Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
These records pertain to Global Climate Change.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
285411017
label
Binder: Conference on Global Climate Change [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
285411017
contentType
document
title
Binder: Conference on Global Climate Change [2]
description
These records pertain to Global Climate Change.
citationUrl
identifierLocal
04822-012
collections
Records of the Domestic Policy Council (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Subject Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
285411017
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
864f74f737c2e109
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2017-0310-F
2017-0310-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin: Domestic Policy Council
Series:
DPC Files
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
04822
Folder ID Number:
04822-012
Folder Title:
Binder: Conference on Global Climate Change [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
18
20
2
U.S. RESPONSE TO CONFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE
DRAFT AS OF APRIL 10, 1990
THEME 1: UNCERTAIN CHANGE: THE SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS
RESEARCH CHALLENGE
1.1 WHAT SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE IS BEING
CONDUCTED OR IS NOW PLANNED IN YOUR COUNTRY? PLEASE
PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF THIS WORK INTO THE FOLLOWING
CATEGORIES:
1.1a GLOBAL/REGIONAL FORECASTS OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES LEADING
TO POSSIBLE GLOBAL CHANGE;
1.1b GLOBAL/REGIONAL MODELS OF GEOPHYSICAL GLOBAL CHANGE
PROCESSES;
1.1c SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF POSSIBLE GLOBAL CHANGE
WITH OR WITHOUT ADAPTIVE STRATEGIES; AND
1.1d SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF SPECIFIC ACTIONS
THAT MIGHT BE TAKEN TO ARREST POSSIBLE GLOBAL CHANGE.
RESPONSE:
U.S. Government agencies, in concert with the national and international scientific
community, have a long history of conducting research into the nature and impacts
(including socioeconomic impacts) of environmental change on global, regional and
local scales including work to: (i) understand and, where necessary, mitigate
changes in air and water quality; (ii) conserve natural resources (including fish,
wildlife, forests, and agriculture); (iii) identify and protect unique ecosystems and
endangered species; (iv) understand and predict climate change and respond to its
regional implications; (v) distinguish between natural variability in the Earth
system and the influence of human-induced change, and (vi) assess the value and
effectiveness of various mitigation and adaptation technologies and practices (e.g.,
trace gas emission controls). The principal U.S. agencies engaged in this work
include: the Department of Commerce (particularly through its National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration), the Departments of Agriculture, Energy and
Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and the National Science Foundation. Each of these agencies
conduct these scientific activities to support their individual missions and
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
1
contribute to a better understanding of the global environment and how human
activities may be affecting the Earth system upon which we rely not only for natural
resources but for life itself.
Over the past several years, the U.S. Government identified the need to focus the
work of these several agencies, in concert with the broad national and international
scientific community, into a more integrated program designed to anticipate and
respond to the significant economic, social and natural resource implications raised
by our increased understanding of current and potential large-scale changes in the
global environment (e.g., stratospheric ozone depletion, global climate change,
deforestation, and loss of biodiversity). The primary focus of global change science
in the United States is now the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP)
which was initiated to improve our understanding of the global Earth system,
reduce major scientific uncertainties and ensure a long-term national commitment
to continually re-evaluate the effectiveness of policy in the light of new scientific
insights and socioeconomic impacts. A brief summary of the history, goal and
scientific objectives of the U.S. Global Change Research Program is included as
Attachment A. In addition, Attachment B to this Questionnaire provides an
annotated bibliography of selected major global change science and economics
research studies in the United States.
1.1b GLOBAL/REGIONAL MODELS OF GEOPHYSICAL CHANGE PROCESSES
The U.S. Global Change Research Program, like similar program in other countires,
will significantly expand Earth system research, data gathering, and modeling
activities with both near- and long-term scientific and public policy benefits. It
includes a carefully-balanced mix of ground- and space-based research efforts that are
essential given the variability of the phenomena being studied and the need to scale
local processes to regional and global levels. Concerning ground-based activities, the
Program will support government-wide (i.e., multi-agency) research thrusts in
several critical areas, including the role of clouds in controlling climate, fluxes of
greenhouse gases, resource responses to global change, past changes in the Earth
system, and the role of human activities in global change. The space-based
component of the Program will initiate the development of the NASA Earth
Observing System (EOS), a key element in a "Mission to Planet Earth," which will
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
2
provide the centerpiece of an integrated international satellite program for
monitoring global change, coupled with a comprehensive data and information
system.
The USGCRP is designed around seven science elements which characterize the
breadth of scientific investigations required to develop a capability to anticipate,
assess, and address the issues associated with global environmental change: Climate
and Hydrologic Systems; Biogeochemical Dynamics; Ecological Systems and
Dynamics; Earth System History; Human Interactions; Solid Earth Processes; and
Solar Influences. Within each of these science elements, the USGCRP is designed to
provide for a balanced program of documenting, understanding and predicting
change. In some cases, projects are designed to provide near-term results by focusing
an aggressive, limited duration scientific attack on some key aspect of the Earth
system (e.g., stratospheric ozone depletion). In other cases, projects are designed as
part of a long-term commitment to the documentation of Earth system changes on a
global scale (e.g., the satellite-based Earth Observing System).
With an ultimate focus on the provision of policy-relevant information about the
current and anticipated state of the global environment, the USGCRP supports three
scientific priorities:
Establish an integrated, comprehensive program of documenting the
earth system on a global scale through observational programs and data
management systems;
Conduct a program of focused studies to improve our understanding of
the physical, geological, chemical, biological, and social processes that
influence earth system processes and trends on global and regional
scales; and
Develop integrated conceptual and predictive earth system models.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
3
1.1a GLOBAL/REGIONAL FORECASTS OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES LEADING
TO POSSIBLE GLOBAL CHANGE;
1.1c SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF POSSIBLE GLOBAL CHANGE
WITHOUT ADAPTIVE STRATEGIES.
Of particular relevance to the questions raised here, are the research projects
planned under the Human Interactions science element. Current and planned
activities under this science element recognize that adequate models of the physical
and biological processes of change must incorporate an understanding of the
relationship between those processes and the human activities that stimulate and
mediate changes in the global environment. USGCRP/Human Interactions studies
address high-priority observational, research and modelling requirements associated
with the following questions:
What data are needed to verify models of interaction between human
(institutions and behavior) and natural systems and to assess the
likelihood of changes in those processes?
How do population dynamics contribute to global environmental
change?
How do institutions influence environmental processes and respond to
changes in global environmental conditions?
How do technological and economic development contribute to global
environmental change, and how will changing environmental
conditions affect future technological and economic development? and
How do changing patterns in the use of land, water, energy resources and
other natural resources affect global environmental change?
In all cases, these research activities are driven by the need to establish a sound
empirical basis upon which to ultimately assess the feasibility and likely results of
various policies options.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
4
1.1c SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF POSSIBLE GLOBAL CHANGE
WITH ADAPTIVE STRATEGIES;
1.1d SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIONS THAT
MIGHT BE TAKEN TO ARREST POSSIBLE GLOBAL CHANGE.
In addition to the fundamental science program embodied in the USGCRP, major
studies of mitigation and adaptation policies are underway throughout the U.S.
Federal Government (e.g., in the Departments of Agriculture, Energy and Interior,
the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Office of Technology Assessment of
the U.S. Congress) and in the private and non-profit sectors (e.g., Electric Power
Research Institute, Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and
Stanford University). Some of the issues addressed by these studies include:
Determining the economic obligations and responsibilities to future
generations and how to allocate costs for reduction in the rate of global
environmental change;
Global analysis of the potential magnitude and impacts of rising energy
costs from global carbon dioxide emissions reductions at various levels;
and
Assessing options for mitigating or reducing tropical deforestation
(including methods for sustainable agriculture and other alternatives).
The role of agricultural practices and techniques in both mitigating and
adapting to possible climate change.
Most of the work in this area has focused on possible climate change and in many
cases, these and similar studies contribute directly to the deliberations of the
Response Strategies Working Group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC). Some specific examples of this work are briefly described below.
The Adaptive Strategies Program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) is designed to identify resource impacts on both domestic and, where possible,
international levels and to examine policy options to mitigate domestic impacts.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
5
The Program builds on the recent EPA Report to Congress entitled POTENTIAL
EFFECTS OF GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE UNITED STATES. The
Adaptive Strategies Program sponsors domestic and international studies to
examine the social and economic impacts of climate change on agriculture, water
resources, coastal resources, forests, biodiversity, fisheries, infrastructure, and
human health. Through this program, the implications of possible global warming
will be assessed as well as the effectiveness of policy alternatives, such as
anticipatory actions to adapt to climate change. The U.S. EPA hopes that these
studies will more clearly define national vulnerabilities and provide for the
exploration of adaptive strategies with natural resource managers, states and local
governments.
The global climate change program in the U.S. Department of Agriculture explores
agriculture's role in reducing negative impacts of current technology and
production systems, expanding the role of agriculture and forestry in reducing
greenhouse gases, and developing stress-resistant crops and livestock to adapt to
possible climate changes. Examples include research to reduce methane production
from rice paddies and livestock and nitrogen dioxide from crop production by
optimizing the use of nitrogen fertilizers. Studies are investigating the use of
agriculture and forestry as important sources of carbon-based chemicals, essentially
recycling carbon dioxide through photosynthesis as an alternative to fossil fuel
sources. Efforts to increase crop and livestock tolerance to environmental stress,
such as temperature extremes and drought for example, are being conducted to help
the agricultural sector adapt if there are major shifts in climate.
An annotated bibliography of selected major global change studies in the United
States, including those addressing the socioeconomic aspects of mitigation and/or
adaptation to possible changes in the global environment (particularly climate
change) is provided in Attachment B to this Questionnaire.
The U.S. Government has recently taken steps to more carefully design and
implement a mitigation and adaptation research strategies program to complement
the fundamental science program outlined in the U.S. Global Change Research
Program. Additional details on this effort are provided in the response to questions
under Theme II -- Integrating Scientific and Economics Research Into the Policy
Process.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
6
1.2 WHAT POTENTIAL CONFLICTS, IF ANY, BETWEEN YOUR
INTEREST IN CONTINUED ECONOMIC PROGRESS AND YOUR
INTEREST IN ARRESTING POSSIBLE UNDESIRABLE GLOBAL
CHANGE HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED BY YOUR EXISTING RESEARCH?
WHAT SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH IS MOST
CRITICAL TO IMPROVING OUR UNDERSTANDING OF RELEVANT
TRADEOFFS AND POSSIBLY IMPROVING THE TRADEOFFS
THEMSELVES?
RESPONSE:
The United States continues to support a decision-making approach which ensures
that environmental considerations are factored into economic development
decisions at the earliest possible stage. We believe that sound policy must be
justified on the basis of a strong scientific understanding not only of physical and
biological processes affected by a proposed action but also the social, economic and
environmental consequences of action or inaction; new scientific insights will
enable us to more effectively consider the environmental impacts of proposed
actions. For example, wildlife researchers in the United States have highlighted the
need to consider the effect on species diversity of filling wetlands for agriculture,
road construction, housing and industrial development. The degree to which we
are successful in identifying and addressing specific environmental considerations
associated with potential large-scale changes in the global environment, depends in
large part on the level of understanding and certainty associated with the local and
regional effects of an anticipated change. In the case of possible global warming due
to greenhouse gases, for example, the limitations of our understanding of the
timing, nature and magnitude of an integrated Earth system response to increased
radiative forcing in the atmosphere constrains the potential effectiveness of policy
decisions chosen today. The United States is committed to joining with our
international colleagues to reduce these uncertainties and continually re-evaluate
the effectiveness of policy in light of new scientific and socioeconomic insights.
The United States believes that uncertainties associated with the timing and
magnitude of possible global change mean that policies will vary in their appeal as
uncertainties are reduced; an appropriate strategy to address possible global change
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
7
based on today's knowledge and in light of today's economic environment may be
wholly inappropriate within a decade. The United States encourages economics
research which focuses on evaluating the benefits and costs of policies under a
broad range of outcomes that reflect the scientific (and related economic)
uncertainties of possible global change.
The United States believes that an effective response to potential environmental
changes requires the consideration of market mechanisms, including: (i) the
development of thorough cost-benefit analyses of possible response options and (ii)
the important role of the private sector in the development of new practices and
technologies to reduce sources or enhance sinks of greenhouse gases and adapt to
possible global environmental changes. Environmental policy in the United States
can often be more effective and economically efficient by harnessing market
mechanisms, such as by offering incentives to the private sector, than by mandating
the use of specific techniques or technologies Government chooses.
Two particular areas of study within the U.S. Global Change Research Program
address the scientific and economic aspects of relevant tradeoffs:
How do institutions influence environmental processes and respond to
changes in global environmental conditions?
How do technological and economic development influence global
environmental change, and how will changing environmental
conditions affect future technological and economic development?
The United States believes that, perhaps, the most important characteristic of an
effective global change research effort is the commitment to continually re-evaluate
policy decisions in the light of new scientific insights.
1.3 WHAT IS YOUR GOVERNMENT'S CURRENT AND PROJECTED
BUDGET FOR SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH RELEVANT
TO GLOBAL CHANGE ISSUES? HOW ARE YOUR RESEARCH
EFFORTS COORDINATED ACROSS AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS
WITHIN YOUR GOVERNMENT?
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
8
RESPONSE:
The President's fiscal year (October 1, 1990 through September 30, 1990) 1991 budget
proposes to spend $1.034 billion for global change research by Federal agencies under
the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). This represents a 57%
increase over the current funding level of $659.3 million for the U.S. Global Change
Research Program. In addition, the participating U.S. Federal agencies are expected
to continue to support related scientific efforts that contribute indirectly to the goal
and objectives of the USGCRP at approximately $440 million in fiscal year 1991.
The USGCRP is coordinated at the highest levels of government through the
interagency Committee on Earth Sciences (CES) which reports directly to the
President's Science Advisor. The CES was formed in April 1987 to:
INCREASE THE OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS AND PRODUCTIVITY OF FEDERAL
R&D EFFORTS DIRECTED TOWARD UNDERSTANDING OF THE EARTH AS A
GLOBAL SYSTEM.
Additional details on the history, membership and activities of the Committee on
Earth Sciences with respect to the USGCRP are provided in Attachment A. The
coordination of global change research activities by CES is primarily focused in: (i)
the Working Group on Global Change which addresses the fundamental science
embodied in the USGCRP and (ii) the newly created Working Group on Mitigation
and Adaptation Strategies. The CES provides the integrating focus in the United
States for scientific input to national and international global change deliberations.
1.4 WHAT IS THE INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE FOR CONDUCTING
SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH RELEVANT TO GLOBAL
CHANGE IN YOUR COUNTRY?
RESPONSE:
U.S. global change research activities are primarily supported through the work of
seven Federal government agencies in close collaboration with the academic
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
9
scientific community and industry. U.S. Federal agencies and laboratories,
universities and private sector research institutions operate in a partnership which
allows each to bring their unique talents and capabilities to bear on the scientific
challenge associated with documenting, understanding and predicting changes in
the global environment and their regional impacts.
The principal Federal funding agencies for global change research are: the
Department of Commerce (primarily through its National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration), the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, and
Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and the National Science Foundation. Investigators at academic
institutions across the country, who are funded by these agencies and also by state,
industrial, and private organizations, collaborate with their Government
counterparts routinely. U.S. Industry is encouraged to bring its expertise to bear on
such problems as the development of new practices and technologies to mitigate
and/or adapt to potential environmental change.
Additional details on the institutional mechanisms established to coordinate global
change research activities in the United States are provided in response to questions
under Theme II -- Integrating Scientific and Economics Research in the Policy
Process.
1.5 WHAT STUDIES HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED IN YOUR COUNTRY ON
METHODS (AND POSSIBLE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC
CONSEQUENCES) OF LIMITING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS?
RESPONSE:
Several studies have been completed on methods and consequences of limiting
greenhouse gas emissions, both within the Federal Government and in the private
and non-profit sectors. The Department of Energy (DOE), for example, recently
completed a qualitative study of policy options in this area which identified over 160
possible policy measures. These investigations have focussed on methods like: (i)
the use of carbon and/or coal taxes as a means to limit emissions; (ii) the shift from
fossil fuels to energy that is more environmentally benign; (iii) reforestation; (iv)
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
10
improving efficiency standard; (v) deposit refund schemes for carbon dioxide
emissions; and (vi) limits of fuel use. An annotated bibliography of selected major
global change science and economics research studies is provided in Attachment B.
Effectively limiting the emission of greenhouse gases requires a clear understanding
of their sources--both natural and human-induced. Through the U.S. Global
Change Research Program, scientists are investigation the sources and sinks of key
greenhouse gases including, for example:
the relative importance of the oceans and terrestrial biosphere as sinks
for fossil fuel carbon dioxide and how they change with time; and
identifying the major sources responsible for current increases in
atmospheric nitrous oxide and methane.
1.6 WHAT STUDIES HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED IN YOUR COUNTRY
REGARDING THE SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COUNSEQUENCES OF GLOBAL WARMING THAT MAY OCCUR?
HOW SENSITIVE ARE THESE ESTIMATES TO THE ASSUMED RATE
OF WARMING AND THE APPLICATION OF ADAPTATION
MEASURES?
RESPONSE:
Several studies have examined the social and economic consequences of potential
global warming. This work has been supported within the Federal Government, at
universities, and in the private and non-profit sector. Completed research has
centered on several areas: agriculture, forests, water resources, the implications of a
rise in sea level, and human health. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
recently submitted a report to the U.S. Congress on the potential effect of possible
climate change on these resources. Far less research has been completed that
examines the social and economic consequences arising from potential effects of
global warming on fisheries and biodiversity.
The value of the results of these studies are somewhat limited by the uncertainties
associated with the climate models used to project a future climate. Most studies of
global warming assume an equivalent doubling of carbon dioxide by the middle of
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
11
the next century. Sensitivity of results is very dependent on the rate of warming
assumed as well as feedback mechanisms which are difficult to incorporate in
models, and which could affect the timing, magnitude and regional nature of any
given increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases on observed surface
temperature. For example, existing climate simulation models are limited in their
ability to adequately represent the role of clouds and ocean circulation in
determining the integrated response of the Earth system to atmospheric greenhouse
forcing. Further, the spatial resolution of current models limits their ability to
accurately predict the regional-scale implications of global climate change.
While several of the studies outline or explore adaptation strategies, the results of
the analyses are generally presented as if no adaptation occurs. For example,
estimates of changes in agriculture generally do not include factors such as farm
management response with existing technology, development of new crop varieties
better suited to the new climate and ambient carbon dioxide conditions, irrigation
costs and options, and changes in the distribution of agricultural pests and diseases.
An annotated bibliography of selected major U.S. studies related to global change
scientific and economics research is provided in Attachment B.
1.7 WHAT ARE THE PRESENT SOURCES, BY PERCENTAGE, OF
ELECTRICAL ENERGY IN YOUR COUNTRY? WHAT ARE THE
PROJECTED SOURCES, AND OVERALL USAGE LEVELS, IN 2000, 2010
AND 2020? WHAT TECHNOLOGIES ARE CURRENTLY UNDER
CONSIDERATION OR BEING PLANNED TO INCREASE ENERGY
EFFICIENCY IN GENERATION AND UTILIZATION IN YOUR
COUNTRY?
RESPONSE:
In 1989, inputs used to generate electricity in the United States were provided by oil
(4 percent), natural gas (10 percent), coal (56 percent), nuclear power (20 percent), and
hydro/other sources (10 percent). As we move into the next century, we expect oil
and natural gas to increase their contribution to electricity generated (to 7 and 15
percent, respectively), while reliance on coal, nuclear, and hydro/other sources may
decline slightly.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
12
A variety of new technologies that produce electricity from coal, oil, natural gas, and
methane with improved efficiency in the conversion of fossil energy into electrical
energy are in various stages of development. Renewable resources, primarily
hydropower and wood, provided 8 percent of the nation's energy in 1988. Newer
renewable resource technologies, including wind, solar thermal electric, geothermal
electric, phototvoltaic, and biomass technologies, will make increasing contributions
in coming decades.
The future use of nuclear power will be dependent upon many factors, including
relative cost, national security considerations, progress in dealing with nuclear
waste disposal, continued safe operation of existing nuclear plants, and
establishment of a stable and certain licensing process.
Many estimates of conservation potential indicate that new technologies could
produce significant savings over expected energy use even by the year 2000. The
contributions from new technology to energy efficiency gains are potentially
substantial, particularly after 2010. Eventual levels of application, however, depend
heavily on fuel prices and the economic lifetimes of capital stock. Because of lower
lifetimes, the prospects for near term stock turnover are highest for transportation
vehicles, appliances, and some light industrial equipment. Most residential,
commercial, industrial, and utility structures and large equipment technologies
require much longer time periods to be replaced.
THEME II: INTEGRATING SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH IN
THE POLICY PROCESS
2.1 WHAT MECHANISMS EXIST IN YOUR COUNTRY FOR PROVIDING
ECONOMIC AND SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CONCERNING
GLOBAL CHANGE ISSUES TO DECISION MAKERS?
2.2 HOW IS THE SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS INFORMATION
CONCERNING GLOBAL CHANGE USED BY DECISION MAKERS IN
YOUR COUNTRY TO ADDRESS THE ENVIRONMENTAL
RAMIFICATIONS OF ECONOMIC POLICIES AND THE ECONOMIC
CONSEQUENCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES?
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
13
RESPONSE:
Global change science and economics research is conducted by a number of U.S.
Federal Government agencies including: the National Science Foundation (NSF),
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Departments of Agriculture (USDA),
Commerce (DOC), Energy (DOE), and the U.S. Interior (DOI).
In fulfilling their individual missions, these Departments and agencies provide
scientific and economics research information for policy deliberations within the
U.S. Government. In addition, a number of coordination and oversight
mechanisms have been established within the Executive Offices of the President to
ensure the effective integration into U.S. policy decisions.
In the Executive Branch of the U.S. Federal Government, the Office of Science and
Technology Policy (OSTP) advises the President of scientific and technological
considerations in several areas, including the environment; monitors the quality
and effectiveness of the Federal effort in science and technology; and assists the
President in providing leadership and coordination for the research and
development programs of the Federal Government.
Within the OSTP, the interagency Committee on Earth Sciences (CES) coordinates
the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). Additional details on the CES
and USGCRP are included in Attachment A, which identifies other U.S. agencies
and offices participating in scientific and economic research on global change.
To assist decision makers take account of economic and environmental interactions
in policy-making, a Working Group on Global Change has been established within
the Cabinet. Members of the Working Group are apprised of new scientific and
economic insights so that economic and environmental policies can be continually
re-evaluated in light of new information.
In the fall of 1989, the Cabinet Working Group on Global Change established three
Task Forces charged with addressing significant obstacles to an effective U.S.
response to the social, environmental and economic challenges posed by changes in
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
14
the global environment. Of particular relevance to this Conference is the White
House Task Force on Economics, chaired by the Council of Economic Advisors,
which provided a thorough review and inventory of all work being conducted at
universities, think-tanks, U.S. Government agencies, and other nations on the
social and economic impacts of possible global change.
2.2 WHAT SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC MODELS ARE USED BY YOUR
GOVERNMENT IN ESTIMATING ENVIRONMENTAL AND
ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF GOVERNMENT ACTIONS
RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE?
RESPONSE:
Global climate models used today have their roots in weather prediction models
used since the 1960's to make operation global forecasts a few days in advance. The
primary climate models, called general circulation models (GCMs), predict a variety
of climatic variables such as temperature, precipitation, winds, snow mass, and soil
moisture. The GCMs are the only models that provide geographic distributions of
these variables and hence, regional predictions, but they have serious limitations.
To be used for global change predictions, an atmospheric GCM must be integrated
with models of the ocean and land surface and the biotic changes inherent to them.
Various combinations of coupled ocean-atmosphere models have been applied to
greenhouse gas-induced warming predictions. Most have been atmospheric GCMs
coupled to simpler, mixed-layer ocean models. Although it is possible to couple
atmospheric and oceanic GCMs, until now it has been impractical because of the
long time required to achieve an equilibrium (steady state) model climate. Non-
equilibrium or transient predictions recently have been made with significant new
results but the computer time required for these 100-year simulations has limited
the number of model runs to date. Integrating with the terrestrial sector and the
biosphere in general is yet more primitive. A few coupled atmosphere-biosphere
GCMs are in the early stages of development and none have been applied to carbon
dioxide-doubling predictions.
Several models are used by the Federal Government to estimate the environmental
and economic consequences of policy actions related to global change. The EPA
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
15
maintains and applies the Atmospheric Stabilization Framework (Edmonds and
Reilly), for evaluating the global consequences of policy options that might be
implemented by individual countries or groups of countries. This modelling
system has been used extensively to support the IPCC efforts currently underway. A
recently completed draft of a study by Montgomery used the Dynamic General
Equilibrium Model developed by Jorgenson to explore the implications of a carbon
charge on reducing emissions and economic effects. Montgomery also used the
Edmonds and Reilly model as well as Global 2100 (developed by Manne and Richels)
to explore the long-term implications of policies restricting carbon dioxide
emissions. A recent study completed by the Department of Energy evaluated a set of
policy options which used: (i) an energy technology demand and supply model
(FOSSIL2); (ii) a transportation model (TEEMS); and (iii) a macroeconomic growth
model (DRI 25-year model).
2.4 WHAT SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH QUESTIONS ARE
THE MOST IMPORTANT TO ANSWER IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE
DEVELOPMENT OF DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL POLICIES
TOWARD GLOBAL CHANGE?
RESPONSE:
U.S. research in this area is driven, in part, by our belief that the nations of the
world become true stewards of our global resources. Effective global stewardship, in
turn, demands a significantly improved understanding of the scientific and socio-
economic aspects of providing for life and prosperity in the 21st century. In the
seven science elements which comprise the U.S. Global Change Research Program,
the following high-priority questions must be addressed to reduce major scientific
uncertainties and significantly enhance our ability to predict both natural and
human-induced changes in the global Earth system. These questions are:
CLIMATE AND HYDROLOGIC SYSTEMS
What is the role of clouds in the Earth's radiation and heat budgets?
How do the oceans interact with the atmosphere in the storage, transport
and uptake of heat?
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
16
How do changes in climate affect temperature, precipitation, soil
moisture patterns, and the general distribution of water and ice on the
land surface?
How can the reliability of global- and regional-scale climate predictions
be improved?
What is the role of polar regions in global climate change?
BIOGEOCHEMICAL DYNAMICS
How do the oceans and terrestrial biosphere respond to increases in the
introduction of fossil fuel carbon to the atmosphere and how might
these responses change with time?
Why is methane currently increasing in the atmosphere at a rate which
may make this the most important greenhouse gas of concern in the
future?
Is the ability of the atmosphere to cleanse itself changing as a result of
changing chemical composition?
Can changes in the natural or anthropogenic sulfur emissions to the
atmosphere ameliorate or enhance global warming?
What are the global consequences of stratospheric ozone depletion in
polar regions resulting from increased concentrations of chlorine and
bromine in the stratosphere?
ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS AND DYNAMICS
What natural and managed systems are most sensitive to global change?
What are the direct effects of carbon dioxide fertilization on natural and
managed ecological systems?
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
17
What are the likely changes and rates of change in natural and managed
ecosystems due to global changes other than the direct effects of carbon
dioxide fertilization?
Can current natural and managed ecological systems adapt to rapid rates
of change?
How do ecological systems themselves contribute to processes of global
change?
How can ecological responses to global change be distinguished from
natural variability, and other anthropogenic sources of change?
EARTH SYSTEM HISTORY
What are the natural ranges and rates of change in the climate and
environmental systems?
How rapidly have ecosystems adapted to past abrupt transitions in
climate?
Do past warm intervals in Earth history provide appropriate scenarios to
test model predictions of future global warming?
What unidentified mechanisms of sea-level fluctuation may impede our
ability to predict future sea-level change?
Are there more than one stable mode of atmosphere-ocean circulation?
HUMAN INTERACTIONS
What data are needed to verify models of interaction between human
and natural systems and to assess the likelihood of changes in those
processes?
How do population dynamics influence global environmental change?
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
18
How do institutions influence environmental processes and respond to
changes in global environmental conditions?
How do technological and economic development influence global
environmental change, and how will changing environmental
conditions affect future technological and economic development?
How would providing food, shelter, and basic amenities to increasing
populations affect natural resources on regional and global scales?
How do changing patterns in the use of land, water, energy resources,
and other natural resources affect global environmental change?
SOLID EARTH PROCESSES
How do different coastal regions respond geologically and ecologically to
higher sea level and how can the contributions from changes in climate
(e.g., glacier melting and ocean warming) be differentiated from those
due to tectonic processes?
What are the magnitude, geographic location, and frequency of
occurrence of volcanic eruptions and their effect on regional and global
climate?
How do permafrost regions of the northern hemisphere respond to
climate warming?
How and at what rate do climatically sensitive transition regions
respond to climate change and human activities?
What are the causes and consequences of crustal deformation?
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
19
SOLAR INFLUENCES
What aspects of solar variability are influencing the stratospheric ozone
layer?
What impact do other solar inputs, e.g., particles, have on the upper
atmosphere and how are they coupled to other atmospheric regions?
How does the sun's output vary and what is the impact on terrestrial
climate?
What do current upper atmosphere models predict for the impact of
greenhouse gases?
The United States believes that economic research on the benefits and costs of
proposed policy actions must be evaluated under a broad range of outcomes that
reflect the uncertainties that pervade the global change issue, so that decision
makers are afforded the highest degree of flexibility in policy options. In responding
to the Cabinet, the Task Force on Economic Costs identified several important
questions to support the development of policies to respond to potential global
change:
What are the economic effects of possible global change?
What are the benefits of slowing such change?
What are the costs and effectiveness of various adaptive and emissions
reduction measures?
What are the effects of such measures on U.S. and world trade and
capital flows?
What are the impacts of such measures on economic growth and
employment?
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
20
What opportunities exist for the private sector in the development of
new adaptation and mitigation practices and technologies?
THEME III: BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS FOR SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS
RESEARCH
3.1
WHAT LESSONS CAN BE LEARNED FROM YOUR COUNTRY'S
EXPERIENCE IN INTEGRATING SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC
ENERGY-RELATED RESEARCH OVER THE PAST TWO DECADES?
RESPONSE:
The U.S. experience suggests that national leaders and their science, environment,
energy, and economic ministers must commit to a long-term program to improve
our understanding of the global Earth system, reduce major uncertainties in the
decision process, and continually re-evaluate the effectiveness of policy in the light
of new insights. In the United States, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
requires Federal agencies to assess impacts of their activities on the human
environment, including economic as well as environmental impacts.
The U.S. experience has demonstrated that no single agency, or for that matter, no
single country, has the expertise or resources to effectively address the issues
associated with global environmental change. Effective stewardship of our global
resources demands cooperation among nations, government-wide integration
within countries, and a deliberate effort to entrain the broadest possible participation
of government, academia and industry. The United States believes that when a
research program encourages these groups to bring their unique talents and
expertise to bear on the problem, the collective result is far greater than the sum of
the parts.
In the United States, successful integration of Earth system science, economics
research and policy reflective of both science and economics requires government
mechanisms or institutions' which ensure: (i) a clear problem statement; (ii)
programs which will provide the scientific basis for decision-making related to that
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
21
problem; (iii) a clearly-identified focus for scientific input to national and
international policy deliberations; (iv) full and equal participation by all relevant
government bodies with clearly stated roles and responsibilities; (v) close ties with
similar efforts in other countries; and (vi) the effective involvement of the full
intellectual resources available in projects which demand multi-disciplinary and
multi-institutional collaboration.
3.2 FORECASTS OF TECHNOLOGY ADVANCES, THEIR COSTS, AND
MARKET PENETRATION NECESSARILY INVOLVE BOTH
SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS. HOW CAN
SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH BE INTEGRATED TO
PROVIDE THE MOST ACCURATE AND CLOSELY-BOUNDED
TECHNOLOGY FORECASTS POSSIBLE? HOW CAN THIS RESEARCH
CONTRIBUTE TO TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT?
RESPONSE:
In the United States, technological development in the public interest is best served
when a framework exists that creates incentives for the private sector to seek the
most cost-effective ways to achieve environmental or other nonmarket goals.
Encouraging close collaboration among scientists and economists within the U.S.
Federal Government, (such as that sponsored by the USGCRP) as well as with
academic and industry counterparts, will assure the development and sharing of
scientific, technical, and economic information relevant to environmental quality
issues and lead to the most accurate technological forecasts possible.
3.3 WHAT ARE YOUR GOVERNMENT'S CURRENT FORECASTS OF
FUTURE TECHNOLOGIES RELEVANT TO MITIGATION OF OR
ADAPTATION TO GLOBAL CHANGE?
RESPONSE:
A broad effort is currently underway in the United States to examine and assess the
feasibility of technologies relevant to mitigation and/or adaptation in a number of
environmental areas. Many of these are technologies that make sense in their own
right, but also reduce greenhouse gas emissions:
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
22
Efforts to rehabilitate coastal and freshwater wetland to improve
productivity and achieve a "no net loss" of valuable wetlands.
Protection of biodiversity and the preservation of endangered species.
Evaluation of the concept of low-input sustainable agriculture (the
subject of a recently-completed National Academy of Sciences report
which examined the potential to maintain and improve agricultural
productivity with changing input and management practices).
Resource conservation and management efforts in a number of U.S.
Federal agencies, including waste minimization through recycling and
separation of wastes.
Reforestation of public and private lands.
Use of agricultural biomass and forest products as a source of industrial
hydrocarbons to recycle carbon dioxide in place of fossil fuel sources.
Studies to reduce methane production from livestock and rice
production.
In the area of global change, the Mitigation and Adaptation Research Strategies
(MARS) Working Group of the Committee on Earth Sciences has been charged with
identifying an explicit research agenda which will, among other things, address the
issue of technology development to either adapt to or mitigate possible global
changes. In the area of climate change, for example, this research agenda is likely to
contribute to:
Efforts to evaluate methods and consequences of limiting greenhouse
gas emissions including the use of market-based mechanisms such as a
carbon tax, tradable emissions and other incentives.
Improvements in energy efficiency in cars, heating, and industrial uses
of fossil fuels, and conservation technologies.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
23
Technological advancements for increasing the use of renewable energy
sources such as solar and geothermal.
Development of new generation nuclear fission reactors.
Determining the scientific and technological feasibility of controlled
nuclear fusion as a potentially inexhaustible source of heat for electricity
generation.
The development and evaluation of new crop and tree varieties and
agricultural and forestry practices, including reforestation.
Developing management options (e.g. water conservation) for
improving the resiliency of water resources to climate changes.
Methods for adapting to or mitigating the effects of sea level rise on both
natural ecosystems and human infrastructure.
The development of new technologies and practices required to mitigate
possible human health effects.
3.4 WHAT INTERNATIONAL MECHANISMS WOULD BE MOST
EFFECTIVE TO CARRY OUT ECONOMIC AND SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH ON GLOBAL CHANGE?
3.5 DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT NEW ENTITIES WILL BE REQUIRED TO
CARRY OUT JOINT RESEARCH EFFORTS? IF EXISTING
ORGANIZATIONS CAN FILL THE NEED, WHICH ONES SHOULD BE
USED? WHAT CHANGES WILL BE NEEDED IN THESE
ORGANIZATIONS TO PRODUCE INTEGRATED RESULTS?
RESPONSE:
The United States believes that the following precepts should characterize an
effective international global change research effort:
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
24
Countries must give further impetus to scientific research on
environmental issues, to developing necessary technologies to support
global data acquisition and to evaluate the economic costs and benefits of
specific response options.
Countries must combine their efforts in order to improve observation
and monitoring on a global scale. Prime examples of the need and
opportunity for such collaboration include: the World Meteorological
Organization's (WMO) World Weather Watch; global ocean monitoring
efforts such as those currently being coordinated by the International
Oceanographic Commission; the global monitoring of atmospheric
constituents being coordinated through United Nations Environment
Program (UNEP) and WMO; the compilation of standard gridded
geophysical data through the UNEP GEMS/GRID program; participation
in the Committee on Earth Observations Satellites; international
cooperation in satellite-based monitoring programs; and data
communication and archiving.
International cooperation to improve the knowledge base regarding the
science and prediction of global change (particularly climate change) will
require a commitment to technology development and transfer which
will strengthen indigenous capacity and infrastructure in developing
countries and will heighten the awareness of decision-makers and the
public to the issues.
Maintaining and improving the quality of international data on human
links to global change, e.g., on energy use, resource availability and
production costs, agricultural production practices, agricultural
technologies and input use, and industrial production. Such efforts
should build on existing international data collection efforts of the
United Nations organizations.
Existing mechanisms and institutions should be used wherever possible
to foster, coordinate and implement global change efforts. For example:
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
25
-
Individual nations should continue to support the activities of
the World Climate Research Program jointly sponsored by the
World Meteorological Organization and the International
Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) as well as enhance support
for the evolving ICSU/International Geosphere-Biosphere
Programme.
-
The WMO/UNEP Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
should continue to be viewed as a continuing forum for
consideration of the issues related to global climate change.
Recognizing the role of satellites in global environmental
monitoring, the Committee on Earth Observations Satellites, a
coordinating mechanism for national and regional agency
satellite programs, should be strengthened and expanded to
more effectively coordinate data management of earth
observations from space.
-
Individual nations should continue to support the activities of
the International Development Association of the World Bank
as well as the OECD.
The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
and Centers for International Agricultural Research should
continue to coordinate research on agricultural and forestry
practices, with renewed emphasis on impacts and responses to
climate change, and integration of such response in coordinated
resource management plans such as the Tropical Forestry Action
Plan (TFAP).
-
The OECD/IEA should continue to develop forecasts of national
greenhouse gas emissions and conduct economic research.
-
The worldwide network of observatories for greenhouse gases
should be strengthened and the World Meteorological
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
26
Organization's initiative to establish a global climatological
reference network to detect climate change should be supported.
There should be cooperation in the WMO's Special Fund for
Climate and Atmospheric Environment Studies which will
initiate scientific activities responding to current international
needs.
The U.S. believes that existing bodies such as the WMO, UNEP, and ICSU should be
encouraged to enhance mechanisms to gain greater communication and
cooperation among the participants in existing and planned global change research
programs. Additional mechanisms include continued international support for
Mission to Planet Earth, enhanced data exchange, existing bilateral cooperative
activities, and the Earth observing, research, and educational activities being
organized by the Space Agency Forum on International Space Year for the
International Space Year in 1992.
3.6 WHAT ARE THE MAJOR BARRIERS TO CARRYING OUT
INTEGRATED ECONOMIC AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ON GLOBAL
CHANGE?
RESPONSE:
The U.S. believes that Global environmental problems, and research efforts in this
area, can be complicated by the fact that the individuals involved live in many
nations. Differences across countries--in incomes, resource endowments,
population, and sensitivity to particular environmental changes--mean that
countries inevitably have different views on the issues. The United States believes
that even if these international differences did not exist, no single agency and no
single nation is equipped to address the problem of global environmental change
alone. The real challenge, therefore, is to achieve collaboration of all interested
parties, each bringing their special expertise and contributions, ensuring scientific
and economic progress that no single group could hope to achieve alone.
Other potential barriers include:
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
27
The need to provide long-term stable support for what will undoubtedly
be an expensive effort.
Support to overcome the barrier posed by the current lack of existing
computers with sufficient capacity and speed to simulate the entire Earth
system as a single system.
The need to encourage existing government and academic institutions to
actively pursue research projects that cross disciplinary and institutional
boundaries. Scientists, economists, institutions and nations must be
innovative not only in the way they look at earth system science but also
in the way that they organize to conduct research.
The need for free and open exchange of monitoring and other data
related to global change and other environmental issues.
The challenge of technology development and transfer for successful
global change scientific and economic efforts. A strong international
scientific and technological infrastructure is essential.
The availability of human resources, unless efforts are made to increase
the intellectual talent pool through education and technical training
programs. Shortages in trained personnel, both as scientists and
educators, appears to be particularly acute in the social sciences.
3.7 WHAT DATA BASES RELEVANT TO GLOBAL CHANGE DO YOU
HAVE IN YOUR COUNTRY WHICH MIGHT BE MADE AVAILABLE
FOR SHARING WITH THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY?
RESPONSE:
The United States believes that an essential ingredient of a successful global change
science effort is the free and open exchange of consistent, relevant data and
information among all participating parties, including observations from global
monitoring networks, field experiments and similar research into Earth system
processes, and predictive information derived from modelling efforts.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
28
U.S. agencies, in collaboration with the national and international scientific
community, have been conducting research related to global change for several
decades. These efforts are producing derived data research products such as global
analyses of critically important global change parameters (e.g., clouds, sea level,
ocean color, vegetation indexes, trace gas sources and sinks), as well as economic
impacts of changes in global climate. These data and information products are
available to the broader scientific community. The following examples provide a
brief description of some of the existing data currently used by U.S. agencies in global
change research:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) - Analysis of many
different types of existing satellite data bases, including Nimbus, Landsat, Seasat,
TIROS, Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE), International Satellite Cloud
Climatology Program (ISCCP), and Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer
(AVHRR) are underway in NASA to assess the current state of the global
environment and its variability. Satellite data are used, for example, to better
understand: (1) the chemistry and dynamics of the upper atmosphere; (2) the climate
effects connected with clouds and radiation; (3) processes affecting global ocean
circulation and the interactions between the atmosphere and ocean; (4) the
dynamics of terrestrial vegetation in the context of global change; and (5) the role of
the ocean in the global carbon cycle.
Department of Commerce/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) - The use of existing data sources for studies of climate and global change
has a prominent position in NOAA. For example, NOAA has assembled a data base
of surface marine observations extending back to 1854. These marine data have
been crucial in the compilation of the global mean temperature record upon which
many of the global climate change issues rest. Vast numbers of deep ocean
observations from 1900 to the present have also been synthesized by NOAA into a
climatology of the ocean basins, providing the basis for ocean model integrations
and establishing a benchmark for observations in the global ocean. Satellite data are
another valuable source of information. Using the satellite data archive, a program
to develop historical measures of cloud parameters has been sponsored by NOAA
and NASA since 1983. Some near-term improvements in representation of cloud
processes in general circulation models can be expected as a result of this effort.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
29
NOAA-sponsored investigators are also active in the use of historical satellite
microwave and IN SITU sea ice measurements to assess past fluctuations and trends
in polar sea ice extent. Looking backward in time, NOAA is sponsoring an
analytical program for the conversion of historical ocean and atmospheric data,
spanning several decades, into a homogeneous climate data set for studies of long-
term climate change. NOAA also maintains data bases on ocean salinity, the
cryosphere, and the means to measure polar vortices.
Department of Commerce/Economic Affairs - This office maintains and makes
available data bases which are easily accessible to researchers. The Economic
Bulletin Board provides timely access to the most current U.S. economic data, such
as Gross National Product (GNP), employment, exchange rates, and international
trade. A second data base, Office of Business Analysis (Office of Business
Analysis) Data, offers economic time series on U.S. capital stocks, energy, and
production, organized by industry. OBAData also contains historical time series for
major U.S. economic statistics, such as the National Income and Product Accounts.
The National Trade Data Bank, currently under development, will provide detailed
statistics on trade between the United States and trade partners by harmonized
product code.
Department of the Interior (DOI) - Space-based and ground-based data are being
extensively used by the Department of the Interior. For example, Landsat Thematic
Mapper data are being used to develop a capability for predicting the hydrologic and
water resource responses to climate change. Some operational capabilities exist in
DOI and others are being developed for classifying land cover and vegetation types
on a regional basis using Landsat data. Changes in land cover and vegetation are
also being monitored operationally over time using Advanced Very High
Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) data. Research on characteristics of irrigated
lands, snow cover, glaciers, and sea ice as they pertain to climate change are being
conducted using remote sensing techniques. In many cases, these ongoing activities
have produced data sets that will be useful as baseline reference data against which
to assess the impacts of global change.
Department of Energy (DOE) - The DOE is using meteorological data from various
sources to evaluate General Circulation Models. Specifically, data from ERBE are
used to determine the agreement between the simulated and observed radiation
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
30
balance at the top of the atmosphere. The DOE is also participating in the
International Satellite Cloud Climatology Program (ISCCP) to establish cloud
climatologies necessary to understand relative heat fluxes to and from the Earth.
Pilot studies have used satellite data from AVHRR, Landsat, and the French SPOT
sensors in studies of deforestation, land use changes, and the exchange of carbon
dioxide between the atmosphere and oceans.
National Science Foundation (NSF) - Various divisions of NSF: support the use of
satellite data extensively for studying ocean circulation patterns, monitoring
geodetic changes related to tectonic activity and sea level change, determining
atmospheric structure, radiation budgets and cloud-radiation feedbacks, making
ozone measurements to detect and study ozone depletion in polar regions, and
studying agricultural drought.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - In support of the U.S. Global Change
Research Program, the EPA is using AVHRR, SPOT and Landsat Thematic Mapper
data to study seasonal dynamics of vegetation in ecosystems across large regions.
Data from these sources are analyzed to provide measurements of vegetation
canopy spectral reflectance, temperature, and "greenness" as functions of leaf area
and biomass distribution. These characteristics determine the rate of
evapotranspiration and trace gas emissions. EPA is also working with the U.S.
