Adaptation and mitigation to climate change

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has said Chile is "highly vulnerable to climate change," citing the country's low coast lines, susceptibility to natural disasters, increased risk for desertification, and noting the fragile and important forests and mountains (such as the Andes) that must be preserved. Subsequently, the Chilean government has taken steps to try to reduce carbon emissions and find other ways to try to slow or negate the effects of global warming.

One "concrete step," as UNFCCC has called it, that Chile has taken in adapting to climate change is reexamining current agriculture techniques and technologies:

(From UNFCCC's 2nd National Communication from Chile:)

Spheres of action pertinent to this sector include the use and changeover of crop varieties; improvement and adjustment of current irrigation practices; changes in irriga- tion systems; sustainable management of groundwater; tree planting; increasing the availability of water; more efficient and effective fertilization; preparation and appli- cation of compost; the use and incorporation of agricultu- ral waste; the controlled use of fire; and the management of herd-irrigation-pasture and livestock infrastructure.

In regard to instruments that support the development and implementation of adaptation measures, while it is true that all instruments that currently exist or have been applied in the recent past in Chile originated to address concerns other than climate change, this does not mean that they are not suitable for supporting adaptation mea- sures or reducing the vulnerability of the agriculture and livestock sector to climate change. 

In an attempt to mitigate the ills of climate change, the country has pledged to use at least 20% energy from renewable sources by the year 2020. Chile has also promised to back research studying both cost and environmentally efficient energy sources.

Of course, many countries in Latin America as a whole have implemented policies and laid the groundwork for adapting to or mitigating climate change. The IPCC outlines here some options Latin American governments have or could opt for in an effort to fight the impact of global warming. One of these options includes an interesting bit about human rights and climate change. Though human lives are discussed in conversation about climate change, as we have contributed and our lives will be influenced as we continue to see change, human rights seem to be an oft ignored part during talks on global warming. Droughts, access to water, food and other resources will be problematic for many people if we continue to warm at the projected rates, this will only further social inequalities as many people will be left to fight even harder for necessary resources. The IPCC suggests that marginalized groups need to be part of the conversation. Local communities, especially impoverished farmlands, must have an avenue through which they can communicate their needs to the government. Furthermore, the IPCC says that the lands belonging to marginalized people need to be legally recognized as such. This procures resources for those who may be most vulnerable in the event of sparsity.

Chile signed the Kyoto Protocol, an international pledge to reduce carbon emissions, on June 17, 1998.

When asked the question "should Chile adapt to or mitigate climate change," my immediate response was mitigate, mitigate, mitigate! If one can, why not prevent or reduce the damage instead of allow the damage to happen and adapt later? However, it is not so simple. Chile is but a small country in a much bigger world that must work together in unity if we desire to mitigate climate change. Let us remember that Chile was actually a very small offender when compared to the majority of other nations when it comes to carbon emissions, while other Latin American countries, such as Brazil, are far more guilty of mass deforestation. If other countries are not actively trying to mitigate climate change, it would be almost miraculous for any country to not suffer the side effects. Chile can do all it can to mitigate climate change through renewable energy, preserving glaciers and the Andes, reevaluating agriculture procedures, and reducing emissions, but adaptation may be the route necessary if not all countries step up to the plate to ensure a clean, smart future.

This NASA image shows that Tyndall Glacier, located in Torres Del Paine National Park, has retreated over the past 17 years. NASA scientists suggest this is due to warmer temperatures and lessened precipitation in the area. Glacier protection has been one of many steps Chile has taken in adapting to climate change.

Impacts of Climate Change

In my last post, we examined Chile's contributions to global warming by specially examining carbon emissions. To summarize, we did find Chile is a relatively small "offender" when compared to nations such as China or our own (the United States), but still has seen a steady rise in emissions over the past century. Why is that worth discussing? Because carbon emissions elicit responses, and we are already seeing these responses manifest in changes in Chile's, and South and Central America's, climate.

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) famous 2007 report (it is the most recent report available, with another updated study currently being crafted together), it is suggested that Central and South America as a whole will "very likely" experience warming during this century. Interestingly, the IPCC suggests that south South America will see warming rates akin to the global mean average (this includes a large portion of Chile), however, the rest of the continent may see faster and more damaging rates. Perhaps this does not come as much of a surprise to you, reader, if you consider industry. It's more than possible, and perhaps likely, that a quick trip to your fridge will reveal much of your produce is farmed in Mexico, it is possible the shirt you are wearing was made in Mexico, and, according to a recent Bloomberg article, Mexico has doubled auto manufacturing since 2009 and is looking to drastically increase steel production.

Scientists are busy creating models in an attempt to figure out just what this warming might look like, and what its impacts might be. For example, scientists are trying to figure out how the warming might effect rain fall. This is a particularly pressing matter, as South America is home to the world's largest rainforest.

Image and explanation property of the IPCC. I do not own this image, but posted it for educational purposes. To see the original image, or for more information on these models, please visit http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch11s11-6-3.html .

