil. Combined with the President's other actions to increase the efficiency of Cyprus.
our cars and household appliances, the President's plan will help American families cut energy waste, lowering their gas and utility bills. In addition, the plan steps up our global efforts to lead on climate change and invests to May15, 2014 5:33 PM EDT strengthen our roads, bridges, and shorelines so we can better protect people's homes, businesses, and way of life Being Biden Vol. 15: Coffee from severe weather. In this edition of Being Biden, the Vice President discusses meeting with Officer Peter Laboy of the While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, we have a moral obligation to act on behalf of future Alexandria Police Department, who was injured in generations. Climate change represents one of the major challenges of the 21st century, but as a nation of the line of duty last year.
innovators, we can and will meet this challenge in a way that advances our economy, our environment, and public health all at the same time. That is why the President's comprehensive plan takes action to: May19. 2014 11.40 AM EDT Making Full Use of Arncrica's Talent Cuts Carbon Pollution in America. In 2012, U.S. carbon pollution from the energy sector fell to the lowest level in For all of the progress women have made in the two decades even as the economy continued to grow. To build on this progress, the Obama Administration is 20th century - gaining the right to vote, becoming putting in place tough new rules to cut carbon pollution-just like we have for other toxins like mercury and arsenic nearly half of the workforce, and increasing their
-so we protect the health of our children and move our economy toward American-made clean energy sources education, there is still work to be done to remove that will create good jobs and lower home energy bills. For example, the plan: barriers that limit us from making full use of our nation's talent in the future.
- Directs EPA to work closely with states, industry and other stakeholder to establish carbon pollution standards for both new and existing power plants; VIEW ALL RELATED BLOG POSTS,
- Makes up to $8 billion in loan guarantee authority available for a wide array of advanced fossil energy and efficiency projects to support investments in innovative technologies:
- Directs DOI to permit enough renewables project-like wind and solar - on public lands by 2020 to power more than 6 million homes; designates the first-ever hydropower project for priority permitting; and sets a new goal to install 100 megawatts of renewables on federally assisted housing by 2020; while maintaining YouTube Facebook the commitment to deploy renewables on military installations;
- Expands the President's Better Building Challenge, focusing on helping commercial, industrial, and multi- Twitter Vimeo family buildings cut waste and become at least 20 percent more energy efficient by 2020; FPickr iTunes
- Sets a goal to reduce carbon pollution by at least 3 billion metric tons cumulatively by 2030 - more than half of the annual carbon pollution from the U.S. energy sector - through efficiency standards set over the course Google- Linkedin of the Administration for appliances and federal buildings;
- Commits to partnering with industry and stakeholders to develop fuel economy standards for heavy-duty vehicles to save families money at the pump and further reduce reliance on foreign oil and fuel consumption post-2018; and
- Leverages new opportunities to reduce pollution of highly-potent greenhouse gases known as hydrofluorocarbons; directs agencies to develop a comprehensive methane strategy; and commits to protect our forests and critical landscapes.
Prepares the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change. Even as we take new steps to cut carbon pollution, we must also prepare for the impacts of a changing climate that are already being felt across the country.
Building on progress over the last four years, the plan:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/25/fact-sheet-president-obama-s-clim... 5/20/2014
FACT SHEET: President Obama's Climate Action Plan I The White House Page 2 of 2
- Directs agencies to support local climate-resilient investment by removing barriers or counterproductive policies and modernizing programs: and establishes a short-term task force of state, local, and tribal officials to advise on key actions the Federal government can take to help strengthen communities on the ground;
- Pilots innovative strategies in the Hurricane Sandy-affected region to strengthen communities against future extreme weather and other climate impacts: and building on a new, consistent flood risk reduction standard established for the Sandy-affected region, agencies will update flood-risk reduction standards for all federally funded projects;
- Launches an effort to create sustainable and resilient hospitals in the face of climate change through a public
-private partnership with the healthcare industry;
- Maintains agricultural productivity by delivering tailored, science-based knowledge to farmers, ranchers, and landowners%and helps communities prepare for drought and wildfire by launching a National Drought Resilience Partnership and by expanding and prioritizing forest- and rangeland- restoration efforts to make areas less vulnerable to catastrophic fire: and
- Provides climate preparedness tools and information needed by state, local, and private-sector leaders through a centralized "toolkit" and a new Climate Data Initiative.
Lead International Efforts to Address Global Climate Change. Just as no country is immune from the impacts of climate change, no country can meet this challenge alone. That is why it is imperative for the United States to couple action at home with leadership internationally. America must help forge a truly global solution to this global challenge by galvanizing international action to significantly reduce emissions, prepare for climate impacts, and drive progress through the international negotiations. For example, the plan:
- Commits to expand major new and existing international initiatives, including bilateral initiatives with China, India, and other major emitting countries:
- Leads global sector public financing towards cleaner energy by calling for the end of U.S. government support for public financing of new coal-fired powers plants overseas, except for the most efficient coal technology available in the world's poorest countries, or facilities deploying carbon capture and sequestration technologies; and
- Strengthens global resilience to climate change by expanding government and local community planning and response capacities.
Download the Full PDF Report View the lnrographic WWW. Wil l TEIO U- S E, G 0V En espatot JAccessibllity CopyroghtInformation. Privacy Policy :Cooact UJA.gov loeveloPers ]Applyfora Job http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/20l3/06/25/fact-sheet-president-obama-s-clim... 5/20/2014