Geological Survey in studies of the hydrologic cycle and water resource responses to
global change.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) - The U.S. Department of Agriculture is using
satellite data from Landsat and AVHRR to map snow cover in selected areas of the
western United States. The resulting information on snow cover is used as input to
hydrologic models to simulate and forecast streamflow. When data bases are
developed on particular river basins, the existing or average conditions can be
perturbed in the models to approximate the effects of potential global warming or
other climate changes. The National Agricultural Library is also expanding its
current role in providing bibliographic data on climate change studies.
The United States believes that there is little economic data that is not relevant to
studies of human interaction with the natural environment; at the heart of the
issue is economic development, industrial and technological development, and the
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
31
costs of supplying humankind with basic material needs through alternative
strategies for utilizing natural resources. Thus, important basic data include
statistics of industrial production and income from the Department of Commerce,
current income and household characteristics from U.S. Census data, basic
agricultural production, price, and agricultural practice data from the Department of
Agriculture, and energy use and price data from the Department of Energy.
The above examples demonstrate the contributions which existing data and data
collection systems are already making to global change research in the United States.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
32
ATTACHMENT A
THE U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM
General Background
The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) represents an integrated,
Government-wide scientific effort designed to document, understand, and predict
changes in the global environment and to provide the scientific foundation for
national and international policy deliberations.
In March 1987, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)
established a new Committee on Earth Sciences (CES). To a great extent, CES was
created in response to the recommendations of a Cabinet Working Group on
Climate Change which concluded that improved mechanisms for Government-
wide coordination were required for the United States to effectively address the
significant economic, social, and environmental issues raised by changes in the
global climate system. Thus, the CES was created to:
Increase the overall effectiveness and productivity of Federal research &
development efforts directed toward understanding the Earth as a global
system.
Participation in the CES includes the principal U.S. Earth sciences funding agencies
(National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Science Foundation,
Commerce, Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, and Departments of
Commerce, Energy, Interior, and Agriculture) as well as other Departments,
Agencies, and Executive Branch offices with interest in the policy implications of
such research (the Departments of State, Justice, Transportation, along with the CEQ,
OSTP, and Office of Management and Budget). Figure 1 shows the organizational
structure of U.S. Government agencies with interest and participation in global
change science and economics research. Although the CES has a number of specific
areas of responsibility, including coordination of Federal activities in groundwater
research, natural hazards reduction, atmospheric research, and the academic
oceanographic fleet, the primary focus of CES efforts to date has been the
development of the U.S. Global Change Research Program and providing a focus for
scientific input to national and international policy deliberations on global change.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
33
The U.S. Global Change Research Program
The USGCRP was formally announced in the January 1989 CES Report: Our
Changing Planet: A U.S. Strategy for Global Change Research. That report defined
the goal, objectives and scientific framework for the USGCRP.
Activities within the USGCRP are designed to be responsive to the Program's
overarching goal:
To gain a predictive understanding of the interactive physical, geological,
chemical, biological, and social processes that regulate the total Earth system,
and hence, establish the scientific basis for national and international policy
formulation and decisions relating to natural and human-induced changes in
the global environment and their regional impacts.
Thus, projects have been framed as part of a broad national and international
scientific endeavor aimed at developing a capability to not only understand but
predict both natural and human-induced changes in the global environment in an
effort to provide decision-makers at all levels with a strong scientific foundation for
policy formulation. In some cases, projects are designed to provide near-term
results by focusing an aggressive, limited-duration attack on some key aspect of the
earth system--e.g., stratospheric ozone depletion or the role of ocean-atmospheric
interactions in the tropical Pacific in determining year-to-year climate variability
over North America. In other cases, projects are designed as part of a long-term
national commitment to the documentation of changes in the earth system on a
global scale. NASA's Earth Observing System and NOAA's ocean observations and
global sea level proposals are examples of such initiatives.
Proposed projects are also designed to provide specific contributions to one or more
of the three scientific objectives or integrating priorities of the USGCRP:
Establish an integrated, comprehensive program of documenting the
Earth system on a global scale through observational programs and data
management systèms;
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
34
Conduct a program of focused studies to improve our understanding of
the physical, geological, chemical, biological, and social processes that
influence earth system processes and trends on global and regional
scales;
Develop integrated conceptual and predictive earth system models.
Again, the ultimate focus is on providing policy-relevant information about the
current and anticipated state of the global environment.
Finally, the priority framework established for the U.S. Global Change Research
Program provides a relative ranking among the seven interdisciplinary science
elements which characterize the USGCRP and within those science elements,
identifies the most pressing scientific uncertainties in the context of the Program's
ultimate goal of predicting significant changes in the global environment.
Improving our ability to anticipate, assess and address the issues associated with
climate system changes are given the highest priority in the Program although CES
recognizes the need to maintain an appropriate level of effort in all seven science
elements including adequate support for the data and information management
activities required by the Program. The individual science priorities in the current
research plan probably represent the most dynamic feature of the USGCRP. As new
insights in earth system processes are gained, and new problems and research needs
are identified in response to that new understanding, the details of the science
priorities will change. In essence, the evolution of the science priorities will be a
measure of the success of the U.S. Global Change Research Program.
The U.S. Global Change Research Program is founded on the premise that
international cooperation and coordination are fundamental to the scientific
planning and the implementation of a successful effort. Research programs like the
International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme and the World Climate Research
Program are truly international in scope and design. The complex scientific agenda
and the infrastructure needed to address the programs outlined in the USGCRP
require a careful assessment and integration of the Program's components with
programs of other governments; intergovernmental bodies (e.g., United Nations
bodies such as the World Meteorological Organization, and the United Nations
Environment Programme); and non-governmental science planning and
coordinating mechanisms such as the International Council of Scientific Unions.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
35
ATTACHMENT B
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
ON GLOBAL CHANGE SCIENCE
AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH
Ahuja D.D. Tirpak and W. Pepper, 1990. "Relative Contributions of Developed
and Developing Countries to Global Warming," to be presented at the
International Conference of Energy Economists, New Delhi, January.
Barnola J.M., D. Raynaud, V.S. Korokevich, and C. Lorius, 1987. "Vostok Ice
Core Provides 160,000-Year Record of Atmospheric CO2," Nature, Vol. 3.
Basheda, G. et al., 1989. "Congressional Greenhouse Initiative Special Study:
Utility Sector," Argonne National Laboratory: Argonne, IL.
Blake, D.R., and F.S. Rowland, 1988. "Continuing Worldwide Increase in
Tropospheric Methane, 1978-1987," Science 239:1129-1131.
Boyd, G. et.al., 1989. "Congressional Greenhouse Initiative Special Study:
Industrial Sector," Argonne National Laboratory: Argonne, IL.
et al., 1989. "Technology Characterizations and Policy Options to
Reduce GHG Emissions: Fossil Energy Supply Sectors," Argonne National
Laboratory: Argonne, IL.
, et al., 1989. "Technology Characterizations and Policy Options to
Reduce GHG Emissions: Industrial Sector," Argonne National Laboratory:
Argonne, Il.
Broadus, J.M., 1989. "Possible Impacts of and Adjustments to Sea Level Rise:
The Cases of Bangladesh and Egypt," in T. Wigley and R. Warrick eds., "The
Effects of Climate Change on Sea Level, Severe Tropical Storms and their
Associated Impacts," University of East Anglia, Norwich, U.K.
California Energy Commission, 1982. Cogeneration Handbook, California Energy
Commission P500-82-054, Sacramento, Ca.
California Energy Commission, 1986a. Biomass Energy Report, Senate Bill 771,
report mandated by the State Agricultural and Forestry Residue Utilization
Act of 1979.
California Energy Commission, 1986b. "Solar and Wind Technology Tax Incentive
Impact Analysis." Consultant Report, May.
;California Energy Commission, 1988. [EPA: Please supply (efficiency
standards) reference.]
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
36
Carl, M.E. et al., 1987. "Energy Conservation Potential: A Review of Eight
Studies," Energetics, Inc., Columbia, Md.
Carlsmith, R.G. et, al., 1989;1 Energy Efficiency: How, Far. Can We Go?", U.S.
Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.
Cavanaugh, Ralph, Chris Calwell, David Goldstein, and Robert Watson, 1989.
"National Energy Policy," World Policy Journal, Spring.
Chamberlin, R., and C. High, 1986. "Economic Impacts of Wood Energy in the
Northeast." Council of North East Governors Policy Research Center, April.
Chandler, J., 1982. "Development of Biogas Systems for Agriculture in
California," paper presented to the Joint United States/China Biomass
Conversion Technologies Symposium, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, November 29.
Chandler, J.A., et al., 1983. "A Low Cost 75kW Covered Lagoon Biogas System,"
paper presented to Energy from Biomass and Wastes VII, Lake Buena Vista,
FL., January 25.
Chandler, William U., 1989. "Assessing Carbon Emission Control Strategies:
The Case of China," paper presented at a Workshop on Energy and
Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy
Research.
, 1988. "Energy Efficiency: A New Agenda," American Council for an
Energy-Efficient Economy, Washington, D.C.
Choucri, Nazli, 1989. "The State System and the Global Environment:
Interactions Among Population, Resources, Technology," paper presented at a
Workshop on Energy and Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT
Center for Energy Policy Research.
Cicchetti, C.J. and W. Hogan., 1989. "Including Unbundled Demand-Side
Options in Electric Utility Bidding Programs," Public Utilities
Fortnightly, June 8.
Cicerone, R.J., and R.S. Oremland, 1988. "Biogeochemical Aspects of
Atmospheric Methane," Global Biogeochemical Cycles 2:299-327.
'Cline, William R., 1989. "Political Economy of the Greenhouse Effect."
Institute for International Economics, August.
Commission of the European Communities, Energy in Europe Major Themes in
Energy, 1989, Brussels.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
37
Council of Great Lakes Governors, 1985. Biomass Resources: Generating Jobs
and Energy. Great Lakes Regional Biomass Energy Program, November.
Criner, G.K., et al., 1986. "An Economic Analysis of a Maine Dairy Farm
Anaerobic Digester," Maine Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 816,
University of Maine.
Crutzen, P.J., 1983. "Atmospheric Interactions--Homogeneous Gas Reactions of
C-, N-, and S-Containing Compounds," in The Major Biogeochemical Cycles and
their Interactions, Scope 21, B. Bolin and R.B. Cook, eds., John Wiley &
Sons, Chichester.
, I. Aselmann, and W. Seiler, 1986. "Methane Production by Domestic
Animals, Wild Ruminants, Other Herbivorous Fauna, and Humans," Tellus
38B:271-284.
Dairy Manure Management, NRAES-31, 1989. Proceedings from the Dairy Manure
Management Symposium, Syracuse, February 22-24.
Darmstadter, Joel, Jae Edmonds, 1988. "Human Development and Carbon Dioxide
Emissions: The Current Picture and the Long-Term Prospects," Greenhouse
Warming: Abatement and Adaptation, Resources for the Future.
Davis, G.R., 1989. "Responding to the Challenge of Global Warming: The Role of
Energy Efficient Technologies," paper presented at a Workshop on Energy and
Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy
Research.
Decker, W.L., V.K. Jones and R. Achutuni, 1985. "The Impact of CO₂-Induced
Climate Change on US Agriculture," in M.R. White ed., "Characterization of
Information Requirements for Studies of CO₂ Effects: Water Resources,
Agriculture, Fisheries, Forests and Human Health." U.S. Department of
Energy, DOE/ER-0236, Washington, D.C.
Detweiler, R.P., and C.A. Hall, 1988. "Tropical Forests and the Global Carbon
Cycle," Science 239:4247.
Dicks, M.R., 1982. "Economic Feasibility of Methane Production in Tunisia,"
Unpublished M.S. Thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics, University
of Missouri.
A
:DiFiglio, C., Duleep, K.G., and D.L. Greene, 1989 (forthcoming). "Cost
Effectiveness of Future Fuel Economy Improvements," The Energy Journal.
Easterling, William E. III, Martin L. Parry, and Pierrie R. Crosson, 1988.
"Adapting Future Agriculture to Changes in Climate." Greenhouse Warming:
Abatement and Adaptation, Resources for the Future.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
38
Edmonds, Jae A., 1989. "A Second Generation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Model:
Outline of Design and Approach," paper presented at a Workshop on Energy
and Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy
Policy Research.
, and John Reilly. "Global Energy and CO2 to the Year 2050," The
Energy Journal. Vol.4, No.3. p.21-47.
Finland (Government of), Ministry of Agriculture and Forests, Council for
Natural Resources, 1989. "Response Strategies: Boreal Forests", paper
submitted to IPCC/RSWG, October 1989
Freidli, H., H. Lotscher, H. Oeschger, U. Siegenthaler, and B. Stauffer, 1986.
"Ice Core Record of the ¹³C/¹²C Ratio of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide in the
Past Two Years," Nature 324:237-238.
Foy, Douglas I., 1989. Testimony on behalf of the Conservation Law Foundation
of New England, U.S. Department of Energy Field Hearings on the National
Energy Strategy, Providence, RI, December 1; corrected version filed
December 29.
. Personal Communication, January 11, 1990.
Fulkerson, W., et al., [dáte?] "Global Warming: An Energy Technology R & D
Challenge," Science 246: 868.
George C. Marshall Institute, 1989. "Science Perspectives on the
Greenhouse Problem," Washington, D.C.
Gibbs, M.J., 1984. "Economic Analysis of Sea Level Rise: Methods and
Results," in M.C. Barth and J.G. Titus, eds., "Greenhouse Effect and Sea
Level Rise: A Challenge For This Generation," New York.
Gilbertson, C.B., D.L. Van Dyne, C.J. Clanton, & R.K. White, 1978.
"Estimating Quantity and Constituents in Livestock and Poultry Manure
Residue as Reflected by Management Systems," Transactions of the ASAE, 22.
Goldemberg, J., T. Johansson, A. Reddy, and R. Williams, 1989. "Changing the
Political Economy of Energy," paper presented at a Workshop on Energy and
Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy
Research.
, 1989. "Energy Use in Developing Countries--A Thought Experiment,"
paper presented at a Workshop on Energy and Environmental Modeling and
Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy Research.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
39
, et al., 1988. "Energy for a Sustainable World," Wiley Eastern
Limited, New Delhi.
Gunnerson, C.G. and D.C. Stuckey, 1986. "Integrated Resource Recovery
Anaerobic Digestion: Principles and Practices for Biogas Systems," World
Bank Technical Paper No.49, Washington, D.C.
Gushee, D.E., R.E. Morrison, and J.R. Justus, 1989. "Global Climate Change:
The Science, Sources, Agricultural and Forestry Impacts, and Proposed
Policy Responses," in Agriculture, Forestry, and Global Climate Change--A
Reader, prepared by the Congressional Research Service and the Library of
Congress, Washington, D.C.
Hansen, J. I. Fung, A. Lacis, D. Rind, S. Lebedeff, R. Ruedy, and G. Russell,
1988. "Global Climate Changes as Forecast by Goddard Institute of Space
Studies Three-Dimensional Model," Journal of Geophysical Research 93:9341-
9364.
Hausman, Jerry, 1979. Individual Discount Rates and the Purchase and
Utilization of Energy Using Durables. Rand Journal of Economics, 10:33-54.
Heffernan, Kathleen, and Lester B. Lave, 1989. "Adjusting to Greenhouse
Effects: Exploring the Economic Costs to Rich and Poor Countries," paper
presented at a Workshop on Energy and Environmental Modeling and Policy
Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy Research.
Hekstra, Gjerrit P., 1988. "Sea-Level Rise: Regional Consequences and
Responses." Greenhouse Warming: Abatement and Adaptation, Resources for
the Future.
Hills, D.J. and D.W. Roberts, 1980. "Basic Fundamentals of Methane Generation
from Agricultural Waste," unpublished paper, Department of Agricultural
Engineering, University of California, Davis.
Hirst, E., 1989a. "Federal Roles to Realize National Energy-Efficiency
Opportunities in the 1990s," prepared by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory
for the U.S. Department of Energy, ORNL/CON-290.
, 1989b. "Electric-Utility Energy Efficiency and Load Management
Programs: Resources for the 1990s", prepared by the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory for the U.S. Department of Energy, ORNL/CON-285.
Hodges, D. et al.., 1989. "Evaluating Potential Economic Impacts of Global
Climate Change on Forestry in the Southern United States, Resource
Management and Optimization," Vol.6, No.3.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
40
Houghton, R.A. et al.., 1987. "The Flux of Carbon From Terrestrial Ecosystems
to the Atmosphere in 1980 Due to Changes in Land Use: Geographic
Distribution of the Global Flux," Tellus 39B:122-139.
Hull, C.H.J. and J.G. Titus (eds.), 1986. "Greenhouse Effect, Sea Level
Rise, and Salinity in the Delaware Estuary." Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
International Manila. Rice Research Institute, 1986. "World Rice Statistics: 1985,"
Jewell, W.J., et al., 1980. "Anaerobic Fermentation of Agricultural Residue:
Potential for Improvement and Implementation," report prepared by Cornell
University for the U.S. Dept. of Energy, DOE/ET/20051-T1.
Johansson T. B., et al., 1989. "Electricity Efficient End-Use and New
Generation Technologies, and Their Planning Implications," Lund University
Press: Lund, Sweden.
Jones, D.D., J.C. Nye and A.C. Dale. "Methane Generation from Livestock
Waste," AE-105, Cooperative Extension Service, Purdue University, West
Lafayette, IN.
Jorgenson, Dale W. and Peter J. Wilcoxen, 1989. "Environmental Regulation and
U.S. Economic Growth," paper presented at a Workshop on Energy and
Research. Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy
Khalil, M.A.K., and R.A. Rasmussen, 1987. "Nitrous Oxide: Trends and Global
Mass Balance Over the Last 3000 Years," Annals of Glaciology 10:73-79.
Kalkstein, L., 1990. "Global Climate Change and Human Health: What Are the
forthcoming. Potential Impacts?", Encyclopedia Britannica Medical and Health Annual,
, 1989. "The Impact of CO2 and Trace Gas-Induced Climate Changes Upon
Human Mortality," in Potential Effects of Climate Change on the United
States, J. Smith and D. Tirpak, eds., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington D.C.
, and Valimont, K.M., 1987. "Climate Effects on Human Health," in
Potential Effects of Future Climate Changes on Forests and Vegetation,
Agriculture, Water Resources, and Human Health, EPA Science and Advisory
Committee Monograph No. 2538, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
41
Kane, Sally, John Reilly, and Rhonda Bucklin, 1989. "Implications of the
Greenhouse Effect for World Agricultural Commodity Markets," presented at
the Western Economic Association Conference, Lake Tahoe, California.
Kaya, Yoichi, 1989. "Impact of Carbon Dioxide Emission Control on GNP
Growth: Interpretation of Proposed Scenarios" IPCC/RSWG mimeo, May 8.
, Ryuji Matsuhashi, and Kenji Yamaji, 1989. "The Grand Strategy for
Global Warming." Paper presented at the Tokyo Conference on Global
Development and Human Response Toward Sustainable Development, September.
1.
Keyes, Dale, and Stephen Seidel, 1983. "Can We Delay a Greenhouse Warming?
The Effectiveness and Feasibility of Options to Slow a Build-up of Carbon
Dioxide in the Atmosphere." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Policy, Planning and Evaluation.
Koelsch, R.K., W.J. Jewell and R.J. Cummings, 1986. "Cogeneration of
Electricity and Heat from Biogas," Applied Engineering in Agriculture,
Vol.2, No.2.
Landgrebe, A., et al., 1989. "Atmospheric Impacts of Fuel Cell and Battery
Technology," paper presented at the Ninth Electrochemical Contractors'
Meeting: Washington, D.C.
Lanly, J.P. and J. Clement, 1979. "Present and Future National Forest and
Plantation Areas in the Tropics," Unasylva, No. 123.
Lashof, Daniel A. and Dennis Tirpak, eds., 1989. Policy Options for
Stabilizing Global Climate: Draft Report to Congress, Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Lashof, Daniel A., and Dilip R. Ahuja, 1989. "Relative Global Warming
Potentials of Greenhouse Gas Emissions," manuscript, Natural Resources
Defense Council.
Lave, Lester, 1989. "The Greenhouse Effect: What Government Actions are
Needed?" paper presented at a Workshop on Energy and Environmental Modeling
and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy Research.
Lerner, J., E. Matthews, and I. Fung, 1988. "Methane Emission From Animals:
A Global High-Resolution Database," Global Biogeochemical Cycles 2:139-156.
Linder, K.P. and M.R. Inglis, 1989. "The Potential Impacts of Climate Change
on Electric Utilities: Regional and National Estimates," in The Potential
Effects of Global Climate Change on the United States, J.B Smith and D.A.
Tirpak, eds., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 230-05-89-058,
Washington, D.C.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
42
Linder, K.P., M.J. Gibbs, and M.R. Inglis, 1987. "Potential Impacts of Climate
Change on Electric Utilities," New York State Energy Research and
Development Authority NYSERDA 88-2, Albany.
Manne, Alan S. and Richard G. Richels, 1989. "CO₂ Emission Limits: An
Economic Analysis for the USA", paper presented at a Workshop on Energy
and Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy
+
Policy Research.
Marks, Robert E., Peter McLennan, Richard Schodde, and Peter L. Swan, 1989.
"The Feasibility and Implications for Australia of the Adoption of the
Toronto Proposal for Carbon Dioxide Emission." Working Paper 89-032,
Australian Graduate School of Management, November.
Marland, G., 1988. "The Prospect of Solving the CO2 Problem Through Global
Reforestation," U.S. Department of Energy, DOC/NBB-0082, Washington, D.C.
, T.A. Boden, R.C. Griffin, S.F. Huang, P. Kanciruk, and T.R. Nelson,
1988. "Estimates of CO2 Emissions from Fossil Fuel Burning and Cement
Manufacturing Using the United Nations Energy Statistics and the U.S.
Bureau of Mines Cement Manufacturing Data," Carbon Dioxide Information
Analysis Center, No. 3176.
Miller, P.M., J.H. Eto, and H.S. Geller, 1989. "The Potential for Electricity
Conservation in New York State," American Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy, draft paper, Washington, D.C.
Mills, E., J.P. Harris, and A.H. Rosenfeld, 1988. "U.S. Energy Trends and
Policies for Developing 'Demand-Side Resources', Lawrence Berkeley
Laboratory LBL-24920, Berkeley.
Mintzer, Irving, 1989. "Projecting Future Energy Demand in Industrialized
Countries: An End-Use Oriented Approach," paper presented at a Workshop on
Energy and Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for
Energy Policy Research.
Miranowski, J.A., J. Hrubovcak, and J. Sutton, 1989. "The Effect of Commodity
Programs on Resource Use," paper presented at the CARP Symposium, Baltimore,
MD.
Montgomery, David, 1989. Oral Briefing about ongoing Congressional Budget
Office Carbon Charge Study, December.
Moskovitz, D., 1988. "Will Least-Cost Planning Work Without Significant
Regulatory Reform?", paper presented at the Least Cost Planning Seminar,
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, Aspen.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
43
Moulton, Robert and Ken Richards, 1989. "Carbon Sequestration Through
Forestation", U.S. Forest Service, draft report, Washington, D.C.
National Climate Program Office, 1989. "Climate Impact Response Functions,"
Report of a Workshop initiated by OMB, USDA, and NCPO, September 11-14,
Coolfont, West Virginia.
National Research Council, 1987. "Current Issues in Atmospheric Change."
Washington, D.C.
National Research Council, 1979. "Energy in Transition 1985-2010, Committee
on Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems," W.H. Freeman, San Francisco.
Natural Resources Defense Council, 1989. "Cooling the Greenhouse. Vital
First Steps to Combat Global Warming," Washington, D.C.
Neftel, A., E. Moor, H. Oeschger, and B. Stauffer, 1985. "Evidence from Polar
Ice Cores for the Increase in Atmospheric CO₂ in the Past Two Centuries,"
Nature 315:45-47.
'New York State Energy Plan, 1989. Albany.
Nordhaus, William D., 1989. "The Economics of the Greenhouse Effect," paper
presented at a Workshop on Energy and Environmental Modeling and Policy
Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy Research.
, 1982. "How Fast Should We Graze the Global Commons?", American
Economic Review, 72:2.
Ogden, Joan M. and Robert H. Williams, 1989. "Solar Hydrogen: Moving Beyond
Fossil Fuels," World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.
Olson, J.S., J.A. Watts and L.J. Allison, 1983. "Carbon in Live Vegetation of
Major World Ecosystems," Report ORNL-5862, Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
Paltridge, Garth, Susan Offutt, and John Reilly, 1989. "Response to Climate
Change: A Framework for Cost-Benefit Analysis at the National Level," draft
paper, USDA/ERS.
Parry, M.L. et al.., 1987. "The Potential Impact of Climatic Variations on
Agriculture," International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis and
United Nations Environment Program.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
44
*
, T.R. Carter, and N.T. Konijn (eds.), 1988a. "The Impact of
Climatic Variations on Agriculture," Vol.1: Assessments in Cool Temperate
and Cold Regions, IIASA/UNEP. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
*
, T.R. Carter, and N.T. Konijn (eds.), 1988b. "The Impact of
Climatic Variations on Agriculture," Vol.2: Assessments in Semi-Arid
Regions, IIASA/UNEP. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
et al., 1989. "The Potential Impact of Climatic Change on
Agriculture and Land Use," draft paper prepared for Working Group II of the
IPCC, University of Birmingham.
Pearman, G.I., D. Etheridge, F. deSilva, and P.J. Fraser, 1986. "Evidence of
Changing Concentrations of Atmospheric C02, N2O and CH4 from Air Bubbles in
Antarctic Ice", Nature 320:248-255.
Peart, Jones, and Curry, "Impact of Climate Change on Crop Yield in the
Southeastern U.S.: A Simulation Study," Study conducted for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, University of Florida.
Persson, S.P.E., et al., 1979. "Agricultural Anaerobic Digesters: Design and
Operation," Pennsylvania State University Bulletin 827, University Park,
PA.
, and H.D. Bartlett, 1981. "Biogas Engines for
Agricultural Motor-Generators," paper presented to the American
Society of Agricultural Engineers, Chicago, December 15-19.
Peskin, Henry M., 1989. "Accounting for Natural Resource Depletion and
Degradation in Developing Countries", paper presented at a Workshop on
Energy and Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for
Energy Policy Research.
*Pirkey, D.B. and R.M. Scheer, 1988. "Energy Conservation Potential: A
Review of Eight Studies," Proceedings of the 1988 ACEEE Summer Study on
Energy Efficiency in Buildings, American Council for an Energy Efficient
Economy, Washington, D.C.
*Plotkin, Steven E., 1989. Statement before the Subcommittee on Energy and
Power, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives,
July 12.
Postel, S. and L. Heise, 1988. "Reforesting the Earth," Worldwatch Institute
No.83, Washington, D.C.
Prinn, R.G., 1988. "How Have the Atmospheric Concentrations of
Halocarbons Changed?", in The Changing Atmosphere, F.S. Rowland
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
45
and I.S.A. Isaksen, eds., John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
*Ramanathan, V., R.J. Cicerone, H.B. Singh, and J.T. Kiehl, 1985. "Trace Gas
Trends and Their Potential Role in Climate Change," Journal of Geophysical
Research 90:5547-5566.
*Reilly, John, and J. Edmonds, 1985. "Changing Climate and Energy Modeling:
A Review," The Energy Journal, Vol.6, No.3. p.137-54.
*
, J.A. Edmonds, R.H. Gardner, and A.L. Brenkert, 1987. "Uncertainty
Analysis of the IEA/ORAU CO2 Emissions Model," The Energy Journal, Vol.8,
No.3. p.1-29.
Reister, David B., 1989. "Energy Technology R&D: What Could Make a
Difference?", paper presented at a Workshop on Energy and Environmental
Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy Research.
Ritchie, Joseph, Baer, and Chou, "Effects of Global Climate Change on
Agriculture: Great Lakes Region," Study conducted for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Michigan State University.
*Roningen, Vernon O., 1986. "A Static World Policy Simulation (SWOPSIM)
Modeling Framework," ERS Staff Report AGE860625, Washington, D.C.
Rosenberg, Norman J., 1989. "Policy Options for Adaptation to Climate
Change," Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.
, 1986. "A Primer on Climatic Change: Mechanisms, Trends, and
Projections," Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.
, William E. Easterling, Pierre R. Crosson, and Joel Darmstadter,
editors, 1988. "Greenhouse Warming: Abatement and Adaptation," Resources
for the Future."
Rosenzweig, Cynthia, "Potential Effects of Climate Change on Agricultural
Production in the Great Plains," Study conducted for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Goddard Space Flight Center/Columbia University.
Ross, M. December 6, 1989. Personal Communication.
Rotty, R.M., 1986. "Estimates of CO2 from Wood Fuel Based on Forest Harvest
Data," Climate Change, Vol.9.
Sant, R.W., 1979. "The Least Cost Energy Strategy," Carnegie-Mellon University
Energy Productivity Center: Arlington, Va.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
46
*Santer, Benjamin, 1985. "The Use of General Circulation Models in Climate
Impact Analyses - A Preliminary Study of the Impacts of a CO2 Induced
Climate Change on West European Agriculture," Climatic Change, No. 7.
Santini, D.J., et al., 1989. "A Characterization of the Attributes of
Transportation Technologies Which Are Relevant to the Estimation of
Greenhouse Gas Reductions in the Transportation Sector," Argonne National
Laboratory: Argonne, IL.
, et al., 1989. "Alternative Greenhouse Gas Reduction Policies for
Application to Light Duty Vehicle Use by Households," draft paper, Argonne
National Laboratory: Argonne, IL.
Sathaye, Jayant A., 1989. "Modeling Long-Term LDC Energy Use to Assess
Impacts on the Global Environment," paper presented at a Workshop on Energy
and Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy
Policy Research.
Schipper, Lee, 1989. "Energy Efficiency and Environmental Policy: Progress,
Plateau, or Passe," paper presented at a Workshop on Energy and
Research. Environmental Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy
Schneider, Stephen H., Norman J. Rosenberg, 1988. "The Greenhouse Effect:
Its Causes, Possible Impacts, and Associated Uncertainties. Greenhouse
Warming: Abatement and Adaptation, Resources for the Future.
*Searle, Milton F., and Chauncey Starr, 1989. "Global Electricity Futures:
Demand and Supply Alternatives." Paper presented at American Nuclear
Society Annual Meeting, November.
Sedjo, R.A. and A.M. Solomon, 1988. "Climate and Forests," paper presented to
the Workshop on Controlling and Adapting to Greenhouse Warming sponsored by
Resources for the Future.
Seiler, W., and R. Conrad, 1987. "Contribution of Tropical Ecosystems to the
Global Budgets of Trace Gases, Especially CH4, H₂, CO, and N₂O", in
York. Geophysiology of Amazonia," R.E. Dickinson, ed., John Wiley & Sons, New
Shaffer, S., 1989. "Biogas Production from Dairy Manure: A Case Study of the
Langerwerf Dairy, Durham, California," unpublished report, California
Department of Food and Agriculture, Sacramenta, CA.
Siegenthaler, V., and H. Oeschger, 1987. "Biospheric CO2 Emissions During the
Past 200 Years Reconstructed by Deconvolution of Ice Core Data," Tellus
39B:140-154.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
47
Solar Energy Research Institute, 1989. "The Potential of Renewable Energy:
An Interlaboratory Analytic Paper," Office of Policy, Planning and
Analysis, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.
, 1981. "A New Prosperity: Building a Sustainable Energy Future,"
Brick House Publishing: Andover, Mass.
*Smith, Joel B. and Dennis Tirpak (eds.), 1989. The Potential Effects of
Global Climate Change on the United States. Draft Report to Congress.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Splinter, W.E. and D.D. Schulte, 1987. "Energy Integrated Swine Farm System
in Nebraska," U.S. Dept. of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, DOE/CS/40378.
Stauffer, B., G. Fischer, A. Neftel, and H. Oeschger, 1985. "Increase of
Atmospheric Methane Recorded in Antarctic Ice Cores," Science 229:1386-
1389.
*Steinberg, M., 1983. "An Analysis of Concepts for Controlling Atmospheric
Carbon Dioxide." U.S. Department of Energy, TR007, DOE/CH/00016-1,
December.
*
, and H.C. Cheng, 1987. "Advanced Technologies for Reducing CO2
Emissions." Document No. 40730, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Brookhaven,
NY.
*Stuntz, Linda G., 1989. Statement before the Subcommittee on Energy and
Power, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives,
July 13.
*Tennessee Valley Authority, 1989. "Economic Impacts of Industrial Wood
Energy Use in the Southeastern U.S." Draft.
*Tompkins, Arnold R, 1989. Comments on Draft Chapter 6 on the Economy and the
Environment--1990 Economic Report of the President. Memorandum to Michael
J. Boskin, December.
United Nations, 1987. 1985 Energy Statistics Yearbook, New York.
United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, 1989. "Implications of
Climate Change for Food Security," paper prepared for Resource Use and
Management Subgroup of Working Group III of the IPCC.
United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, 1982. "Conservation and
Development of Tropical Forest Resources," Forestry Paper 37, Rome.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
48
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1987. "Fixed Reproducible Tangible Wealth in
the United States, 1925-85." Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Economic
Analysis.
U.S. Department of Energy, 1989. "A Preliminary Analysis of U.S. CO2
Emissions Reduction Potential from Energy Conservation and the Substitution
of Natural Gas for Coal in the Period to 2010," DOE/NBB-0085.
, Climate Change Committee, October 1989. "Energy and Global Change,"
Washington, D.C.
, 1989. "Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Clean Coal
Technology Demonstration Program," DOE/EIS-0146, Washington, D.C.
*
, 1989. "Energy Conservation Trends: Understanding the Factors that
Affect Conservation Gains in the U.S. Economy," DOE/PE-0092, Washington
D.C.
, 1989. "Energy and Climate Change: Report of the DOE Multi-
Laboratory Climate Change Committee." Draft of December 1989. UCRL-
102476. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
, December 8, 1989. Office of Environment, Office of Nuclear Energy,
Personal Communications.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1989. "Costs and Benefits of Phasing
Out Production of CFCs and Halons in the United States."
U.S. Forest Service, 1989. "Tree Planting and Forest Improvement to Reduce
Global Warming." Draft Report, Washington, D.C.
Van Dyne, D.L. and C.B. Gilbertson, 1978. "Estimating U.S. Livestock and
Poultry Manure and Nutrient Production," U.S. Department of Agriculture,
ESCS, ESCS-12.
Van Dyne, D.L., and C.B. Gilbertson, 1979. "Estimated Inventory of Livestock
and Poultry Manure Resources in the United States," Agricultural Wastes:
An International Journal, Vol.1, No.4.
Veselka, T., 1989. Personal Communication.
Waybright, R, 1989. "Waste Not! Want Not!," conference paper to
"Commercializing Industrial Uses for Agricultural Commodities," Overland
Park, Kansas, March 28-29.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
49
Walsh, J.L., et al., 1988. Handbook on Biogas Utilization, published for U.S.
Department of Energy by the Southeastern Regional Biomass Energy Program,
Tennessee Valley Authority, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.
*Wenders, John T., 1986. "Economic Efficiency and Income Distribution in the
Electric Utility Industry." Southern Economic Journal, April.
*Whalley, John, and Randall Wigle, 1989. "Cutting CO2 Emissions: the Effects
of Alternative Policy Approaches." Mimeo, University of Western Ontario,
September.
White, M.R., and I. Hertz-Picciotto, 1985. "Human Health: Analysis of Climate
Related to Health", in Characterization of Information Requirements for
Studies of CO2 Effects: Water Resources, Agriculture, Fisheries, Forests,
and Human Health. U.S. Department of Energy, Washington D.C.
Williams, Robert H., 1989. "Innovative Approaches to Marketing Electric
Efficiency," paper presented at a Workshop on Energy and Environmental
Modeling and Policy Analysis, MIT Center for Energy Policy Research.
Womach, J., 1989. "Impacts of Global Climate Change on Agriculture."
Agriculture, Forestry, and Global Climate Change--A Reader, prepared by the
Congressional Research Service and the Library of Congress, Washington,
D.C.
*Wuebbles, D.J. and J. Edmonds, 1988. A Primer on Greenhouse Gasses. U.S.
Department of Energy, Carbon Dioxide Research Program, report DOE/NBB0083.
*Yoshino, M., T. Horie, H. Seino, H. Tsujii, T. Uchijima, and Z. Uchijima,
1988. "The Effects of Climatic Variations on Agriculture in Japan," Part
VI in the Impact of Climatic Variations on Agriculture, Vol.1: Assessments
in Cool Temperate and Cold Regions, M.L. Parry, eds.
U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire
50
Figure
1
U.S. Global Change Research
Program Priority Framework
STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
Support Broad U.S. and
International Scientific Effort
Identify Natural and Hu
man -Induced Changes
Focus on Interactions
and Interdisciplinary Science
Share Financial Burden,
Use the Best Resources,
and Encourage Full
Participation
INTEGRATING PRIORITIES
Documention of
Earth System Change
Observational
Programs
Data Manage
ment Systems
Focused Studies on
Controlling Processes
and Improved
Understanding
Integrated Concep
tual and Predictive Models
SCIENCE PRIORITIES
Climate and
Biogeochemical
Ecological Systems
Earth System
Human
Solid Earth
Solar
Hydrologic Systems
Dynamics
and Dynamics
History
Interactions
Processes
Influences
Role of Clouds
Bio/Atm/Ocean Fluxes
Long-Term Measure-
Paleoclimate
Data Base Development
Coastal Erosion
EUV/UV Monitoring
Ocean Circulation and
of Trace Species
ments of Structure/
Paleoecology
Models Linking:
Volcanic Processes
Atm/Solar Energy
Heat Flux
Atm Processing of
Function
Atmospheric
Population Growth
Permafrost and Marine
Coupling
Land/Atm/Ocean
Trace Species
Response to Climate
Composition
and Distribution
Gas Hydrates
Irradiance (Measure/
Increasing Priority
Water & Energy
Surface/Deep Water
and Other Stresses
Ocean Circulati on
Energy Demands
Ocean/Seafloor Heat
Model)
Fluxes
Biogeochemistry
Interactions between
and Composi tion
Changes in Land Use
and Energy Fluxes
Climate/Solar Record
Coupled Climate System
Terrestrial Biosphere
Physical and
Ocean Producti vity
Industrial Production
Surficial Processes
Proxy Measurements
& Quantitative Links
Nutrient and
Biological Processes
Sea Level Chan ge
Crustal Motions and
and Long-Term
Ocean/Atm/Cryosphere
Carbon Cycling
Models of Interactions,
Paleohydrology
Sea Level
Data Base
Interactions
Terrestrial Inputs to
Feedbacks, and
Marine Ecosystems
Responses
Productivity/Resource
Models
Increasing Priority
04 10 90 21:26
9 357 9629
AD GEO
KEEL
5.
002 006
Draft: April 10, 1990 at 8 pm
Climate Change
The Climate System:
The Earth's climate is controlled by the radiative balance of the atmosphere and by
internal processes within the climate system. The radiative balance depends upon the input
of solar radiation and the atmospheric concentrations of radiatively active trace gases (i.e.,
greenhouse gases), clouds and aerosols. To predict changes in the climate system requires
an understanding of future changes in the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse natural gases
and aerosols, and the processes that control the response of the climate system to
and human-influenced changes in the radiation balance.
Changes in the Forcing of the Climate System:
Natural greenhouse gases, primarily water vapor and carbon dioxide, and to a
lesser extent, methane, nitrous oxide and ozone, keep the Earth much warmer than it would
otherwise be. It is well documented that since the industrial revolution the atmospheric
concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and industrially produced
chlorofluorocarbons (strong greenhouse gases) have been increasing primarily due to
human activities. However, there are many uncertainties concerning the magnitudes of the
sources and sinks of these greenhouse gases, hence their residence time in the atmosphere.
In particular, the magnitude of the uptake and release of carbon dioxide by the oceans and
terrestrial biosphere, and strengths of the individual sources of methane and nitrous oxide
are quite uncertain. These uncertainties limit our ability to understand the quantitative
consequences of particular emissions control strategies, e.g., it is difficult to relate future
emissions of carbon dioxide to growth in its atmospheric concentration. It should be
noted, however, that the time taken for atmospheric carbon dioxide to adjust to changes in
sources is of order 50-200 years, determined by the slow exchange of carbon between
surface waters and deeper layers of the ocean and the response of the terrestrial biosphere.
Consequently, carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere today will influence the
atmospheric abundance of carbon dioxide for centuries into the future, and the atmospheric
concentration of carbon dioxide will only respond slowly to changes in emission rates.
Predictions of Climate Change:
General Circulation Models (GCM's) are currently the best tools with which to
predict changes in the Earth's climate in response to a change in the atmospheric
concentrations of trace gases or aerosols, solar activity, or surface albedo. However, it
must be recognized that the current GCM's have certain limitations. In particular, the
prediction of global climate change is very sensitive to the treatment of cloud-radiation
interactions. Different cloud-radiation parameterizations in GCM models lead to significant
differences, up to a factor of three, in the magnitude of the predicted global warming.
Prediction of regional climate changes are very uncertain, and are particularly sensitive to
the treatment of ocean dynamics and ocean-atmosphere interactions (the exchange of
energy and chemicals between the atmosphere and the surface waters, and between the
surface waters and the deep oceans controls the rate of predicted warming), and to the
terrestrial vegetation-atmosphere interactions (the transfer of energy and moisture between
land surfaces and the atmosphere). In addition to our current lack of understanding of
several key processes, today's computer capabilities severely limit the spatial resolution of
the GCMs. Consequently, while the current GCMs represent the overall climatology of the
1
04/10
90
21:27
9 357 9629
AD GEO
KEEL
003 006
Draft: April 10, 1990 at 8 pm
present to an increase in the atmospheric abundance of greenhouse gases, it the is that
climate system quite well and all predict that the Earth's climate will warm clear in
response the predictions of the magnitude and timing of climate changes, especially at regional in
level, are somewhat uncertain. In particular, accurate regional predictions of changes climatic the
state and variability of climatic parameters needed to assess the impact of
mean change on agriculture, natural ecosystems, coastal regions, and water resources (such as
temperature, precipitation, evaporation, soil moisture and the occurrence of severe storms
at uncertainties concern feedbacks between climate change and biogeochemical cycling, and
sub-continental scales) are not possible at this time. Other potentially important
possible non-linear feedbacks within the climate system itself, i.e., a change in ocean
circulation.
A key question is what do the GCM's predict for future climate changes based on
emission, recognizing that there are significant scientific uncertainties, and
trace assuming gas that there will be no long-term changes in solar irradiance or atmospheric aerosol
concentrations. Rather than discuss a number of complex emission scenarios it is
reasonable to believe that the atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and the other
greenhouse gases will continue to increase at a rate such that there will be a radiative
equivalent of a carbon dioxide doubling sometime during the middle of the next century. the If
this occurs then the GCM's predictions that are considered to be most likely are that: (i)
equilibrium increase in global mean surface temperature should lie between 1.5 and 4.5
degrees centigrade (highly sensitive to modeling the feedback between clouds and climate
change; recent models with more sophisticated treatments of clouds have tended to predict
temperature changes at the lower end of this range); (ii) between 60 and 80% of the
equilibrium warming should be realized at the time of "equivalent doubling" (sensitive to
the treatment of ocean circulation); (iii) global mean precipitation should increase; (iv) sea-
ice extent should decrease; and (v) the predicted warming in the northern polar winter
should be greater than the global mean.
There are some consistent GCM predictions of climate change at the continental
scale (but not sub-continental scale) such as, (i) land areas are predicted to warm more
rapidly than oceans, and (ii) mid-latitude land masses in the northern hemisphere will warm
more than the global mean and be accompanied by a decrease in summer precipitation.
These results carry important implications. but must be stated with lower scientific
confidence than those presented above.
Observations of Temperature Changes:
The instrumental record of surface temperatures suggests an increase of berween
0.3 and 0.6 degrees centigrade since the mid-nineteenth century, with an undetermined, but
probably small (less than 0.05 degrees centigrade) artificial component due to urbanization. the
The observation of a marked retreat of mountain glaciers in all parts of the world since
end of the nineteenth century tends to support the notion that temperatures have increased
globally over the last one hundred years. However, temperatures have not increased
smoothly with time, nor uniformly throughout the world. Several points should be noted:
(i) the majority of the temperature increase occurred before 1940, prior to most of the
anthropogenic increase in the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases; (ii) there is
little evidence that the continental U.S. has warmed since 1900: (iii) the northern
hemisphere cooled between 1940 and the early 1970s, while the southern hemisphere
continued to warm, albeit at a very slow rate; (iv) there have been significant differences in
regional changes, especially in the northern hemisphere since 1950; and (v) from 1975 to
1982 a more general warming occurred, followed by little global warming since 1982. It is
2
04/10 90 21:28
9 357 9629
AD GEO
--- KEEL
5.
004/006
Draft: April 10, 1990 at 8 pm
important to recognize, however, that coupled ocean-atmosphere GCM's predict a highly
variable global warming signal, moreover, substantial regional variations are expected.