Though predictions do vary slightly by model, it is agreed that there might be a chance for some very damaging and tragic manifestations of the warming as it occurs in Central and South America. Studies suggest that an increase in temperature, and subsequent decrease in the water in the soils, may result in "significant biodiversity loss through species extinction" (IPCC). The IPCC also anticipates that some drier climates in the area will become even more so, resulting in a devastating impact on crops and a jeopardizing of food availability. Parts of the continent which lay lower might also see sea water levels rising, putting the coasts at "increased risk" for floods.

However devastating these predictions may be, they are more devastating still considering Latin America has already been impacted by climate change. The IPCC has found that there have been significant changes in climate and weather, citing many of these variations starting around the 1990s. Venezuela, for example, experienced severe and profoundly greater-than-average rainfalls in 1999 and 2005, while the Amazon experienced a drought in 2005. The IPCC reminded us in this same report that extremes in weather variations and severe weather can result in an "increase in mortality and morbidity" among local people. The chances of weather variations causing significant harm to the people is less likely when proper technology is utilized and the information is accessible. Unfortunately, due to the socio-economic situations of many areas in Latin America, this is often lacking.

Much of the climate change that has already occurred in Central and South America, and will continue to increase, is the result of deforestation. According to the IPCC, 3/4 of the drylands on the continent have already been impacted by "degradation processes." The continent's beautiful tropical forests, which house an abundance of diverse plant and animal life, are under severe threat- deforestation rates have grown astronomically over the last decade. Animals at risk of losing their homes if mass deforestation continues includes Jaguars, Golden Lion Tamarins, Three-Toed Sloths, Hyacinth Macaws, and Poison Dart Frogs.

The Three-Toed Sloth lives in South America's warm, moist, and comfortable rain forests because they cannot regulate their own body temperatures!
For more information on these sloths, please visit http://gifts.worldwildlife.org/gift-center/gifts/Species-Adoptions/Three-toed-Sloth.aspx .

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources-- Please visit these sites for more in-depth information on the impacts of climate change on Chile, Central, and South America.

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/contents.html

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/spm.html 

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch11.html 

http://www.sheppardsoftware.com/content/animals/kidscorner/endangered_animals/endangeredanimals_1.htm

Chile's contribution to climate change

This is (my attempt at) a Keeling Curve. This graph tells us about the increase in carbon dioxide concentration  over the decades. The numbers on the left side is the carbon dioxide concentration in parts per million, while the bottom numbers obviously represent the year. This is not specific to Chile, but is representative of the upward trend we are all experiencing and perhaps contributing to.

[MORE GRAPHS TO COME, AFTER I UPDATE SOFTWARE.]

In step with a global trend, Chile's CO2 emissions have been pretty steadily on the rise since 1900. It is of interesting note, however, that between 1970 and 1990 we saw emissions peak (1970) and consistently drop through the 1980s. These numbers began to pick up again in 1990, and reached record levels by present day. As of 2010, Chile saw emissions of CO2 at 1.2 metric tons!

When trying to figure out why we saw a steady drop in CO2 admissions after 1970, I discovered that Chile was in a state of economic and political turmoil at this time. By 1973, inflation had risen by over 800%. The people of Chile were not happy with the cost of living, or the current president's handling of the nation, which lead to strikes. Truck owners, copper workers, and other factory hands refused to work, which could have resulted in reduced emissions during this time. By 1989, Chile had transitioned to a Democracy, ushering in a new age of prosperity for the people. This, of course, is when emissions again began to hike up.

In comparing Chile's CO2 emissions with that of the United States, which emits 4.9 metric tons as of 2008, Chile releases only 24% of the US's emissions. In terms of rank, Chile is number 93 on CDIAC's list of emissions per capita. The United States is listed at 12. I think a major component of this difference in emissions could be individual wealth. According to the OECD Better Life Index, the average disposable income of a family in Chile is just $11,000 (USD) a year. This is much less than the United States' $38,000 per year. I think that the amount of money boasted by the average American allows us to partake in and consume CO2-emitting activities and goods at higher rates. But of course, Chile's population, and therefore emissions, is profoundly smaller than ours (about 17 million vs. 313 million).



Now, in zooming back out into a slightly wider world view and then narrowing in a couple of select countries to gain a broader perspective of Chile's fossil fuel emissions, we'll examine the numeric relationship between Chile, the United States, and China.

The break down leaves Chile looking like quite the good, innocent, clean country of the bunch!

In 2008, Chile emitted 19,937 metric tons of fossil fuels. While this is a big number, the United States emitted 1,546,903 metric tons and China emitted an astounding 1,917,621 metric tons! This is the result of population and manufacturing. Of course, let us not be too hasty in jumping down China's throat. Though perhaps more regulation is needed in China, as it is in a great many nations, the US's emissions and China's are truly comparable when we look at the numbers- in the millions, it's just plain too much! However, when we factor in population, it is the US whose numbers seem staggering. China has 1,338,000,000 people to the US's 312,000,000. That means, if we were to just hypothetically break this down into emissions per person, each American would contribute .005 to every Chinese' .001. This means maybe the US had a bit more 'splainin to do! (It is of note, however, that per capita, Qatar is actually the biggest offender in fossil furl emissions.)


A quick closing note, it is important to remember that carbon emissions are different than carbon dioxide concentrations. Concentrations are the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, versus the amount we've emitted into the atmosphere.