Detection of the "Anthropogenic Greenhouse" Signal:
The Earth's climate is inherently variable on all timescales, both regionally and
globally. Hence, the challenge is to detect an "anthropogenic greenhouse" signal amidst
the natural variability of the system. While it can be stated that the observed global mean
temperature increase over the past 100 years is broadly consistent with theoretical
predictions of climate change, it should be noted that the implied climate sensitivity of the
actual system would then be in the lower one-third to one-half of the range predicted by
GCM's. In addition, natural variability of the climate system may be as large as the
observed changes to date, hence the observed changes could be wholly attributable to
natural variability or possibly natural variability could have masked (due to natural
variability causing 2 decrease in temperatures) a larger "anthropogenic greenhouse" signal.
Consequently, the current observations cannot confirm the presence or absence of an
"anthropogenic greenhouse" signal. Detection of an "anthropogenic greenhouse" signal
will require determining trends in both forcing functions and several climatically important
parameters, coupled with a quantified understanding of natural variability, and the use of
time-dependent coupled ocean-atmosphere GCMs.
Sea Level:
Although the data are difficult to interpret, the best scientific assessment is that over
the past 100 years, sea level has risen at an average rate of rise of 1.0-2.0 mm/yr. The
uncertainties are large, but the principal causes of this rise are consistent with the expected
thermal expansion of the oceans and the melting of mountain glaciers. Regional values
differ considerably from global values and predicting future conditions is even more
uncertain. If the global mean surface temperature increases, then sea level is predicted to
rise, primarily due to to the thermal expansion of the oceans and to a melting of some land-
ice. The current predicted range of sea level increase, at the time of a radiative equivalent
of a carbon dioxide doubling (sometime during the middle of the next century), lies
between about 10 and 30 cm. Accurate predictions remain difficult, and somewhat
controversial, because of the predicted increased snow accumulation over the Antarctic
continent.
Ecological Systems:
Biological Productivity: Where temperature is limiting, warming of soils would increase
nutrient availability to plants with potential for increased productivity. Increased
temperature will affect respiration more than photosynthesis, possibly reducing carbon
stored in terrestrial ecosystems resulting in a positive feedback on atmospheric carbon
dioxide concentrations. Higher atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations can increase
dioxide fertilization effects" is unknown. However, while there is some knowledge of the
photosynthesis with potential increases in net production, but the duration of "carbon
responses of biological production processes to changes in parameters of the physical
environment, how these integrate over the life cycle of even one species interacting in a
complex of other species is unknown.
Ecosystem Composition: Species will respond differently to changes in temperature,
precipitation, and atmospheric carbon dioxide, either singly or in some combination.
3
04/10 90 21:28
9 357 9629
AD GEO
KEEL
5
005 006
Draft: April 10, 1990 at 8 pm
However, exactly what these responses will be is not known. Also unknown are the
changes that will occur among species, including plant-animal and plant-microbe
interactions- both beneficial symbioses as well as insect and fungal pathogens, that affect
change much more rapidly in response to an increase in greenhouse gases, up to a factor be of
the structure of ecosystems. GCM's predict that global mean surface temperatures may
100, than they did during ice age cycles. If this were to occur, some species will not
able to migrate or otherwise adapt to the changing climate and become extinct. Offsetting
this will be the possible genetic differentiation and expansion that might occur as habitat
boundaries are altered, with creation of new barriers to reproduction and dissolution of
some old barriers. However, extinction is likely to be more frequent than speciation,
further decreasing biological diversity.
Marine Ecosystems: The historic record leaves little doubt that global warming will have an
impact on marine planktonic organisms. The structure and productivity of marine
ecosystems are strongly influenced by ocean circulation and mixing, physical parameters
tightly linked with climate. In high latitudes, the distribution of sea ice is especially
important, both for plankton and marine mammals and birds. In sub-polar and temperate
regions, physical, chemical and biological parameters are highly variable and the system
behavior consequently unpredictable. Thus, effects of warming or other changes are
determinant of ocean productivity. Again, while there is considerable knowledge of specific
similarly uncertain. Warming affects vertical mixing and in turn nutrient supply, a major
processes and specific parts of the global oceans, the integration of this knowledge is
incomplete and significant gaps in understanding exist.
Scientific Research Needed to Reduce Scientific Uncertainties:
To improve our current understanding of: (i) the natural and hurnan-influenced
processes that control the Earth's climate, and (ii) the impacts of climate change at the
regional scale, will require an internationally coordinated program of space-based and
ground-based research. This research program will need to: (i) establish an integrated
long-term program of systematic observations of the Earth's system; (ii) improve our
understanding of the physical, chemical, biological, geological, and social processes that
influence the Earth's environment and its responses; and (iii) develop integrated predictive
models. In particular, we need to document the natural variability of the Earth's climate,
and to improve our understanding and modeling of: (i) cloud-radiation feedbacks; (ii) the
exchange of energy between the atmosphere and the surface waters of the ocean, and
between the surface and deep waters of the ocean; (iii) the cycling of carbon and other key
elements between the atmosphere, land and oceans; (iv) the exchange of water and energy
between land surfaces and the atmosphere; and (v) the current structure and functioning of
ecosystems, and their response to environmental changes.
4
Mi
04/10 90 21:29
9 357 9629
AD GEO
--- KEEL
5
006 006
Draft: April 10, 1990 at 8 pm
Summary of Areas of Scientific Uncertainty
a.
Hydrological cycle: primarily cloud-radiation and land surface-atmosphere
interactions. These uncertainties affect the predicted rate (magnitude at a
given time) of "climate change".
b.
Role of the oceans: the exchange of energy between the ocean and the
atmosphere, and between the upper layers of the ocean and the deep ocean.
These uncertainties affect the predicted rate of climate change, especially at
the regional scale.
C.
Trace Gases: quantification of the uptake and release of carbon dioxide by
the oceans and terrestrial biosphere, and quantification of the individual
sources of methane and nitrous oxide. These uncertainties affect our
understanding of how the climate system will be "forced", hence the rate of
predicted climate change. These uncertainties also limit the formation of
control strategies.
d.
Predictions of regional climate change: limitations in computer resources
(spatial resolution and physical sophistication), coupled with an inadequate
understanding of several key processes (e.g., the exchange of water and
energy between vegetative surface and the atmosphere) limit the accuracy of
regional climate change predictions at the scale required for impact
assessments to be performed (sub-continental).
e.
Detection of global change: trends in a number of climatically important
parameters, coupled with a quantified understanding of natural variability, is
needed to differentiate between human-induced changes in the environment
from those that occur naturally. This will require long-term observations of
climatically important parameters and forcing functions, as well as careful
development of time-dependent coupled ocean-atmosphere GCM's.
5
OF
PRESE THE OF SEAL THE UNITED
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE
April 17-18, 1990
Washington, D.C.
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
THE OF SEAL OF THE UNITED
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE
April 17-18, 1990
Washington, D.C.
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
(1)
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
PRE-CONFERENCE MATERIAL
FOR DELEGATES
Printed on Recycled Paper
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
April 5, 1990
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
Dear Colleague:
On behalf of President Bush, we are honored that you will be coming to the United
States April 16-18 to serve as a delegate to the White House Conference on Science
and Economics Research Related to Global Change.
By contributing your country's expertise in identifying the critical needs in the fields
of science and economics research, you will advance international cooperation and
understanding in dealing with the uncertainties of global change.
The United States welcomes a free and open discussion of the science and economics
research issues related to global change. As co-chairmen of the Conference, we look
forward to joining you in that effort.
Yours Sincerely,
DAMAN Samley
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for Science and Technology
Mahal J Brown
Michael J. Boskin
Chairman
Council of Economic Advisers
Michael R. Deland
Chairman
Council on Environmental
Quality
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
3
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Overview of the Conference
Preliminary Delegation List
Conference Co-Chairmen Biographies
U.S. Delegation Biographies
Hotel/Transportation/Logistics
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
$
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
OVERVIEW OF THE CONFERENCE
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CONFERENCE:
President George Bush invited the Heads of State from seventeen nations and the leadership of the
E.C. and the OECD to send ministerial-level delegations to the White House Conference on Science
and Economics Research Related to Global Change. The Conference is designed to bring together
government leaders in science, economics, energy, and the environment concerned with the central
research issues of Global Change. The Conference is designed to advance understanding of Global
Change phenomena, to enhance international cooperation, and to build the basis for future efforts
among nations to integrate more fully science and economics research into the policy process. The
Conference adds a new dimension to the international dialogue on Global Change - - the proposition
that economics, both analysis and research on economic policy and economic consequences, is an
essential link between the science of Global Change and policy alternatives. Science and economics
research can also serve to identify and develop technologies and policy instruments that relax the
tension between growth and Global Change, allowing for greater progress on both fronts. To address
these broad goals, the Conference will:
Focus on science and economics research issues relevant to policy on Global Change,
Address important next steps to substantially enhance and broaden international
understanding of science and economics research issues that relate to Global Change,
Highlight the special role that economics plays in integrating the science of Global Change
with the policy process,
Demonstrate linkages between science and economics research and domestic and
international policy processes, and
Seek to take the initial steps to implement joint international science and economics
research efforts.
The Conference is conceived as an integral part of the ongoing international process to understand
the science of and policy options relating to global environmental issues. The need to improve
substantially understanding of both the science and economics of Global Change has been noted by
many world leaders. The Conference, therefore, focuses on science and economics research issues as
a complement to the ongoing Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other interna-
tional forums that seek to address the issue of Global Change. It is hoped that the results of the Con-
ference will contribute to the IPCC process and other ongoing international debates and actions.
The Conference focuses on "Global Change," an area of research concerned with understanding the
fundamental processes that govern the Earth system functions. Global Change encompasses such
diverse and interrelated issues as ozone depletion, greenhouse gases, climate change, food security,
water supply, sea level changes, wetlands, deforestation, biodiversity, population change, and energy
demand.
1
OVERVIEW
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
The Conference will provide a forum for international leaders to address the complex science and
economics research issues central to the policy process, including:
How well can we predict temperature trends in the decades ahead?
How "good" are our global scale models, such as models to predict temperature changes?
How well can we predict the interconnections between global environmental change and the
resulting social and economic impacts?
What are the economic consequences of adapting to or mitigatinGlobal Change?
How "good" are the models used to assess these economic consequences and their impact on
the well-being of humanity?
By addressing such questions, it is hoped that the nations might pledge to enhance joint international
research efforts that focus on rapid improvement of both scientific and economic knowledge and de-
velopment of the necessary infrastructure to implement such efforts.
To address these complex and interrelated issues, President Bush invited heads of state from a small
group of nations to send delegations led by ministerial-level officials. The Conference was conceived
with the idea that a representative group of countries would be invited to participate. Their selection
was based on the simple criteria that the meeting should include countries or organizations of
countries that have substantial populations, large land masses, industrialized economies, heavy
future energy needs, major research infrastructures, or have provided international leadership on
issues related to climate and Global Change. These countries and organizations were selected:
1.
Australia
2.
Brazil
3.
Canada
4.
Federal Republic of Germany
5.
France
6.
India
7.
Indonesia
8.
Italy
9.
Japan
10.
Mexico
11.
Netherlands
12.
Nigeria
13.
Norway
14.
Poland
15.
Soviet Union
16.
United Kingdom
17.
Zaire
18.
European Community
19.
OECD
The White House Conference
2
on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change
THE EXPECTED RESULTS OF THE CONFERENCE
The Conference will provide an opportunity to address the science and economics research issues
related to Global Change in the context of the policy process. To accomplish these goals, the Confer-
ence will focus on and seek to promote:
A substantially enhanced understanding of science, economics, and environmental research
agenda central to the needs of future Global Change policy development.
A substantive understanding of the uncertainties in both science and economics knowledge of
changes in the global environment of the planet.
Increased mutual understanding of and sensitivity to the substance of science and economics
research between both of those research communities.
Increased sensitivity by the two research communities to the policy needs evolving in such
areas as environmental and energy policy, and vice versa.
A solid and well implemented science and economics research effort as a prerequisite for a
complement to evolving efforts by nations to address the international policy questions of
global environmental changes.
A communication network among national leaders concerned with, and responsible for, the
research and policy agenda related to Global Change. More particularly, this Conference
provides a "first-ever" opportunity to forge a partnership between the science and economics
research communities and the policy-makers.
To provide a vehicle to focus on these vital issues, the Conference will include two Plenary Sessions
and several concurrent Working Groups, which will address the three major themes of the Confer-
ence:
The Science and Economics Research Challenge
Integrating Science and Economics Research in the Policy Process
Building a Partnership for Science and Economics Research
The Conference is expected to produce a Co-Chairmen's Report, which will outline the deliberations
of the Conference and set forth common actions designed to expand research and cooperation among
nations.
As President Bush stated in his invitation letter, "It is my hope that the expertise, experience, and
data available in our respective countries can be brought together in a more integrated and coherent
fashion. By working together, our nations can enhance international cooperation in these vital areas
and contribute to the success of the ongoing IPCC process."
3
OVERVIEW
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
$
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
PRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST
Current as of April 4, 1990; 12:00 Noon
BRAZIL
(tentative)
Name
Title
Jose Lutzenberger
Environment Secretary
Jose Goldemberg
Science Secretary
CANADA
(tentative)
Name
Title
Lucien Bouchard
Federal Environment Minister
Derek Burney
Ambassador to the U.S.
Dr. Ann White
Director, Canadian Global Change Program
Dr. Arthur W. May
President, the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY
(confirmed)
Name
Title
Professor Dr. Klaus Töpfer
Federal Minister for Environment, Nature Protection and Nuclear
Safety
Dr. Gebhard Ziller
State Secretary, Ministry for Research and Technology
Dr. Wilhelm Knittel
State Secretary, Ministry for Transportation
Baldur Wagner
Assistant Secretary, Federal Chancellery
Dr. Mario Graf von Matuschka
Assistant Secretary, Foreign Ministry
Dr. Horst Glatzel
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Federal Chancellery
Walter Lötz
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Ministry of Economics
Professor Dr. Ansgar Vogel
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Ministry for Environment, Nature
Protection, and Nuclear Safety
Dietrich Kupfer
Director, Office of International Cooperation, Ministry for
Environment, Nature Protection and Nuclear Safety
Professor Dr. Hartmut Grossl
Scientist, Max Planck Society, Hamburg
1
PRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
FRANCE
(tentative)
Name
Title
Minister Hubert Curien
Minister of Research and Technology
Minister Brice Lalonde
Secretary of State for the Environment
Jean Audouze
Science Advisor to the President
Claude Alegre
Special Advisor to the Minister of Education
Ambassador Jean Ripert
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Environment)
Yves Martin
Chairman of the Interministry Committee on Greenhouse
Madame Borione
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Andre LeBeau
General Director of the Meteorological Center
M. Nasse
Ministry of Economy and Budget
Sylvie Faucheux
Professor of Economy at Paris I
INDIA
(tentative)
Name
Title
Ms. Maneka Gandhi
Minister of State for Environment and Forests
Vasant Gowarikar
Secretary of Department of Science and Technology
Mahesh Prasad
Secretary of Ministry of Environment and Forests
Dr. A.P. Mitra
Director General of Council for Science and Industrial Research
The White House Conference
2
on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change
INDONESIA
(confirmed)
Name
Title
Prof. Dr. Ing. B.J. Habibie
Minister of State for Research and Technology; Chairman of the
Agency for the Assessment and Application of Technology
Prof. Dr. Samaun Samadikun
Chairman of the Indonesian Institute of Science
Prof. Dr. John A. Katili
Deputy Chairman of the National Research Council
Prof. Dr. Gunawan Satari
Permanent Secretary, Ministry of State for Research and Technology
Mr. Poedji Kuntarso, MA
Director General for Foreign Economic Relations; Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
Prof. Dr. Rustam Didong
Deputy Chairman (Economics), National Development Planning
Agency
Prof. Dr. Harsono Wiryosumarto
Deputy Chairman (Technology Development); Agency for the
Assessment and Application of Technology
Prof. Dr. S.B. Joedono
Assistant Minister (Industry, Energy and Mining), Office of the
Coordinating Minister for the Economy, Finance, Industry and
Development Supervision
Dr. M. Alwi Dahlan
Assistant Ministery (Population), Office of the Minister of State for
Population and the Environment
His Excellency Abdulrachman Ramly
Ambassador of the Republic of Indonesia to the United States of
America
ITALY
(tentative)
Name
Title
Hon. Adolfo Battaglia
Minister of Industry, Head of Delegation
Prof. Umberto Colombo
Director of the National Agency for Nuclear and Renewable Energies
Prof. Giuseppe Biorci
Vice President of the National Research Council
Prof. Giuseppe Bianchi
Director General for Energy Sources, Ministry of Industry
Prof. Antonio Praturlon
President of the CNR Committee on Geological Sciences
Prof. Roberto Frassetto
CNR Institute of the Dynamics of Great Masses
Prof. Emilio Gerelli
Economic Counselor to the Minister of Environment
Dr. Corrado Clini
Director General for Pollution Prevention, Ministry of Environment
Prof. Guido Visconti
Department of Physics, University of Aquila
Dr. Giovanni Sacco
Vice Director General of Treasury, Ministry of Treasury
3
PRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
MEXICO
(tentative)
Name
Title
Lic. Patricio Chirinos
Secretary of Urban Development and Ecology
Dr. Jose Sarukhan
Rector, National Autonomous University
Dr. Herminio Blanco
Undersecretary for Foreign Commerce, Secretariat of Commerce and
Industrial Development
Ing. Alberto Escofet
Undersecretary for Energy, Secretariat of Energy, Mines and Parastatal
Industries
Lic. Jose Angel Gurria
Undersecretary for International Financial Affairs, Secretariat of the
Treasury
Fis. Sergio Reyes
Undersecretary for Ecology
Amb. Alberto Szekely
Legal Counsel, Secretariat of Foreign Affairs
Dr. Julian Adem
Director, Center for Atmospheric Studies, National Autonomous
University
Dr. Manuel Ortega
Director General, National Council for Science and Technology
Hector Santana
Staff Aide to Secretary Chirinos
THE NETHERLANDS
(tentative)
Name
Title
Hans Alders
Minister for Housing, Physical Planning and Environment
Dr. B.C.J. Zoeteman
Deputy Director-General for Environment
Dr. Pier Vellinga
Coordinator for National Climate Programs
N.D. Van Egmond
Director for Chemistry and Physics, State Institute for Public Health
and Environmental Hygiene
I.G. Roos
Directorate-General for European Cooperation, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
Dr. H.M. Fijnaut
Director of the Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute
Dr. A.P.M. Baede
Head of the Department for Dynamical Meteorology
D.F.W.T. Pietermaat
Environmental Coordinator in the Directorate-General for Energy,
Ministry of Economic Affairs
Prof. J.B. Opschoor
Professor of Ecology, Free University, Amsterdam
The White House Conference
4
on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change
NORWAY
(confirmed)
Name
Title
Kristin Hille Valla
Minister of Environment
Einar Steensnaes
Minister of Education and Research
Ambassador Kjeld Vibe
Norwegian Ambassador to the United States
Oddmund Graham
Secretary General, Ministry of Environment
Kaare Bryn
Director General, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Dr. Tore Olsen
Director General, Ministry of Education and Research
Per M. Bakken
Coordinator, Air Pollution, Ministry of Environment
Lorents Lorentsen
Director of Research, Central Bureau of Statistics
Professor Dr. Ivar Isaksen
University of Oslo
Leif Westegaard
Science Officer, Norwegian Embassy in Washington
THE OECD
(tentative)
Name
Title
Robert Cornell
Deputy Secretary-General
William L. Long
Director for Environment
John Ferriter
Deputy Executive Director, International Energy Agency
Andrew Dean
Administrator, Department for Economic Affairs and Statistics
George Kowalski
Head of the Division of Economic Analysis, International Energy
Agency
5
PRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
POLAND
(tentative)
Name
Title
Jan Janowski
Deputy Prime Minister; Head of the Office of Scientific and
Technological Progress
Andreyewski
Deputy Minister of the Environment
Tadeusz Diem
Deputy Minister of Education
Rybicki
Central Planning Office
Kazimierz Duchowski
Department of Economic Cooperation, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Wiackowski
Chairman, Parliamentary Commission on Environmental Protection
Stakel
Professor, Polish Academy of Sciences
Sadowski
Institute of Metallurgy and Water Management
Wlodzimierz Bojarski
Senator
Jan Kinast
Polish Ambassador to the United States
SOVIET UNION
(tentative)
Name
Title
Nikolay P. Laverov
Chairman of the USSR State Committee on Science and Technology
Yuriy A. Izrael
Chairman of the State Committee on Hydrometeorology
V.F. Kostin
Deputy Chairman, State Committee for Nature Protection
Aleksander A. Metalnikov
Deputy Chairman, State Committee for Hydrometeorology
A.A. Troitsky
Deputy Chairman, State Planning Committee
V.M. Kotliakov
Director, Institute of Geography, USSR Academy of Sciences
Yu. L. Golubev
Assistant to Chairman, State Committee for Hydrometeorology
Yu. V. Vakajuk
Chief, Division of Global Geophysical Problems, Climate Change
and Economic Consequences, State Committee for Hydrometeorology
Yu. V. Pikhanov
State Committee for Hydrometeorology, Department of International
Cooperation
Mrs. N. Yu. Vail
State Department Committee for Hydrometeorology, Department of
International Cooperation
The White House Conference
6
on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change
UNITED KINGDOM
(tentative)
Name
Title
David Trippier RD, JP, MP
Minister for the Environment and Countryside
Sir John Fairclough
Chief Scientific Adviser, the Cabinet Office
Sir Crispin C.C. Tickell, GCMG, KCVO
United Kingdom Permanent Representative to the United Nations
Dr. John T. Houghton CBE
Director-General, Meteorological Office
J.G. Odling-Smee
Deputy Chief Economic Adviser; HM Treasury
Dr. David J. Fisk
Chief Scientist, Department of Environment
Dr. W. David Evans
Chief Scientist, Department of Energy
Dr. Eileen Buttle
Secretary, Natural Environment Research Council
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(confirmed)
Name
Title
Nicholas F. Brady
Secretary of the Treasury
Manuel Lujan, Jr.
Secretary of the Interior
Clayton Yeutter
Secretary of Agriculture
Robert A. Mosbacher
Secretary of Commerce
Admiral James D. Watkins (Ret)
Secretary of Energy
William K. Reilly
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency
Richard H. Truly
Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
John A. Knauss
Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere; and
Director, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Erich Bloch
Director, National Science Foundation
Richard Schmalensee
Member, Council of Economic Advisers
ZAIRE
(tentative)
Name
Title
Citoyen Lobo Kanza Kanza
Secretary of State (Deputy Minister); Ministry of Environment and
Conservation of Nature
7
PRELIMINARY DELEGATIONLIST
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRMEN BIOGRAPHIES
MICHAEL J. BOSKIN
D. ALLAN BROMLEY
MICHAEL R. DELAND
Michael J. Boskin
Chairman
President's Council of
Economic Advisers
Michael J. Boskin is the Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers. He was appointed
to this post by the President on February 2, 1989, following unanimous confirmation by the Senate. As
Chairman, he provides economic analysis and advice directly to the President and assists in formulating
national economic policies. Dr. Boskin is on leave from Stanford University, where he is the Burnet C.
and Mildred Finley Wohlford Professor of Economics, and was the founder and Director of the Center
for Economic Policy Research. He is also on leave as a Research Associate of the National Bureau of
Economic Research.
Dr. Boskin is the recipient of numerous professional awards and citations, ranging from the
Chancellor's Award and the Department Citation as outstanding undergraduate at the University of
California in 1967 and the first National Tax Association Outstanding Doctoral Dissertation Award in
1971 to the Abramson Award for Outstanding Research from the National Association of Business
Economists in 1987 and Stanford University's Distinguished Teaching Award in 1988. He is the author
of more than 80 books and articles in the areas of government spending, tax theory and policy, public
debt, Social Security, retirement patterns and behavior, U.S. saving behavior, capital formation, U.S.
economic growth, and the economic status of the elderly.
Dr. Boskin received his B.A. degree with highest honors in 1967 from the University of California at
Berkeley, where he received his M.A. in 1968 and his Ph.D. in 1971.
Previously, Dr. Boskin had served as a consultant and adviser to the White House, Department of
Health and Human Services, Treasury Department, National Science Foundation, and other govern-
ment agencies, and various congressional committees.
Dr. Boskin is a member of the Economic Education Committee of the American Economic Association.
He and his wife Chris moved to Washington, D.C. from California. They both enjoy skiing and tennis.
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
Science and Technology
D. Allan Bromley is Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) in the Executive Office of the President. He is on leave from his
former position as Henry Ford II Professor of Physics at Yale University, where he was founder and
Director of the A.W. Wright Nuclear Structure Laboratory.
One of the world's leading nuclear physicists, he has carried out pioneering studies on both the struc-
ture and dynamics of nuclei and is considered the father of modern heavy ion science, one of the major
areas of nuclear science. He has also played major roles in the development of accelerators, of detection
systems, and in computer-based data acquisition and analysis systems. An outstanding teacher, over
the past two decades his laboratory at Yale graduated more Ph.D.'s in experimental nuclear physics
than any other institution worldwide. He has published over 450 papers in science and technology as
well as edited eighteen books and has received numerous honors and awards, including the National
Medal of Science.
For more than two decades, Dr. Bromley has been a leader in the national and international science and
science policy communities. As Chairman of the National Academy's Physics Survey in the early 1970s,
he contributed in a central way to charting the future of that science in the subsequent decade. As
President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the world's largest scientific
society, and the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics, the world coordinating body for that
science, he has been one of the leading spokesmen for U.S. science and for international scientific
cooperation.
Prior to his present appointment, Dr. Bromley served as a member of the White House Science Council
throughout the Reagan Administration and as a member of the National Science Board in 1988-1989. As
the U.S. chairman for both the Gandhi-Reagan, Indo/U.S. and the Sarney-Reagan, Brazil/U.S. Science
and Technology Initiatives, he led four Presidential missions to conduct negotiations for bilateral
cooperation in science and technology.
Born in Westmeath, Ontario, Canada, he received the B.Sc. degree with highest honors in 1948 in the
Faculty of Engineering at Queen's University, Ontario, Canada. He received the M.Sc. degree from
Queen's University in 1950 and the Ph.D. degree from the University of Rochester in 1952, both degrees
in nuclear physics. He subsequently has been awarded ten honorary degrees from universities in
Canada, France, Germany, Italy, South Africa, and the United States.
Dr. Bromley is married to the Former Patricia J. Brassor, and they have two children, David John and
Karen Lynn.
Michael R. Deland
Chairman
White House Council
on Environmental Quality
Michael R. Deland was appointed by President Bush to be Chairman of the White House Council on
Environmental Quality on August 1, 1989, following unanimous confirmation by the United States
Senate. In this capacity he serves as environmental adviser to the President as well as Director of the
Office of Environmental Quality which oversees the development of environmental policy, interagency
coordination of environmental quality programs and environmental data acquisition and assessment.
In addition, Mr. Deland is responsible for overseeing implementation of the National Environmental
Policy Act.
Prior to Mr. Deland's appointment as CEQ Chairman, he was the New England Regional Administrator
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In that capacity, from 1983 to 1989, he admini-
stered the federal government's programs dealing with air and water pollution control, hazardous
waste management, drinking water, toxic substances, radiation, and pesticides.
Mr. Deland was counsel at Environmental Research and Technology, Inc., a national firm headquar-
tered in Concord, Massachusetts from 1976 to 1983. While in the private sector, Mr. Deland published
numerous papers and articles, including the Regulatory Focus monthly column in Environment, Science
and Technology. Between 1971 and 1976, Mr. Deland served in EPA's Office of Regional Counsel in New
England (Region I) in several capacities, including Chief of the Agency's Legal Review Section and
Chief of the Enforcement Branch.
Mr. Deland received his Bachelor of Arts degree from Harvard College in 1963 and served as an officer
in the U.S. Navy before obtaining his law degree from Boston College in 1969. He is a member of the
Massachusetts Bar and the American Bar Association and its Natural Resources Committee. Mr.
Deland was President of the Business Associates Club (Boston) from 1981 to 1982 and is a former
Director of the Environmental Lobby of Massachusetts and the Center for Environmental Intern
Programs, a national non-profit organization headquartered in Boston.
Mr. Deland has received numerous awards and citations, including the Massachusetts Audubon Society
Award for his leadership in cleaning up Boston Harbor and the New England Environment Leadership
Award for the New England Environmental Network. In 1987, he was honored as "Environmentalist of
the Year" by the Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissions. In March of 1989, he was
awarded the National Wildlife Federation's Special Achievement Award for his role in prompting the
cleanup of Boston Harbor, for his efforts at protecting valuable fishing areas from off-shore oil drilling,
and for his early endorsement of environmentally-based growth controls on Cape Cod. Mr. Deland
resides in Washington with his wife Jane and three children.
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
U.S. Delegation Biographies
As part of the Conference handout materials, we are
preparing an information/reference booklet which will
include:
one-page narrative biography of each delegate
an 8" X 10" photograph of each delegate
the delegate's organization's logo/seal
The biographies, logos and photographs of the U.S.
delegation included in this section are representative of the
materials we are seeking from each foreign delegation
member.
Please provide this information to the White House
Conference as soon as possible.
THE OF THE TREASURY
1789
Nicholas F. Brady
Secretary
Department of the Treasury
Nicholas F. Brady became the 68th Secretary of the Treasury on September 15, 1988.
Secretary Brady served in the United States Senate from April 20, 1982 through December 27, 1982.
During that time he was a member of The Armed Services Committee and the Banking, Housing and
Urban Affairs Committee.
In 1984 President Reagan appointed Secretary Brady Chairman of the President's Commission on
Executive, Legislative and Judicial Salaries. He has also served on the President's Commission on
Strategic Forces (1983), the National Bipartisan Commission on Central America (1983), the Commis-
sion on Security and Economic Assistance (1983), and the Blue Ribbon Commission on Defense
Management (1985). Most recently, Secretary Brady chaired the Presidential Task Force on Market
Mechanisms (1987).
Secretary Brady's career in the banking industry spans 34 years. He joined Dillon, Read & Co., Inc. in
New York in 1954, rising to Chairman of the Board. He has been a Director of the NCR Corporation, the
MITRE Corporation, and the H.J. Heinz Company, among others.
He has also served as a trustee of Rockefeller University and a member of the Board of the Economic
Club of New York. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. He is a former trustee of
the Boys' Club of Newark.
Mr. Brady was born April 11, 1930 in New York City. He was educated at Yale University (B.A., 1952)
and Harvard University (M.B.A., 1954). He and his wife, Katherine, have four children.
OF
THE
DEP
S.
INTERIOR
March
3,
1849
Manuel Lujan, Jr.
Secretary
Department of the Interior
POLITICAL
President George Bush selected Manuel Lujan, Jr., who had just completed a 20-year career in the House of Repre-
sentatives, to be his Secretary of the Interior. He was sworn in on February 3, 1989.
The 46th Secretary of the Interior, Lujan was first elected to the House of Representatives from New Mexico in 1968.
When he left the Congress on January 3, 1989, he ranked 15th in seniority among all Republicans and 52nd in senior-
ity among all House members.
A member of the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee since 1969, Lujan was its second ranking Republican.
The Committee has jurisdiction over all activity in the U.S. Department of the Interior as well as the Nuclear Regu-
latory Commission. Lujan was also the senior Republican on the Energy and Environment Subcommittee.
Lujan was the Vice-Chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. As senior Republican,
Lujan was a member of all subcommittees, including Space Science and Applications which has oversight over
NASA.
PERSONAL
Born May 12, 1928 in San Ildefonso, New Mexico. Raised in Santa Fe where Lujan's father, Manuel Lujan, Sr.,
served three elected terms as Mayor.
A graduate of the College of Santa Fe with a B.A. degree, Lujan also attended St. Mary's College in California.
Prior to entering Congress, the Secretary was a partner in a family insurance and real estate business with three
offices in New Mexico. His brother, Edward Lujan, is the managing partner of the business.
Married to the former Jean Couchman of Santa Fe, the Lujans have four children; Terra Everett, Jay, Barbara and Jeff.
Secretary and Mrs. Lujan maintain residences in both Washington, D.C. and Albuquerque.
LEGISLATIVE
Economy in Government: Lujan was a Congressional leader in the battle against wasteful government spending.
"The effort to stop inflation boils down to a fight against needless government intervention and spending," stated Lujan.
Environmental Protection: Lujan has co-sponsored seven major environmental protection bills including the Clean
Air Act of 1970 and the Clean Water Act. More recently, Lujan successfully sponsored legislation setting aside
more than 600,000 acres of New Mexico land as wilderness areas, ensuring its beauty and enjoyment for future
generations.
Education: Lujan strongly supported student loan programs in the public and private sectors. His work led to New
Mexico adopting a student loan program that is a model for other states.
Technology: Lujan believes strongly that scientific research is the key to our future. "Science and technology can help
us meet the challenges of the 21st century," said Lujan.
STATES DEPARTMENTO OF NOROCULTURA
Clayton Yeutter
Secretary
Department of Agriculture
Clayton Yeutter was sworn in as the 23rd United States Secretary of Agriculture on February 8, 1989.
Yeutter's career includes distinguished public and private-sector service in agricultural policy develop-
ment, law, economics, marketing and trade.
From July 1985 until shortly before his new cabinet appointment, Yeutter served as U.S. Trade Repre-
sentative. His previous USDA posts include Assistant Secretary for International Affairs and Commod-
ity Programs from March 1974 to June 1975, Assistant Secretary for Marketing and Consumer Service
from January 1973 to March 1974 and Administrator of the Consumer and Marketing Service from
October 1970 to December 1971.
Yeutter's other career highlights: President and Chief Executive officer, Chicago Mercantile Exchange,
July 1978 to June 1985; senior partner, law firm of Nelson, Harding, Yeutter & Leonard, Lincoln,
Nebraska, April 1977 to June 1978; Deputy U.S. Special Trade Representative, June 1975 to February
1977; Director, University of Nebraska Mission in Colombia (a large agricultural technical assistance
program), September 1968 to October 1970; executive assistant to the governor of Nebraska, January
1966 to September 1968; faculty member, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Ne-
braska, January 1960 to January 1966; operator of a 2,500 acre farming-ranching-cattle feeding enterprise
in central Nebraska, 1957-1975; and enlistee, later commissioned officer, U.S. Air Force, 1952-1957.
Yeutter was graduated with high distinction from the University of Nebraska in 1952 with a Bachelor of
Science degree in animal husbandry. In 1963, he obtained his law degree from the same university,
graduating cum laude and ranked first in his class. In 1966, he received his Ph.D. in agricultural
economics, again from the University of Nebraska, and was named outstanding graduate student in the
program.
Yeutter is a former member or chairman of many private and public-sector boards of directors, councils
and trusteeships, including: the President's Export Council; the Chicago Association of Commerce and
Industry; the Chicago-Tokyo Bank; the U.S. Meat Export Federation; the Chicago Council on Foreign
Relations; the Farm Foundation, Oak Brook, Illinois; Tri-Valley Growers, San Francisco, California; and
ConAgra, Inc., Omaha, Nebraska.
Yeutter was born in Eustis, Nebraska, December 10, 1931. He and his wife, Jeanne Vierk Yeutter, have
four children. He retains ownership of his Nebraska farm, which is currently operated by a tenant.
Yeutter's permanent home is in Lincoln, Nebraska, but he currently resides in McLean, Virginia.
SUPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
*
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Robert A. Mosbacher
Secretary
Department of Commerce
Nominated Secretary of Commerce by President-Elect George Bush on December 6, 1988. He was
confirmed 100-0 by the United States Senate on January 31, 1989.
Formerly:
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Mosbacher Energy Company
Director of Texas Commerce Bancshares, Houston, Texas
Director, Enron Corporation, Houston, Texas
Director, New York Life Insurance Company, New York
Past Chairman of the National Petroleum Council
Charter member and past Chairman of the All American Wildcatters Association
Member of the Executive Committee and Board of Directors of the American Petroleum Institute
Past Chairman of the Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association
Twice Past Chairman of the Board of Visitors of the Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Institute
Former member of Board of Trustees of the Texas Heart Institute
Former National Trustee, Boys Clubs of America Southwest Region
Past Active Trustee of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
Member of Washington Roundtable and Co-Chair of Houston Roundtable of the Center for Strategic
and International Studies
National Finance Chairman for George Bush for President
National Finance Chairman of the Fund for America's Future
Chairman of Victory 88'
Co-Chairman of the Republican National Finance Committee
Member of the Executive Committee for Reagan-Bush
National Finance Chairman for the President Ford Committee in 1976
Won both the North American and World Sailing Championships in the Olympic classes (Dragon
and Soling)
Won the Southern Ocean Racing Circuit
Won the Gold Cup twice
Born in White Plains, New York, Mosbacher has lived in Houston, Texas since 1948. He graduated from
Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Virginia in 1947.
Mosbacher is married to the former Georgette Paulsin and is the father of four (Diane, Robert Jr.,
Kathryn and Lisa) and grandfather of five. The Mosbachers reside in Washington, D.C.
UNITED DEPA RIMENT STATES OF OF ENERGY. REVENUE
James D. Watkins
Secretary
Department of Energy
James David Watkins was nominated by the President to be the sixth Secretary of Energy on January 20,
1989. Admiral Watkins was confirmed by the United States Senate and sworn into office on March 1,
1989.
Admiral Watkins was born in California on March 7, 1927, and claims the city of Pasadena as his home.
A 1949 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, his tours as flag officer included Chief of Naval Personnel;
Commander of the Sixth Fleet; Vice Chief of Naval Operations; and Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific
Fleet. Admiral Watkins was selected by President Reagan to become the 22nd Chief of Naval Opera-
tions on June 30, 1982. His military decorations include several Distinguished Service and Legion of
Merit medals, the Bronze Star with combat "V" and other medals, campaign and service ribbons, and
decorations from many foreign nations.
Following his retirement on June 30, 1986, Admiral Watkins devoted his time to issues regarding
America's youth, and worked with a number of philanthropic organizations to establish a national
program for personal excellence. He also served as a member of advisory boards in both the education
and energy fields and has received several honorary doctorates and public service awards.
In October 1987, Admiral Watkins was appointed Chairman of the Presidential Commission on the
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (AIDS) Epidemic, submitting the Commission's final report to the
President on June 24, 1988.
Admiral Watkins received his master's degree in mechanical engineering in 1958, and is a graduate of
the reactor engineering course at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. He was selected by Admiral
Hyman G. Rickover to enter the Navy's nuclear-powered submarine program in 1959, and was quali-
fied as an Engineering Officer of the Watch at one of the Navy's land-based reactor plants. He served
for three years in the Atomic Energy Commission as Admiral Rickover's assistant for Naval Nuclear
Propulsion and later, in a variety of assignments associated with the management of the nuclear navy.
These assignments included Commanding Officer of a nuclear-powered submarine and Executive
Officer of the world's first nuclear-powered cruiser.
Admiral Watkins married Sheila Jo McKinney of San Diego, California, in 1950. They have six children:
Katherine Watkins Coopersmith, Laura Jo Watkins Kauffmann, Susan, Charles, James Jr., and Edward.
Admiral and Mrs. Watkins have eight grandchildren.
UNITED
STATES.
AGENCY
PROTECTION
William K. Reilly
Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
William Kane Reilly was sworn in as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by
President Bush on February 8, 1989. The President announced his appointment on December 22, 1988,
and officially nominated him on January 20, 1989. The U.S. Senate unanimously confirmed his nomina-
tion on February 2, 1989.
Prior to becoming EPA Administrator, Reilly held five environment-related positions during the
previous two decades. He was President of World Wildlife Fund-U.S. (1985-1989) and President of the
Conservation Foundation (1973-1989). Those two organizations joined in a formal affiliation in 1985
and Reilly became President of both organizations. He was Executive Director of the Task Force on
Land Use and Urban Growth from 1972-1973. From 1970 to 1972, he was on the staff of the President's
Council on Environmental Quality and, from 1968 to 1970, was Associate Director, Urban Policy Center
and the National Urban Coalition. He also served as Chairman of the Natural Resources Council of
America, an association of all major conservation groups, from 1981-1983.
During his presidency of World Wildlife Fund-U.S., Reilly intensified his mission, the protection of the
diversity of life on earth. Between 1961 and 1989, the organization supported 1,371 wildlife and
endangered habitat projects in 103 countries. At the Conservation Foundation, he continued its long-
standing interest in land programs and initiated new programs in environmental dispute resolution,
water toxic substances control, and urban conservation and energy. In 1976, Reilly began a program
advocating direct cooperation between business leaders and conservationists in resolving polarizing
issues in resources and environmental policy, which resulted in several major consensus-building
policy dialogues, including the National Groundwater Policy Forum and the National Wetlands Policy
Forum.
Reilly has written and lectured extensively on environmental issues, has served on the boards of various
private and public sector organizations and received the Horace Albright Medal for his contributions to
national parks and the Alfred B. LaGasse Medal for his contributions to environmental progress.
An alumnus of Yale University, Reilly holds a law degree from Harvard University and a master's
degree in urban planning from Columbia University. He was born in Decatur, Illinois on January 26,
1940, grew up in Fall River, Massachusetts, and served as a U.S. Army captain (1966 to 1967).
He is married to Elizabeth "Libbie" Bennet Buxton Reilly. They have two daughters, Katherine Buxton
Reilly, age 19, and Margaret Mahalah Reilly, age 14. The family resides in Alexandria, Virginia.
NASA
Richard H. Truly
Administrator
National Aeronautics and
Space Administration
Richard H. Truly became the eighth Administrator of NASA on July 1, 1989. One day earlier, he
concluded his naval career of more than 30 years, retiring as a Vice Admiral, United States Navy. He is
the first astronaut to head the nation's civilian space agency.
Truly became NASA's associate administrator for space flight on February 20, 1986. In this position, he
led the painstaking rebuilding of the Space Shuttle program. This was highlighted by NASA's cele-
brated "return to flight" on September 29, 1988, when Discovery lifted off from Kennedy Space Center,
Florida, on the first Shuttle mission in almost three years.
Before returning to NASA, the former Shuttle astronaut served as the first commander of the Naval
Space Command, Dahlgren, Virginia, established October 1, 1983. His career in the U.S. Navy began in
1959, when he was commissioned an ensign. This coincided with his graduation from Georgia Institute
of Technology, which he attended as a Naval R.O.T.C. midshipman and earned a bachelor's degree in
aeronautical engineering.
Following flight school, he was designated a naval aviator in 1960. His initial tour of duty, Fighter
Squadron 33, was aboard USS Intrepid and USS Enterprise, and he made more than 300 carrier land-
ings. From 1963 to 1965, he was a student and then instructor at the U.S. Air Force Aerospace Research
Pilot School, Edwards Air Force Base, California.
In 1965, Truly became one of the first military astronauts selected to the Air Force's Manned Orbiting
Laboratory program in Los Angeles, California, and transferred to NASA as an astronaut in August
1969. He served as capsule communicator for all three of the manned Skylab missions in 1973 and the
Apollo-Soyuz mission in 1975. As a naval aviator, test pilot, and astronaut, Truly has logged over 7,500
hours in numerous military and civilian jet aircraft.
He was pilot for one of the two-man crews that flew the 747/Space Shuttle Enterprise approach and
landing test flights during 1977. He then served as backup pilot for STS-1, the first orbital test of the
Shuttle. His first flight in space was November 12-14, 1981, as pilot of Space Shuttle Columbia (STS-2),
significant as the first manned spacecraft to be reflown in space. His second flight (STS-9, August
30-September 5, 1983) was as commander of Space Shuttle Challenger, the first night launch and
landing in the Shuttle program.
On January 18, 1989, Truly was awarded the Presidential Citizen's Medal by President Reagan. His
NASA awards include two NASA Distinguished Service Medals, the NASA Outstanding Leadership
Medal, two NASA Exceptional Service Medals, and NASA Space Distinguished Service Medal, the
Defense Superior Service Medal, two Legions of Merit, the Navy Distinguished Flying Cross, and the
Meritorious Service Medal.
Truly was born in Fayette, Mississippi, on November 12, 1937 and attended school in Fayette and
Meridian, Mississippi. He is married to the former Colleen (Cody) Hanner of Milledgeville, Georgia.
They have three children: Mike, Dan and Lee, and three grandchildren: Ashley, Courtney and Peter.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
*
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
John A. Knauss
Under Secretary
Department of Commerce
John A. Knauss, Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere and Administrator of the Department's
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), took office August 7, 1989.
A noted oceanographer and educator, Knauss was a professor of oceanography at the Graduate School
of Oceanography at the University of Rhode Island (URI). He also served as dean of the URI Gradu-
ate School of Oceanography from 1962 to 1987, and as the university's provost for marine affairs from
1969 to 1982.
Knauss has been a member of two presidential commissions on marine affairs: the Commission on
Marine Science, Resources, and Engineering (the Stratton Commission) in 1967 to 1968 and the National
Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA), 1978 to 1985. He served as Chairman of
NACOA from 1981 to 1985. He has been President of the Association of Sea Grant Program Instititions,
Chairman of the Ocean Science Committee of the National Academy of Sciences/National Research
Council, and Chairman of the Marine Division of the National Association of State Universities and
Land-Grant Colleges.
He has served as President of the oceanographic section of the American Geophysical Union (AGU),
Vice President of the Marine Technology Society (MTS), Vice Chairman of the American Association for
the Advancement of Science's (AAAS) Atmospheric and Hydrospheric Sciences Section, and a council
member of the American Meteorological Society. He was a co-founder of the Law of the Sea Institute
and served on its governing board from 1965 to 1976 and 1981 to 1987. He has been elected a fellow of
the AAAS, the AGU, and the MTS.
Knauss graduated from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (B.S., 1946), the University of Michigan
(M.S., 1949), and the University of California, Scripps Institution of Oceanography (Ph.D., 1959).
nsf
Erich Bloch
Director
National Science Foundation
Erich Bloch was confirmed by the Senate to be Director of the National Science Foundation on August 6,
1984. As Director, he is responsible for an agency charged with strengthening the national scientific and
engineering research potential and with improving science and engineering education at all levels. The
Foundation has an annual budget exceeding $1.7 billion and the annual award of 12,000 to 14,000 grants
for research in all fields of natural, social sciences, and engineering.
Before joining NSF, Mr. Bloch was a corporate Vice President for Technical Personnel Development at
IBM Corporation, which he joined in 1952 as an electrical engineer. During his career at IBM, Mr. Bloch
was the engineering manager of IBM's STRETCH supercomputer system in the late 1950's and early
1960's. In 1962, he headed development of the Solid Logic Technology program, which provided IBM
with microelectronic technology for its System/360 computer. Subsequently, Mr. Bloch was appointed
a vice president of the company's Data Systems Division and general manager of the East Fishkill
facility, which is responsible for the development and manufacture of semiconductor components used
in IBM's product line. He was elected an IBM vice president in 1981.
From 1981 to 1984, Mr. Bloch served as Chairman of the Semi-conductor Research Cooperative, a group
ofleading computer and electronicsifirms that fund advanced research in universities and shares in the
results, and was the IBM representative on the board of the Semiconductor Industry Association.
In February 1985, Mr. Bloch was awarded the National Medal of Technology by President Reagan. The
award was made for his part in pioneering developments related to the IBM/360 computer that
revolutionized the computer industry. In 1989, Mr. Bloch was the recipient of the IEEE United States
Activities Board Award for Distinguished Public Service and the IEEE 1990 Founders Medal. He also
received honorary Doctorate of Engineering degrees from the Colorado School of Mines, the University
of Notre Dame, and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; honorary Doctorate of Science degrees from the
University of Massachusetts at Amherst, George Washington University, State University of New York
at Buffalo, the University of Rochester, Oberlin College, and Washington College; and an honorary
Doctorateof Science and Engineering degree from the Ohio State University.
He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering and is a Fellow of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science and of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and a
member of its Computer Society. He received his education in electrical engineering at the Federal
Polytechnic Institute of Zurich, Switzerland, and a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering
from the University of Buffalo in 1952.
Richard Schmalensee
Council of Economic Advisers
Office of the President
Richard Schmalensee is a Member of the Council of Economic Advisers. He has primary responsibility
for the analysis of microeconomic and regulatory policy. Dr. Schmalensee is on leave from the Massa-
chusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he is the Gordon Y. Billard Professor of Economics and
Management.
Dr. Schmalensee's research and teaching have focused on industrial organization and on anti-trust and
regulatory policy. He has written numerous articles in professional journals and is the author of three
books and co-author of three others. He has extensive consulting experience on anti-trust and regula-
tory matters. He has served on the editorial boards of several economics journals, is co-editor of the
Handbook of Industrial Organization, and is founding editor of the MIT Press Regulation of Economic
Activity monograph series. Dr. Schmalensee has also served on various committees of the American
Economic Association and the Econometric Society, of which he is a Fellow.
Dr. Schmalensee attended the public schools of Belleville, Illinois and received his B.S. (Economics,
Politics and Science; 1965) and Ph.D. ( Economics; 1970) degrees from MIT. Prior to joining the MIT
faculty in 1977, he taught at the University of California, San Diego. He is married to the former Diane
Hawk; they have two sons.
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
HOTEL/TRANSPORTATION/LOGISTICS
Dr. Franmarie Keel
White House Conference on Global Change
Suite 615
1019 19th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: (202) 653-5980
Fax: (202) 653-2034
Telex: 249118SDAVISUR
Telemail (OMNET): GLOBAL.CHANGE
HOTEL
The White House Conference is being held at:
The J.W. Marriott Hotel
1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004
Telephone: 202-393-2000
The White House Conference has reserved rooms for each official delegation member.
Charges for the hotel room April 16th and 17th, 1990 and for Conference meals served
April 17 and 18, 1990, will be paid for by the White House Conference.
Hotel room check-in is 3:00 p.m. Conference registration begins at 12:00 noon, Sunday, April
15, for delegates arriving in Washington early. Registration will continue Monday all day
and until 12:00 noon on Tuesday, April 17. Special arrangements should be made with White
House Conference coordinators for early or late arrivals/departures and check-in.
To cover any personal incidental expenditures (such as telephone calls, charges at the hotel
restaurants and gift shops, and additional room service), each delegation member must
present one of the following upon registration at the hotel to guarantee incidentals:
credit card (American Express, VISA, Master Card, Diners Club, JCV)
a letter received by April 14th, 1990 from the delegation's embassy
stating embassy will cover its delegation's incidentals prior to
delegation's departure from the hotel
TRANSPORTATION
Delegations will be met by White House Conference personnel at Washington National
Airport, Washington Dulles Airport, Baltimore-Washington International Airport, and
Andrews Air Force Base and will be escorted to the hotel beginning Sunday, April 15.
White House Conference personnel meeting flights can be identified by a White House
Conference sign. Delegations arriving in Washington domestically will be met at the gate.
International arrivals will be met at the exit of the mobil lounge at the entrance to U.S.
Immigration and Customs.
Procedures have been established by the Conference to assist in the facilitation of U.S.
Customs.
1
HOTEL/TRANSPORTATION/LOGISTICS
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
Transportation will be provided for delegations' return to those designated airports after the
close of the Conference Wednesday, April 18, through Thursday evening, April 19.
All transportation for official Conference events held outside of the J.W. Marriott Hotel will
be provided by the White House Conference.
All airline arrival and departure times must be confirmed as soon as possible with the
White House Conference at 202/653-5980.
Please inform the White House Conference immediately if flight plans change at
departure (i.e. cancelled flight, family emergency, etc.)
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
Any special room, bed, dietary, or medical requirements should be forwarded to White
House Conference coordinators as soon as possible.
MISCELLANEOUS
Simultaneous interpretation in Russian, Spanish, and French will be provided during the
Conference meetings.
Please note the dinner at the State Department, on Tuesday, April 17, is business attire.
The White House Conference
2
on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change
WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS
RESEARCH RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE
Delegate Travel Accommodation Registration
PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE
Name:
Title:
Country Delegation:
HOTEL ACCOMMODATIONS:
In order to facilitate your registration upon arrival at the Conference site at the J.W. Marri-
ott Hotel, it will be necessary to provide the information requested in this form. The White
House Conference provides each delegate with a hotel room from check-in April 16th to
check-out on April 18th. The J.W. Marriott Hotel requires guarantee of payment for inci-
dentals, such as telephone, room service, gift shop, laundry, restaurants, etc., with cash, a
credit card or a Letter of Guarantee from your Embassy. A Letter of Guarantee should in-
clude delegate's name, check-in date, Embassy Financial Officer, and any stipulations, and
must be received by April 14, 1990.
Credit Card #
Expiration Date:
Type (American Express, Visa, Master Card, Diners Club, JCV):
Name as it appears on card:
Signature:
Date:
This should be completed and sent by fax (202-653-2034) to Susan Thoren at the White
House Conference in Washington, D.C., or delivered by April 12th to 1019 19th Street NW,
Suite 615, Washington D.C. 20036
8
7
9
6
10
3
11
5
12
4
13
1
14
2
Rendering by S. Finkenberg, New York.
1. JW Marriott Hotel
8. United States Capitol
2. The White House
9. Air and Space Museum
3. Convention Center
10. Hirshhorn Museum
4. Museum of American History
11. Smithsonian "Castle"
5. Natural History Museum
12. Freer Gallery
6. National Gallery of Art
13. Department of Agriculture
7. National Gallery of Art East Wing
14. Washington Monument
Printed on Recycled Paper
SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH
FOR GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP
Global stewardship is our shared responsibility and our
PRESIDENT
OF
shared opportunity. We must manage the Earth's natural
THE
resources in ways that assure the sustainability of
UNUM
UNITED
humanity on this planet and in ways that maximize our
potential for growth and opportunity for all. Global
stewardship is a continuing process of political, economic
and social decision-making that meets the needs of the
THE
present generation while expanding the opportunities of
OF
SEAL
STATES:
future generations.
Global stewardship will become a dominant scientific,
economic and environmental issue of the 21st century.
The experience of the past 45 years has shown that
GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP
growth can be achieved only through the synergy of
democratic political institutions and market economic
systems. But just as democratic institutions are
expanding, our ability to grow could be limited by
changes in our already stressed environment. Solutions
must be found which will protect the quality of our
natural environment while allowing for the economic
growth necessary to sustain and improve the living
standards of a growing world population.
For perhaps the first time in human history, we now
understand that our progress dep ends on accounting for
our environmental resources and using them wisely. A
A STATEMENT OF
new understanding of complex environmental systems is
emerging. This understanding means that we are now
THE CONTEXT AND CHALLENGES
called upon to create new directions for our creative
FACING THE
energies and technologies. Global stewardship is the key.
WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
To exercise effective global stewardship, we must
advance our knowledge of natural and human systems.
ON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS
We must create solutions that join economic growth with
RESEARCH RELATED TO
sound management of our environment. Meeting this
challenge will require an integration of scientific,
GLOBAL CHANGE
economic, and environmental concerns-an integration
which moves global stewardship and human
sustainability to center stage.
GLOBAL ST
As global stewards we must advance our knowledge of nat
these systems to assure the prosperity and Si
Natural Systems
Ozone Depletion
Greenh
Resolving Uncertainty
Population Changes
Foo
E
i
Sea Level Changes
Wetlands
Bio
mining
Systems Modeling
Balance
Global
EWARDSHIP
ural and human systems and manage the integration of
ustainability of humanity on this planet.
ouse Gasses
Climate Change
Remote Sensing
I Security
Energy Demands
Research Integration
IDO
liversity
Water Supply
Deforestation
Partnership
Public Education
1999
Strategic Initiative
998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
We need new tools to effectively
evaluate how to respond to global
environmental changes. Science
and economics research can
provide some of the tools needed
to understand and properly manage our changing planet.
Global change is concerned with such diverse but interre-
lated issues as ozone depletion, greenhouse gases, climate
change, food security, water supply, sea level changes,
wetlands, deforestation, biodiversity, population changes,
and energy demands. A common ingredient in each of
these issues is the level of uncertainty about the scale at
which these changes are occurring and humanity's
relative contribution to the change. There is also uncer-
tainty regarding the social and economic consequences of
change itself and of policy measures which might be
taken to address it. As global stewards we must address
these uncertainties by increasing our scientific and
economic knowledge and take justifiable actions to
manage global change with due consideration given to
the uncertainties which exist.
Therefore, the challenges of global stewardship require
agreement in these three areas:
Science and economics uncertainties-
research challenges;
Strategies for and challenges to integrating economics
and science research; and
Building better international partnerships for econom-
ics and science research.
Our existence depends on our ability to draw sustenance
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
from the natural world while supporting the systems that
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
regenerate that world. Building an integrated program of
economics and science research is the step we must take
today. Global stewardship is not a fixed state, but a proc-
ess of change in which environmental and economic
values are brought into balance to meet human needs and
RELATED TO
to expand human prospects. Let us join together and
GLOBAL CHANGE
accept the challenge of Global Stewardship.
ay Bush
The White House Conference
on
Science and Economics Research Related to Global Change
CHARTER FOR COOPERATION
in
Science and Economics Research Related to Global Change
Government officials of Science, Economics, and the Environment from eighteen
nations, the European Community (EC), and the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) have gathered in Washington, D.C. on
April 16-18, 1990, to attend the White House Conference on Science and Economics
Research Related to Global Change. The Conference was designed to address
important next steps for substantially enhancing and broadening international
understanding of science and economics research related to Global Change. The
delegates to the Conference noted that:
WHEREAS:
o
Scientific evidence demonstrates that the Earth and its environment
are changing on time and spatial scales not fully known to humankind,
O
Human impacts on the Earth system are closely linked to both the
level of economic activity and the selection of technologies that
are driven by underlying economic forces,
O
Scientific uncertainty remains as to the contributions made by
natural variability in Earth system processes and those made by
impacts from anthropogenic sources, hence limiting the ability of
science to predict, with acceptable accuracy, the future behavior
of the Earth system,
0
Gaps in scientific and economic understanding substantially limit
the abilities of nations to gauge the economic and social
consequences of policy measures that might be taken to address
changes in the global environment,
World leaders are considering unprecedented postures and actions to
address the potential economic and social implications of these
changes, and
O
These national and international developments, taken in total, have
placed global environmental issues central on the agenda of
international affairs.
1
THEREFORE:
The delegates gathered at the White House Conference on Science and Economics
Research Related to Global Change acknowledge the need to:
Increase and coordinate their science and economics research programs
related to Global Change,
Work together to develop complementary national science and economics
research programs that contribute to a coherent international effort,
Work to enhance existing international mechanisms for planning and
implementing science and economics research programs, and to foster,
when necessary and appropriate, new mechanisms to foster cooperation
among the world's governments and international agencies in the
conduct of Global Change science and economics research,
Work toward full participation of all nations in the formulation,
refining, and implementation of the science and economics research
agenda and work toward developing indigenous research activities
relevant to global environmental change research in all participating
nations.
Encourage the nations of the world to contribute resources and
personnel to the research agenda in measure and kind reflecting
national capabilities,
Collaborate with other nations in support of education, training,
and human resources development that contribute to the research
agenda and that support full participation by developing countries,
and
Work toward developing cooperative access to pertinent research
facilities and research data and information by all nations.
2
The White House Conference
on
Science and Economics Research Related to Global Change
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTES
for
Research on the Science and Economics of Global Change
BACKGROUND:
Government officials of Science, Economics, and the Environment from eighteen
nations, the European Community (EC), and the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) have gathered in Washington, D.C. on April
16-18, 1990, to attend the White House Conference on Science and Economics
Research Related to Global Change. The Conference provided a forum to consider
a new dimension to the international dialogue on Global Change the proposition
that economics, both analysis and research on broad economic policy and on
economic consequences of policy options, is an essential link between the science
of Global Change and policy alternatives. The Conference delegates addressed
the importance of substantially enhancing and broadening international
understanding of the relationship between science and economic research related
to Global Change and the international policy process. The delegates also
discussed the need to broaden the participation of all nations in fundamental
economics and scientific research.
THE PROPOSAL:
It is suggested that interested nations consider the establishment, as joint
partnerships between both industrialized and developing countries, of
International Institutes for Research on the Science and Economics of Global
Change. Institutes, in some cases building on existing "centers," could serve
as both focal points of cooperative research activities that address fundamental
questions in the economics of Global Change and as vehicles to address those
issues in the context of international science and policy interests. The
Institutes could stimulate the integration of economics, science and broad policy
research. The Institutes, for example, might:
0
Sponsor and conduct research directed at basic economic (including
related science and policy) issues central to international interests
in Global Change.
0
Provide a "bridge" between economic research, scientific research,
and policy studies, adding the perspectives of economic analysis to
the scientific research results and adding new scientific results
to economic analyses, thereby enriching the fundamental knowledge
base available to nations for public policy deliberations.
1
0
Serve as a conduit for policy-relevant information between the
physical, chemical, geological, and biological scientists, on the
one hand, and economists and other social scientists on the other.
0
Provide a mechanism for communication and improved understanding of
Global Change science and economics research among nations.
Science and economics should be interrelated and interdependent with policy
choices being derived from an understanding of both the science and economic
implications of changes in the global environment. Policy choices depend on both
scientific evidence of risks and economic analyses of the favorable and adverse
consequences of policy. By drawing upon each other, the two disciplines will
be better able to advance global stewardship of the Earth and its natural
resources.
The Institutes could sponsor and conduct, through both internal programs and
external grants to international scholars, forward-looking, policy-oriented
research. Although present national and international research institutions
conduct research independently in science and economics, the challenge for the
Institutes is to ensure that the range of scientific and economic aspects of
policy choices is studied in an integrated fashion, and that all nations are
involved. For example, research within the Institute framework might include:
0
Empirical studies of long-run growth in developing and developed
economies, with a focus on linkages to Global Change issues.
o
Efforts to identify the Global Change indicators that have the most
significant potential human consequences--so that scientific research
can give priority to reducing uncertainty in those areas.
o
Developing new perspectives on the economic implications of changes
in the global environment.
o
Studies of the economic and scientific aspects of diverse policy
options.
0
Development, refinement and application of techniques for the
valuation of environmental amenities.
0
Development and refinement of discounting methods relevant to Global
Change issues with a significant time dimension.
The Institutes would be international, involving researchers from throughout
the world, and interdisciplinary, bringing the scientists associated with
international global change research efforts (e.g., the World Climate Research
Program, the International Geosphere-Biosphere Program, and other related
international research programs) together with economists and other social
scientists in related research efforts. By focusing their efforts on research
topics chosen by virtue of their relevance to ongoing policy deliberations, the
Institute could provide a bridge between scientific research and the policy
process. One possibility is that such Institutes might be founded to address
2
Global Change research questions from a regional perspective, such as issues
facing the countries of the Pacific Basin, the Euro-African region, or the
Western Hemisphere. Such regional foci might also provide vehicles for
developing the multilateral arrangements to sponsor an Institute as a joint
venture between the more highly industrialized countries and those nations with
newer economic and industrial programs.
ACTION SUGGESTED
It is proposed that interested nations engage in a set of informal discussions
with the goal of developing detailed proposals for the potential establishment
of one or more International Institutes for Research on the Science and Economics
of Global Change.
3
The White House Conference
on
Science and Economics Research Related to Global Change
GLOBAL CHANGE DATA AND COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
BACKGROUND:
The study of Global Change requires the communication, exchange and analysis of
large volumes of economic and scientific data and information dispersed
throughout the international community. As nations plan to undertake new and
expanded Global Change research efforts, including, for example, observational
programs on regional, national and global scales, effective data and information
management and people-to-people communications become essential elements for
success. International cooperation is vital to ensure efficient and effective
allocation of resources to support these data exchange and communication efforts.
Global Change scientists and economists must have the means to share information
and exchange ideas directly with one another to achieve the synergistic potential
of this international research effort.
THE PROPOSAL:
With this in mind, a "Global Change Data and Communications Network" is proposed.
Part one of this two-part "Network," (the Data Module), would integrate existing
international computer networks and provide a mechanism to facilitate various
types of data transfer. Part two, a "Communicatons Module," would apply
advanced technologies to electronically link investigators involved in Global
Change science and economics research.
In order to provide the widest possible availability of key Global Change data
and information for worldwide research efforts, the nations of the world must
collaborate in ensuring the availability and exchange of economic and scientific
data and information. One of the key purposes of the proposed Global Change Data
and Communications Network is to provide an advanced communications capability
to developing countries. Some of the infrastructure is already in place through
entities such as the Global Telecommunications System of the World Meteorological
Organization, which is used to routinely exchange meteorological observations
on a global basis. Other regional and point-to-point links have been established
on a project-specific basis. In other cases, researchers use commercially
available facilities to the extent possible. There are over fifteen existing
computer communications networks already in place around the world that could
become associated with and benefit from the enhanced capabilities of the Global
Data and Communications Change Network.
1
New technologies, available today, provide capabilities to implement a worldwide
network in support of Global Change science and economics research.
International Switching Device Network (ISDN), and higher bandwidth technologies,
are now being implemented throughout the world and will be available for use in
transmitting large amounts of data between institutions handling voice mail,
interactive graphics and video conferencing, allowing for the development and
use of a new multi-media communications network. The communications module of
the proposed network would build upon the solid foundation of communications
networks already in place around the world. These existing networks could be
integrated into, and be substantially enhanced by, the proposed Global Change
Data and Communications Network.
This enhanced communications capability could greatly advance international
Global Change science and economics research. Through international cooperation
and collaborative planning, this capability can be ensured, and its use made
easier and more accessible to all interested nations.
It is important to continue and enhance efforts to collect, control the quality
of, and maintain data and data systems (including directories and catalogs) in
parallel with the creation of new communications systems/networks.
Communications capabilities will only contribute to the goals of Global Change
science and economics research if quality data sets are available to be accessed
through it and enhancements are provided to facilitate person-to-person
communications. This communications system would grow in support of the research
endeavor. Through international cooperation and integration of existing systems,
the Global Change Data and Communications Network can serve to significantly
enhance the research efforts of the international scientific and economic
community.
ACTION SUGGESTED:
It is proposed that interested nations engage in a set of informal discussions
to develop a strategy for implementing a Global Change Data and Communications
Network. It is also proposed that the issues of data and information access
and exchange and international communication among economics and science
researchers continue to be addressed as appropriate in international forums
related to Global Change.
2
The White House Conference
on
Science and Economics Research Related to Global Change
"STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES"
for
Developing a Strategy for Implementing
International Cooperation in Science and Economics Research Related to
Global Change
BACKGROUND:
Government officials of Science, Economics, and the Environment from eighteen
nations, the European Community (EC), and the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) have gathered in Washington, D.C. on
April 16-18, 1990, to attend the White House Conference on Science and Economics
Research Related to Global Change. The Conference provides a forum to explore
the possibility of developing a jointly agreed upon set of principles that could
lead to an "implementation strategy" among nations for cooperative international
research programs, that includes sharing of scientific and economic data,
coordinating the development of international global observing systems, and
improving the capabilities of models to predict: baseline emissions trends,
costs, rates of market penetration of new energy technologies, the human
consequences of Global Change policy measures which may be taken, and controlling
global and regional environmental processes.
The United States proposes that delegates consider endorsing a "Statement of
Principles" that outlines the essential ingredients for an "implementation
strategy," the focus of which would be on research efforts that can be
substantially enhanced by joint efforts that build on the collective expertise,
experience, and data and information of participating countries. It is suggested
that a more fully coordinated international research effort could substantially
increase collective knowledge of the science and economics of Global Change,
assist the on-going policy debate, and support future international policy
forums, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the
Second World Climate Conference.
The proposal builds upon existing discussions initiated by the International
Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU), developed during the recent ICSU Annual
Meeting in Lisbon, in October 1989. The proposal is intended to fully support
the implementation of research programs such as the World Climate Research
Program (WCRP), the International Geosphere-Biosphere Program (IGBP), other
international efforts like the "Human Dimensions of Global Change" program, and
to support new international research efforts as needed. The proposal suggests
that such a "Strategy" could lead to what might be called an "International
1
Global Change Research Program," an informal agreement among nations to
coordinate more fully their national Global Change research programs with other
countries.
THE PROBLEM TO ADDRESS
The international research community has recognized the need for a world-wide
network of research programs to address the gaps in knowledge and the
uncertainties in understanding the Earth system. National and international
planning and coordination mechanisms have been established to address the
fundamental scientific questions of "Global Change," e.g., the International
Geosphere-Biosphere Program, the World Climate Research Program, the U.S. Global
Change Research Program and other such national programs, and the G-7 Summit
proposal for a multinational global observing and monitoring system.
The process, however, is incomplete. The structuring of planning,
implementation, and resource allocation is evolving primarily within the many
individual international research programs, good examples of which are the
Tropical Ocean Global Atmosphere Program (TOGA), the World Ocean Circulation
Experiment (WOCE), the International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project (ISCCP),
and the Joint Global Ocean Flux Study (JGOFS). A critical remaining need is to
foster international cooperative planning, implementation strategies, and
resources allocations among and between the variety of international programs
that address the science of Global Change and to foster links between science
and economics. For example, emissions trends that are inputs to climate
modelling scenarios depend on forecasted levels of economic activity and
technology development. Economics research is also essential for translating
the output of climate model scenarios into human consequences and for assessing
the human consequences of proposed policy actions.
Resolving the need for cooperative planning in science and economics research
could lead to a coherent and more fully coordinated international scientific
research effort, one that optimizes the allocation of financial, human (i.e.
economists and scientists), and major facility (e.g., satellites and ships)
resources. The premise is that nations cannot hope to address the complex
scientific and economic research questions except through a more fully
coordinated international research program. It is out of this context that the
U.S. proposal is offered.
THE PROPOSAL:
The United States offers the following "Statement of Principles" as a vehicle
for discussions at the White House Conference on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change, and as a framework that might lead to further
discussions among individual national agencies that are responsible for Global
Change research programs.
2
"STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES"
1. THE PREMISE:
The economic and scientific research efforts that address Global Change
are all guided by a fundamental premise that profound uncertainties exist
in our understanding of how the total Earth system functions and that
carefully-conceived research programs are needed to describe and expand
our understanding of the interactive processes that regulate the Earth
system, and the roles played by both natural and human-induced changes.
Human contributions to Global Change, the human consequences of Global
Change and the human consequences of measures that might be taken to
address global change involve fundamental questions of economics. An
effort to understand the Earth system and its interaction with human
activity requires a coordinated international implementation framework for
research in both fundamental earth science and economics disciplines. That
framework must enjoin the best researchers of the world, the best of
resources and scientific facilities of many nations, and the support of
national and international organizations and bodies.
2. THE CONTEXT:
There is now a need to consider the establishment and fostering of
partnerships among the various international scientific organizations and
their adherent national organizations (e.g., ICSU and its various national
academies of science and "unions"), intergovernmental bodies (e.g., United
Nations specialized agencies like the World Meterological Organization,
UNESCO, and its agencies like the International Oceanographic Commission
and the United Nations Environment Program), and individual government
coordinating bodies (e.g., the U.S. Committee on Earth Sciences which
coordinates the U.S. Global Change Research Program) and agencies of those
governments with global environmental science responsibilities.
3. THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE POLICY PROCESS:
There exists a need for strong and well-designed relationships between
the policy processes of governments and the science and economics that
define the need for policy development. Any international effort that
seriously seeks to address the science and economics of Global Change
must, by necessity, evolve from the need to dramatically increase our
understanding of Earth system processes and human activity and to more
adequately support the policy process within and between governments.
4. THE GOAL:
The overarching goal for an international Global Change research program
is to substantially improve scientific and economic knowledge in order to
reduce the uncertainties in our understanding of and ablility to accurately
predict global processes and their regional implications as well as
forecast human activities and their contributions to Global Change
processes. Such knowledge is designed to enable individual nations and
international bodies to develop international policy(s) that reflect an
3
understanding of the roles that both natural and human-induced changes play
in Global Change, their attendant regional impacts, and the human
consequences of change itself and of policy measures which might be taken
to address that change.
5. THE ELEMENTS OF A JOINT INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH PROGRAM
As wider recognition of the need for a comprehensive effort to study Global
Change on an international basis grows, nations are establishing their own
internal organizations for the coordination and implementation of their
national research priorities which, when taken together, could form the
beginning of a comprehensive and more coherent international Global Change
research program. The funding levels planned and the recognition that no
nation alone can mount the required global-scale studies leads inexorably
to a need to coordinate among nations and to link with the national and
international research communities (e.g., ICSU) and intergovernmental (and
regional) bodies (e.g., WMO, ICO, UNEP, and the Organization for
Cooperation and Economic Development).
6. THE ELEMENTS OF AN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY:
It is suggested that interested countries, through an ad hoc Working Group,
develop and produce a draft "Strategy" for an international science and
economics research program which brings together the collective expertise,
experience, and data available in participating countries in a more
integrated and coherent fashion. It is proposed that an ad hoc Working
Group of representatives from interested countries prepare a draft
"Strategy" document for an international Global Change research program.
The draft might include, inter alia:
a.
The rationale and need for a joint strategy for implementing
an international program of economics and scientific research
on Global Change issues,
b.
The goals, objectives, and expectations for a joint research
program,
C.
The conceptual framework for structuring a science and economic
research program,
d.
The central and priority economic and scientific questions
that must be addressed,
e.
A framework for discussing priorities, mechanisms for
implementation, etc.,
f.
The international arrangements to support the program,
including linkages between government research agencies,
intergovernmental (e.g., WMO, IOC, OECD and others), and non-
governmental research bodies (e.g., ICSU),
g.
The linkages to the policy process, and
4
h.
The identification of products expected from the program,
oversight review mechanisms, and the necessary timetables for
results that support the policy process.
SUGGESTED ACTION:
It is suggested that the Conference delegations consider the possibility of
creating an ad hoc Working Group so that a draft outline of a strategy is
produced within a few months after the Conference, including plans for subsequent
"in-country" review by all interested countries. The strategy, when completed,
could provide the basis for an aggressive and more fully coordinated
international research program, and might be a helpful addition to up-coming
meetings, e.g., various "Summit" meetings, the meetings of the IPCC, the Second
World Climate Conference, and the 1992 "Environment" meeting in Brazil.
5
RESPONSE STRATEGIES WORKING GROUP
of the
INTERGCVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE
FIRST MEETING
WASHINGTON, D.C.
January 30 - February 1, 1989
Speech I
1/30/89
REMARKS BY
THE HONORABLE JAMES A. BAKER III
SECRETARY OF STATE
BEFORE THE
RESPONSE STRATEGIES WORKING GROUP
INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
JANUARY 30, 1989
Thank you Fred Bernthal, Professor Bolin, ladies and
gentlemen. I am very pleased to have the opportunity to join
you this morning, however briefly, and to welcome you to the
Department of State. You are the first official group that
I've had the pleasure of welcoming to the Department.
I would also like to welcome Bill Reilly, who is here with us
this morning -- President of the World Wildlife Fund and the
Conservation Foundation. Bill has let President Bush talk him
into becoming the nominee for the post of Administrator of the
United States Environmental Protection Agency, and it's my
fervent hope. Bill, that nothing you hear at this conference
this morning will cause you to change your mind.
The truth is, though, as I don't need to tell those of you who
are here, we face some very difficult problems. It is also
true, though, that we now recognize them to be problems, and in
my experience in government that is at least half of the battle
Some months ago President Bush said, "We face the prospect of
REPRODUCED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE
being trapped on a boat that we have irreparably damaged -- not
by the cataclysm of war, but by the slow neglect of a vessel we
believed to be impervious to our abuse.'
The establishment of the Intergovernment Panel on Climate
Change and this meeting of the Panel's Response Strategies
Working Group, I think, shows beyond a doubt that this is a
transnational issue. We are all in the same boat. And as I
put it in my testimony to the Senate recently, "The tides and
the winds can spread environmental damages to continents and
hemispheres far removed from the immediate disasters."
PR NO. 11
-2-
So, if I may borrow a phrase from the environmentalists, the
political ecology is now ripe for action. We know that we need
to act, and we also know that. we need to act together: That is
what this meeting is all about.
But I would take it even a step further. One of the big
advantages of being Secretary of State is that because I am not
a scientist, I am, therefore, not called upon to assess the
evidence, especially on global climate change. Yet it is also
clear. I think, that we face more than simply a scientific
problem. It is also a diplomatic problem of when and how we
take action. And here, if I might, I would like to make four
points.
The first is that we can probably not afford to wait until all
of the uncertainties have been resolved before we do act. Time
will not make the problem go away.
The second is -that while scientists refine the state of our
knowledge, we should focus immediately on prudent steps that
are already justified on grounds other than climate change.
These include reducing CFC emissions, greater energy efficiency
and reforestation.
The third is that whatever global solutions to global climate
change are considered, they should be as specific and
cost-effective as, they can possibly be.
The fourth is that those solutions will be most effective if
they transcend the great fault line of our times, the need to
reconcile the transcendent requirements for both-economic
development and a safe environment.
Without in any way downgrading the difficulty of the task, I
would conclude, ladies and gentlemen, by noting that progress
generally results when common interests are joined to a common
understanding. This meeting and others like it will play a
REPRODUCED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE
crucial role in moving us all toward that common understanding
of what we must do to protect and to preserve our environment.
Thank you very much for having me this morning, and Godspeed.
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
Executive Summary
2
3
4
We are certain of the following:
5
6
The greenhouse effect is real; natural greenhouse gases already keep the earth over
7
30°C warmer than it would otherwise be.
8
9
Man made emissions are substantially increasing the atmospheric concentrations of
10
the main greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, methane, the chlorofluorocarbons, and
11
nitrous oxide. These increases will lead to a warming of the Earth's surface.
12
13
14
Our best tools predict that, in the absence of other effects, man made
15
emissions will lead to the following changes:
16
17
By the year 2020, global mean temperatures will have risen 1.8 C above pre-industrial,
18
with a probable range between 1.3 and 2.5 C; global mean precipitation and
19
evaporation will have increased by 3%. By the year 2070, the range of temperature
20
increase will be 2.4 to 5.1 C with a best estimate of 3.5 C, and precipitation will be 7%
21
greater. Areas of snow cover and sea-ice will be smaller.
22
23
Regional changes will in most cases be different to the global mean; in general, land
24
surfaces warm more rapidly than the oceans. Examples of regional change are that
25
temperature increases in Southern Europe and North America will be higher than the
26
global mean, accompanied by reduced summer precipitation and soil moisture.
27
28
Sea Level is expected to rise mainly due to the thermal expansion of the oceans and
29
the melting of some land ice. Sea level will rise by about 20cm (with a probable range
30
of 10cm to 32cm) by 2030, and by 2070 it will have risen 45cm (with a range of 33cm
31
to 75cm). Within the next century, it is unlikely that there will be a major outflow of ice
32
from the West Antarctic Ice Sheet due directly to greenhouse warming.
33
34
35
Our best judgement is that:
36
37
Global - mean surface air temperature has increased by 0.3 to 0.6 C over the last 100
38
years, with the six global-average warmest years being in the 1980s.
39
40
The size of this warming is broadly consistent with predictions of climate models but,
41
because of natural variability and other factors, we cannot say how much of the
42
observed temperature rise to date is due to man-made greenhouse gases.
43
44
There is no real evidence that climate has become more variable over the last few
45
decades. However, episodes of high temperatures will become more frequent in the
46
future simply due to an increase in the mean temperature.
47
48
Ecosystems will be affected by a changing climate and by increasing carbon dioxide
49
concentrations. Many ecosystems disadvantaged by climate change will be unable to
50
migrate fast enough, and will become prone to extensive damage by exceptional
51
events such as drought and fire.
52
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
2
We calculate with confidence that:
3
4
Some gases are potentially more effective than others at changing climate; the Global
5
Warming Potential index of each gas relates the warming effect of its emissions to
6
those of equal emissions of carbon dioxide. Because carbon dioxide emissions are
7
much larger than those of the other greenhouse gases, it is likely to be responsible for
8
over half the total man-made greenhouse effect.
9
10
To stabilise the atmospheric abundances of most greenhouse gases at present levels
11
would require reductions in man-made emissions of 50-80%; methane would require
12
only a 15-20% reduction.
13
14
There is a long lag between changes in the emission of greenhouse gases and the
15
resultant change in climate. Therefore, reductions in man-made greenhouse gas
16
emissions will take decades to centuries to be become fully effective. Emission
17
decreases made sooner will have a greater effect than the same decreases made
18
later.
19
20
21
To Improve our predictive capability, we need:
22
23
To accelerate the development of numerical models.
24
25
To undertake experimental and theoretical studies aimed at understanding
26
critical processes within the climate system.
27
28
To maintain and improve global observing systems, particularly those which
29
are space-based.
30
31
To increase support for national research activities, and for international
32
programmes under which they can be carried out.
33
34
UNEP
WMO
INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON
CLIMATE CHANGE
POLICYMAKERS
SUMMARY
OF THE
SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT OF
CLIMATE CHANGE
Report to IPCC from Working Group 1
Second Draft, 12 March 1990
Redraft following discussion at the WGI Lead Authors Meeting
Edinburgh, 26 February . 2 March, 1990
Prepared by the IPCC Group at the Meteorological Office, Bracknell, UK
1
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
Introduction: what is the issue ?
2
3
There is concern that man may be inadvertently changing the climate of the globe
4
through the enhanced greenhouse effect, by continuing to emit pollutants which
5
will eventually cause the temperature of the earth to increase - the so called "global
6
warming". If this occurs, consequent changes to sea level and to ecosystems may
7
have a significant impact on society and economies.
8
9
The purpose of the Working Group I report, as determined by the first meeting of
10
IPCC, is to provide a scientific assessment of:
11
12
1) the factors which may affect climate change during the next century
13
especially those which are due to human activity.
14
15
2) the responses of the atmosphere - . ocean land - - ice system.
16
17
3) current capabilities of modelling global and regional climate changes
18
and their predictability.
19
20
4) the past climate record and presently observed climate anomalies.
21
22
On the basis of this assessment, the report presents current knowledge regarding
23
predictions of climate change (including sea level rise and the effects on
24
ecosystems) over the next century, the timing of changes together with an
25
assessment of the uncertainties associated with these predictions.
26
27
This Policymakers Summary aims to bring out those elements of the main report
28
which have the greatest relevance to policy formulation, in answering the following
29
questions:
30
31
What factors determine climate, and how might man change them?
32
33
What are the greenhouse gases, and how and why are they increasing?
34
35
Which gases are the most important?
36
37
How much do we expect the climate to have changed by the year 2020
38
and beyond?
39
40
How much confidence do we have in our estimation?
41
42
What will be the effects on sea level and ecosystems?
43
44
Are the predicted climate changes unusual?
45
46
Has man already begun to change global climate?
47
48
What should be done to reduce uncertainties, and how long will this
49
take?
50
51
52
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
Throughout the report, we keep in mind the practical needs of the policymaker.
2
The report is not an academic review, neither is it a plan for a new research
3
programme. Uncertainties attach to almost every aspect of the report, yet
4
policymakers are looking for clear guidance from scientists; hence authors have
5
been asked to provide best-estimates wherever possible, together with an
6
assessment of the uncertainties.
7
8
This report is a summary of our understanding as at mid-1990. Although continuing
9
research will deepen this understanding and require the report to be updated at
10
frequent intervals, basic conclusions concerning the reality of the greenhouse.
11
effect and its potential to alter global climate are unlikely to change.
12
13
14
15
What factors determine global climate and how
16
might man change them ?
17
18
The driving force for weather and climate comes from the sun. The earth intercepts
19
solar radiation (mainly in the short-wave, visible, part of the spectrum); about a third
20
of it is reflected, the rest is absorbed by the different components (atmosphere,
21
ocean, ice, land and biosphere) of the climate system. The energy absorbed from
22
solar radiation must be balanced (in the long term) by outgoing radiation from the
23
earth and atmosphere; this terrestrial radiation takes the form of long-wave invisible
24
infra-red energy. As the amount of outgoing terrestrial radiation is determined by
25
the temperature of the earth, this temperature will adjust to emit just the right
26
amount of radiation to balance that coming from the sun.
27
28
There are several important factors which can change the balance between the
29
energy (in the form of solar radiation) absorbed by the earth and that emitted by it in
30
the form of longwave infra-red radiation - - the radiative forcing on climate. The
31
most obvious of these is a change in the amount or seasonal distribution of solar
32
radiation which reaches the earth; these changes were probably responsible for
33
initiating the ice ages.
34
35
One of the most important of these factors is the greenhouse effect. Shortwave
36
solar radiation can pass through the clear atmosphere relatively unimpeded. But
37
long-wave terrestrial radiation emitted by the warm surface of the earth is partially
38
absorbed and then re-emitted by a number of trace gases in the atmosphere
39
above. Since the atmosphere is cooler than the earth's surface, the emission to
40
space is reduced. Both the atmosphere and the surface warm until the outgoing
41
long wave radiation balances the incoming solar radiation. This is the basic
42
greenhouse effect. The main greenhouse gases are not the major constituents,
43
nitrogen and oxygen, but water vapour (the biggest contributor), carbon dioxide,
44
methane, nitrous oxide, ozone in the low atmosphere and (in recent years)
45
chlorofluorocarbons. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases keep the earth warm
46
enough to be habitable, but their increase will raise temperatures- and change
47
other aspects of climate, particularly precipitation and evaporation.
48
49
Other factors which affect climate are mentioned later in the Summary, when we
50
discuss uncertainties in climate predictions.
51
52
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
2
Simple diagram Illustrating the greenhouse effect
3
4
5
How do we know that the greenhouse effect is real ?
6
7
The greenhouse effect is real: infrared absorbing gases in the atmosphere make
8
the surface of the earth warmer than it would otherwise be. It is a well understood
9
effect, based on established scientific principles.
10
11
We know that the greenhouse effect works in practice, for several reasons. Firstly,
12
the mean temperature of the earth's surface is already about 33 C warmer than it
13
would be if the natural greenhouse gases (mainly carbon dioxide and water
14
vapour) were not present. Satellite observations of the radiation emitted from the
15
earth's surface and atmosphere demonstrate the absorption due to the
16
greenhouse gases.
17
18
Secondly, we know the compositions of the atmospheres of Venus, Earth and Mars
19
are very different, and their surface temperatures are in good agreement with
20
greenhouse theory.
21
22
Thirdly, measurements from ice cores going back 160,000 years show that the
23
earth's temperature closely paralleled the amount of greenhouse gases in the
24
atmosphere. It is likely that changes in greenhouse gases were part (but not all) of
25
the reason for the large (4 - 5 C) temperature swings between ice ages and
26
interglacial periods.
27
28
2
29
Local temperature
o
30
-2
31
change C
-4
32
-6
33
-8
700
34
10
35
36
600
methane
37
38
500
39
40
methane concentration ppbv
41
400
42
1990
level
43
44
45
300
300
46
280
280
carbon dioxide
47
240
48
49
carbon dioxide
concentration ppmv
260
260
240
220
220
200
50
200
180
51
180
52
O
40
80
120
160
53
Age (thousand years before present)
1
The enhanced greenhouse effect
2
3
We are confident that an increase in concentrations of the greenhouse gases will
4
raise the global, annual-mean surface-air temperature (which, for simplicity, is
5
referred to as the "global temperature"). Strictly, this is an enhanced greenhouse
6
effect - above that occurring due to natural greenhouse gas concentrations; the
7
word "enhanced" is usually omitted, but it should not be forgotten. A global
8
warming will cause sea levels to rise, partly due to the thermal expansion of the
9
ocean surface waters, and partly due to the melting of land ice (but not due to the
10
melting of sea ice - such as the north polar sea ice - which is already floating and
11
thus displacing water).
12
13
14
What are the greenhouse gases and how are they
15
changing ?
16
17
We know, with certainty, that the concentrations of greenhouse gases in the
18
atmosphere have changed naturally on ice-age timescales, and have been
19
increasing since pre-industrial times due to human activities. The table below
20
summarizes the present and pre-industrial abundances, present rates of change
21
and atmospheric lifetimes of the main greenhouse gases.
22
23
SUMMARY OF KEY MAN-MADE GREENHOUSE GASES
Carbon
Methane
CFC-11
CFC-12
Nitrous
Dioxide
Oxide
Atmospheric
concentration
ppmv
ppmv
pptv
pptv
ppbv
Pre-industrial
280
0.79
0
0
288
Present daytt
354
1.717
280
484
310
Current rate of change
1.6
0.015
10
17
0.8
(0.5%)
(0.9%)
(4%)
(4%)
(0.25%)
Atmospheric lifetime
(50-200)+
10
65
130
150
(years)
24
ppmv = parts per million by volume; ppbv - parts per billion by volume;
25
pptv = parts per trillion by volume.
26
t- The way in which CO2 is absorbed by the oceans is not simple and a single value cannot be given
27
tt- estimated
28
29
Carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide all have significant natural and man-
30
made sources, while the chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are purely man-made. Water
31
vapour is also a major greenhouse gas and, although its concentration may also
32
change in future, this will be as a consequence of any global warming and not as a
33
direct result of man-made emissions; we incorporate the effects of this in the
34
estimates of future climate change discussed later.
35
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
For a thousand years prior to the industrial revolution, the abundances of these
2
greenhouse gases were relatively constant. However, as the world's population
3
increased, and the world became more industrialized, the abundances of the
4
greenhouse gases increased markedly. The figures below illustrate this for carbon
5
dioxide and methane.
6
7
8
350
9
10
350
11
12
340
13
14
18
Carbon dioxide (ppmv)
330
15
320
16
17
310
19
300
20
290
21
&
8000°°
22
280
23
24
270
25
2000
1700
1800
1900
26
YR
27
28
Carbon dioxide concentration from ice cores (squares)
29
and surface observations (Mauna Loa - crosses)
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
1,600
37
38
39
41
CH4 concentration (p.p.b.v.)
1
40
1200
42
43
44
45
46
800
47
48
49
1600
1700
1800
1900
50
Year
51
Methane concentration deduced from ice cores
and from recent surface observations
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
We know quite well the reasons for the increased abundances of carbon dioxide,
2
methane, chlorofluorocarbons, and tropospheric ozone, but those for nitrous oxide
3
are less certain. Since the industrial revolution carbon dioxide has increased by
4
25% because of the combustion of fossil fuels and deforestation practices, in mid-
5
latitudes and in the tropics. Methane has more than doubled because of rice
6
production, breeding domestic ruminants, biomass burning, coal mining and
7
ventilation of natural gas; transport and industry may have also contributed in an
8
indirect way. Low - level ozone has doubled because of increased abundances of
9
carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and hydrocarbons from industry and transport;
10
and nitrous oxide has increased by 8% probably because of fossil-fuel combustion
11
or agricultural practices. Chlorofluorocarbons, which are used as aerosol
12
propellants, solvents, refrigerants, and foam blowing agents were not present in the
13
pre-industrial atmosphere.
14
15
16
Lifetimes and stabilisation of the gases
17
18
The lifetimes of the greenhouse gases are determined by their sources and sinks in
19
the oceans, atmosphere and biosphere. Carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons and
20
nitrous oxide have long lifetimes; hence, following a change in emissions, their
21
atmospheric concentrations respond slowly and would not reach a new equilibrium
22
state for many centuries. In contrast, some of the CFC substitutes and methane
23
have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes so that their atmospheric concentrations
24
respond quite quickly and would reach a new equilibrium within a few decades
25
following a change in emissions. This emission-concentration relationship is
26
illustrated below for some of the gases.
27
28
29
30
31
1000
soo
32
aso
CFC12 - -
Constant 1990
Show - 2010
33
800
seo
480
34
son requation
CO2
800
35
co2 Concontrations (ppm)
-
36
002 consentration ppm
2% 8 in 1980
400
400
100% reduction
460
37
aso
CFC12 concentration into
seo
38
son Reduction
aso
CO2 emission reduction
39
.
aso
40
300
2109
1975
2000
2025
2050
2075
use
1975
9000
2025
2075
2100
1978
2025
2078
41
YEAR
TEAR
42
YEAR
43
44
45
46
47
It can be seen, for example, even with a complete cessation in the emission of
48
CFC 12 in the year 1990, its atmospheric abundance would still be about a third of
49
today's level in the year 2100. Also shown is the effect on concentrations of
50
continuing man-made emissions of carbon dioxide at 1990 levels, or 50% of 1990
51
levels, and of a reduction in global emissions of 2% per year from 1990 and from
52
2010; if there are critical concentration levels that should not be exceeded then it
53
can be seen that earlier emission reductions are more effective than later ones.
54
1
The term "atmospheric stabilisation" is often used to describe the limiting at
2
present day values of the concentration of the greenhouse gases. The amount by
3
which man-made emissions of a greenhouse gas must be reduced in order to
4
achieve this is shown in the box below.
5
6
7
STABILISATION OF ATMOSPHERIC CONCENTRATIONS
8
9
Reductions in the man-made emissions of greenhouse gases required to
10
stabilise concentrations at present day levels:
11
12
Carbon Dioxide
60 - 80%
13
Methane
15 - 20%
14
Nitrous Oxide
70 . 80%
15
CFC11
70 - 75%
16
CFC12
75 - 85%
17
HCFC22
40 - 50%
18
19
Natural sources and sinks are assumed to remain unchanged
20
Note that the stabilisation of each of these gases would have different
21
effects on climate, as explained in the next section.
22
23
24
The same models used for these calculations are also used to determine future
25
concentrations of the greenhouse gases which would arise from scenarios of future
26
emissions generated by IPCC Working Group 3. Shown below are the
27
concentration trends of some of the greenhouse gases expected to result from the
28
High Emissions scenario.
29
30
31
CH4 Average Concentrations
CFC12 Average Concentrations
CO2 Average Concentrations
32
1400
5000
900
33
1200
34
800
4000
1000
35
co2 Concentration (ppm)
700
36
600
37
500
CM4 Concentration (ppb)
CFC12 Concentration (ppt)
800
3000
600
38
2000
400
400
39
200
1000
40
300
2100
1975
2000
2025
2050
2075
2100
41
1975
2000
2025
2050
2075
2100
1975
2000
2025
2050
2075
YEAR
YEAR
YEAR
42
43
44
45
46
Which gases are the most important?
47
48
We know, with certainty, that more greenhouse gases means more radiative forcing
49
and hence a global warming. We can calculate the the radiative forcing due to the
50
increase in concentration of each gas with much more confidence than the
51
calculation of the resulting climate change because the former only involves
52
laboratory measurements of the gases: how strongly, and where in the spectrum,
Dran:
1390
1
they absorb infra-red radiation. We then have a base from which to calculate the
2
relative effect on climate of an increase in concentration of each gas in the
3
atmosphere: both in absolute terms and relative to carbon dioxide. These relative
4
effects span a wide range; methane is about 21 times more effective, molecule-for-
5
molecule, than carbon dioxide, and CFC11 about 12 000 times more effective.
6
7
The total radiative forcing at any time is the sum of those from the individual
8
greenhouse gases. For simplicity, we can express total forcing in terms of the
9
amount of carbon dioxide which would give that forcing; this is termed the
10
equivalent carbon dioxide concentration. We show how this quantity has
11
changed to date (based on observations of all the greenhouse gases) and how it
12
might change in the future (based on the IPCC Working Group 3 High Emissions
13
scenario) in the figure below. At present, greenhouse gases have increased since
14
pre-industrial times (the mid 18th century) by an amount that is radiatively
15
equivalent to about a 53% increase in carbon dioxide, although carbon dioxide
16
itself has only risen by 26% - other gases have made up the rest.
17
18
19
Change in Equivalent CO2
1600
1400
projected
1200
Equivalent CO2 ppmv
1000
800
600
observed
400
200
1900
1950
2000
2050
2100
YEAR
20
21
22
23
24
The contributions of the various gases to the total increase in climate forcing during
25
the 1980s is shown below as a pie diagram; carbon dioxide is responsible for
26
about half the decadal increase.
27
28
29
30
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
Contribution to climate forcing change:
1980-90
surface
ozone
CFCs+HCFCs
carbon
dioxide
N20
methane
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How can we evaluate the effect of different greenhouse gases?
8
9
To evaluate possible policy options, it is useful to know the relative radiative (and,
10
hence, climate) effect of equal emissions of each of the greenhouse gases. The
11
concept of relative Global Warming Potentials (GWP) has been developed
12
which takes into account the differing times that gases remain in the atmosphere.
13
14
This index allows for the determination of the time-integrated, relative warming
15
effect based on the instantaneous release of a unit mass (1 kg) of a given
16
greenhouse gas. These GWPs are defined for convenience relative to carbon
17
dioxide, the greenhouse gas of most concern. The GWPs in the following table are
18
shown for three time horizons, reflecting the need to consider these cumulative
19
effects on climate over various time scales.
20
21
The table indicates, for example, that the effectiveness of methane in influencing
22
climate will be greater in the first few decades after initial release, whereas
23
emission of the longer lived nitrous oxide will affect climate for a much longer
24
period of time. The lifetimes of the proposed CFC replacements range from 1 to 40
25
years. The longer lived replacements are still potentially effective as agents of
26
climate change. The extreme example of this, HCFC 143a (with a 40 year lifetime),
27
has a very similar effect (when released in the same amount) to CFC11 on a 20
28
year timescale.
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Draft : Monday, March 12, 1990
1
2
3
GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS
4
The warming effect of an emission of 1kg of each gas relative to that of CO2
5
6
time horizon
7
20 yr
100 yr
500 yr
8
9
Carbon dioxide
1
1
1
10
11
Methane
63
21
9
12
13
Nitrous oxide
270
290
190
14
15
CFC11
4500
3500
1500
16
17
CFC12
7100
7300
4500
18
19
HCFC22
4100
1500
510
20
21
Global Warming Potentials for a range of CFCs and potential replacements are given in the full text
22
23
24
25
Although the table shows carbon dioxide to be the least effective greenhouse gas
26
on an equal emissions basis, the warming effect on will depend on the size of
27
emissions. In the example shown below, 1990 emissions of carbon dioxide will
28
contribute well over half the man-made warming effect over the next 100 years.
29
30
31
32
THE RELATIVE CUMULATIVE CLIMATE EFFECT OF 1990 EMISSIONS
33
34
GWP
1990
relative
35
(100yr
emissions
contribution
36
horizon)
(Tg)
over 100yr
37
38
carbon dioxide
1
26000t
61%
39
40
methane
21
300
15%
41
42
nitrous oxide
290
6
4%
43
44
CFC11
3500
0.3
2%
45
46
CFC12
7300
0.4
7%
47
48
HCFC22
1500
0.1
0.4%
49
Others (including indirect effects, eg that of NO2 on surface ozone)
10.6%
50
51
52
53
t26000Tg of carbon dioxide = 7Gt of carbon
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
There are other criteria which may help policymakers to decide, in the event of
2
emissions reductions being necessary, which gases should be considered. Does
3
the gas contribute in a major way to current, and projected future, climate forcing?
4
Does it have a long lifetime, so that controlling its concentration would require
5
emissions to be reduced sooner rather than later? And are its sources and sinks
6
well enough known to decide which of them could be controlled in practice? The
7
table below illustrates these factors.
8
9
10
11
MAJOR
LONG
SOURCES
12
GAS
CONTRIBUTOR?
LIFETIME?
KNOWN?
13
14
carbon dioxide
yes
yes
yes
15
16
methane
yes
no
qualitatively
17
18
nitrous oxide
no
yes
qualitatively
19
20
CFCs
yes
yes
yes
21
22
HCFCs etc
not at
mainly no
yes
23
present
24
25
surface ozone
yes
no
yes
26
27
28
29
30
How much do we expect climate to change?
31
32
Computer-based numerical models are the best tools we have for making climate
33
predictions; a description of their main features, and how much confidence we can
34
place in their results, are given in the boxes. We outline below the predictions they
35
make for changes at a global and sub-global level.
36
37
To estimate the change in climate, we need to know what emissions of greenhouse
38
gases will be over the next decades; in the predictions below we assume the High
39
Emissions scenario developed by IPCC Working Group 3. The concentrations
40
and radiative forcing derived from this emissions scenario were shown earlier.
41
42
How quickly will global climate change ?
43
44
Using this emissions scenario we estimate that, by the year 2020, the increase in
45
global mean temperatures due to man-made greenhouse gas emissions will be 1.8
46
C above pre-industrial, with a probable range between 1.3 and 2.5 C. By the year
47
2070, the range is 2.4 to 5.1 C with a best estimate of 3.5 C. The best-estimate
48
projection out to the year 2100 is shown in the diagram below.
49
50
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
IPCC High Emissions Scenario
7
High Estimate
6
c
5
Best
Temperature rise from 1765
4
3
2
Low Estimate
1
O
1880
1930
1980
2030
2080
YEAR
1
2
3
The global warming will also lead, on average, to increased precipitation and
4
evaporation; perhaps by 3% and 7% by the years 2020 and 2070. Not surprisingly,
5
we expect areas of sea-ice and snow to diminish.
6
7
There will be large variations in the magnitude of the warming, and those in
8
precipitation will be even greater, with substantial areas of decreased precipitation
9
within an overall global increase.
10
11
What will be the patterns of climate change by about 2020?
12
13
Knowledge of the global mean warming and change in precipitation is of limited
14
use in determining the impacts of climate change, for instance, on agriculture. To
15
do this we need to know what these changes will be at a smaller scale. Our best
16
models predict that surface air over land warm faster than that over oceans; the
17
northern hemisphere will warm faster than the southern, and a minimum of
18
warming will occur around Antarctica and in the North Atlantic region.
19
20
There are some continental scale changes in which we have relatively high
21
confidence because they are consistently predicted by the most comprehensive
22
models and because we understand the physical reasons for them. The warming
23
is predicted to be 50-100% greater than the global mean in high northern latitudes
24
in winter, and substantially smaller than the global mean in regions of sea ice in
25
summer. Precipitation is predicted to increase in middle and high latitude
26
continents in winter (by some 5 - - 10% over 35-55 N).
27
28
In the box below are given the changes in temperature, precipitation and soil
29
moisture, which are predicted to occur by 2020, averaged over the 5 regions (each
30
of which are a few million square kilometres in area) selected by IPCC. There may
31
be considerable variations within the regions. In general, confidence in these
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
regional estimates is low, especially for the changes in precipitation and soil
2
moisture, but they are examples of our best estimates. We cannot yet give reliable
3
regional predictions at the smaller scales demanded for impacts assessments.
4
5
6
CURRENT BEST ESTIMATES FOR CHANGES BY 2020
7
(IPCC High Emissions scenario; changes from pre-Industrial)
8
9
Central North America (35 -55N, 85 -105W)
10
11
The warming ranges between 3 and 4 C in winter and 2 to 3 C in summer.
12
13
deceases of 5 to 10% in summer. Soil moisture decreases in summer by 10
Precipitation increases range from O to 20% in winter whereas there are
14
to 15%.
15
16
South East Asia (5 -30N, 70 -102 E)
17
18
The warming ranges from 1 to 2 C throughout the year. Precipitation changes
19
little in winter and generally increases throughout the region by 5 to 15% in
20
summer. Summer soil moisture increases by 5 to 10%.
21
22
Sahel (10 - 20 N, 20 -38 E)
23
24
The warming ranges from 1 to 2 °C. Area mean precipitation increases and
25
area mean soil moisture decrease marginally in summer. However there are
26
areas of both increase in and decrease in both parameters throughout the
27
region which differ from model to model.
28
29
Southern Europe. (35 - 50 N, 10 W - 45 E)
30
31
The warming is about 2 °C in winter and varies from 2 to 3 °C in summer.
32
There is some indication of increased precipitation in winter, but summer
33
precipitation decreases by 5 to 15%, and summer soil moisture by 10 to 25%.
34
35
Australia (12 - 43 S, 115 - 154 E)
36
37
The warming ranges from 1 to 2 O in summer and is about 2 OC in winter.
38
Summer precipitation increases by around 10% , but there the models do not
39
produce consistent estimates of the changes in soil moisture. There are large
40
variations at the sub-continental level within this area.
41
42
43
44
How will climate extremes and extreme events change?
45
46
Changes in the variability of weather and the frequency of extremes will generally
47
have more impact than changes in the mean climate at a place. With the possible
48
49
from our work so far that weather variability will change in the future. However, with
exception of an increase in the number of intense showers, there is no evidence
50
no change in variability, even for a modest change in the mean, the number of days
51
with temperatures above a given value at the high end of the distribution will
52
increase substantially. Similarly, there will be a decrease in days with temperatures
Draft : Monday, March 12, 1990
1
at the low end of the distribution. So the number of very hot days or frosty nights
2
will be substantially changed without any change in the variability of the
3
weather. Changes in the number of days with a minimum threshold amount of soil
4
moisture (for viability of a certain crop, for example) would be even more acute.
5
6
7
Will storms increase in a warmer world?
8
9
Storms can have a major impact on society. Will their frequency, intensity or
10
location increase in a warmer world?
11
12
13
Tropical storms, such as typhoons and hurricanes, only develop at present over
14
seas that are warmer than about 26°C. As the area of sea having temperatures
15
over this critical value will increase as the globe warms, the potential certainly
16
exists for there to be a wider area available for storm development. However, the
17
vertical structure of the atmosphere may also change, and offset this increase.
18
Climate models give no clear indication whether tropical storms will increase or
19
decrease in frequency or intensity as greenhouse gases increase; neither is there
20
any evidence that this has occurred over the past few decades.
21
22
23
Mid-latitude storms, such as those which track across the North Atlantic, are
24
driven by the equator-to-pole temperature contrast. As this contrast will probably be
25
weakened in a warmer world (at least in the northern hemisphere), it could be
26
argued that mid-latitude storms will also weaken. But higher in the atmosphere the
27
thermal contrast strengthens, and it addition the increased amount of water vapour
28
in the atmosphere can supply extra energy to storm development. We do not know
29
which of these factors will be the more influential, and how storms will change in
30
frequency or intensity. Even if changes of this sort do not occur, the tracks they take
31
might move and affect new regions; again, we have no evidence of where, or if, this
32
would happen.
33
34
35
36
What tools do we use to predict future climate ?
37
38
It is relatively easy to predict the direct effect of the radiative forcing due to increases in greenhouse
39
gases. However, as climate begins to warm, various processes act to amplify (through positive
40
feedbacks) or reduce (negative feedbacks) the warming. The feedbacks are due to changes in
41
water vapour, sea-ice, clouds and the oceans. In making a climate forecast, all these processes
42
have to be taken into account. These are described in three-dimensional mathematical model of
43
the atmosphere and ocean (often known as a general circulation model or GCM ). These are
44
based on the equations of motion and use descriptions in simple physical terms (called
45
parameterisations) of the smaller scale processes such as those due to clouds and to deep mixing
46
in the ocean. (The atmospheric component of a climate model is essentially the same as a weather
47
prediction model).
48
49
Draft Monday, March 12, 1990
1
2
3
Equilibrium and realised climate change
4
5
We have explained that increases in greenhouse gases will (instantaneously) increase radiative
6
forcing. However, the full warming will not occur instantaneously, because of the effect of the the
7
oceans. Firstly, the mixed layer of the ocean (about 100m deep) will have to warm at about
8
same rate as the atmosphere, because transfer of heat from one to the other takes place very
9
efficiently; this will take typically 10 years. Secondly, there are two areas of the oceans (the
10
northern North Atlantic and the Antarctic ocean) where circulation patterns act to draw down water
11
from the warm upper layers into the very deep ocean. Some of the heat from the upper layers is
12
therefore also drawn into the deep ocean, where it remains for a very long time - upwards of a
13
thousand years; on the century timescale we are considering here, the heat is effectively lost.
14
15
Consider the case where continuing increases in greenhouse gases is giving a steady increase in
16
radiative forcing at a rate of about 1% per year this is roughly what is happening at the moment.
17
The first diagram below shows the equilibrium temperature rise which would ultimately occur due
18
to this forcing - this is also the temperature we would experience straight away if there were no
19
oceans. The lower line shows our best estimate of the realised temperature rise; the temperature
20
trend that (in the absence of other forcing and variability) we would observe. The realised
21
temperature trend approximates to the eventual temperature trend reduced (mainly because of
22
the heat sequestered into the deep ocean) by about a third.
23
24
The concept of the equilibrium temperature can best be illustrated (as in the second diagram
25
below) by the artificial case of halting and stabilising the radiative forcing at a future date
26
temperature would then rise slightly over a ten year period as the ocean mixing layer "catches up"
(remembering that this would require a very large reduction in emissions). The realised
27
28
with the atmosphere, but then rise further only very slowly, to meet the equilibrium temperature in
29
over a thousand years.
30
31
32
forcing
stabilisation
33
34
35
36
FORCING
37
38
39
equilibrium
40
41
equilibrium
42
temperature
43
slow rise (1000yr)
44
TEMPERATURE
toward equilibrium
45
46
realised
47
temperature
48
49
TIME
TIME
50
51
52
53
The long term change in surface air temperature following from a doubling of carbon dioxide be
54
(generally used as a benchmark and referred to as the climate sensitivity) is most likely to
55
somewhere between 1.5 and 4.5°C, with a most likely estimate of 2.5°C. The lowest result from all
56
models so far is about 1.5°C and, although some models give figures higher than 4.5°C (up to
57
5.2°C), there are good reasons to believe that the less detailed representation of cloud processes
58
in these models leads to an over-estimation of the warming. This range of climate sensitivity
59
deduced from mathematical models is consistent with empirical evidence from paleo epochs.
60
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
2
How do we forecast climate ?
3
4
Climate forecasts are derived in a different way from weather forecasts. A weather prediction model
5
gives a description of the atmosphere's state up to 10 days or so ahead, starting from a detailed
6
description of an initial state of the atmosphere at a given time. Such forecasts describe the
7
movement and development of large weather systems, though they cannot represent very small
8
scale phenomena; for example, individual shower clouds.
9
10
To make a climate forecast, the climate model is first run for a few (simulated) decades. The
11
statistics of the model's output will be a description of the model's simulated climate which, if the
12
model is a good one, will bear a close resemblance to the climate of the real atmosphere and ocean.
13
The above exercise is then repeated with increasing concentrations of the greenhouse gases in
14
the model. The differences between the statistics of the two simulations (for example in mean
15
temperature and interannual variability) provide an estimate of the accompanying climate change.
16
17
A completely different, and potentially powerful, way of predicting patterns of future climate is to
18
search for periods in the past when the global mean temperatures were similar to those we expect
19
in future, and then use the past spatial patterns as analogs of those which will arise in the future.
20
For a good analog, it is also necessary for the forcing factors (eg. greenhouse gases, orbital
21
variations) and other conditions (e.g. ice cover, topography, etc.) to be similar; direct comparisons
22
with climate situations for which these conditions do not apply cannot be easily interpreted. So far,
23
analogs of future greenhouse-gas-changed climates have not been found. We cannot therefore
24
advocate the use of paleo climates as predictions of regional climate change due to future
25
increases in greenhouse gases.
26
27
28
29
How much will sea level rise ?
30
31
Simple models were used to calculate sea level rise to the year 2100 AD; the
32
results are illustrated below. The calculations necessarily ignore any long-term
33
changes, unrelated to greenhouse forcing, that may be occurring but cannot be
34
detected from the present data on land ice and the ocean. For the IPCC High
35
Emissions scenario, sea level is expected to be between 10 cm and 32 cm higher
36
than today by the year 2030, with a best-estimate of 20 cm.
37
38
SEA LEVEL RISE A BETA=1.0 K=0.6338 DT=1.5.2.5,4.5 W=4 DQ=4.367
39
40
41
Sea Level Rise estimated from IPCC
100
Business as Usual emissions scenario
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Sea Level Rise (cm)
50
54
55
0
2000
2025
2050
2075
2100
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
The best estimate is made up of positive contributions from thermal expansion of
2
the oceans (12cm); melting of glaciers (8cm) and the Greenland ice sheet (1cm),
3
with a 1cm negative contribution from Antarctica due to higher ice/snow
4
accumulation in a slightly warmer climate. By the year 2070, sea level is expected
5
to be 45cm higher, with a range of 33cm to 75cm.
6
7
By 2030, even if greenhouse forcing increased no further, the world would still be
8
committed to a continuing sea level rise for many decades and even centuries, due
9
to delays in climate, ocean and ice mass responses (see figure below). Sea level
10
would go on rising from 2030 to 2100, by a further 23cm, due to the effects of pre-
11
2030 greenhouse gas increases alone. Moreover, in the longer term, irreversible
12
changes could be triggered with long-lasting effects. For instance, for a persistent
13
4°C warming, the major part of the Greenland ice sheet would eventually
14
disappear (but over thousands of years), and would not reform even with a return to
15
the present climatic conditions.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Sea Level Rise (cm)
50
STOP CHANGE IN
26
GREENHOUSE
FORCING IN 2030
43cm
27
28
29
20cm
30
31
0
2000
2025
2050
2075
2100
YEAR
32
33
SEA LEVEL RISE COMMITMENT. Even if
34
greenhouse gas concentrations were stabilised in
35
2030, sea level would continue to rise steadily
36
37
38
39
The West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) is of special concern, as a large portion of it is
40
grounded far below sea level and it contains an amount of ice equivalent to 5m of
41
global sea level. Recent studies have demonstrated that individual ice streams are
42
changing rapidly on a decadal to century time scale. This variability is not
43
necessarily related to climate, but is important for future sea level change. Within
44
the next century, it is not likely that there will be a major outflow of WAIS ice due
45
directly to greenhouse warming.
46
47
Regional rise in sea level is expected to differ substantially from the global mean
48
value. Thermal expansion, changes in ocean circulation, and surface air pressure
49
will vary from region to region as the world warms, but in a yet unknown way. Such
50
regional details await further development of realistic physical models of the ocean
51
circulation. In addition, vertical land movements can be as large or even larger
52
than changes in global mean sea level. For estimates of regional sea level rise,
53
these should be added to climate-related changes in ocean volume.
20
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
How much confidence do we have in our
2
predictions?
3
4
Uncertainties in the predictions above arise from a number of sources. Firstly, it is
5
obvious that future climate change will depend on the rate at which greenhouse
6
gases (and other gases which influence them) are emitted; this in turn will be
7
determined by various complex economic and sociological factors.
8
Scenarios of future emissions were generated within IPCC by Working Group 3;
9
four such scenarios are explored in the main report, and one of these
10
(corresponding to a Business as- Usual case) is used to illustrate this Summary.
11
12
Secondly, because we do not fully understand the sources and sinks of the
13
greenhouse gases, there are uncertainties in our calculations of future
14
concentrations arising from a given emissions scenario. For carbon dioxide, for
15
example, the concentration calculated for 2070 from the Business-as-Usual
16
emissions scenario ranged from 560ppmv to 720ppmv; we have chosen a best
17
estimate for each gas. Furthermore, because natural sources and sinks of
18
greenhouse gases are sensitive to a change in climate, they may substantially
19
modify future concentrations; ice core records show that methane and carbon
20
dioxide concentrations changed in the same way as temperature between ice ages
21
and interglacials. For example, if wetlands become warmer, methane emissions
22
(and hence concentrations) will increase; if they become drier, methane emissions
23
will decrease. Although these factors are complex, it appears that they are more
24
likely to increase greenhouse gas abundances overall and hence increase the
25
climate change estimates given above.
26
27
Thirdly, although we understand quite well the forcing due to changing gas
28
concentrations, other factors apart from these can influence climate. Those which
29
could be important on a decadal timescale are: short term variability of solar
30
radiation output; aerosols from a large volcanic eruption and low level aerosols
31
arising from man-made sulphur emissions. On the timescale of the next century,
32
however, the change in climate due to increasing greenhouse gases is likely to be
33
far more important than that from these other effects.
34
35
Because of long period couplings between ocean and atmosphere the earth's
36
climate would still vary without being perturbed by any external influences. This
37
natural variability could act to speed up, or slow down, any man-made warming
38
but on a century timescale would be less than greenhouse gas-induced changes.
39
40
Fourthly, models are only as good as our understanding of the processes which
41
affect climate, and this is far from perfect. The range in the climate predictions
42
given above reflects an estimate of uncertainties due to model imperfections; the
43
largest of these is cloud feedback, leading to a factor of two uncertainty in the size
44
of the warming. Neverthless, for reasons given in the box below, we have
45
substantial confidence that models can predict at least the broad scale features of
46
climate change.
47
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
2
3
Confidence in predictions from climate models
4
5
What confidence can we have that climate change will look anything like what the models tell us?
6
Weather forecasts can be compared with the actual weather the next day and their skill assessed;
7
we cannot do that with climate predictions. There are several indicators that give us some
8
confidence in the predictions from climate models.
9
10
When they are run with the present amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere their simulation of
11
present climate is generally realistic, capturing the major features such as the wet tropical
12
convergence zones and mid-latitude depression belts, as well as the contrasts between summer
13
and winter circulations. The models also simulate the observed variability; for example, the large
14
day-to-day pressure variations in the middle latitude depression belts and the maxima in interannual
15
variability responsible for the very different character of one winter from another both being
16
represented.
17
18
Overall confidence is increased by their generally satisfactory portrayal of aspects of variability of
19
the atmosphere such as that associated with El Niño (the irregular warming of the Eastern tropical
20
Pacific).
21
22
In addition, when forced with correct conditions (solar radiation, greenhouse gas forcing, ice
23
caps,etc) they can capture important features of climates 6,000 to 9,000 years ago and the most
24
recent ice age about 20,000 years ago.
25
26
It is also worth noting that the weather forecasting models (from which climate models have been
27
developed) predict weather for several days ahead, with generally great success.
28
29
30
31
32
Will the predicted changes be unusual?
33
34
When considering future climate change, it is clearly essential to look at the record
35
of climate variation in the past. From this record we can learn about the range of
36
natural climate variability, to see how it compares with what we expect in the future,
37
and also look for evidence of recent climate change due to man's activities.
38
39
Climate varies naturally on all time scales from hundreds of millions of years down
40
to the year to year. Prominent in the earth's history have been the 100,000 year
41
glacial-interglacial cycles when climate was mostly cooler than at present. Global
42
surface temperatures have typically varied by 5 to 7°C through these cycles, with
43
large changes in ice volume and sea level, and temperature changes as great as
44
10-15°C in some middle and high latitude regions of the northern hemisphere.
45
Since the end of the last ice age, about 10,000 years ago, global surface
46
temperatures have probably fluctuated by little more than 1°C. Some fluctuations
47
have lasted several centuries, including the Little Ice Age which ended in the
48
nineteenth century and which appears to have been global in extent.
49
50
The changes predicted to occur by about 2040 due to man made increases in
51
greenhouse gas concentrations will make global mean temperatures higher than
52
they have been in the last 100,000 years.
53
54
55
56
Draft : Monday, March 12, 1990
1
Has man already begun to change the global
2
climate?
3
4
The instrumental record of surface temperature is fragmentary until the mid
5
nineteenth century, after which it slowly improves. Because of different methods of
6
measurement, historical records have to be harmonised with modern ones,
7
introducing some uncertainty. Despite these problems we believe that a real
8
warming of the globe of 0.3 - 0.6 C has taken place over the last century.
9
Moreover since 1900 similar temperature increases are seen in three
10
independent data sets: one collected over land and two over the oceans. The
11
figure below shows current estimates of smoothed global mean surface
12
temperature over land and ocean since 1860.
13
14
15
Global average (land + sea) temperature change
16
0.6
17
C
Change relative to 1951-80 mean
18
0.4
19
20
0.2
21
22
23
Temperature change
-0.0
24
-0.2
25
26
-0.4
27
-0.6
28
1990
1870
1890
1910
1930
1950
1970
2010
29
30
31
32
Although overall temperature rise has been broadly similar in both hemispheres, it
33
has not been steady, and differences in their rates of warming have sometimes
34
persisted for decades. Much of the warming since 1900 has been concentrated in
35
two periods, the first between about 1920 and 1940 and the other since 1975. The
36
northern hemisphere cooled between the 1940s and the early 1970s when
37
southern hemisphere temperatures stayed nearly constant. The pattern of global
38
warming since 1975 has been uneven with some regions, mainly in the northern
39
hemisphere, continuing to cool until recently. This regional diversity indicates that
40
future regional temperature changes are likely to differ considerably from a global
41
average.
42
43
That there has been a real temperature rise is strongly supported by the retreat of
44
most mountain glaciers of the world since the end of the nineteenth century and
45
the fact that sea level has risen over the same period by an average of 1 to 2 mm
46
per year.
47
48
Estimates of thermal expansion of the oceans, and of increased melting of
49
mountain glaciers and the ice margin in West Greenland over the last century,
50
shows that the major part of the rise appears to be related to the observed global
51
warming. This apparent connection between observed sea level rise and global
52
warming provides grounds for believing that future warming will lead to an
53
acceleration in sea level rise.
Draft: Monday, March 12, 1990
1
The magnitude of the warming over the last century is broadly consistent with the
2
theoretical predictions of climate models. If the sole cause of the observed warming
3
were the man-made greenhouse effect, then the implied climate sensitivity would
4
be in the lower half of the range inferred from the models. However, the range of
5
natural variability is almost certainly as large as any change to date due to the
6
man-made greenhouse effect.
7
8
Global-mean temperature alone is an inadequate indicator of greenhouse-gas-
9
induced climatic change. Identifying the causes of any global-mean temperature
10
change requires examination of other aspects of the changing climate, particularly
11
its spatial and temporal characteristics the man-made climate change "signal".
12
However, we do not yet know what the "signal" looks like because, as we have
13
seen, prediction of many of these detailed characteristics is not yet possible;.
14
15
Although we are convinced of the reality of an increasing anthropogenic
16
greenhouse effect, by the time unequivocal detection has been achieved, the
17
commitment to future climate change will be considerably larger than it is today.
18
19
20
What will be the effect of climate change on
21
ecosystems ?
22
23
Our life support system depends on the basic functioning of our ecosystems.
24
Photosynthesis captures atmospheric carbon dioxide and solar energy and stores
25
them in organic compounds which are then utilized for subsequent plant growth,
26
the growth of animals or the growth of microbes in the soil which release CO2 via
27
respiration into the atmosphere.
28
29
The rates of ecosystem processes are dependent on climatic factors in the short
30
term and carbon dioxide concentration may also modify the rates of
31
photosynthesis and respiration. In the longer term, climate and atmospheric
32
carbon dioxide control the structure of ecosystems by selecting species which
33
together function within them. Changes in climate and atmospheric carbon dioxide
34
concentrations will, therefore, modify both function and structure in our
35
ecosystems.
36
37
Photosynthesis fixes 120-160 Gt of carbon each year (90-120Gt on land and 30-40
38
Gt in the oceans). Most land plants have a system of photosynthesis which will
39
respond positively to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide ("the carbon dioxide
40
fertilization effect"), but the response varies with species and may decrease with
41
time. The response to increased carbon dioxide results in greater efficiencies of
42
water and nitrogen use and may be particularly important in plants of stressed
43
ecosystems (in arid/semi arid and infertile areas). Photosynthesis will also
44
increase as temperature and moisture increase and as nutrient availability
45
increases through the stimulation of the decomposition process by increased
46
temperatures.
47
48
So far there is no incontravertible proof that net terrestrial ecosystem production
49
has increased. If there were, it would be almost impossible to apportion this
50
between land use effects, fertilization by atmospheric pollutants and climate
51
change. The extent to which ecosystems can sequester increasing atmospheric
52
carbon remains to be quantified.
1
As various species respond differently to various components of the physical
2
environment, some species in a particular location will be more advantaged than
3
others by global change. They will then displace other species and communities
4
and ecosystems will change in structure. Displaced species will be forced to
5
higher latitudes and altitudes, and will be prone to extinction, having no potential
6
habitat while existing where change is predicted to be greatest. Communities will
7
not move en bloc and new assemblages of species will form at new locations.
8
However, a major constraint on the movement of species will be their potential
9
migration rates which will almost always be less than the rates projected for climate
10
change. The result is likely to be unstable ecosystems prone to extensive damage
11
by exceptional events such as drought and fire.
12
13
14
Deforestation and Reforestation
15
16
Man has been deforesting the Earth for millennia since the development of shifting cultivation.
17
During the early part of the century this was mainly in temperate regions, more recently it has been
18
concentrated in the tropics. Deforestation has three potential impacts on climate: through the
19
carbon and nitrogen cycles (where it can lead to changes in carbon dioxide concentrations);
20
through the change in reflectivity of terrain when forests are cleared, and through their effect on
21
the hydrological cycle (precipitation and evaporation).
22
23
The destruction of 100,000 square km of tropical forest has been estimated to release up to 2 Gt
24
of carbon (GtC) to the atmosphere, though allowing for replacement by grassland suggests that
25
nearer 1 GtC is a likely figure. If all the tropical forests were removed, the input is variously
26
estimated at from 150 to 350 GtC; this would increase atmospheric carbon dioxide by 35 to 80
27
ppmv. The rate of loss of forest is difficult to estimate; probably till the mid-20th century,
28
deforestation was a more important contributor to atmospheric carbon dioxide than was the burning
29
of fossil fuels. Since then, fossil fuels have become dominant; one estimate is that around 1980
30
1.7 GtC was being released annually from the clearing of tropical forests, compared with 5 GtC from
31
burning of fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide will be absorbed from the atmosphere during the growth
32
phase of new forests; it is estimated that the planting of 4 million square kilometres of temperate
33
forest would withdraw about 1Gt of carbon from the atmosphere per year for over 100 years.
34
35
Deforestation can also alter climate directly by decreasing the absorption of solar radiation, so
36
weakening the local heat source and decreasing rainfall. Experiments with climate models predict
37
that replacing all the forests of the Amazon basin by grassland reduces the rainfall over the basin
38
by about 20%.
39
40
41
How can we limit climate change?
42
43
From studies of how quickly ecosytems can adapt to climate change, it may be
44
relevant to assess what maximum emissions of greenhouse gases would result in
45
global temperatures changing by, say, 0.1°C or 0.2°C per decade.
46
47
Even if we were able to stabilise atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse
48
gases at present day levels (requiring, as we saw above, cutbacks in emissions of
49
50 - 80% in most gases), this would still not keep climate as it is today; we may
50
already be committed to a global rate of change of about 0.1 C per decade. To limit
51
global temperature increase to about 0.2 C per decade, emissions of carbon
52
dioxide would have to be reduced by about XX% (calculation to be finalised),
53
making reasonable assumptions about the effect on CFCs of the Montreal Protocol,
54
and assuming emissions of other gases remain unchanged.
25
Draft Monday, March 12, 1990
1
What should be done to reduce uncertainties, and
2
how long will this take ?
3
4
Policymakers will be aware from this assessment that, although we can say that
5
significant climate change is unavoidable, much uncertainty exists in prediction of
6
global climate properties such as the temperature and rainfall near the surface and
7
the mean sea level. Even greater uncertainty exists in predictions of regional
8
climate change.
9
10
To reduce these uncertainties large improvements are required in our capability to
11
model and to observe the global climate system, and to understand it through
12
studies of the processes that need to be represented in the global models. As far
13
as the global modelling is concerned, it is particularly urgent to develop coupled
14
atmosphere -ocean-ice models with increased spatial resolution, incorporating
15
more realistic formulations of relevant physical, chemical and biological processes.
16
17
As far as the processes are concerned, the main areas of uncertainty are (1) the
18
role of the clouds which lead to feedback that may amplify or limit the response of
19
the atmosphere to greenhouse forcing, (2) the changes that can occur in the world
20
ocean circulation and in the heat intake of the ocean which acts to reduce and
21
delay surface warming, and (3) the changes that will modify biological activity on
22
land and in the seas. Detailed field studies of these processes are either planned
23
or underway.
24
25
As far as the global observational capability is concerned there needs to be
26
increased accuracy and coverage in the observations of the properties of the
27
atmosphere and oceans, especially those directed to the earlier possible detection
28
of climate changes and towards the verification of climate models. The main
29
observational requirements are (1) the maintenance and improvement of
30
observations provided by the World Weather Watch programme of WMO, (2) the
31
development of major new satellite observing systems to obtain global description
32
of properties such as three dimensional cloud distribution and rainfall from polar
33
orbiting platforms, and three dimensional wind fields from a low altitude satellite
34
covering tropical regions, and (3) a new initiative to establish measurements from
35
ships and automatic instrumented vehicles, deep sea moorings and shore stations.
36
37
International cooperation to carry out all aspects of this work is concentrated in the
38
World Climate Research Programme and the International Geosphere-Biosphere
39
Programme. These are large and complex endeavours - - the largest coordinated
40
international scientific programmes yet attempted. To reinforce existing projects
41
and tackle new scientific problems not only will increased resources be necessary
42
to support existing research teams in each nation, but an increased supply of
43
trained scientists will also be essential; this has implications now at all levels of
44
education. The international community of scientists also needs to be widened to
45
include more participants from developing countries.
46
47
As research advances, increased understanding and improved observations will
48
lead to progressively more reliable climate predictions. However considering the
49
complex nature of the problem and the scale of the scientific programmes to be
50
undertaken we know that rapid results cannot be expected. Indeed further
51
scientific
Draft : Monday, March 12, 1990
1
advances may expose unforseen problems and areas of ignorance. Surprises are
2
possible; for instance it is worth noting that the "ozone hole" resulting from the
3
effects of CFCs was entirely unpredicted. The box below gives some important
4
milestones towards narrowing the uncertainties.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
TIMESCALES FOR
12
NARROWING UNCERTAINTIES
13
1990
PREDICTIONS OF RATE OF CHANGE OF CLIMATE
1995
(as a result of coupled atmos-ocean models
and better understanding of the ocean)
PREDICTIONS OF REGIONAL DIFFERENCES IN
2000
CLIMATE INCLUDING WATER RESOURCES (as
a result of higher resolution models and a
better understanding of the water cycle)
IMPROVED RELIABILITY OF PREDICTIONS &
DEFINITION OF RANGE OF POSSIBLE CLIMATE
2005
VARIATION (as a result of models
containing better representations of
clouds, oceans, ice-sheets, chemistry &
biosphere)
SUMMIT OF THE ARCH
16 July 1989
ECONOMIC DECLARATION
1) We, the Heads of State or Government of seven
major industrial nations and the President of the Commission
of the European Communities, have met in Paris for the
fifteenth annual Economic Summit. The Summit of the Arch
initiates a new round of Summits to succeed those begun at
Rambouillet in 1975 and at Versailles in 1982. The round
beginning in 1982 has seen one of the longest periods of
sustained growth since the Second World War. These Summits
have permitted effective consultations and offered the
opportunity to launch initiatives and to strengthen
international cooperation.
2) This year's world economic situation presents
three main challenges:
- The choice and the implementation of measures
needed to maintain balanced and sustained growth, counter
inflation, create jobs and promote social justice. These
measures should also facilitate the adjustment of external
imbalances, promote international trade and investment, and
improve the economic situation of developing countries.
- 12 -
ENVIRONMENT
33) There is growing awareness throughout the world
of the necessity to preserve better the global ecological
balance. This includes serious threats to the atmosphere,
which could lead to future climate changes. We note with great
concern the growing pollution of air, lakes, rivers, oceans
and seas; acid rain, dangerous substances; and the rapid
desertification and deforestation. Such environmental
degradation endangers species and undermines the well-being of
individuals and societies.
Decisive action is urgently needed to understand
and protect the earth's ecological balance. We will work
together to achieve the common goals of preserving a healthy
and balanced global environment in order to meet shared
economic and social objectives and to carry out obligations to
future generations.
34) We urge all countries to give further impetus
to scientific research on environmental issues, to develop
necessary technologies and to make clear evaluations of the
economic costs and benefits of environmental policies.
The persisting uncertainty on some of these issues
should not unduly delay our action.
In this connection, we ask all countries to combine
their efforts in order to improve observation and monitoring
on a global scale.
35) We believe that international cooperation also
needs to be enhanced in the field of technology and technology
transfer in order to reduce pollution or provide alternative
solutions.
- 13 -
36) We believe that industry has a crucial role in
preventing pollution at source, in waste minimization, in
energy conservation, and in the design and marketing of
cost-effective clean technologies. The agricultural sector
must also contribute to tackling problems such as water
pollution, soil erosion and desertification.
37) Environmental protection is integral to issues
such as trade, development, energy, transport, agriculture and
economic planning. Therefore, environmental considerations
must be taken into account in economic decision-making. In
fact good economic policies and good environmental policies
are mutually reinforcing.
In order to achieve sustainable development, we
shall ensure the compatibility of economic growth and
development with the protection of the environment.
Environmental protection and related investment should
contribute to economic growth. In this respect, intensified
efforts for technological breakthrough are important to
reconcile economic growth and environmental policies.
Clear assessments of the costs, benefits and
resource implications of environmental protection should help
governments to take the necessary decisions on the mix of
price signals (e.g., taxes or expenditures) and regulatory
actions, reflecting where possible the full value of natural
resources.
- 14 -
We encourage the World Bank and regional
development banks to integrate environmental considerations
into their activities. International organizations such as the
OECD and the United Nations and its affiliated organizations,
will be asked to develop further techniques of analysis which
would help governments assess appropriate economic measures to
promote the quality of the environment. We ask the OECD,
within the context of its work on integrating environment and
economic decision-making, to examine how selected
environmental indicators could be developed. We expect the
1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development to give
additional momentum to the protection of the global
environment.
38) TO help developing countries deal with past
damage and to encourage them to take environmentally desirable
action, economic incentives may include the use of aid
mechanisms and specific transfer of technology. In special
cases, ODA debt forgiveness and debt for nature swaps can play
a useful role in environmental protection.
We also emphasize the necessity to take into
account the interests and needs of developing countries in
sustaining the growth of their economies and the financial and
technological requirements to meet environmental challenges.
39) The depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer
is alarming and calls for prompt action.
- 15 -
We welcome the HELSINKI conclusions related, among
other issues, to the complete abandonment of the production
and consumption of chloro-fluorocarbons covered by the
MONTREAL protocol as soon as possible and not later than the
end of the century. Specific attention must also be given to
those ozone-depleting substances not covered by the Montreal
protocol. We shall promote the development and use of suitable
substitute substances and technologies. More emphasis should
be placed on projects that provide alternatives to
chloro-fluorocarbons.
40) We strongly advocate common efforts to limit
emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, which
threaten to induce climate change, endangering the environment
and ultimately the economy. We strongly support the work
undertaken by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
on this issue.
We need to strengthen the worldwide network of
observatories for greenhouse gases and support the World
Meteorological Organisation initiative to establish a global
climatological reference network to detect climate changes
41) We agree that increasing energy efficiency
could make a substantial contribution to these goals. We urge
international organizations concerned to encourage measures,
including economic measures, to improve energy conservation
and, more broadly, efficiency in the use of energy of all
kinds and to promote relevant techniques and technologies.
- 16 -
We are committed to maintaining the highest safety
standards for nuclear power plants and to strengthening
international cooperation in safe operation of power plants
and waste management, and we recognize that nuclear power also
plays an important role in limiting output of greenhouse
gases.
42) Deforestation also damages the atmosphere and
must be reversed. We call for the adoption of sustainable
forest management practices, with a view to preserving the
scale of world forests. The relevant international
organizations will be asked to complete reports on the state
of the world's forests by 1990.
43) Preserving the tropical forests is an urgent
need for the world as a whole. While recognizing the sovereign
rights of developing countries to make use of their natural
resources, we encourage, through a sustainable use of tropical
forests, the protection of all the species therein and the
traditional rights to land and other resources of local
communities. We welcome the German initiative in this field as
a basis for progress.
TO this end, we give strong support to rapid
implementation of the Tropical Forest Action Plan which was
adopted in 1986 in the framework of the Food and Agricultural
Organization. We appeal to both consumer and producer
countries, which are united in the International Tropical
Timber Organization, to join their efforts to ensure better
conservation of the forests. We express our readiness to
assist the efforts of nations with tropical forests through
financial and technical cooperation, and in international
organizations.
- 17 -
44) Temperate forests, lakes and rivers must be
protected against the effects of acid pollutants such as
sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. It is necessary to pursue
actively the bilateral and multilateral efforts to this end.
45) The increasing complexity of the issues related
to the protection of the atmosphere calls for innovative
solutions. New instruments may be contemplated. We believe
that the conclusion of a framework or umbrella convention on
climate change to set out general principles or guidelines is
urgently required to mobilize and rationalize the efforts made
by the international community. We welcome the work under way
by the United Nations Environment Program, in cooperation with
the World Meteorological Organization, drawing on the work of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the results
of other international meetings. Specific protocols containing
concrete commitments could be fitted into the framework as
scientific evidence requires and permits.
46) We condemn indiscriminate use of oceans as
dumping grounds for polluting waste. There is a particular
problem with the deterioration of coastal waters. To ensure
the sustainable management of the marine environment, we
recognize the importance of international cooperation in
preserving it and conserving the living resources of the sea.
We call for relevant bodies of the United Nations to prepare a
report on the state of the world's oceans.
- 18 -
We express our concern that national, regional and
global capabilities to contain and alleviate the consequences
of maritime oil spills be improved. We urge all countries to
make better use of the latest monitoring and clean-up
technologies. We ask all countries to adhere to and implement
fully the international conventions for the prevention of oil
pollution of the oceans. We also ask the International
Maritime Organization to put forward proposals for further
preventive action.
47) We are committed to ensuring full
implementation of existing rules for the environment. In this
respect, we note with interest the initiative of the Italian
government to host in 1990 a forum on international law for
the environment with scholars, scientific experts and
officials, to consider the need for a digest of existing rules
and to give in-depth consideration to the legal aspects of
environment at the international level.
48) We advocate that existing environment
institutions be strengthened within the United Nations system.
In particular, the United Nations Environment Program urgently
requires strengthening and increased financial support. Some
of us have agreed that the establishment within the United
Nations of a new institution may also be worth considering.
49) We have taken note of the report of the sixth
conference on bioethics held in Brussels which examined the
elaboration of a universal code of environmental ethics based
upon the concept of the "human stewardship of nature".
50) It is a matter of international concern that
Bangladesh, one of the poorest and most densely populated
countries in the world, is periodically devastated by
catastrophic floods.
- 19 -
We stress the urgent need for effective,
coordinated action by the international community, in support
of the Government of Bangladesh, in order to find solutions to
this major problem which are technically, financially,
economically and environmentally sound. In that spirit, and
taking account of help already given, we take note of the
different studies concerning flood alleviation, initiated by
France, Japan, the US and the United Nations Development
Program, which have been reviewed by experts from all our
countries. We welcome the World Bank's agreement, following
those studies, to coordinate the efforts of the international
community so that a sound basis for achieving a real
improvement in alleviating the effects of flood can be
established. We also welcome the agreement of the World Bank
to chair, by the end of the year, a meeting to be held in the
United Kingdom by invitation of the Bangladesh Government, of
the countries willing to take an active part in such a
program.
51) We give political support to projects such as the
joint project to set up an observatory of the Saharan areas,
which answers the need to monitor the development of that
rapidly deteriorating, fragile, arid region, in order to
protect it more effectively.
DRUG ISSUES
52) The drug problem has reached devastating
proportions. We stress the urgent need for decisive action,
both on a national and an international basis. We urge all
countries, especially those where drug production, trading and
consumption are large, to join our efforts to counter drug
production, to reduce demand, and to carry forward the fight
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Brussels, Belgium)
For Immediate Release
December 4, 1989
FACT SHEET
The President's Initiatives During the Malta Meeting
December 2 - 3, 1989
The President and Chairman Gorbachev exchanged views on a variety
of issues during their meetings in Malta, including the
remarkable events leading to peaceful and democratic change in
Eastern and Central Europe.
The President noted his strong support for perestroika and
suggested that the two leaders work to give major new upetus to
the U.S.-Soviet relationship. The President conveyed his strong
personal commitment to this goal.
In this spirit, the President put forward the following ideas:
Next Steps
1.
Holding the Summit in the United States during the last two
weeks in June.
2.
Having the next meeting of Foreign Ministers next month in
the Soviet Union to prepare for the Summit.
Economics and Commercial Relations
1.
Targeting the 1990 Summit for completion of a trade
agreement granting Most Favored Nation status to the Soviet
Union, SO that the President can grant a Jackson-Vanik
waiver at that time. To reach that goal, the President
proposed beginning negotiations on a trade agreement now and
urged the Supreme Soviet to complete action on its
emigration legislation early next year.
2.
Supporting observer status for the Soviet Union in GATT
after the Uruguay Round is completed next year. The
President urged the Soviet Union to use the intervening time
to move toward market prices at the wholesale level SO its
economy will become more compatible with the GATT system.
3.
Expanding U.S.-Soviet technical economic cooperation. The
President presented a paper proposing specific economic
projects, covering topics such as finance, agriculture,
statistics, small business development, budgetary and tax
policy, a stock exchange, and anti-monopoly policy.
4.
Exploring with Congress the lifting of statutory
restrictions on export credits and guarantees after a
Jackson-Vanik waiver.
- 2 -
5.
Beginning discussions of a bilateral investment treaty that
would provide protections for American business people who
want to invest in the Soviet Union.
6.
Improving ties between the Soviets and the OECD, and
East-West economic cooperation through the economic basket
of the CSCE process.
Human Rights
Resolving all divided family issues by the time of the 1990
Summit. In this regard, the President handed over a list of
people wishing to emigrate.
Regional Issues
Expressed disappointment with Soviet policy on Central
America, noting it was out of step with the new Soviet
direction domestically in Eastern Europe and in arms
control. Nicaragua/Cuba remains the single most disruptive
factor in the relationship.
Arms Control
1.
Speeding achievement of a chemical weapons ban by offering
to end U.S. production of binary weapons when the
multilateral convention on chemical weapons enters into
force, in return for Soviet acceptance of the terms of our
UN proposal to ban chemical weapons.
2.
Proposing to sign an agreement at the 1990 Summit to destroy
U.S. and Soviet chemical weapons down to 20 percent of the
current U.S. level.
3.
Suggesting joint U.S.-Soviet support for a CFE Summit to
sign a CFE treaty in 1990.
4.
Accelerating the START process in order to resolve all
substantive issues and to conclude a treaty, if possible, by
the 1990 Summit. To this end, the President suggested that.
Secretary Baker and Foreign Minister Shevardnadze
concentrate on resolving at their January meeting three of
the outstanding START issues: ALCMs, non-deployed missiles,
and telemetry encryption.
5.
Completing work on the Threshold Test Ban Treaty (TTBT) and
the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty (PNET) for signature
at the 1990 Summit.
6.
Proposing that the Soviet Union join efforts to constrain
missile proliferation more effectively by observing the
limits developed bv the U.S. and its allies in the Missile
Technology Control Regime.
-- more --
- 3 -
Military Openness
Making public more information on military programs. The
President suggested that the Soviet Union make public the
details of its military budget, force posture, and weapons
production figures, just as the United States now does.
Olympics
Suggesting joint U.S.-Soviet support for Berlin as the site
of the 2004 Olympic Games.
Environment
1.
Hosting a. conference next fall to negotiate a framework
treaty on global climate change, after the working groups of
the UN-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
submit their final report.
2.
Convening an international meeting at the White House next
spring for top level scientific, environmental, and economic
officials to discuss global climate change issues. The
President expressed hope that the Soviets will join us by
sending their top officials in the field.
Student Exchanges
Increasing significantly university exchanges so that an
additional 1,000 American and 1,000 Soviet college students
are studying in each other's country by the beginning of the
1991 school year.
# # #
Economic Report
of the President
Transmitted to the Congress
February 1990
TOGETHER WITH
THE ANNUAL REPORT
OF THE
COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1990
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington. D.C. 20402
CONTENTS
Page
ECONOMIC REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT
1
ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC
ADVISERS*
9
CHAPTER 1. BUILDING ON SUCCESS
19
CHAPTER 2. DEVELOPMENTS IN 1989 AND FUTURE PROSPECTS
33
CHAPTER 3. DESIGN OF FISCAL, MONETARY, AND FINANCIAL
POLICIES
63
CHAPTER 4. INVESTING IN AMERICA'S FUTURE
109
CHAPTER 5. HUMAN RESOURCES IN THE 1990s
143
CHAPTER 6. THE ECONOMY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
187
CHAPTER 7. GROWTH AND MARKET REFORM IN THE GLOBAL
ECONOMY
225
APPENDIX A. REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF
THE COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS DURING 1989
265
APPENDIX B. IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF ECONOMIC STATIS-
279
TICS
APPENDIX C. STATISTICAL TABLES RELATING TO INCOME.
EMPLOYMENT, AND PRODUCTION
287
*For a detailed table of contents of the Council's Report, see page 13.
(iii)
CHAPTER 6
The Economy and the Environment
ECONOMIC PROSPERITY and environmental quality are
widely regarded as two of this Nation's most important goals. Some
view these as competing goals and argue that economic growth
begets environmental degradation. Increasingly. however. this con-
ventional wisdom is being questioned, and a new consensus is
emerging that economic growth and environmental quality need
not be incompatible. Indeed, economic growth and environmental
quality are in many respects complementary. For example. eco-
nomic growth provides the opportunity for firms to invest in new
facilities that are cleaner and more efficient. It is no coincidence
that the wealthy societies are the ones that are both willing and
able to devote substantial resources to environmental protection.
Compatibility between economic growth and environmental im-
provement is far from automatic, however; it depends on selection
of appropriate goals and careful design of regulatory programs. En-
vironmental goals must balance the associated benefits and costs.
The public interest is best served when government provides a
framework that creates incentives for the private sector to seek out
the most cost-effective way to meet its regulatory goals. Govern-
ment should not be in the business of picking environmental pro-
tection technologies and imposing them on firms, their workers,
and their customers.
This chapter presents the Administration's principles for envi-
ronmental regulation and illustrates how they can be put into
action to address local, national, and global environmental con-
cerns. The consistent application of these principles will ensure
that this Nation's considerable investment in environmental pro-
tection-$81 billion in 1987, about the same as all American house-
holds' electricity and natural gas utility bills-will be made in
ways that help to achieve both a strong economy and a healthy en-
vironment.
PRINCIPLES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
Market-based economies do not automatically provide the level of
environmental quality that consumers desire. Understanding why
environmental protection may require government action leads to
187
an understanding of policies that best serve both the economy and
the environment.
MARKET FAILURE
Environmental problems arise in market economies when pri-
vate individuals and businesses lack incentives to take full account
of the environmental consequences of their actions. These market
failures, which provide a rationale for government action, can be
traced to three sources.
First, individual producers or consumers who pollute the envi-
ronment generally do not pay for their pollution, even though it
may harm others or cause others to incur additional costs. Excess
pollution results. just as free electricity would lead firms and
households to use electricity without regard to the resources used
to produce it.
Second, no single individual can produce tangible evidence of an
overall improvement in environmental quality by his or her own
actions to reduce or control pollution. When there are some costs
and no apparent payoff for individual cleanup effort, rational indi-
viduals may be unwilling to act. even in cases where a coordinated
effort would yield environmental benefits that exceed the costs of
collective action. This problem is analogous to that faced by a stadi-
um full of standing football fans who would all be happier to see
the game sitting down if only their actions could be coordinated.
Finally. the private market does not always produce the informa-
tion needed to solve public problems. Private firms typically do not
realize profits from research and development aimed at under-
standing environmental processes or the relationship between pol-
lution and human health. Government action is often necessary to
produce such information to further public policy objectives.
Regulations can also be motivated by factors other than the
market milures outlined above Paternalism. the belief of legisla-
tors and regulators that they can improve citizens' overall welfare
by taking certain choices out of their hands, can play a significant
role. Because the diversity of individual choice generally reflects
differences in tastes, needs, and situations among individuals, pa-
ternalistic regulation is much more likely to reduce overall well-
being than to increase it. Another motive for regulation is the pur-
suit of private advantage, which can be reflected in the specific
design features of regulations that may be broadly grounded in
public interest consideration. For example, firms routinely seek to
keep their existing products and facilities under the current regu-
latory regime when more stringent regulations are implemented
for new products and facilities.
188
an understanding of policies that best serve both the economy and
the environment.
ENVIRONMENTAL R
MARKET FAILURE
The Federal Governme
Environmental problems arise in market economies when pri-
tion is relatively recent.
tion between 1970 and
vate individuals and businesses lack incentives to take full account
of the environmental consequences of their actions. These market
acted in this era rely he
failures, which provide a rationale for government action, can be
mand-and-control regula
use market incentives 1
traced to three sources.
emissions charges or trac
First, individual producers or consumers who pollute the envi-
the environment and the
ronment generally do not pay for their pollution, even though it
mental protection (Box 6-
may harm others or cause others to incur additional costs. Excess
pollution results, just as free electricity would lead firms and
households to use electricity without regard to the resources used
Box 6-1.-A Glossary
to produce it.
Command-and-Contr
Second, no single individual can produce tangible evidence of an
tive or statutory rules
overall improvement in environmental quality by his or her own
devices on classes of se
actions to reduce or control pollution. When there are some costs
sions standards to narr
and no apparent payoff for individual cleanup effort. rational indi-
Emission Standard-
viduals may be unwilling to act, even in cases where a coordinated
mum allowable emissio
effort would yield environmental benefits that exceed the costs of
tion source.
collective action. This problem is analogous to that faced by a stadi-
Emission Charge-a
um full of standing football fans who would all be happier to see
unit of pollutant emitte
the game sitting down if only their actions could be coordinated.
Tradable Emission A
in which all sources o:
Finally, the private market does not always produce the informa-
ances for all emissions
tion needed to solve public problems. Private firms typically do not
distributes a number C
realize profits from research and development aimed at under-
sions level, which can
standing environmental processes or the relationship between pol-
the private sector.
lution and human health. Government action is often necessary to
produce such information to further public policy objectives.
Regulations can also be motivated by factors other than the
In the final decade of
market failures outlined above. Paternalism, the belief of legisla-
that include stratospheric
tors and regulators that they can improve citizens' overall welfare
mate change are receiving
by taking certain choices out of their hands, can play a significant
are also leading to deeper
role. Because the diversity of individual choice generally reflects
rain and pesticide contam
differences in tastes, needs, and situations among individuals, pa-
cerns grows, policymakers
progress on several fronts
ternalistic regulation is much more likely to reduce overall well-
economy.
being than to increase it. Another motive for regulation is the pur-
Regulatory goals should
suit of private advantage, which can be reflected in the specific
ciety from regulation outw
design features of regulations that may be broadly grounded in
should be chosen to maxis
public interest consideration. For example, firms routinely seek to
is impossible to remove ali
keep their existing products and facilities under the current regu-
it is impossible to rémove
latory regime when more stringent regulations are implemented
given pollutant or risk is
for new products and facilities.
rise and the incremental
benefits often become mir
astronomical as the limit
188
252-061 90 7
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
The Federal Government's involvement in environmental protec-
tion is relatively recent. The Congress first enacted major legisla-
tion between 1970 and 1980. Many environmental programs en-
acted in this era rely heavily on an approach referred to as com-
mand-and-control regulation. Alternative regulatory schemes that
use market incentives to further environmental goals, such as
emissions charges or tradable emissions allowances, can serve both
the environment and the economy by reducing the costs of environ-
mental protection (Box 6-1).
Box 6-1.-A Glossary of Environmental Regulation Terms
Command-and-Control Regulation-a system of administra-
tive or statutory rules that requires the use of specific control
devices on classes of selected pollution sources or applies emis-
sions standards to narrowly defined pollution sources.
Emission Standard-a limit, usually expressed as a maxi-
mum allowable emission rate, applied to an individual pollu-
tion source.
Emission Charge-a fee levied by the government on each
unit of pollutant emitted.
Tradable Emission Allowances System-a regulatory regime
in which all sources of pollution are required to hold allow-
ances for all emissions of covered pollutants. The government
distributes a number of allowances equal to the target emis-
sions level, which can then be freely bought and sold within
the private sector.
In the final decade of this century, new environmental issues
that include stratospheric ozone depletion and possible global cli-
mate change are receiving increased attention. Advances in science
are also leading to deeper understanding of problems such as acid
rain and pesticide contamination. As the list of environmental con-
cerns grows, policymakers must carefully design programs to make
progress on several fronts while minimizing adverse impacts on the
economy.
Regulatory goals should be set SO that the potential benefits to so-
ciety from regulation outweigh the potential costs. Specific objectives
should be chosen to maximize net benefits to the extent possible. It
is impossible to remove all pollution or environmental risks, just as
it is impossible to remove all risk of accident or illness. As any
given pollutant or risk is reduced, the costs of further reductions
rise and the incremental benefits fall. Because these additional
benefits often become minuscule and the additional costs become
astronomical as the limit of zero pollution or zero environmental
189
risk is approached, the pursuit of such extreme goals is likely to
reduce the overall quality of life. Cost-benefit analysis can be
useful both in setting appropriate goals within a particular area of
concern and in setting priorities across areas.
Where regulation is necessary, it should wherever possible employ
economic incentives to achieve its goals rather than attempt to legis-
late behavior without changing the underlying structure of private
incentives. Where incentive-based approaches such as emissions
fees or tradable allowances cannot be used, it is preferable to let
each firm decide how best to meet flexible performance standards
rather than to impose inflexible design standards that specify how
pollution must be controlled. Regulation should also define pollu-
tion sources broadly rather than narrowly, to give plants that emit
emissions at more than one point flexibility in meeting an overall
emissions objective. Regulation of any type should pass a test for
cost-effectiveness-reaching its goals at the lowest possible cost. To
forsake cost-effectiveness simply wastes resources that could be
used for many purposes, including further environmental improve-
ment.
The command-and-control approach generally fails to create in-
centives consistent with regulatory goals. Indeed, the hallmark of
the command-and-control approach is the uniform treatment of pol-
lution sources without regard for the differences in damages they
cause or the costs of control. Because command-and-control regula-
tion relies on administrative or statutory rules, flexibility is limited
and incentives to firms are distorted. The likelihood that innova-
tion to reduce the costs of pollution control will be met by tighter
regulatory requirements presents a particularly large disincentive
to innovation (Box 6-2).
Finally, often an insufficient private incentive exists to under-
take research that is necessary to understand and rationally ad-
dress environmental issues. Government support may be required
to spur inquiry into environmental problems, benefits and costs of
action, and methods of pollution reduction.
In short, the following principles should guide environmental
regulation:
Goals for pollution abatement and risk reduction should be
based on a comparison of the costs and benefits involved.
Elimination of all risk is almost never a sensible goal.
Where possible, market-based approaches that provide flexibil-
ity, encourage innovation, and support economic growth should
be used to achieve environmental goals in a cost-effective
manner.
Government policy should encourage the development and
sharing of scientific and technical information relevant to envi-
ronmental quality issues.
190
Box 6-2.-Problems with Command-and-Control Regulation
Regulators generally lack the detailed knowledge of individ-
ual production facilities and processes and of alternative pro-
duction and abatement methods that would be necessary to im-
plement an efficient regulatory program by command-and-con-
trol.
Firms sensibly expect that any demonstration of potential
for environmental improvement or the exploration of new ap-
proaches to emission control will increase their risk of being
targeted for tougher emission standards. Therefore, there is a
disincentive to innovate that magnifies the inefficiency of com-
mand-and-control regulation over time. Regulators may try to
overcome the incentive problem by incorporating their own
forecast of future technology into regulatory requirements.
This inflexible approach is a poor substitute for a decentralized
innovation process in which many possibilities are pursued at
the same time, with winners emerging naturally only as addi-
tional information is developed.
Command-and-control regulation also fails to account for pri-
vate responses that tend to neutralize its impact. For example,
a common regulatory practice is to impose new product stand-
ards that are tougher than those for existing products and fa-
cilities. This practice locks in the continued use of old products
or facilities that may actually be more environmentally dam-
aging. Aside from being costly, such standards can actually in-
crease pollution from levels that might have been obtained
without a bias against new investment.
Finally, command-and-control regulation sometimes involves
issuing threats that are not credible. In 1976, when it became
clear that car manufacturers could not meet the automobile
emissions standards for the 1977 model year, the Congress
quickly revised the standards. The implicit threat to shut down
the U.S. auto industry was simply too draconian to be believed.
The rest of this chapter considers the application of these princi-
ples in the Administration's proposals to update the Clean Air Act
and food safety legislation, in Federal soil conservation programs,
and in the Administration's approach to global environmental
issues.
THE CLEAN AIR ACT
Prior to 1970, State and local governments held the primary re-
sponsibility for determining air quality targets and emission con-
191
trol strategies. Some States and cities, such as California and Pitts-
burgh, did address pollution problems. Others, however, were reluc-
tant to impose and enforce strict pollution controls that might
drive industry elsewhere.
The Clean Air Act amendments enacted in 1970 expanded the
Federal role in clean air issues beyond its previous focus on sup-
port for scientific research on air pollution problems. Under its pro-
visions, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which was
also established in 1970, sets national air quality standards for
major pollutants. These standards, defined as permissible concen-
tration levels of pollutants in the air over a specific time period,
are designed to protect the health of the most sensitive members of
the population with an adequate margin of safety and without
regard to cost. National emission standards for new industrial, util-
ity, and commercial facilities that are significant sources of pollu-
tion and new car emission standards are also set and administered
at the Federal level. State and local governments retain responsi-
bility, however, for developing plans to reduce emissions from exist-
ing utility and industrial pollution sources so that air quality
standards are met or exceeded at all locations.
EXPERIENCE UNDER THE CURRENT LAW
Meeting the objectives of the Clean Air Act has been complicated
by several factors. One is the sheer number of pollution sources.
There are an estimated 27,000 major industrial and utility sources
of air pollution in the Nation. Mobile sources of pollution (automo-
biles, trucks, aircraft, and locomotives) number well over 150 mil-
lion, and vehicle miles traveled have been steadily increasing.
Moreover. because pollutants are transformed and transported in
the atmosphere, the selection of control strategies is complicated.
Despite rising levels of economic activity and automobile use,
emissions of the most common air pollutants have declined sub-
stantially since 1970. For example, emissions of carbon monoxide,
particulate matter, and lead fell by 39, 62, and 96 percent, respec-
tively, between 1970 and 1987. Yet, in 1987, 12 years past the origi-
nal target date for meeting air quality standards, more than 100
million people lived in areas where air quality standards had not all
been achieved. Failures to meet the ground-level ozone standard
accounted for 90 percent of these exposures. Some have argued,
however, that this official measure of air quality status gives little
indication of normal air quality in affected areas. For example, air
quality monitoring data show that the air quality standards are
met more than 99 percent of the time in all areas other than Los
Angeles, and 97 percent of the time there, even though it is the
city with the most polluted air in the United States.
192
A major feature in the regulatory approach of the Clean Air Act
is the requirement that new facilities meet EPA emission rate
standards. This approach can effectively offer grandfather protec-
tion to old facilities and slow the rate at which firms replace older,
inefficient plant and equipment with newer plant and equipment
that meet EPA standards.
This peculiar consequence of regulation is apparent in the utility
sector. Concern over the impact of emission standards on mining
employment in high-sulfur coal regions led the Congress in 1977 to
mandate a design standard for new coal-fired power plants. Sulfur
dioxide removal from exhaust gases (via scrubbing technology) was
required even when the same emission rate could be reached at
lower cost by burning low-sulfur coal. Because such scrubbing may
add 20 percent to the capital cost of a new plant, and old generat-
ing units can be kept running for 65 years or more, replacement of
old generating capacity inevitably slowed. Moreover, because new
generating units with scrubbers often have higher operating costs
than old unscrubbed units, utilities naturally chose to run the old
units as much as possible. Having new, clean plants sit idle while
old, dirty ones operated at full capacity was an unintended conse-
quence that vividly illustrates the perverse effects that command-
and-control regulation can have.
THE CLEAN AIR INITIATIVE
The Administration has proposed a comprehensive plan for revis-
ing and strengthening the Clean Air Act. The Administration's
proposal includes initiatives to achieve complete attainment of air
quality standards, control toxic air pollutants, address the problem
of acid rain, and reduce automobile emissions. The acid rain and
automobile emissions programs provide particularly clear applica-
tions of the Administration's regulatory principles. The former pro-
poses the use of tradable emissions allowances to reduce sulfur di-
oxide emissions from utility plants that are a primary cause of acid
rain (Box 6-3). The latter uses flexibly applied and carefully target-
ed standards to limit automobile emissions that are the major
source of ground-level ozone pollution.
TRADABLE ALLOWANCES FOR SULFUR DIOXIDE
EMISSIONS
The Administration proposes to achieve a permanent 10-million-
ton reduction in annual sulfur dioxide emissions in a cost-effective
manner, using a system of tradable emissions allowances. The use of
tradable emissions allowances is an approach that has been repeat-
edly advocated in this Report for more than a decade. Emission
allowances reflecting the required reduction in current emissions
193
Box 6-3.-Acid Rain and Sulfur Dioxide
Acid rain results from the formation of sulfuric and nitric
acids in atmospheric reactions involving sulfur dioxide and ni-
trogen dioxide. These acids fall to the Earth's surface as dry
particles or mixed with rainfall over an area that may extend
for hundreds of miles from the location where emissions occur.
Thus, emissions from the Midwest can cause acid rain in the
Northeast. Rainfall in the most heavily affected areas is eight
to nine times more acidic than it would be under pristine con-
ditions.
Sulfur dioxide is regulated as a pollutant under the Clean
Air Act. Federal air quality standards for sulfur dioxide are
currently met at virtually all locations throughout the country.
In some areas, compliance was attained by switching to fuels
with lower sulfur content. In others, scrubbing technology was
applied to remove sulfur from smokestack gases. Another ap-
proach was to build taller smokestacks that spread emissions
over a much wider area and allowed standards to be met at all
measuring sites near the emission point. Building taller smoke-
stacks was very cost-effective within a local area. But over a
larger region, it exacerbated the contribution of sulfur dioxide
emissions to the formation of acid rain. The 1977 Clean Air Act
amendments limited allowable stack height.
While measured urban sulfur dioxide air quality has im-
proved steadily, aggregate sulfur dioxide emissions, which
heavily influence acid rain levels, have declined by only 28 per-
cent since 1970. Almost two-thirds of sulfur dioxide emissions
come from electric utility plants, with industrial sources ac-
counting for the bulk of the remaining emissions. Most utility
emissions occur at coal-burning power plants-particularly
from older plants burning high-sulfur coal without emission
controls.
are allocated to existing utility plants. Plant owners, who are
required to hold allowances equal to their actual emissions, are then
free to trade these allowances among themselves. Thus, the emission
rates of individual plants can vary considerably, while overall emis-
sions are automatically held at the target level. An additional
requirement that operators of new utility plants hold allowances
equal to their emissions after the system is fully in place guarantees
against any rise in utility emissions over time.
The allowances trading system has several major advantages
over the command-and-control approach. The tradable-allowances
approach is estimated to result in cost savings of at least 20 per-
194
cent annually-totaling billions of dollars over the next two dec-
ades-compared with command-and-control regulations. These sav-
ings arise from the ability to trade allowances in order to take ac-
count of differences in plant access to low- and high-sulfur coal sup-
plies, in expected plant life, and in site constraints that may rule
out the installation of scrubbers at some plants. With tradable per-
mits, a plant with low control costs has an incentive to control
more and sell its excess allowances to a plant that could only
reduce emissions to its original allocation at very high cost. The
scope for trading is widened by allowing industrial sources with
low control costs to participate in the system and by a provision for
the conversion of nitrogen dioxide emissions reductions in excess of
required levels into allowances.
Incentives for Conservation and Innovation
Because reductions in electricity generation levels translate direct-
ly into a reduced need to hold allowances. the allowances system
puts utility energy conservation programs on an equal footing with
other emissions reduction strategies. Firms can also economize on
allowances by using cleaner plants more intensively. By requiring
utilities to buy or hold a costly allowance for each ton of pollution
they emit, the allowances system uses the private objectives of cost
minimization and profit maximization to promote environmentally
sound practices. By ensuring that each pound of actual emissions
carries a cost, which will be reflected in the price of electricity,
additional conservation is promoted as demand falls in response to
higher prices. In sum, a market-based approach sends the proper
signals to both consumers and producers, resulting in cost-effective
reductions in pollution.
Immediate cost savings are only part of the benefits of the trading
program. The possibility of future trading creates strong incentives
for further cost reduction and innovation by both utilities and non-
utility firms, which could save additional billions of dollars. Utili-
ties can take advantage of the opportunity to carry forward unused
allowances for future sale or use. Such banking of allowances
would shift emissions reductions from the future toward the
present, allowing for more rapid environmental improvement while
lowering compliance costs. Firms always stand to gain if they can
achieve additional emissions reductions at a cost below the market
value of the allowances that would be freed up for external sale.
Thus, these firms have a continuing incentive to explore new
abatement and combustion technologies, nonconventional energy
sources, conservation programs, and other options that emerging
technologies and local circumstances may suggest. Because allow.
ances are transferable and continue in force after the retirement of
the plant to which they were initially allocated, the investment dis-
incentive implicit in standard regulatory schemes is avoided.
195
The inherent flexibility of the allowances system, which lets the
market choose among competing approaches, is particularly valua-
ble given the impossibility of knowing which technology will prove
to be best over the long haul. Several different technologies for
burning high-sulfur coal cleanly without scrubbing, as well as im-
proved scrubbers, are currently under development. New concepts
will undoubtedly arise over the next decade. The government is no
more capable of picking winners in emissions-control technology
than in other industrial arenas. By encouraging decentralized inno-
vation and avoiding the pitfalls of centralized technological plan-
ning, the allowances system maximizes the potential for the inven-
tion and application of new ways to achieve environmental protec-
tion.
The Workability of the System
There are several precedents for successful emissions trading and
marketable allowances systems. Nationally marketable allowances
were used during the phasedown of the lead content of gasoline, with
substantial savings. EPA's longstanding bubble policy allows owners
of an industrial facility with multiple pollution sources to balance
more control at some sources for less control at others to meet
emissions targets on a cost-effective facility-wide basis. Since their
inception in the 1970s. bubbles have saved billions of dollars com-
pared with a policy of requiring each source to meet its own
emissions standard. Trading is also used in EPA's offset policy,
which allows construction of new facilities in areas that do not meet
air quality standards to be offset by reductions in emissions from
existing facilities. Trading in these programs has occurred despite
the high air quality modeling costs incurred to verify that proposed
trades will not worsen the air quality at any location. Transaction
costs for sulfur dioxide emissions trading will be much lower, be-
cause local air quality modeling will not be required and continuous
emissions monitoring data will be available to verify compliance.
The incentive-based approach to environmental protection offers
clear advantages over command-and-control regulation, yet it gen-
erates several philosophical and practical criticisms. A common ob-
jection is that a marketable allowances system gives industry a right
to pollute that it would not otherwise have. This view fails to
recognize that command-and-control regulation confers exactly the
same sort of pollution right, only in a nontransferable form.
Some observers have raised the concern that trade in allowances
will be inhibited by State regulatory actions or manipulated to pre-
vent the entry of new producers into the electric power market.
However. facts about market structure and behavioral incentives
suggest that the market for allowances will work. The initial distri-
bution of allowances among a large number of utilities means no
196
one firm or State could exercise market control. Antitrust laws pro-
vide an additional safeguard against the possibility of anticompeti-
tive behavior. Existing incentives for cost and rate minimization
should lead regulators and utilities with low-cost emissions reduc-
tion opportunities to sell sufficient allowances to meet the demand
from new plants and new entrants. Of course. there is no guaran-
tee that every utility or regulator will seek to minimize costs and
electric rates and maximize shareholder returns. But in a competi-
tive situation, cost-minimizing behavior by every participant is not
required for the market to work effectively.
AUTOMOBILE EMISSIONS CONTROL
The goals selected in the President's clean air package reflect the
careful comparison of benefits and costs that is a fundamental
consideration in the Administration's approach to regulatory pol-
icymaking. For example, the President's package includes tighter
tailpipe emissions standards for new cars and light trucks and
other measures to reduce automobile emissions significantly. How-
ever, it explicitly rejects a proposal for unreasonably stringent tail-
pipe standards that has been advocated in some quarters.
EPA estimates that the exotic technologies required to attain
such an unreasonably stringent standard would add about $500 to
the cost of each new vehicle. At a projected sales rate of approxi-
mately 14 million covered vehicles per year, the additional costs
would be more than $7 billion annually, almost doubling the pro-
jected costs of all actions proposed by the Administration to reduce
urban ozone pollution. This standard would result in slightly lower
emissions from each new car. However, because consumers would
undoubtedly respond to higher new car prices by buying fewer new
cars, emissions of pollutants that contribute to ozone formation
could actually increase in the period immediately following adop-
tion of these extreme standards, as consumers would be led to
make greater use of old vehicles with significantly higher per mile
emission rates. Even after a complete phase-in of vehicles meeting
the extreme standard, total reductions in emissions of pollutants
that contribute to ozone formation would be only slightly larger
than emissions reductions under the President's proposal. Spending
$7 billion or more per year to achieve, at most, very small environ-
mental improvements is simply not sensible.
Flexibility and Targeting
The President's clean air initiative also incorporates flexibility in
its provisions for automobile emission standards. Automakers can
average across their product line to reach applicable standards.
opening the possibility of substantial cost savings while achieving
exactly the same environmental benefits as a standard applied on a
car-by-car basis. Because an automaker who elects to use averaging
197
must necessarily produce some vehicles that are cleaner than the
standard, averaging implicitly encourages advances in emission-
control technology.
Cost-effectiveness is also enhanced by tailoring program require-
ments to local needs rather than using a one-size-fits-all approach.
Some areas currently meet air quality standards for ground-level
ozone, while others do not. Because air quality standards are set at
levels that protect the public health with an adequate margin of
safety, areas that already meet standards have little to gain from
further reductions in emissions. Cost-effectiveness requires focusing
reductions where they are needed. For this reason, the Administra-
tion's plan for extra-clean, alternative-fueled vehicles is carefully
targeted on the areas with the most severe nonattainment prob-
lems. Even within these areas, local authorities are free to opt out
of the program if they can achieve equivalent air quality benefits
in other ways.
The targeted approach is also evident in the President's proposal
for recovery of refueling emissions. Refueling vapors can be recov-
ered using either on-board canisters or gasoline pump recovery sys-
tems. The latter approach is preferable because it can be applied
selectively in areas with ozone problems without imposing unneces-
sary costs on new car buyers in clean areas. It also provides more
immediate environmental benefits in problem areas, because all
pumps can be modified long before all cars on the road are re-
placed. In this matter, as in many others, environmental and eco-
nomic interests are convergent.
RISK AND THE REGULATION OF AGRICULTURE
Today the regulation of agriculture involves a complex array of
Federal programs-from traditional price support and acreage re-
duction programs to conservation, environmental, and food safety
regulations-administered by the Department of Agriculture, the
Environmental Protection Agency, and the Food and Drug Admin-
istration. Some programs, such as the acreage reduction programs,
affect a farmer's land-use and crop-choice decisions. Others, such as
pesticide regulations, affect choice of production methods. Still
others, such as conservation regulations, may affect both land-use
and management decisions. The combination of farm production
decisions and the physical characteristics of farmers' fields-such
as soil type, depth of groundwater, and proximity to surface
water-are key factors that determine the impacts agriculture has
on the environment.
Two questions arise regarding environmental issues that relate
to agriculture. What are the circumstances in agriculture that may
justify government intervention? When government action is justi-
198
fied, how can policies be designed to reduce environmental risks to
appropriate levels at least cost?
SOIL CONSERVATION RECONSIDERED
The dust bowl of the 1930s, dramatized by John Steinbeck's The
Grapes of Wrath, left a public perception that the effects of soil ero-
sion can have dire economic consequences. Because of the dust
bowl experience, a principal objective of soil conservation programs
since the 1930s has been to prevent the loss of agricultural produc-
tivity. Yet, analyses of data on soil erosion indicate that the princi-
pal benefits from soil conservation are the prevention of offsite
damages such as water pollution, not the prevention of agricultural
productivity effects. There is accordingly a need to reconsider the
design of soil conservation programs.
Soil Erosion and Productivity
Alarming stories in the press periodically warn that erosive prac-
tices are again ruining American farmland and will lead to a food
crisis. Such alarmist claims are not supported by the facts. The De-
partment of Agriculture estimates that some ? billion to 3 billion
tons of soil are lost from farmers' fields to erosion each year in the
United States. Topsoil is a renewable resource, however, and is re-
placed as organic matter from crop residues is incorporated into
the soil. Because of this replenishment, the rate of net loss of top-
soil in the United States as a whole is low.
The gains and losses of soil are not distributed evenly, however.
Some areas are net losers and may experience lower productivity
as topsoil becomes shallow. These productivity losses are largely
offset by gains elsewhere. The Department of Agriculture recently
estimated that continuing current rates of soil erosion for 100 years
would reduce productivity only about 2 percent (Table 6-1). Be-
cause annual productivity gains in U.S. agriculture have averaged
more than 2 percent for the past 20 years, one year's normal pro-
ductivity growth will offset the likely effects of erosion on produc-
tivity over the next century.
TABLE 6-1.- Estimated Percent Loss of Productivity From 100 Years of Eroston
Farming region
Water erosion
Wind erosion
Northeast
7
Lake States
Corn Belt
Appalachia
Southeast
Delta States
16
Northern Plains
6
Southern Plains
2
21
Mountain States
4
1.4
Pacific States
2.3
2
United States
18
5
I Less than 0.01 percent.
Source Department of Agriculture. The Second RCA Appraisal June 1989
199
Alarmist claims about soil erosion's effects on agriculture also
appear to run counter to basic economics. The farmer who uses ero-
sive practices that cause a decline in current or future expected
productivity of the land reduces the value of that land. This loss
takes the form of lower farm output and a lower value of the land
as an asset. Landowners thus have an economic incentive to limit
erosion to the degree that it is profitable to do so. Department of
Agriculture research shows that erodibility and topsoil depth do
help explain differences in land values. These findings mean that
buyers and sellers of farmland are in fact aware of these factors
and generally take them into consideration in their decisionmak-
ing. Even if some buyers and sellers of farmland are unable to
know the impacts of erosion on productivity precisely, there is no
reason to believe the government would be able to do so significant-
ly better.
In short, private gains from soil conservation provide farmers
and landowners with adequate incentives to protect soil productivi-
ty without government intervention. It is in environmental and
other offsite effects of soil erosion that the market fails to account
adequately for the effects of erosion, and it is there that govern-
ment conservation programs are needed.
Pollution Effects of Soil Erosion
There are a host of offsite effects of wind and water erosion.
Wind erosion contributes to particulate air pollution in the West-
ern United States that is estimated to cause $4 billion or more in
annual damages in the form of increased cleaning costs, reduced
recreational opportunities, and impaired health. Erosion caused by
water runoff is a major cause of water pollution that damages res-
ervoirs and navigational channels, harms aquatic and plant life
and wildlife, has adverse effects on human health, and reduces the
recreational value of lakes and rivers. These damages are estimat-
ed to range from $5 billion to $18 billion annually.
These damages reflect a classic market failure: farmers typically
bear little if any of the cost of the offsite effects of erosion from
their fields. Agricultural pollution usually originates on many
farms and it is difficult to attribute any specific amount of damage
to any one source. Consequently, policies to control agricultural
pollution usually must be designed to change farmers' production
decisions-such as tillage practices or chemical use-that are relat-
ed to pollution. The design of efficient environmental policies is
complicated by the effects that Federal agricultural subsidies have
on farmers' management decisions.
The Conservation Reserve Program
This program was introduced in the 1985 farm bill to accomplish
environmental objectives, such as improved water quality, by re-
200
moving highly erodible land from production. This program was
also intended to help curb the production of subsidized commodities
and to provide income support to farmers. About 34 million acres
are now enrolled, roughly 8 percent of U.S. cropland. In exchange
for government payments, farmers must plant grass or trees on the
enrolled acres. All farmers can participate in the program. provid-
ed their land meets technical criteria for erodibility.
The Conservation Reserve Program illustrates the potential ben-
efits of conservation programs and the problems in designing pro-
grams to meet environmental, income-support, and broader policy
objectives. In order to attract widespread participation, the pro-
gram originally allowed farmers to enroll any land in the program
that met erodibility criteria, whether or not erosion was likely to
cause damages such as water pollution. The program thus provided
an incentive for farmers to place low-valued land into the program.
Consequently, a disproportionately large share of the acres en-
rolled-more than 40 percent-is nonirrigated land in the Plains
and Mountain States, where most wind erosion occurs but damages
are relatively small. Relatively few acres in the program are
higher valued land in the Midwest and South. where most water
erosion occurs and a large part of the nationwide damages also
occur. Because it is estimated that only 30 percent of the most
highly erodible land is now enrolled in the program, it can be con-
cluded that an even smaller share of the damage caused by erosion
is being prevented.
Federal agricultural policy also strives to maintain and enhance
the U.S. position as the major agricultural exporter in the world.
Conservation programs that attempt to achieve environmental
goals by removing millions of acres of cropland from production
are not consistent with this broader policy objective. The inconsist-
ency in U.S. policy is highlighted by the 1985 Food Security Act.
The act established the Conservation Reserve Program to remove
40 million to 45 million acres of U.S. cropland from production and
simultaneously instituted an export subsidy program-the Export
Enhancement Program-to increase U.S. agricultural exports.
These conflicts between environmental and trade objectives may
increase if current international negotiations, discussed in Chapter 7
of this Report, lead to agricultural policy liberalization.
IMPROVING CONSERVATION PROGRAM DESIGN
The targeting problems encountered with the Conservation Re-
serve Program and its inconsistency with broader U.S. policy objec.
tives both suggest that the Federal Government should reconsider
its approach to conservation programs. How can conservation pro-
grams be made more effective at meeting conservation objectives
and also be consistent with broader policy and trade objectives?
201
The answer is to target environmental impacts while keeping as
much viable land in production as possible. Land retirement could
still be used in those special circumstances, such as protection of
wetlands, in which there are no viable alternative methods to meet
environmental objectives.
Conservation programs are not an efficient means of transferring
income to farmers because they do not target those farmers who
might be thought to be deserving of income subsidies. Hence, they
should not be used as a means to support farm income. Instead,
conservation programs should be designed to achieve environmen-
tal objectives by targeting land that causes offsite damages and
land that needs to be protected for other environmental reasons
such as protection of wildlife. The recent changes in the Conserva-
tion Reserve Program's eligibility criteria, to include environmen-
tally sensitive lands such as wetlands and areas bordering rivers
and lakes, represent a move toward better targeting of environ-
mentally sensitive land. These criteria could be further improved
by explicitly linking them to potential damages. If the program en-
rollment is increased from the current 34 million acres to 40 mil-
lion as proposed by the Administration, participation should be ex-
tended to land meeting criteria that target environmental dam-
ages.
Conservation programs could also be made compatible with both
environmental and trade objectives by using economic incentives to
encourage farmers to invest in conservation improvements that
reduce wind and water erosion damages while keeping land in pro-
duction. Investments such as terracing and windbreaks can be used
to reduce wind erosion, and filter strips and grassed waterways can
reduce water pollution. Federal conservation programs have long
shared the costs of these investments, but not in a way that targets
the investments to mitigate offsite damages. Such targeting could
be accomplished by linking these investment incentives to the po-
tential for erosion to cause environmental damage.
PESTICIDES: BENEFITS, RISKS, AND REGULATION
Pesticides are believed to have been a major contributor to the
growth in the productivity of U.S. agriculture since the 1950s. This
growth in productivity-almost 220 percent since the early 1950s-
has benefited consumers by making more food available at lower
prices. Pesticides are poisons, however, and their widespread use in
agriculture has led to growing public concern about detrimental ef-
fects on human health and the environment.
Many pesticides have immediate health effects that pose a risk
to pesticide users and others from accidental poisonings. Some sci-
entists also believe that low-level exposure to many pesticides may
cause delayed health effects. These delayed effects-cancers, birth
202
defects, and neurological disorders-are much more difficult to
demonstrate than immediate effects. Because experimentation on
humans is not possible, researchers must infer delayed effects from
animal studies or from statistical data on human exposure. Be-
cause neither method provides definitive data, regulatory decisions
regarding delayed effects are inevitably based on imperfect scientif-
ic evidence.
The effects of pesticides on nature may be even more difficult to
measure and evaluate than the effects on human health. Countless
plant and animal species inhabit the natural world. Plants them-
selves contain many natural pesticides necessary for survival. The
scientific challenge to understand the effects of pesticides is great,
even if attention is focused only on those organisms that have im-
mediate economic value. Researchers have only recently begun to
construct a framework for systematic quantitative assessment of
pesticide impacts.
The Regulatory Process
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
directs EPA to evaluate the effects of pesticides on human health
and the environment and to regulate pesticide use as necessary to
balance benefits and risks. Pesticides that pass the benefit-risk
analysis under FIFRA must also meet a health-risk tolerance for
residues in processed foods established by the Federal Food. Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). The risk tolerance is to be set in light
of the need for "an adequate, wholesome, and economical food
supply." EPA uses available data-including laboratory studies of
effects on animals, pesticide use data, and food consumption data-
to estimate the risk of an adverse health effect (e.g., the probability
of a person developing a cancerous tumor during a lifetime). This
risk estimate is then used with other relevant information to make
regulatory decisions.
This regulatory scheme is straightforward in principle, but its in-
formation requirements are burdensome in practice. Within the
next decade, EPA must evaluate hundreds of active ingredients
contained in thousands of pesticides. Because many studies and
analyses are required on each active ingredient. EPA faces a formi-
dable regulatory task. The current regulatory process takes years
to complete. In deciding whether to remove a dangerous pesticide
from use, current procedures can take 4 to 8 years. Some of the
delays in the regulatory process can be attributed to the way it is
organized, and the Administration has proposed reforms to expe-
dite the process. But a major constraint is still the time and cost
involved in producing reliable scientific information needed to
make responsible decisions.
203
Negligible Risk and the Delaney Clause
Both risks and benefits of a pesticide are considered in setting
most tolerances under FFDCA and in all regulatory decisions
under FIFRA. For most decisions, EPA uses the concept of negligi-
ble risk. A negligible risk is one below which it is deemed that the
public health is not threatened. and is often interpreted to be a
lifetime cancer risk in the range of 1 in 1,000,000. When a chemical's
risk is estimated to be less than 1 in 1,000,000, its use is not
regulated. When a chemical's risk exceeds 1 in 1,000,000, benefits
from use are weighed against risks in making a regulatory decision.
A different risk standard is applied in the case of pesticide resi-
dues in processed foods, however, because of the Delaney Clause in
Section 409 of FFDCA. The Delaney Clause states that a pesticide
that has been found to cause cancer cannot be registered for use if
any residues are found in processed foods. This zero-residue stand-
ard implies a zero-risk tolerance for carcinogenic pesticides in proc-
essed foods, no matter how small the risk or how large the econom-
ic benefit from their use. Thus, benefits are balanced against risks
if a carcinogenic pesticide residue is present on fresh produce, but
not if it is found in processed food.
The Congress adopted the Delaney Clause's zero-risk standard in
the 1950s when laboratory techniques were able to detect residues
only in parts per million. With modern techniques, such as gas
chromatography, it is possible to detect residues in parts per bil-
lion, effectively increasing the stringency of the Delaney Clause's
risk standard by a factor of one thousand.
The current negligible-risk standard for pesticides is very strin-
gent-some would say excessively so-and represents a high degree
of safety. More stringent pesticide regulations could have little
effect on the total number of cancers. To put pesticide health risks
into perspective, consider that the risk of cancer in the U.S. popu-
lation is 300,000 in 1,000,000. Pesticides account for only a small
fraction of the 2 percent of cancers attributed to all sources of pol-
lution, whereas tobacco use and diet are believed to contribute to
about 65 percent of all cancers. The National Cancer Institute has
announced its goal to reduce cancer mortality in the year 2000 by
50 percent through changes in tobacco use, diet, and health care.
The Institute's focus on reductions of large risks, rather than ones
that are already negligible, is clearly sensible.
THE ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSALS FOR PESTICIDE
POLICY REFORM
The National Academy of Sciences recently studied pesticide reg-
ulation extensively and recommended that the inconsistencies be-
tween FIFRA and FFDCA be eliminated by abandoning the distinc-
204
tions now made between residues in processed and nonprocessed
foods and by replacing the Delaney Clause with a negligible-risk
standard for all pesticides. The National Academy concluded that
the consistent application of a negligible-risk standard for carcino-
gens in food would allow regulatory efforts to be focused on the
most dangerous substances and would thereby dramatically reduce
total dietary exposure to cancer-causing pesticides with modest re-
duction of pesticide benefits.
The Administration proposes to adopt the National Academy's
recommendation that a negligible-risk standard replace the Delaney
Clause in FFDCA. Where risk is greater than negligible, the Ad-
ministration proposes to extend to processed foods the existing reg-
ulatory procedures for nonprocessed foods. These procedures allow
economic and health benefits of a pesticide to be balanced against
risks in all cases. By allowing better targeting of regulatory efforts,
this change should reduce cancer risks.
The Administration's food safety proposal also would amend
FIFRA to strengthen and simplify the pesticide regulation process.
The President's plan would establish a periodic review of all pesti-
cides, simplify and make more effective the process of canceling the
use of a pesticide found to be harmful to public health, and im-
prove enforcement of pesticide regulations.
Other Regulatory Reforms
Pesticide regulation, like air pollution regulation, is based large-
ly on command-and-control techniques (Box 6-2). Uniform regula-
tory standards are notoriously inefficient because they fail to take
into account the diversity of local conditions. Because pest prob-
lems are often location-specific, large production inefficiencies can
be caused by uniform pesticide regulations. There is a need for al-
ternative, cost-effective methods of pesticide regulation that allow
farmers to adapt production methods to the particular pest prob-
lems they face. For example, it may be possible to employ a system
of marketable pesticide-use allowances to reduce pesticide contami-
nation of surface and groundwater efficiently. A marketable allow-
ances system (Box 6-1-tradable allowances) would restrict the
total use of pesticides in environmentally sensitive areas and would
allow those farmers who benefit most from pesticides to use them.
Both Federal and State governments have already financed re-
search into production practices that impose fewer health and envi-
ronmental risks. For example, many States have developed re-
search programs under the rubric of integrated pest management.
Also on the horizon are promising developments in biogenetic re-
search that could enhance pest resistance and reduce the need for
chemical pest control. In 1990, the Administration will begin a 5-
year interagency research initiative to improve understanding of
the process of groundwater contamination, develop safer produc-
205
tion practices, and disseminate the new practices through the Ex-
tension and Soil Conservation Services.
Better data on actual pesticide use, occupational exposure, and
environmental contamination are needed to enable regulators to
make informed decisions. The Department of Agriculture is cur-
rently improving data on pesticide use. The EPA is now conducting
the first national assessment of pesticide contamination of well
water. Further funding of pesticide data collection and analysis is
under consideration.
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF FEDERAL FARM
PROGRAMS
Federal farm programs may encourage farming practices that in-
crease health and environmental problems. Farm programs may
have adverse environmental impacts through several channels.
Crop-specific subsidies can encourage farmers to use more fertiliz-
ers and pesticides. To limit the costs of programs, farmers can re-
ceive subsidies only on those acres that are part of the farmer's
program crop base. This criterion for program participation creates
a disincentive to rotate crops, even though crop rotation is an im-
portant nonchemical technique for pest control. Thus, the pro-
grams may further aggravate pesticide pollution by encouraging
farmers to substitute chemical pest control for nonchemical con-
trol.
When farm subsidies are based on how much land a farmer de-
votes to particular crops such as wheat and corn, land suitable for
those crops becomes more valuable. Higher agricultural land
values in turn encourage farmers to bring more land into produc-
tion. Land that is not already being farmed is generally less pro-
ductive or more costly to convert to agricultural uses. Such land
may be steeply sloped and thus erodible, or it may be wetlands that
provide important wildlife habitat. Agricultural subsidies based on
land use thus create incentives for farmers to use land in ways
that may increase adverse environmental impacts.
Unfortunately, only limited research has addressed the linkages
between agricultural policy and environmental quality. Some evi-
dence supporting these linkages is contained in case studies con-
ducted by the National Academy of Sciences in its report, Alterna-
tive Agriculture. Other research casts doubt on the generality of
that evidence, however. Research shows that pollution caused by
agricultural chemical use, for example, depends on the physical
characteristics of the farmer's field and its proximity to groundwat-
er and surface water. The diversity of conditions under which agri-
cultural production takes place makes it very difficult to draw
broad generalizations from limited data.
206
The potential adverse environmental impacts of Federal agricul-
tural programs could be reduced by breaking the links between agri-
cultural subsidies and farmers' production and land-use decisions.
These links could be broken, for instance, by making three
changes: continuing the reductions of price-support levels that were
begun by the 1985 farm bill; relaxing restrictions on the use of land
enrolled in subsidy programs; and changing the criterion for re-
ceipt of subsidies from one that is based on crop acreage to one
that is not related to production of a specific crop. For example, an
income-based safety net could replace the current system of crop-
related deficiency payments. These same policy changes would also
bring U.S. agricultural policy in line with the broader trade policy
goals of this Administration that are discussed in the next chapter
of this Report.
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Like environmental problems at the local or national level.
global environmental problems arise because actions taken by one
individual have unintended adverse effects on another. Global envi-
ronmental problems are complicated by the fact that the individ-
uals involved live in many nations. Because one nation cannot
impose its wishes on another, international cooperation is required
to solve such problems. Differences across countries-in income,
natural resource endowments, population, sensitivity to particular
environmental changes, and the political strength of environmen-
tal movements-mean that countries inevitably have different
views on these issues. At the Paris Summit in July 1989, the Presi-
dent joined other heads of state in recognizing the need for coop-
eration in addressing global environmental concerns. The President
has also encouraged international organizations to facilitate inter-
national cooperation to solve global environmental problems.
Stratospheric ozone depletion and possible climate change are
two global issues that may affect the economy and the environ-
ment far into the next century. To evaluate the impact of a policy
course chosen today, the impact it will have on the economic well-
being of both current and future generations and its environmental
impact must be assessed.
Scientific evidence of possible stratospheric ozone depletion is
stronger than scientific evidence of possible global warming, al-
though significant uncertainties surround both. These uncertain-
ties extend to environmental and economic as well as scientific as-
pects of these two issues. Because policymakers must understand-
ably make decisions before information on such issues is complete,
the government has an important role to play in supporting basic
207
scientific and economic research that can reduce critical uncertain-
ties in the meantime.
Even when uncertainty cannot be eliminated, identifying a prob-
able range of effects can inform policy choice. For example, a con-
sensus that changes in global climate will lead to at most a small
rise in sea level over the next 60 years would make a policy re-
sponse to protect high-value coastal areas more feasible than if a
large rise were expected. Finally, because the regulatory agenda is
often influenced by public perceptions that may not accurately re-
flect available knowledge, the government also has a responsibility
to educate the public.
STRATOSPHERIC OZONE DEPLETION
Ozone in the upper layer of the Earth's atmosphere (the strato-
sphere) provides an essential screen from the Sun's ultraviolet
rays. In recent years, evidence has mounted that the stratospheric
ozone layer is being depleted. Several chemical compounds, most
notably chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and bromofluorocarbons
(halons) have been identified as sources of the increased atmospher-
ic concentrations of chlorine and bromine that cause ozone deple-
tion. These chemical compounds have long atmospheric lifetimes,
so that even if their production were halted immediately, elevated
concentrations of chlorine and bromine would persist for decades
before subsiding. If production is phased out by 2000, current chlo-
rine concentrations would be likely to increase by 50 percent and
then decline slowly to one-half of current levels by 2080. Without
any production curtailment, these concentrations would rise indefi-
nitely.
The appearance of a major hole in the stratospheric ozone layer
over Antarctica, where no emissions originate, illustrates the
global scope of the ozone-depletion problem. Long before the hole
was observed. the United States acted in 1978 to ban the use of
CFCs as aerosol propellants, a use in which substitutes were read-
ily available. Canada and Sweden followed suit. CFCs and halons
are also used in applications such as automotive and residential
air-conditioning systems, refrigerators, and fire extinguishers; as
blowing agents in the production of insulating board and other
foam products; and as industrial solvents. These uses of CFCs and
halons have continued to grow.
Protecting the Ozone Layer: Benefits and Strategies
The potential benefits from protecting the ozone layer-improve-
ments in human health and favorable impacts on crops, fish, and
materials-arise from lower exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation.
Both skin cancer and cataracts are related to cumulative exposure
to ultraviolet radiation. A phaseout of CFCs and halons is estimat-
ed to reduce the incidence of these health problems in the current
208
population by 50 to 75 percent from levels that would prevail if
there were no curtailment of production. (This estimate is likely to
be high, because it assumes that individuals take no offsetting ac-
tions to reduce their exposure to increased ultraviolet radiation.)
For future generations, which would suffer a greater cumulative
exposure to ultraviolet radiation if ozone depletion continued. the
health benefits would be even larger.
The geographic distribution of ozone-depleting emissions and
their expected growth unless action is taken is such that no single
country can act alone and have a significant impact on stratospher-
ic ozone depletion. Individual countries have little reason to act
alone. The benefits of national policies to reduce ozone-depleting
emissions spill over national boundaries, but costs are concentrated
where reductions occur. Thus, the application of cost-benefit crite-
ria on a national level would cause any one country, working in
isolation, to reject control measures that may be desirable from a
global perspective.
Two international agreements regarding ozone depletion are cur-
rently in effect. The 1985 Vienna Convention established a frame-
work for international scientific and technical cooperation. The
1987 Montreal Protocol commits signatories who are major CFC
users to freeze production levels by 1989, and then to cut their pro-
duction in half by 1998. In addition, beginning in 1992 the produc-
tion of several halons is frozen at 1986 levels. The United States
and other major industrialized countries have announced further
intentions to phase out production of CFCs and halons completely
by the turn of the century if safe substitutes are available. Amend-
ments and revisions to the Montreal Protocol, including extending
coverage to other compounds with ozone-depleting potential, are
currently under consideration.
Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), the most promising substi-
tutes for CFCs in a wide range of applications. themselves have
one-fiftieth to one-tenth the ozone-depleting potential of CFCs. By
allowing HCFCs to substitute for CFCs in the near term, the Mon-
treal Protocol rejects the uneconomic approach of barring all new
ozone-depleting compounds regardless of their advantage relative
to current products and their usefulness during the transition to
substitutes with no effect on the ozone layer.
Atmospheric lifetime is one important factor in decisions regard-
ing the coverage of the protocol. Decisions to reduce or eliminate
the use of short-lived ozone-depleting compounds, such as methyl
chloroform, involve weighing the short-term impact of delay
against the opportunity to develop improved substitutes to lower
the economic costs of action. Under these conditions, it may be sen-
sible to eliminate their use as good substitutes become available.
209
Costs of Protecting the Ozone Layer
Preliminary estimates place the U.S. costs of a phaseout of CFCs
and halons by 2000 at $2.7 billion over the next decade if the sched-
ule of intermediate reductions currently incorporated in the Mon-
treal Protocol is maintained. Acceleration of this schedule would
drive compliance costs upward significantly. These cost estimates
reflect a substitution strategy involving conservation, process
changes, and the use of more expensive substitute compounds. The
availability of substitutes is critical to avoid economic disruption.
The United States is using transferable allowances to implement
the reductions required under the protocol in a cost-effective
manner. Manufacturers and importers of CFCs and halons will re-
ceive permits in proportion to their base period market shares. As
supply is restricted, rising prices will encourage users with avail-
able low-cost substitutes to switch, leaving remaining supplies for
high-value uses. This approach avoids unnecessary direct regula-
tion of end-use applications, while ensuring compliance with U.S.
obligations to reduce production and consumption. Moreover, be-
cause there are significant economies of scale in the production of
CFCs and halons, the use of permit transfers to concentrate pro-
duction in a small number of facilities during the phasedown has
the potential to increase efficiency on the supply side. Allowing for
this kind of flexibility on the international level would yield fur-
ther cost savings.
GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
Greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, CFCs, and nitrous
oxide, among others) absorb heat that radiates from the Earth's
surface and send some of the heat downward, warming the climate.
Many scientists believe that fossil fuel burning, certain agricultur-
al practices, deforestation, and other human activities that increase
the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases will alter the
global climate. Scientists are much less confident of the magnitude,
timing, location, and character of the greenhouse-induced warming.
Many argue that no warming has yet occurred despite a substan-
tial increase in greenhouse emissions; some contend that apprecia-
ble future warming is unlikely. Others strongly dispute these
views.
Computer models of the Earth's climate system are a principal
tool of global climate research. Economic models of energy supply
and demand provide the future emissions projections used as input
by the climate models. Economic models can also be used to assess
the cost and growth impacts of policy actions to change the future
emissions profile.
210
Economic and Scientific Uncertainties
Projections of future emissions of greenhouse gases, a critical
input to climate models, are highly sensitive to future rates of pop-
ulation growth, economic growth, and development of new technol-
ogies for energy production and use. The inability to place narrow
bounds on any of these factors necessarily places very wide bounds
on any forecast of future emissions. One recent study could con-
clude only that actual global carbon emissions from fossil fuel com-
bustion in the year 2050 are likely to be between 50 and 1,100 per-
cent of current annual emissions. This result is typical of the high
degree of uncertainty in this area.
Even if estimates of future emission levels are correct, the mag-
nitude of actual climate change will depend on numerous interre-
lated and, as yet, poorly understood geophysical processes that
have both positive and negative feedbacks on warming. For exam-
ple, an increase in evaporation from a warmer climate will almost
certainly increase average cloud cover. Depending on their altitude
and configuration, additional clouds can either intensify or coun-
teract warming. Current climate models are incapable of providing
reliable estimates of the effect that clouds will actually have if
warming occurs.
If the atmosphere begins to warm, a transfer of heat from the air
to the oceans is expected to slow the rate at which air temperature
actually rises. This effect, which would decrease as ocean tempera-
tures increased, could delay the full effect of any increase in the
concentration of greenhouse gases on air temperature for a period
ranging from decades to centuries, with wide variations by region.
Regional variation in other critical effects such as seasonality, rain-
fall distribution, and soil moisture is also likely, but current cli-
mate models lack sufficient resolution to identify regional differ-
ences clearly. This deficiency makes it difficult to specify, among
other things, the sea level rise resulting from any degree of aver-
age warming.
Considerable resources and effort are being devoted to resolving
uncertainties in climate modeling, and in gaining a better under-
standing of processes that are poorly understood and are not explic-
itly treated in current climate models. The President's 1991 budget
proposal includes $1.03 billion in funding for global climate change
research. This figure reflects an increase of 57 percent over the
current funding levels and a 100-percent increase over 1989 ex-
penditures. The United States has also taken a leadership role in
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the primary
international forum for consideration of the scientific, socioeconom-
ic, and policy issues concerning global climate change.
At the Malta meeting with the Soviet President in December, the
President of the United States announced his intention to host a
211
White House Conference on Scientific and Economic Research on
the Environment in the spring of 1990. The general purpose of this
high-level international meeting will be to advance the quality and
understanding of the scientific and economic analytical tools and
data necessary to confront international environmental problems,
including global climate change. Sound scientific and economic
analyses must be the foundation for any policy action in this area.
The President of the United States also offered to host the first ne-
gotiating session for an International Framework Convention on
Global Climate Change in the fall of 1990.
The compounded uncertainties of the projections of future emis-
sions and the climate models present a formidable barrier to accu-
rate forecasting. At present, there is an extremely high level of un-
certainty regarding possible future climate change. Some reputable
scientists believe that there will be no significant greenhouse
warming over the next century. But other reputable scientists be-
lieve that a warming of between 1.5 °C and 4.5 °C (with most recent
estimates falling into the lower half of this range) could occur by
the middle of the next century if emissions grow rapidly. A warm-
ing of this magnitude could result in a rise in sea level estimated
to range from a little under one foot to about a foot and a half by
the end of this period. Both the more optimistic and the more pessi-
mistic judgments are subject to revision as scientific and economic
inquiry progresses and additional data are gathered.
If the current understanding of greenhouse processes is correct,
some warming could occur by virtue of past emissions. Therefore,
some adaptation would be required even if future greenhouse emis-
sions were sharply curtailed. Even though scientists may yet learn
that no significant warming is likely, it is nonetheless worthwhile
to address two distinct policy questions. First, what actions could
be taken now to limit emissions of greenhouse gases and what are
the likely costs of those actions? Second, what are the possible eco-
nomic and other effects of warming that, if these scientists are cor-
rect, will occur in any event?
Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Some steps have already been taken that will reduce greenhouse
gas emissions. In addition to their role in stratospheric ozone deple-
tion, CFCs account for 14 percent of total greenhouse emissions
from human activities on an impact-weighted basis; the planned
phaseout of CFCs is clearly important. In the recently negotiated
agreement to replenish the financial resources of the International
Development Association, the United States called for preparation
of environmental action plans in borrowing countries, expansion of
programs for end-use energy conservation and renewable energy
sources, and other environmental reforms.
212
On the domestic front, the Administration's clean air initiative
promotes the development of technologies that will improve the ef-
ficiency of converting energy stored in coal and other fossil fuels
into electricity. The allowances system and the proposed cap on
sulfur dioxide emissions may also focus renewed attention on im-
proving efficiency in end-uses of electricity as an alternative to new
fossil-fueled generating capacity. Although the measures cited
above should reduce net greenhouse emissions, the justification for
taking these actions does not depend on resolving the high uncer-
tainties about possible climate change.
Carbon dioxide accounts for about one-half of the current green-
house gas emissions caused by human activity. The shares of meth-
ane, CFCs, nitrous oxide, and other gases are 18, 14, 6, and 13 per-
cent, respectively. Clearly, possible climate change is not a one-gas
problem: gases other than carbon dioxide play a significant role.
Nonetheless, international attention and current analysis of green-
house gas limitation policies focus almost exclusively on carbon di-
oxide.
THE COSTS OF REDUCING CARBON DIOXIDE
EMISSIONS
Fossil fuel combustion is the primary source of carbon dioxide
emissions. Deforestation accounts for an additional 10 to 30 per-
cent. Other activities such as agriculture and cement manufactur-
ing contribute smaller shares. Although all fossil fuels contain
carbon, coal contains about 1.75 times as much carbon per unit of
heat energy as natural gas and about 1.25 times that of oil.
In contrast to the situation for CFCs, low-cost substitutes for
fossil fuels used in electricity generation, transportation, heating
and cooling, and process heat applications are not currently avail-
able or on the immediate horizon. Unlike sulfur dioxide, no com-
mercially feasible technology for scrubbing carbon dioxide from
combustion waste gases is available. Thus, for the foreseeable
future, only lower energy consumption or fuel switching could
reduce carbon dioxide that results from fossil fuel combustion. A
substantial increase in the price of fossil fuels would likely be re-
quired to reduce consumption substantially.
Experience following the 1973 and 1979 oil shocks shows that
large increases in the price of energy can reduce the energy intensity
of economic activity. The period between 1973 and the sharp de-
cline in oil prices in 1986 saw a significant increase in the relative
price of energy. Between 1973 and 1985, the price of energy rose by
47 percent relative to nonenergy products at the consumer level
and by more than 80 percent at the industrial level. The ratio of
energy use to real gross national product fell by 2.3 percent annu-
ally in the United States over this period as consumers and produc-
213
ers responded to higher energy prices by substituting away from
energy and energy-intensive products. With no growth in energy
consumption over the period 1973 to 1985, carbon dioxide emissions
remained level. The impact on carbon dioxide emissions of the in-
crease in the share of primary fossil energy derived from coal over
this period was offset by growth in the use of nuclear power, which
produces no greenhouse emissions, and of natural gas. However,
the growth rates of output and productivity over this period, 2.3
percent and 1.0 percent, respectively, were far below the corre-
sponding rates of 3.7 percent and 2.9 percent for the 1948-73 pre-
shock period.
The relationship between energy prices, energy consumption, and
economic growth is also reflected in more recent data covering a
period of significant decrease in relative energy prices at the con-
sumer and industrial levels. Between 1985 and 1988, annual growth
rates in output and energy use snapped back to 3.6 percent and 2.7
percent, respectively.
Although the slowdown in productivity and output growth be-
tween 1973 and 1985 can be attributed to many factors, higher
energy prices clearly played an important role. Energy price in-
creases of comparable or larger size would likely be needed to
induce the large energy efficiency improvements and demand re-
ductions that must occur to achieve the ambitious targets for
carbon dioxide emissions reductions that some have advocated. Al-
though much has changed since 1973-it may be harder now to
expand reliance on nuclear power, for instance, even though the
regulatory policy errors of that period are less likely to be made-
the oil-shock period provides a useful benchmark for consideration
of the likely impact of emission reduction policies on output and
productivity growth. On balance, there is no reason to believe that
an attempt to reduce energy use significantly would be substantial-
ly less economically disruptive today.
Modeling the economic effects of policies to curtail carbon diox-
ide emissions is still in its infancy, and results of modeling efforts
remain tentative and controversial. (Even less has been done with
regard to other greenhouse gases.) Recent studies suggest, however.
that the costs of policies to stabilize or reduce carbon dioxide emis-
sions from fossil fuel combustion would be high.
One recent study placed the cost of gradually reducing U.S.
carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent between now and 2100 to
range from $800 billion. under optimistic scenarios of available fuel
substitutes and increasing energy efficiency, to $3.6 trillion under
pessimistic scenarios. These present-value estimates, which reflect
the discounting of real future costs at a 5-percent annual rate (Box
6-4), are between 35 and 150 times larger than EPA's similarly dis-
counted estimate of the costs that would be incurred over the next
214
century by consumers and industries forced to use more expensive
or less effective substitutes if a complete phaseout of CFCs and
halons were implemented by the year 2000.
Box 6-4.-Discounting Over Long Horizons
The costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions must be
borne both now and well into the next century; the benefits of
slowing climate change may not be perceptible for many dec-
ades. Discounting is required to compare costs and benefits-
both market and nonmarket-that occur at different dates.
Suppose, for instance, that a 5-percent real rate of interest is
appropriate for these calculations. (If an investment yields a 9-
percent rate of interest in dollar terms, but prices rise by 4
percent per year, the real purchasing power of invested funds
grows by 5 percent annually.) One dollar invested at 5 percent
per year in 1990 will return $18.68 in purchasing power in
2050 if the interest income between 1990 and 2050 is reinvest-
ed. Therefore, it makes no sense to spend $1 today to obtain
benefits worth $10 in 2050: future generations must receive at
least $18.68 in 2050 benefits to be better off than they would be
if the dollar were invested instead.
It is always possible to compare values in either current or
future terms. To compare in 1990 terms, one must divide the
2050 value by 18.68. Thus, $100 billion in 2050 is worth only
$5.35 billion in 1990. To compare in 2050 terms, $100 billion in
1990 is worth $100 billion X 18.68 = $1,868 billion, or $1.868
trillion. Either approach will give comparable results; what
matters is that all values are placed on a consistent basis.
The costs of carbon dioxide stabilization policies can also be
looked at from a future perspective. The present-value estimates
cited above reflect reductions in real U.S. output ranging from 1 to
5 percent over the 2010 to 2100 period. Other preliminary estimates
place the cost of stabilizing 2050 emissions at 1990 levels in the
range of 1 to 2 percent of 2050 gross national product (GNP). To
put these estimates in perspective, a 2-percent reduction in GNP in
the year 2050 is worth about $340 billion 1990 dollars, assuming a
2-percent average annual rate of economic growth between now
and 2050.
The impact of carbon dioxide stabilization policies can also be
considered in terms of growth-rate impacts. A recent estimate
based on energy-output balance relationships suggests that global
carbon dioxide stabilization could cut world economic growth in
half, even after accounting for substitution toward cleaner energy.
Other studies and U.S. experience following the oil shocks suggest
215
substantial if less dramatic impacts. As shown in Chapter 4, even
small changes in growth rates can have a large effect on future
output levels.
Clearly, economic models as well as climate models are subject to
considerable uncertainty. The early estimates of potential costs de-
scribed above are far from definitive. The critical uncertainty re-
garding forecasts of the date and cost at which alternative technol-
ogies will become available is unlikely to be resolved soon. Mean-
while, the refinement of current estimates and the development
and application of new, more detailed economic models would help
to provide a stronger foundation for decisions regarding possible ac-
tions to limit carbon dioxide emissions.
Other Issues in Reducing Carbon Dioxide Emissions
Reductions in U.S. carbon dioxide emissions on a unilateral basis
or in cooperation with other Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) countries alone would not significantly
alter the projected growth in world carbon dioxide emissions (the
OECD is an international organization of industrialized countries
that promotes economic growth and trade). Chart 6-1 shows cur-
rent and projected shares of total carbon dioxide emissions. The
emissions share of the United States and other industrialized coun-
tries is projected to decline sharply as non-OECD economies experi-
ence growth and increasing energy intensity. Developing countries
are expected to account for the majority of future emissions in-
creases. Clearly, any significant reduction in emissions growth
would require the cooperation of the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe,
and the developing countries.
The ratio of carbon dioxide emissions to energy consumption de-
pends on the mix of energy sources employed and thus varies sub-
stantially among industrialized nations. This ratio is high for the
United States, which depends more heavily on coal than most of its
major competitors (Table 6-2), as is energy use per dollar of GNP.
All else equal. uniform international standards or user charges for
carbon dioxide emissions are thus likely to have a larger adverse
impact on the United States than on its major competitors. In par-
ticular, a fee on carbon dioxide emissions (discussed below) would
increase electricity rates in the United States relative to rates in
countries that rely more heavily on nuclear and hydroelectric
energy, which produce no greenhouse emissions, or in countries re-
lying on fossil fuels with less carbon per unit of energy content.
This situation presents a marked contrast to the 1973 and 1979 oil
shocks, where greater U.S. self-sufficiency in energy provided an
advantage relative to most other industrialized countries.
Other than hydroelectric or geothermal power, which have very
limited potential to supply increased electricity within the United
States, nuclear power is the only large-scale technology for electric-
216
Chart 6-1
CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS BY REGION. The LDC share of carbon dioxide emissions is projected
to grow rapidly. The U.S. share is projected to decline.
Billions of metric tons of carbon
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1985
2000
2025
2050
2075
2100
USSR &
LDCs (including
United States
Rest of OECD
Eastern Europe
China and India)
Source: Environmental Protection Agency, Policy Options for Stabilizing Global Climate(Rapidly Changing World Scenario)
TABLE 6-2.-Fuel Share in Electricity Generation, 1986
(Percent)
Nuclear,
Country
Coal
Oil
Gas
Hydroelectric.
and Geothermal
Canada
15.7
1.3
15
81.5
France
9.7
15
8
88.1
West Germany
56.9
3.1
62
33.8
Japan
14.7
28.2
193
37.8
Netherlands
26.8
5.1
61.8
6.3
Sweden
3.0
2.0
1
94.9
United States
56.2
5.5
10.1
28.1
Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, "Energy Policies and Programmes of IEA Countries-1987
Review," Paris, 1988.
ity production that is both benign from a greenhouse emissions per-
spective and commercially available now. Policies regarding the
future role of nuclear power, including the timetable for the devel-
opment and commercialization of modularized, inherently safe re-
actor designs, will need to be closely coordinated with policies that
affect the future role of fossil-fuel generation.
217
POLICY TOOLS TO IMPLEMENT A REDUCTION IN
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
A variety of policy tools, including user charges, correction of
market failures, regulatory standards, expanded funding for re-
search on and development of substitutes for fossil fuels and other
sources of greenhouse emissions, and efforts to reduce and reverse
deforestation, could be used to slow the buildup of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere. These approaches are relevant for nearly
all greenhouse gases, not just carbon dioxide. While international
attention has naturally focused on carbon dioxide as the single
largest contributor to the greenhouse effect, control costs must also
be considered in the design of any strategy to reduce net emissions
of greenhouse gases. A cost-effective strategy may involve a focus
on other gases or on sinks that absorb greenhouse emissions. Dif-
ferent approaches may be suitable for different countries.
A fee, charge, or tradable allowances system for greenhouse gas
emissions based on an index of the global climate impacts of each
greenhouse gas would provide a least-cost reduction in such emis-
sions. A fee or a tradable allowances scheme would lead firms and
individuals to consider the social cost of greenhouse emissions in
their private decisions. An emission charge or the need to consider
the value of allowances would affect decisions ranging from the
choice among alternative technologies for generating electricity, to
the energy efficiency of cars, buildings, and industrial equipment,
to the demand for automobile travel. Because market-based ap-
proaches are flexible and provide incentives that affect decisions at
all points along the production-consumption chain and across all
industries, they automatically focus on those activities where emis-
sions reductions can be achieved at least cost.
The economic impact estimates for carbon dioxide stabilization
discussed above reflect the high costs of reaching very ambitious
goals even when efficient market-oriented tools are used. Market-
based approaches could also be implemented at a less draconian
level to nudge the economy gently and gradually in the direction of
greater energy efficiency. Such an approach would test the flexibil-
ity of the economy without betting the current way of life on the
outcome.
Publicly supported research and development of nonfossil energy
sources. including biomass, solar, and next-generation nuclear fis-
sion. may contribute to a reduction in greenhouse emissions. It is
often noted that the fruits of innovation cannot always be fully
captured by the innovator, leading to underinvestment in the de-
velopment of new technology. This problem is particularly acute
for innovations that address a global problem, such as greenhouse
emissions. Breakthroughs in environmentally benign technologies
hold the promise of lowering the future emissions trajectory while
218
advancing economic progress. Opportunities also exist outside the
energy area. For example, emissions of methane from agriculture
might be cut through the development of improved techniques for
farming and livestock management.
Reforestation can contribute to reductions in net emissions of
carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Just as tropical deforestation
increases carbon dioxide emissions by releasing carbon that is fixed
in trees through photosynthesis, reforestation can increase the
uptake of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by increasing photo-
synthesis. Reforestation potential varies significantly across coun-
tries according to their climate and land use patterns. The United
States has an abundant supply of urban and rural land suitable for
reforestation. Large-scale reforestation efforts could have signifi-
cant impacts on agricultural and timber production, however,
which would in turn affect consumers and producers in those mar-
kets.
Correcting Market Failures
In some cases, market failures may serve to increase emissions of
greenhouse gases. Interventions that address market failures direct-
ly are generally preferable to direct regulation via standards. Ap-
proaches that merit consideration include public information pro-
grams, promotion of efficient appliances by utilities, and changes
in mortgage qualification rules to reflect appliance operating costs.
One promising concept to reduce the growth in electricity use is
demand-side management. A utility faced with capacity constraints
would consider proposals for demand reduction through efficiency
improvements and proposals to increase supply on an equal foot-
ing, and choose the lowest cost alternative. One barrier to imple-
menting programs of this type is that utility profits under tradi-
tional State rate-setting regulation are often linked directly to the
level of electricity sales. Regulatory changes at the State level, pos-
sibly to permit nonutility companies to bid for demand reduction
that can be compared with the costs of increasing supply, are
needed to implement demand-side management. Although esti-
mates of the emissions reductions available through widespread ap-
plication of this approach vary widely, the removal of regulatory
barriers and biases in the market for electric power makes econom-
ic sense.
The Limitations of Efficiency Standards
Energy efficiency standards can also be used to overcome infor-
mation barriers and institutional rigidities. However, this com-
mand-and-control approach has several significant disadvantages
compared with incentive-based systems or alternative approaches
that address perceived market failures directly. First, the burden of
meeting standards cannot be reallocated across industries or across
219
the different greenhouse gases in private cost-saving transactions.
Second, in the absence of price increases for fossil fuels, standards
can increase the demand for energy-using services. Finally, stand-
ards reduce the range of products available to meet diverse con-
sumer needs.
The costs of efficiency standards are often hidden. For example, a
higher average fuel economy standard might force consumers to
buy only the more fuel-efficient and generally cheaper vehicles in
the existing product line, thereby actually reducing their purchase
and gasoline costs. However, out-of-pocket costs do not reflect costs
imposed by denying consumers the option to purchase other valued
attributes such as safety, performance, and comfort. Higher fuel ef-
ficiency without higher fuel prices also lowers the per mile cost of
driving, which encourages more trips, more fuel consumption, and
more emissions. Because fuel economy labels already inform con-
sumers about energy consumption, and few apparent institutional
rigidities exist, the economic rationale for stringent auto efficiency
standards is doubtful at best.
Assertions that efficiency improvements are cost-saving or nearly
costless beg the question why these improvements are not auto-
matically taking place. Such assertions must be examined to see if
the claimed efficiency gains involve the sacrifice of other product
attributes that were excluded from the analysis or market imper-
fections that could be addressed directly. One must ask whether
the analysis considers the entire range of consumer usage rates
and energy prices, or is based only on national average values.
In the latter case, efficiency standards may appear to be cost-ef-
fective on the national level, while actually restricting the choices
of only those consumers who face low energy prices or have low
usage rates (and thus energy consumption) for the product. Those
with high usage rates or those who face high energy prices would
purchase high-efficiency products even in the absence of mandatory
standards. Taking this diversity into consideration, an efficiency
standard that appears to save money on the national level may ac-
tually impose costs.
IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
Available assessments of the costs of substantially slowing the
rate of greenhouse gas emissions may reach the trillions of dollars.
What benefits might be obtained with those costs? This question is
difficult to answer, but it is possible to identify several nonmarket
impacts of possible future climate change, and to arrive at prelimi-
nary estimates of some market effects.
There may be both positive and negative effects of climate change
on human health. although these effects are controversial. Tempera-
ture extremes-both hot and cold-are associated with higher mor-
220
tality rates for populations, such as the elderly, that are susceptible
to physical stress. These relationships suggest that higher tempera.
tures in winter could reduce weather-related illness and death.
whereas higher summer temperatures could increase them. These
adverse health effects are not well understood. however. as illus-
trated by the fact that the average temperature differential be-
tween New York City and Atlanta is as large as the most extreme
predictions of warming, yet there is no evidence that Atlanta's
warmer climate creates a greater health risk than New York's.
There could also be changes in the regional distribution of vector-
borne diseases, such as those carried by ticks, fleas. and mosqui-
toes, associated with climate change.
Substantial reductions in economic growth in low-income coun-
tries caused by attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions could
have far greater adverse health consequences than any direct health
effects associated with climate change. When one considers the very
close relationship around the world between income levels and im-
portant health indicators such as infant mortality and life expect-
ancy, it is clear that one of the most important factors affecting
health is the ability to afford adequate nutrition and health care.
If global warming occurs, its impact on plants and animals, in-
cluding humans, is likely to depend on how rapidly it occurs. Both
the human and other species' ability to adapt to warming appear
to increase if the rate of change is slow. In agriculture. plant breed-
ing and biogenetic techniques can be used to adapt crop varieties to
changes in solar radiation, temperature, and moisture. These tech-
niques are more likely to succeed when the incremental changes
are small and there is adequate time to undertake adaptive re-
search. In the wild, species can adapt to climate change by moving
to suitable environments or adapting to new ones through natural
selection. Scientists believe that some wild species of plants and
animals may not adapt to rapid climate change and might be lost,
thus threatening the biological diversity that has evolved over mil-
lions of years. The fact that many medicines contain active ingredi-
ents obtained from substances in plants and animals, especially
those in the tropics, suggests that a reduction in diversity could
represent a significant economic loss.
There is also some reason to believe that extreme weather events
may be more important than the increase in average temperature
for adaptation to and survival of climate change. A change in the
frequency and intensity of hurricanes and tornadoes, for example,
could substantially affect their costs, measured in both human life
and property.
Sea-level rise is another possible effect of global warming. The
U.S. coastline, like the coastlines of other industrial maritime na-
tions, has been extensively developed, with buildings often within
221
100 feet of the sea. The cost of protecting the entire U.S. shoreline
against substantial sea-level rise would be prohibitive, as it would
be for many countries with densely populated low-lying areas. The
cumulative costs of protecting densely developed shoreline areas
from a 20-inch rise is estimated to be between $37 billion and $50
billion, or between $7 billion and $10 billion in present value under
the assumption that all costs were incurred in 2025. If the costs of
protecting against sea-level rise were spread over the more distant
future, as seems likely, their present value would be lower. If the
sea level rises gradually and predictably, a reasonable response
strategy might include steps to encourage some population and eco-
nomic activity to relocate inland to higher ground when existing
structures come due for routine replacement.
Most sectors of industrial economies are not climate-sensitive, or
could adapt to climate changes. The costs of adaptation depend on
how rapidly warming occurs. Useful lives of plant and equipment
tend to be shorter than 50 years, so that a slow warming trend
would permit change in the location and composition of economic
activity without major or unanticipated disruptions. More rapid
changes could result in loss of some immobile private assets, aban-
donment of certain public infrastructure, and reinvestment at new
locations.
The most significant impacts on industry are likely to be in ac-
tivities that involve biological processes that are sensitive to tem-
perature and rainfall such as agriculture, forestry, and fishing-
which account for about 2 percent of U.S. GNP. Global climate
change could have both positive and negative impacts on productiv-
ity. Up to a point, higher carbon dioxide concentrations improve
the efficiency of photosynthesis and thus increase agricultural pro-
ductivity. Warming could change the amount and distribution of
precipitation and shift cropping patterns regionally, but regional
predictions are now considered highly unreliable.
Preliminary analyses show that global climate change could
result in a net loss in agricultural productivity, but no evidence
shows that it would threaten the world's food supply even under the
most pessimistic scenarios. The Department of Agriculture has
made preliminary estimates of the regional and global economic
impacts of changes in agricultural production that might be associ-
ated with warming. Under one scenario, the net global costs of a
doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide were estimated to range
from $35 billion to $170 billion annually, with the United States
losing $1 billion annually. Equally plausible but less pessimistic as-
sumptions about yield effects implied small net gains to the global
and U.S. economies. Underlying these small net effects would be
some redistribution of income from consumers to producers
through higher agricultural prices.
222
These estimated impacts on global and U.S. agriculture can be
put into perspective by comparing them with the impacts of agri-
cultural policies discussed in Chapter 7. Using the same economic
model, Department of Agriculture researchers estimated that the
trade-distorting policies now in place around the world impose a
net cost on the world of $35 billion annually and $10 billion annu-
ally for the United States. Thus, the annual costs of current agri-
cultural policies are estimated to be the same order of magnitude
as the estimated agricultural impacts of global warming. However,
the agricultural losses from a doubling of carbon dioxide are not
likely to occur until well into the next century. For example, using
a 5-percent real interest rate, a global loss of $170 billion in 2050
amounts to about $9 billion in 1990 dollars (Box 6-4). Thus, the
costs of today's agricultural policies are estimated to be more im-
portant in economic terms than even pessimistic estimates of the
effects of global warming, largely because the former must be
borne in the present and the latter may occur, if at all, in the rela-
tively distant future.
SUMMARY
The United States is taking a leadership role in international ef-
forts to reduce scientific and economic uncertainties about global
climate change and to build a common understanding about all as-
pects of the climate change issue from the basic Earth science, to
impacts on human activities, to potential response strategies. The
data now available on the economic costs of reducing greenhouse
gas emissions suggest that it may be as important to improve un-
derstanding of the economics of global warming as it is to improve
current ability to predict warming itself.
Policies such as the phaseout of CFCs, the President's clean air
proposal, and reforestation can significantly reduce global net emis-
sions of greenhouse gases. At the same time, they can be justified
on their own merits. Increased research and development funding
and modest changes in fuel prices can reflect the broader social in-
terest in promoting energy conservation. Currently available analy-
ses indicate that near-term stabilization or immediate reduction of
carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion is likely to
impose large economic costs on current and future generations.
Such measures must be carefully scrutinized, given the current
limited understanding of the impacts and likelihood of global
warming. The highest priority in the near term should be to im-
prove understanding in order to build a foundation for sound policy
decisions.
Until such a foundation is in place, is no justification for
imposing major costs on the economy in order to slow the growth
of greenhouse gas emissions. Policies that may result in slower
223
growth in greenhouse emissions, but can also be fully justified on
other grounds, are the best short-run way to address this potential
problem while the uncertainties that exist today are reduced.
Being justified on other grounds means that a program yields non-
greenhouse benefits commensurate with its costs; it cannot mean
simply having some non-greenhouse benefits. The adoption of many
small programs, each of which would fail a standard cost-benefit
test, could significantly slow economic growth and eliminate jobs.
Because the intense research currently underway may reveal
that it is desirable to slow the growth of greenhouse gas emissions,
it is useful to consider the elements of what would be an economi-
cally rational strategy to do so. Any strategy to limit aggregate
emissions without worldwide participation would be likely to fail. A
cost-effective policy must provide for comprehensive coverage of
both sources and sinks of all major greenhouse gases. It must also
provide appropriate incentives for emissions reductions and deal di-
rectly with market failures. Carbon dioxide emissions, in particu-
lar. could be reduced at much lower cost through the use of emis-
sions fees than through government-imposed standards for energy
efficiency.
CONCLUSION
There is widespread agreement that both economic growth and
environmental quality are desirable policy goals. They need not be
incompatible, and are in many respects complementary. Three
principles should guide regulation. First, realistic environmental
and risk-reduction goals that balance benefits and costs must be
set. Second, strategies that work with rather than against market
incentives should wherever possible be used instead of less effective
command-and-control regulation. Market-oriented approaches, such
as marketable air pollution allowances, create incentives for firms
to achieve environmental goals in a cost-effective manner. Third,
government should support the development and dissemination of
scientific and technical information about environmental and
health risks.
The Administration's clean air initiative, its proposals to im-
prove pesticide regulation and food safety, and its efforts to im-
prove the understanding of global environmental issues each illus-
trate how these principles for environmental regulation can be put
into action. Other pressing environmental issues will face the
Nation in the 1990s and beyond. The application of these principles
to all environmental problems will help to achieve both a strong
economy and a healthy environment.
224
WASH. POST : 04-22-90
3 3
0
of nature. And they must apply this vision in
their daily lives-in home and workplace,
during leisure time, as family members, as
community residents, as producers, as con-
sumers.
What can one individual do? Recycle trash
and, if possible, compost garbage and yard
waste. Car-pool or take Metro to work, and
avoid unnecessary driving. Buy a low-flow
shower head and energy-efficient fluores-
cent light bulbs. Carry groceries home in
reusable tote bags (Europeans have been
using them for decades). Plant trees. Shop
carefully for recycled and recyclable prod-
ucts, and for products without excessive
packaging. Avoid "throwaway" products.
Drink your coffee or tea from a mug, in-
stead of a styrofoam cup.
And if any of these actions seem like too
much trouble, remember this: Our planet's
natural systems do not exist just to be ex-
ploited or to support human economic ac-
tivity. Nature has an intrinsic worth that
transcends narrow utilitarian values and
should be respected. We should all take re-
sponsibility for practicing environmental
reciprocity, for nurturing and sustaining the
planet that nurtures and sustains us.
sense that just this kind of conservation
I
ethic is on the rise, in the United States
and around the world. The millions of
people in more than 130 nations who are
participating in this weekend's Earth Day
celebrations are evidence of a new high-wa-
ter mark in the rising flood of public con-
cern for nature.
Back in April of 1970, I was a newly hired
staff member at the President's Council on
Environmental Quality, working for Russell
Train. On Earth Day that year, many of us
participated in a Potomac riverfront clean-
up. Along with other White House staffers,
I collected trash along the shore.
No one came into contact with the water,
though: In those days a tetanus shot was
prescribed for people who fell into the Po-
tomac.
I like to remember that experience now
on summer days, as I watch the windsurfers
across from National Airport or south of the
Wilson Bridge. Like most of the rest of the
country, Washington has benefited greatly
from the environmental commitments made
in the years following Earth Day 1970.
As we celebrate its 20th anniversary, we
must take this opportunity to renew our
commitment to planet Earth: we must re-
member that living in harmony with nature
is both a practical necessity and a moral
obligation. Taking care of the environment
is not just important for our future-it is
our future.
A WORLD
WASH. 04-22-90
IN OUR HANDS
Forget the Doomsayers-
have cost refiners about $3.6 billion. But
Environmental Action Means
the quantifiable benefits add up to more
than $50 billion, including nearly $42 billion
Both Progress and Profits
in medical costs avoided for both children
and adults; $1.6 billion in pollution-related
environmental damage avoided; nearly $5.8
By William K. Reilly 91p
billion in lower vehicle maintenance costs;
and $1.1 billion in improved fuel economy.
WENTY YEARS ago, when the
And those figures don't count the truly
original Clean Air Act was being
priceless value of saving more than 5,000
debated in the House of Repre-
lives and avoiding 8,000 heart attacks,
sentatives, one of the bill's oppo-
strokes and cases of high blood pressure in
nents took the floor to insist that
1986 alone.
pollution control is incompatible
Environmental protection is a sound eco-
with economic growth.
nomic investment.
The congressman quoted a con-
The nation spends more than $80 billion
stituent, a small-town mayor, as
a year to comply with federal environmental
saying: "If you want this town to grow, it has got
regulations. mostly in private funds. and the
to stink."
Imagine making that kind of argument today!
trends are up. Our capital and operating
One important legacy of that first Earth Day is
expenditures on pollution control and clean-
the growing recognition that environmental im-
up, as a percentage of gross domestic prod-
provements must keep pace with economic
uct. are higher than all of the other Western
growth; that there must be a direct connection
industrial nations for which data are avail-
between prosperity and environmental progress.
able-in the range of 1.5 to 1.7 percent.
The plight of the newly independent nations of
Those expenditures could double in the
Eastern Europe suggests what can happen when
1990s as the revised Clean Air Act takes
this principle is violated. East Germany, Poland,
effect and the multi-billion-dollar cleanups
Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia and the So-
of hazardous-waste sites and government
viet Union have suffered an environmental catas-
nuclear facilities go forward.
trophe that will take years and billions of dollars
Some analysts suggest that the environ-
to correct. Parts of East Germany, Poland and
ment will be the growth industry of the
Romania are virtually uninhabitable. I find it in-
1990s. Many large pollution-control com-
teresting that no one can identify any economic
panies are now trading on the stock market
benefits from all the pollution-control costs these
countries avoided. Why? Because healthy natural
at price-to-earnings ratios of more than 20-
to-1. compared to a Wall Street norm of
systems are the foundation for all human activity,
about 12-to-1.
including economic activity.
This is one lesson we in the United States have
The star corporate performers of the
been learning, however slowly, over the past 20
1990s will be the companies that are ahead
years. Here are four more-each of them essen-
of the environmental power curve. Their
tial to remember as we move into the "environ-
customers. employees. stockholders and
mental decade" of the '90s:
boards will increasingly demand a positive
The money we spend on sound environmental
environmental performance-not only out
programs is an investment in the nation's well-
of concern for the environment, but also
being.
because pollution is a sign of poor manage-
There's no question that compliance with en-
ment. waste and inefficiency.
vironmental laws has an enormous impact on the
A pollutant, after all, is nothing more
economy. This will be true, for example, with the
than a misplaced resource. It's no coinci-
Clean Air Act amendments now pending in Con-
dence that our principal economic challeng-
gress, just as it was true with the original clean
ers, Japan and West Germany, produce less
air law. That's why the Bush administration has
waste and consume less energy than we do.
been so careful to analyze every measure in our
West Germany creates half as much solid
clean air bill, in order to ensure that for every
cost, there is a commensurate benefit.
waste per capita as we do and generates
And just look at the benefits we already have
about 60 percent as much carbon dioxide.
realized from our pollution control investments.
Germany is more energy-efficient than we
Over the past two economically robust decades,
are largely because its population is less
while the nation's gross national product grew by
dispersed than ours, its railroads and other
70 percent, we have made great progress in
mass transit more convenient and more
cleaning up our air and water, lowering the levels
widely used. and its automobiles more ef-
of toxic substances, removing many dangerous
ficient (partly a reflection of Europe's high-
and persistent pesticides from the marketplace
en fuel costs).
and improving control over hazardous wastes.
Japan now uses one-third as much energy
Environmental programs have saved or pro-
per capita as the United States. Between
longed tens of thousands of human lives: pre-
1973 and 1984, as Japan began to clean up
vented birth defects and other damage to human
its historic legacy of pollution and to
and animal health; preserved thousands of natural
emerge as a global economic power, the en-
areas; and avoided billions of dollars in health
ergy and raw materials used in Japanese
costs, lost workdays and crop damage.
production decreased, astoundingly, by 40
Look, for example, at the nation's phase-out of
leaded gasoline. Over an eight-year period. it will
percent.
WASH. POST 04-22-90
G.O.P.
AMD STOP
CALLING
CUTE
all
1970 - EARTH DAY AND THE EVOLUTION OF THE ELEPHANT - 1990
To remain competitive internationally,
In response, society imposed wide-rang-
by giving electric utilities a limited number
the United States will have to achieve sub-
ing "command-and-control" regulations to
of "allowances," or marketable permits. de-
stantial increases in efficiency in our indus-
force accountability and action. While the
signed to reduce their sulfur dioxide emis-
trial processes and our use of energy: and
regulations were successful in cleaning up
sions by about half. EPA will monitor emis-
we will need to recycle many of the mate-
the most obvious pollution, they did little to
sions to ensure that they do not exceed the
rials and byproducts we now throw away. It
encourage enterprise and innovation; they
allotted levels. If a company finds that
'can be done. The Borden Chemical Co.'s
offered few incentives to go beyond the
cleanup costs are particularly high at one
Freemont plant, near San Francisco, re-
minimum standards set by law. And since
plant and that purchasing additional allow-
duced the level of toxic organic pollutants in
most of the regulations were based on con-
ances would be less expensive, it will be
its wastewater by 93 percent in the 1980s
trolling emissions at the "end of the pipe,"
able to buy allowances from other utilities.
using pollution-prevention techniques.
they neglected the prevention of pollution
On the other hand, a company could cut
One major reduction came when the com-
as part of the industrial process.
its emissions so far that it would be able to
pany changed its method of rinsing large
Today, as consumers increasingly de-
sell its extra allowances or bank them to
chemical reactor vessels. Borden had been
mand clean industrial practices and "green"
provide for future growth. And it will be
using a single rinse that produced waste-
products-and as the costs of regulations.
able to pursue the cheapest available meth-
water that was too dilute for recycling but
waste disposal and liability continue to
od of pollution control-energy conserva-
too polluted to dispose of easily. The com-
climb-we can build on the traditional com-
tion, different fuels, new technology-pro-
pany switched to a two-stage process: A
mand-and-control programs with economic
vided only that it gets the pollution reduc-
small first rinse cleans out most of the re-
incentives to harness the dynamics of the
tions the country needs.
sidual chemicals, which are then recycled:
marketplace on behalf of the environment.
This flexibility will achieve our air-quality
the second rinse produces dilute wastewa-
Using a combination of incentives and
goals at the lowest possible cost-cutting
ter which is readily handled by existing
tough enforcement of existing laws, we can
the price tag of acid rain reductions by
treatment systems. Moreover, the company
engage the marketplace in environmental
about one-fifth.
is saving money by recycling raw materials
protection without having to rely exclusive-
Environmental protection is as much an
that it had been paying to eliminate.
ly on the kind of cumbersome government
individual duty as it is a responsibility of
Strong environmental programs, espe-
intervention that we relied on in the past.
government and industry.
cially those that encourage the prevention
Marrying the environment and the economy
Ultimately, the environmental problems
of pollution before it's generated, can help
is essential to deal effectively with the vast-
of the 1990s and the next century will re-
stimulate the improvements needed to in-
ly more subtle and complex environmental
quire cooperation among governments, and
crease efficiency, productivity and compet-
problems of the 1990s. These are often
between government and the private sec-
itiveness. One important benefit of the acid
caused by small, widely scattered sources
tor, on an unprecedented scale. Yet what
rain provisions of President Bush's Clean
which are not easily amenable to federal
government and industry can achieve by
Air Act proposals is that they will encour-
regulation-problems like municipal and
way of conserving energy, slowing the gen-
age electric utilities to improve energy ef-
hazardous wastes, toxic substances in the
eration of waste or reducing the emission of
ficiencies and promote conservation in or-
air and water. groundwater contamination
gases that cause ozone depletion and cli-
der to cut back on their sulfur dioxide emis-
from agricultural and urban runoff, and
mate change, will depend to a great extent
sions.
global atmospheric changes.
on people's readiness to change their hab-
The marketplace is environmentally neu-
Many of the provisions in the Clean Air
its, to buy new products and to safeguard
tral: it can damage the environment or it
Act amendments proposed by the president
nature from their own practices.
can help protect it.
already reflect this market-based approach.
People everywhere, in developed and
We have known for some time that un-
The bill would cut millions of tons a year
developing nations alike, must embrace a
regulated economic markets don't always
from the suifur dioxide that causes acid rain
new ethic of conservation and stewardship
protect public health and environmental
quality; nor do they ensure that environ-
mental costs of air and water pollution are
paid by those doing the polluting.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT STATES PUMLITY THE UNITED
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20500
Michael R. Deland
Chairman
May 18, 1990
(202) 395-5080
MEMORANDUM TO KenneD P.yale
FROM:
Michael R. Deland
SUBJECT: Attached memorandum, "Bush Administration Environmental
Initiatives and Accomplishments"
We have prepared the enclosed memorandum for your use, entitled
"The Bush Administration and the Environment: Initiatives and
Accomplishments." Please circulate it to all relevant personnel.
This memorandum summarizes all Administration actions which
promise to have a beneficial result for environmental quality and
conservation of natural resources. We hope it is helpful to you
and your staff as you prepare speeches and respond to inquiries.
It was not prepared for release to the news media, but it has
been rigorously reviewed to ensure its factual integrity.
In the past year, several summaries or "scorecards" have been
prepared by various EOP offices, Federal departments and
agencies, and outside groups. These have been consulted and this
summary incorporates many of those items.
We would welcome your comments, suggestions or additions. The
memorandum will be kept up to date and distributed at least
quarterly by my assistant, Dale Curtis, who can be reached on
395-5750.
Recycled Paper
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFICE COUNCIL PRESIDENT STATES PUALITY THE UNITED
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20500
Michael R. Deland
(202) 395-5080
Chairman
The Bush Administration and the Environment:
Summary of Initiatives and Accomplishments
May 1990
President George Bush, continuing a life-long record of
concern for the environment, has demonstrated a commitment to
environmental protection, conservation, and wise management of
our natural resources. What follows is a summary of the
Administration's initiatives and accomplishments.
1.
General leadership
2.
Air pollution
3.
Environmentally-sensitive budget policy
4.
Pollution prevention and recycling
5.
Asbestos ban
6. Water pollution, water projects and wetlands
7. Energy
8.
Global climate change
9.
International environmental initiatives
10. Alaskan oil spill
11. Future oil spill prevention
12.
Food safety
13. Hazardous wastes and Superfund
14. Clean oceans and coastlines
15. Radon
16.
Defense & the Environment Initiative
17.
Endangered species
18.
Earth Day
19.
Environmental education
20.
Enforcement
21.
Deterring conflicts of interest
Recycled Paper
2
1)
General leadership:
President Bush appointed William K. Reilly to be
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
the first professional conservationist to hold the post.
The President named Michael R. Deland, former
Administrator of EPA's Boston regional office, to be
chairman of the President's Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ). The President is committed to revitalizing CEQ's
advisory role and requested funding to increase the staff of
CEQ from 10 to 34 positions over two years.
The President supports elevating EPA from sub-Cabinet
to full Cabinet status, and approved the elevation of EPA's
International Activities Office to the assistant
administrator level.
President Bush has directed all Cabinet officers to
incorporate consideration of environmental impacts into all
agency decisions. More departments are embarked on
substantive environmental policy intitiatives than ever
before (see below). The President has devoted dozens of
speeches, news conferences, and events to environmental
themes, and the White House Domestic Policy staff has
devoted thousands of hours to ambitious environmental
quality initiatives.
2) Air pollution:
After a decade of policy gridlock, President Bush's
Administration crafted amendments to the U.S. Clean Air Act
to reduce the emissions that cause acid rain, urban smog and
toxic air pollution. Thanks in large measure to the
President's personal commitment, a bill recently passed the
Senate and it appears likely this complex reform package
will be enacted in 1990.
Among several other administrative actions on clean
air, EPA issued rules that lower gasoline volatility (which
contributes to smog) in summer months; and rules to reduce
industrial emissions of the hazardous pollutant benzene by
90 percent. EPA proposed standards to require source
separation by municipal waste handlers to effectively reduce
overall air emissions from municipal waste incinerators by
90 percent.
The Administration has taken important strides forward
on global air pollution issues (see #8 and #9).
3
Related actions on automobile fuel efficiency, energy
efficiency and renewables, and clean coal technology are
listed below.
3)
Environmentally-sensitive budget policy:
The Administration's budget request for 1991 continued
a trend begun with the President's first budget in 1990:
substantial funding increases for most environmental
programs, and greater sensitivity to the impact of federal
actions on the environment. Notable areas include:
-- Increases for EPA's operating budget, especially for
enforcement (more than 500 new staff) and cleanup at
Superfund and federal sites (see #10)
-- "America the Beautiful": a three-pronged effort to
acquire lands with high environmental or recreation
value (up to $1 billion over four years) ; restore
threatened natural resource and recreation areas
("Legacy '99") ; and a new program to expand and
accelerate national reforestation to a rate of one
billion trees annually
-- concerning global climate change, sharply higher
funding for the "Mission to Planet Earth" space-based
Earth observation system, solar and renewable energy,
energy conservation (see #7), and basic research
-- research, protection and enhancement of the nation's
wetlands; termination or mitigation of certain water
projects (see #5)
-- proposed demonstration projects to terminate
wasteful "below-cost" timber sales at nine national
forests and provide improved recreational facilities in
those areas
-- an increase of almost $800 million, or 21 percent
above 1990 levels, for Federal facility cleanups
-- full funding for the Clean Coal Technology program
4)
Pollution prevention and recycling:
The Administration seeks reforms to move beyond costly
end-of-the-process cleanups, toward an emphasis on pollution
prevention.
4
Within EPA, two percent of every program's budget has
been set aside to fund specific pollution prevention
demonstration projects.
EPA has launched a nationwide "early warning system" to
prevent municipal sewage treatment plants from violating
Clean Water Act standards.
Legislation and administrative actions are under
development to spur federal and private pollution prevention
efforts. The legislation would set numerical goals and
timetables, enhance data collection, improve municipal solid
waste minimization and management, and create helpful new
market incentives.
5)
Asbestos ban:
EPA announced a ban on almost all uses of asbestos in
the United States by 1997. Asbestos is a carcinogen linked
to lung and chest cancer.
6)
Water pollution, water projects, and wetlands:
EPA Administrator Reilly blocked issuance of a permit
that would allow construction to begin on the Two Forks Dam
in Colorado. President Bush seeks termination of uneconomic
and destructive projects such as the Garrison Diversion Unit
in North Dakota. EPA rejected the proposed Big River
reservoir project in Rhode Island, based on unacceptable
adverse effects on wetlands, wildlife and recreation.
EPA issued proposals to regulate 17 pesticides and 21
other contaminants in drinking water, almost doubling the
number of pollutants subject to federally enforceable
standards. The proposals also call for monitoring 110
currently unregulated contaminants.
The Bureau of Reclamation has been given new direction
and proposed doubled funding to pursue mitigation of adverse
impacts of certain large water projects already constructed.
Concerned by the rapid loss of American wetland
habitats, the President directed an interagency task force
to report by late 1990 on ways to implement a policy of "no
net loss" of wetlands. EPA and Army Corps of Engineers
signed an agreement to clarify wetlands protection policy;
the Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service signed an agreement to cooperate in expanding the
wetlands breeding habitat for numerous species.
5
The President's FY91 budget seeks a 24 percent boost
(to $460 million) for research, protection and enhancement
of wetlands, including acceleration of the national wetlands
inventory. This follows a 32 percent increase in 1990.
For related actions on ocean pollution, see #14.
7) Energy:
The Department of Energy is preparing a National Energy
Plan which emphasizes, among other things: energy
conservation and efficiency; alternative and renewable
energy sources; and nuclear power safety.
DOE announced eleven initiatives in energy efficiency
and renewables, including: more efficient lighting for
federal buildings; regulatory and legislative changes to
stimulate efficiency improvements in the utility, commercial
and construction sectors; and using the government-industry
technology transfer process to speed promising energy
technologies into widespread use.
In a reversal of previous policy, DOE proposed rules to
centralize and significantly strengthen compliance with the
environmental assessment process under the National
Environmental Policy Act.
The Department of Transportation raised the corporate
average fuel economy (CAFE) standard for autos to 27.5 mpg.
The President postponed lease sales and oil and gas
development in sensitive areas off the shores of California
and Florida, and will make a final decision on these leases
in 1990.
The President has requested all of the necessary funds
to complete the $2.5 billion Clean Coal Technology program.
To address waste cleanup at DOE facilities, funding was
increased by $500 million in FY90; an increase of $600
million is sought for FY91. DOE released a five-year, site-
by-site cleanup plan, and a five-year research and
development plan to reduce outyear costs.
8)
Global climate change:
The Bush Administration has demonstrated a willingness
to confront the complex and important question of global
climate change.
6
The Secretary of State's first major address in January
1989 expressed the President's intention to take
comprehensive action in this area. In February 1990, the
President became the first and only head of state to address
the U.N.-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), the leading global forum for climate change policy.
The U.S. agreed in November 1989 to stabilize U.S.
carbon dioxide emissions and study further reductions; the
President proposed two major international conferences on
the issue in 1990. The first conference, held April 17-18,
addressed scientific and economic questions. The second
conference would open negotiations toward a multilateral
framework treaty once the IPCC has completed initial
assessments of the scientific evidence, potential impacts,
and policy options.
The President supports efforts to build upon the
Montreal Protocol and phase-out all uses of chloro-
fluorocarbons (CFC's) and halons by the turn of the century.
The Administration supports financial and technical
assistance to developing countries to make the transition to
non-CFC technologies.
The FY91 budget request seeks $1 billion for research
into global climate change, up 57 percent from 1990. That
research includes work on the "Mission to Planet Earth"
orbiting observation system, renewable and solar energy
sources, and energy efficiency/conservation.
The Administration's clean air bill, National Energy
Strategy and increased CAFE standard also will have the
effect of stabilizing/reducing "greenhouse gas" emissions.
9)
Other international environmental initiatives:
The President banned imports of African elephant ivory
(see #18).
During his 1989 trips abroad, the President pledged
financial and technical aid to Poland and Hungary to control
air and water pollution, draft environmental statutes, and
establish an East European environmental center.
President Bush led efforts to make the environment a
major focus of the "G-7" Summit in Paris. In Tokyo, the
President held meetings with leaders of Japan and Brazil to
discuss the problem of rapid rainforest depletion.
7
The Administration helped develop and then signed the
Basel Convention, which governs transboundary shipments of
hazardous wastes in an environmentally sound manner.
President Bush supported and signed a bill to prohibit
U.S. support for foreign development loans unless
environmental impacts are studied first.
The Administration persuaded Japan, Taiwan and Korea to
enter into agreements to monitor driftnet fishing. This
will allow the U.S. to monitor the incidental take of birds,
seals, whales, dolphins and other marine mammals.
In 1990, for the first time, Peace Corps volunteers
will be trained by EPA in water pollution prevention, waste
disposal, reforestation and pesticide management.
The President's plan to elevate EPA to full Cabinet
status will give the U.S. Environment Secretary commensurate
status with his counterparts from other nations. The plan
would also enhance "USDE" authority to offer technical
assistance to foreign environmental programs. In early
1989, EPA's International Activities Office was elevated to
the assistant administrator level.
10) Alaskan oil spill:
The President sent Vice President Quayle and a Cabinet-
level team to assess the situation; the Department of
Transportation is overseeing cleanup by Exxon, while EPA is
coordinating an interagency task force on long-range
restoration of Prince William Sound.
After negotiations broke down, the Justice Department
issued a five-count criminal indictment against Exxon with
potential penalties of up to $600 million.
11) Future oil spill prevention:
The President proposed, and Paris Summit leaders
accepted, a call for increased international efforts on oil
spill prevention and cleanup. In May 1989, President Bush
sent Congress comprehensive oil pollution liability and
compensation legislation. The Interior Department began a
$6 million, 3-year joint project with the American Petroleum
Institute to research and develop new cleanup technology.
8
12) Food safety:
The Administration proposed legislation to improve food
safety by streamlining regulations to allow faster removal
of dangerous substances from the market. EPA prohibited all
sales, distribution and use of "Alar" products labeled for
use on food products, and stepped up its efforts against
other suspect pesticides. EPA blocked the sale of roughly
100 million apples that had been illegally treated with the
fungicide "Botran."
13) Hazardous wastes and Superfund:
After an intensive management review, the
Administration reoriented the "Superfund" hazardous waste
dump cleanup to an "enforcement first" program to get more
responsible parties to undertake cleanups. EPA added 500
new enforcement staff to this program.
The Administration fought Congressional attempts to cut
the Superfund budget and in 1989, exceeded Congressionally-
mandated targets for cleanup starts and site studies.
The Administration commenced a similar review of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), expected to
yield proposals for upcoming legislative reauthorization.
14) Clean oceans and coastlines:
EPA implemented the first step of the President's
commitment to prevent medical wastes from washing up on
beaches: a pilot medical waste tracking system to serve as
a model for further action. The program involves the states
of Connecticut, Louisiana, New Jersey, New York and Rhode
Island, as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.
EPA negotiated agreements with local jurisdictions to
stop ocean dumping of sewage sludge by late 1991, an
initiative that also resulted in penalty actions against 61
cities in 1989. The President proposed legislation to
require criminal felony penalties for illegal ocean dumping.
15) Radon:
EPA released data showing high levels of cancer-causing
radon to be widespread in housing throughout the country,
and undertook public education efforts to urge Americans to
test and safeguard their homes, schools and businesses.
9
16) Defense & the Environment Initiative
The Department of Defense established a five-point
initiative intended to forge long-term partnerships in
defense-environmental matters well beyond mere compliance.
An autumn 1990 conference will attempt to: finalize a near-
term DOD environmental action plan; activate an enhanced DOD
environmental decision-making structure; and discuss how
global strategic policy might encompass environmental
challenges.
17) Endangered species:
The President has rejected the suggestion of amendments
to the federal Endangered Species Act.
The President banned imports of African elephant ivory
products in an effort to save that endangered species; and
he requested funding from Congress to assist African
countries with management and protection of this species.
The Department of Interior issued an emergency listing
of the Desert Tortoise as an endangered species in Southern
California, Utah and Nevada. DOI acquired additional
habitat for endangered panthers in Florida.
The Two Forks Dam and Big River decisions (see #6)
protected thousands of acres of wildlife habitat. And the
President reversed a proposal to cap the outlay of funds
under the Wallop-Breaux Trust Fund used for fisheries
protection and development.
18) Earth Day
The Council on Environmental Quality coordinated
actions by all federal agencies to celebrate the 20th
anniversary of Earth Day, including an exhibition on the
Mall in Washington, and various activities by more than a
dozen Federal agencies.
19) Environmental education
The President proposed a program of cash awards of up
to $5,000 to elementary and secondary school teachers in the
50 states, the District of Columbia and the territories who
develop innovative, effective environmental education
curricula.
10
20) Enforcement
EPA's aggressive enforcement program levied civil and
administrative penalties totaling just under $35 million in
fiscal year 1989, including $13.6 million from over 4,000
administrative actions, two record highs.
EPA referred 364 civil judicial cases of alleged
environmental law violation to the Department of Justice for
prosecution in FY89, just short of the 1988 record of 372.
EPA referred 60 criminal cases to Justice in FY89.
Notable enforcement actions include:
--Proposed fines of $1.65 million on 42 companies that
failed to report toxic chemical discharges as required by
law.
--Civil lawsuits against 34 companies and individuals to
halt violations of rules protecting the public from unlawful
asbestos demolition and renovation practices.
--Civil lawsuits against 61 cities (including Detroit, El
Paso, Phoenix and San Antonio) for violations of the Clean
Water Act.
--A civil penalty of $15 million against the Texas Eastern
company for toxic substance violations at up to 89 sites
along a 1,000 mile-long natural gas pipeline. The fine was
the largest ever for violation of any environmental statute.
--A coordinated campaign to protect the Chesapeake Bay
included charges against 26 facilities in the watershed for
violations of the Clean Water Act.
After negotiations broke down, the Justice Department
issued a five-count criminal indictment against Exxon with
potential penalties of up to $600 million.
21) Deterring conflicts of interest:
EPA has set a strict new policy on the agency's use of
contractors, barring them from involvement 17 specific
activities and warning of improper conflicts of interest in
15 additional areas.
Our Changing Planet:
The FY 1991
U.S. Global Change Research Program
A Report by the Committee on Earth Sciences
To Accompany the
U.S. President's Fiscal Year 1991 Budget
This photograph of the Earth was taken from the Apollo 16 Spacecraft. Much
of the Earth is heavily cloud covered. A portion of the United States from the
Great Lakes to Southern California, including the Rocky Mountain area, is visible.
The North American coastline from Southern Mexico to Alaska can be seen.
Our Changing Planet:
The FY 1991
U.S. Global Change Research Program
A Report by the Committee on Earth Sciences
To Accompany the
U.S. President's Fiscal Year 1991 Budget
Office of Science and Technology Policy
Federal Coordinating Council for Science,
Engineering, and Technology
Committee on Earth Sciences
Chairman
Dallas L. Peck, Department of the Interior, United States
Geological Survey
Vice-Chairman
Robert W. Corell, National Science Foundation
Members:
Nancy Maynard, Office of Science and Technology Policy
Frederick M. Bernthal, Department of State
Erich Bloch, National Science Foundation
Erich W. Bretthauer, Environmental Protection Agency
Robert E. Grady, Office of Management and Budget
Mark Dowis, Department of Transportation
Charles E. Hess, United States Department of Agriculture
Michael R. Deland, Council on Environmental Quality
David B. Nelson, Department of Energy
George Millburn, Department of Defense
John A. Knauss, Department of Commerce
J. R. Thompson, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Harlan L. Watson, Department of the Interior
Executive Secretary
Paul V. Dresler, Department of the Interior, United States
Geological Survey
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20506
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS:
I am pleased to forward with this letter "Our Changing Planet: The FY
1991 U.S. Global Change Research Program," a report by the Committee on
Earth Sciences of the Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineer-
ing, and Technology to accompany the President's Fiscal Year 1991 Budget.
The report outlines an accelerated, focused research strategy designed
to reduce key scientific uncertainties and to develop more reliable scientific
predictions upon which sound policies and responses to global change can
be based. Because of the importance of this area, the President is proposing
a 57 percent increase in the budget for this effort for FY 1991.
The research program presented here is a key component of the Presi-
dent's overall approach to the global change issue. This approach has, as its
central goal, the provision of a sound scientific basis for developing national
and international policy on global change. The President has called for an
expanded schedule of international collaboration on research, monitoring,
data exchange, and a new Framework Convention on climate change. This
comprehensive approach recognizes the profound economic and social im-
plications of responding to global environmental changes and maintains
U.S. leadership on this issue.
The Committee on Earth Sciences' report outlines a careful blend of
ground- and space-based efforts in research, data gathering, and modeling
activities with both near- and long-term scientific and public policy bene-
fits. The report has benefited from close interaction with the National
Academy of Sciences, the International Council of Scientific Unions' Inter-
national Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, and the World Meteorological
Organization's World Climate Research Programme. As such, I believe the
report and the process which produced it provide an exemplary model of a
coordinated, integrated research strategy and a sound basis for planning.
Chairman Dallas Peck, Vice Chairman Robert Corell, and their interagency
committee members, associates, and staff have done an excellent job and
are to be commended.
Sincerely,
DAuan Promley
D. Allan Bromley
Director
To obtain a copy of this document - - send request to:
Committee on Earth Sciences
c/o U.S. Geological Survey
104 National Center
Reston, VA 22092
(703) 648-4450
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
1
Introduction
3
Planning the FY 1991 Program
5
Planning Framework
5
Priority Framework
6
Evaluation Criteria
6
Agency and Organizational Roles
11
Benefits
12
Research Program and Budgets
16
Budget Overview
16
Budget by Science Element
17
Climate and Hydrologic Systems
22
Biogeochemical Dynamics
25
Ecological Systems and Dynamics
29
Earth System History
32
Human Interactions
34
Solid Earth Processes
36
Solar Influences
39
Data Management
40
Budget by Scientific Objective
43
Budget by Agency
44
Budget by Federal Budget Function
48
Budget by Ground- and Space-Based Research
49
The Carbon Cycle: An Example of Interdisciplinary
Research
51
Policy Needs
51
Scientific Background
51
Required Understanding
53
U.S. Global Change Research Program Approach
53
Special Issues
56
Education
56
Emerging Disciplines
56
International Dimension
57
Appendix: FY 1990-1991 Global Change Research
Program by Project
58
List of Tables and Figures
Tables
1. FY 1990-1991 U.S. Global Change Research Program
Focused Budget
18
2. FY 1990-1991 Budget of Contributory Programs
to the U.S. Global Change Research Program
20
3. FY 1990-1991 U.S. Global Change Research Program
by Budget Function
48
Figures
1. U.S. Global Change Research Program Priority
Framework
8
2. U.S. Global Change Research Program Budget
by Science Element
17
3. U.S. Global Change Research Program Budget
by Scientific Objective
43
4. U.S. Global Change Research Program Budget
by Agency
44
5. U.S. Global Change Research Program Budget
by Ground- and Space-Based Programs
49
1
Executive Summary
Although the Earth has been changing for millions of years,
dramatic recent changes such as antarctic ozone depletion
demonstrate that human activities are affecting the Earth
system.
Recognizing the profound economic and social implica-
tions of responding to global environmental changes, the
President has set in motion a comprehensive process
designed to continue U.S. leadership on this issue. This
includes an accelerated, focused research effort; active
participation in international collaborative efforts intended
to culminate in a Framework Convention; and a compre-
hensive review of potential policies and their implications.
As the research component of this process, the U.S. Global
Change Research Program is designed to reduce key scien-
tific uncertainties and to develop more reliable scientific
predictions upon which sound policy strategies and
responses can be based.
An improved predictive model of the integrated Earth
system and a better understanding of human interactions
with this system will provide direct benefits by anticipating
and planning for impacts on commerce, agriculture, energy,
resources utilization, and human safety.
Because of the high priority attached to the U.S. Global
Change Research Program, the President is proposing
$1,034 million for this research effort in the FY 1991
budget, a $374.8 million or 57 percent increase over the
FY 1990 level.
This proposed budget will significantly expand research,
data gathering, and modeling activities with both near- and
long-term scientific and public policy benefits. It includes
a carefully balanced mix of ground- and space-based
2
research efforts that are essential given the variability of the
phenomena being studied and the need to scale local proc-
esses to regional and global levels.
For the ground-based program, the proposed budget will
initiate multi-agency research thrusts in several critical
areas, including the role of clouds in controlling climate,
fluxes of greenhouse gases, resource responses to global
change, past changes in the Earth system, and the role of
human activities in global change.
For the space-based program, the proposed budget will
initiate the development of the NASA Earth Observing
System, a key element in "Mission to Planet Earth," which
will provide the centerpiece of an integrated international
satellite program for monitoring global change, coupled
with a comprehensive data and information system.
This report summarizes the key features and budget of the
proposed U.S. Global Change Research Program for FY
1991. A more detailed FY 1991 research plan will be
released in the spring of 1990.
The research program was developed by the Committee on
Earth Sciences of the Federal Coordinating Council for Sci-
ence, Engineering, and Technology, in close interaction
with the National Academy of Sciences, the International
Council of Scientific Unions' International Geosphere-
Biosphere Programme, and the World Meteorological
Organization's World Climate Research Programme.
3
Introduction
World leaders are taking an increased interest in the
economic and social implications of global environmental
changes, both natural and human-induced. The 1988 midwest-
ern U.S. drought underscored the potential effects of a warm,
dry summer, just as the climate in recent decades in the Sahel
starkly reveals the human tragedy that can occur in marginal-
subsistence zones of a changing planet. Furthermore, the very
recent linking of the antarctic ozone "hole" to man-made
chlorofluorocarbons and the current debate over humanity's
role in the greenhouse effect have placed the environment high
on the national and international agenda.
In virtually all of these issues, the salient feature is the
significant scientific uncertainty associated with predicting the
behavior of the coupled ocean-atmosphere-land system. The
formidable costs associated with addressing environmental
change require that policy decisions be based on adequate
scientific knowledge. To provide this knowledge, the U.S.
Global Change Research Program has been created as a key
component of the President's overall approach to global envi-
ronmental change. Because of the priority attached to this
issue, the President is requesting $1,034 million for the
research program in FY 1991, an increase of $374.8 million
or 57 percent over the FY 1990 level.
The present document is the second in a series of overviews
that accompany the President's annual budget to the Congress.
It highlights the Program's FY 1991 research activities and
budget developed by the Committee on Earth Sciences (CES)
of the Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering,
and Technology.
The CES activities of the past year began with the publica-
tion in January 1989 of Our Changing Planet: A U.S. Strategy
for Global Change Research. Following this strategic plan, the
CES prepared Our Changing Planet: The FY 1990 Research
Plan (July 1989), which reviewed the Earth system changes
that have occurred in the past; the forces that are at work today;
4
and the strengths and weaknesses in current scientific under-
standing. It also described the highest priority interdisciplinary
research needs, agency roles, and new FY 1990 research
initiatives.
The FY 1990 Research Plan was reviewed by the National
Academy of Sciences, the American Geophysical Union, and
others, all of whom strongly endorsed the Program's holistic
approach to understanding the Earth system. The Plan is also
consistent with the concepts outlined by the International
Geosphere-Biosphere Programme and the World Climate
Research Programme.
While recognizing the need for a comprehensive research
and modeling effort, the FY 1991 Program also focuses on the
scientific issues underlying current and future policy questions,
including: Should the "Montreal Protocol on Substances that
Deplete the Ozone Layer" be strengthened? Has a global
warming signal been detected, and what are the relative contri-
butions from natural processes and human activities? What
will the climate of the coming century be like, and how will it
impact agriculture, forestry, habitation, and water and energy
supply and use?
Furthermore, the present document shows how this inte-
grated interdisciplinary program has begun to address such
crosscutting activities as understanding the carbon cycle, data
management, education, and emerging disciplines.
A comprehensive FY 1991 research plan will be published
in the spring of 1990.
5
Planning the FY 1991 Program
In The FY 1990 Research Plan, the CES established the
following goal and objectives for the U.S. Global Change
Research Program:
Goal:
To establish the scientific basis for national and interna-
tional policymaking relating to natural and human-induced
changes in the global Earth system.
Objectives:
To establish an integrated, comprehensive long-term pro-
gram of documenting the Earth system on a global scale.
To conduct a program of focused studies to improve our
understanding of the physical, geological, chemical, bio-
logical, and social processes that influence Earth system
processes and trends on global and regional scales.
To develop integrated conceptual and predictive Earth
system models.
Planning Framework
Each year the CES will review the Program to ensure that it
continues to aggressively address its goal and objectives. This
process began in mid-July 1989, when CES evaluated individ-
ual agency initiatives relative to ongoing programs and the
priority and evaluation framework outlined later in this section.
At a series of meetings over the ensuing months, agency
representatives developed a final recommendation on the
content and resource requirements for the FY 1991 Program.
Subsequently, during the fall of 1989, there were extensive
program reviews and discussions that led ultimately to the FY
1991 Program and budget summarized herein.
6
As part of these deliberations, the CES has forged increas-
ingly effective partnerships among the Federal agencies and
with the scientific community. These partnerships, the need to
integrate science into the policy process, and the focus on
interdisciplinary science have become the "Basic Tenets" (see
box on page 7) of the CES cooperative planning process.
Priority Framework
In the preparation of The FY 1990 Research Plan, the CES
created and implemented a multi-level priority-setting frame-
work that was used to focus and integrate the program develop-
ment and budget proposals. This framework contains three
levels of priorities for the U.S. Global Change Research Pro-
gram, diagrammed in Figure 1. These strategic, integrating,
and science priorities focus on those research questions that
will produce significant early improvements in understanding
and modeling the interactive Earth system. For example, there
is little disagreement that a major shortcoming of existing
general circulation models is their inability to simulate the role
of clouds and convective processes accurately; hence, that
research is the highest priority in the Climate and Hydrologic
Systems element. However, concurrent progress in high
priority activities in all science elements is necessary for the
Program to achieve its overall goal, although not all will
receive equal emphasis.
Evaluation Criteria
Within each science element, the CES evaluated FY 1991
research initiatives, taking into account the priorities and
several evaluation criteria (see box on page 10). These criteria
provided a framework for designing the specific project-by-
project structure that constitutes the Program (see Appendix for
project listing).
7
The CES Process: Basic Tenets
Integrate Science into the Policy Process. The need for
effective relationships between the policy processes of govern-
ments and the underlying science of environmental issues has
always been recognized and central to the U.S. Global Change
Research Program. A process for policy development has evolved
within the Executive Branch that directly involves the CES,
including (i) it being the focal point for the development and
coordination of U.S. scientific programs for global change, both
domestically and internationally, and (ii) ensuring that the results
of these scientific efforts provide the foundation for rational policy
debate and effective action.
Maintain a Partnership Among All Participants. A
partnership has evolved among the CES members and between
CES and the non-Federal research community through the relevant
Committees and Boards of the National Academy of Sciences
(NAS), notably the Committee on Global Change (CGC). Within
CES, there has been a conscious effort not to designate "lead"
agencies. Leadership is distributed among the agencies, with each
contributing its strengths to the planning, documentation, review,
and implementation process. This partnership concept is funda-
mental to the operation of the CES. The same philosophy is
operative in the parallel planning relationship with the NAS,
including joint meetings, program reviews, and exchange of ideas
for developing implementation strategies. In addition, the CES
has interacted with (i) the international scientific community and
agencies of other governments, (ii) several intergovernmental
bodies with global change concerns, (iii) the environmental
community, and (iv) the private sector.
Focus on Interdisciplinary Science and Interactions.
The CES science program is founded on the premise that the
essential scientific questions can only be addressed through interdis-
ciplinary research on the interacting components of the Earth
system. This is also the scientific strategy of the CGC and its
international counterpart, the International Geosphere-Biosphere
Programme (IGBP), thereby further strengthening the interactions of
the CES and CGC.
8
Figure
U.S. Global Change Research
STRATEGIC
Support Broad U.S. and
Identify Natural and Hu
Focus on Interactions
Share Financial Burden,
and Encourage Full
INTEGRATING
Documention of
Observational
Data Manage
Focused Studies on
and Improved
Integrated Concep
SCIENCE
Climate and
Biogeochemical
Ecological Systems
Earth System
Hydrologic Systems
Dynamics
and Dynamics
History
Role of Clouds
Bio/Atm/Ocean Fluxes
Long-Term Measure-
Paleoclimate
Ocean Circulation and
of Trace Species
ments of Structure/
Paleoecology
Heat Flux
Atm Processing of
Function
Atmospheric
Increasing Priority
Land/Atm/Ocean
Trace Species
Response to Climate
Composition
Water & Energy
Surface/Deep Water
and Other Stresses
Ocean Circulati
Fluxes
Biogeochemistry
Interactions between
and Composi
Coupled Climate System
Terrestrial Biosphere
Physical and
Ocean Producti
& Quantitative Links
Nutrient and
Biological Processes
Sea Level Chan
Ocean/Atm/ Cryosphere
Carbon Cycling
Models of Interactions,
Paleohydrology
Interactions
Terrestrial Inputs to
Feedbacks, and
Marine Ecosystems
Responses
Productivity/Resource
Models
Increasing
9
1
Program Priority Framework
PRIORITIES
International Scientific Effort
man -Induced Changes
and Interdisciplinary Science
Use the Best Resources,
Participation
PRIORITIES
Earth System Change
Programs
ment Systems
Controlling Processes
Understanding
tual and Predictive Models
PRIORITIES
Human
Solid Earth
Solar
Interactions
Processes
Influences
Data Base Development
Coastal Erosion
EUV/UV Monitoring
Models Linking:
Volcanic Processes
Atm/Solar Energy
Population Growth
Permafrost and Marine
Coupling
and Distribution
Gas Hydrates
Irradiance (Measure/
on
Energy Demands
Ocean/Seafloor Heat
Model)
tion
Changes in Land Use
and Energy Fluxes
Climate/Solar Record
vity
Industrial Production
Surficial Processes
Proxy Measurements
ge
Crustal Motions and
and Long-Term
Sea Level
Data Base
Priority
10
The CES Evaluation Criteria
Relevance/Contribution. The research must
address the overall goal and one or more of the
three key scientific objectives of the Program.
Scientific Merit. The proposed work must be
scientifically sound and of high priority, and be
the product of a documented scientific planning
and review process.
Readiness. The level of planning must be
mature, of high quality, and the research likely to
produce vital and needed advances.
Linkages. The CES looks for established inter-
agency, other national, and international connec-
tions.
Costs. The CES considers whether the identified
resources are adequate; if they represent an
appropriate share of total available resources
(e.g., a balance between space- and ground-based
program elements); prospects for joint funding;
and the degree to which long-term resource
implications have been evaluated.
Enhancements to Existing Program Research.
The highest priority existing programs will
receive adequate support before new initiatives
are funded.
Agency Approval. The proposed program or
activity must have policy-level approval by the
submitting agency.
11
Agency and Organizational Roles
At the outset of the Program, the CES developed a set of
role statements that specifically define each agency's respec-
tive role in the Program (see The FY 1990 Research Plan,
Appendix A). In developing the FY 1991 Program, that
process of role definition has been extended. The current
status of participation in the Program by CES agencies and
other Federal organizations has three categories:
(1) Agencies whose budget initiatives are in the "focused"
category and hence are detailed in this document. These are
the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmos-
pheric Administration (DOC/NOAA), Department of Energy
(DOE), Department of the Interior (DOI), Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), National Science Foundation (NSF),
and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
(2) Agencies whose programs fall into the "contributing"
category. These agencies' programs support many of the sci-
ence elements, but were initiated for reasons other than the
focused Program goal. They include the agencies with focused
programs and the research agencies of the Department of
Defense (DOD) (including the Office of Naval Research, the
Oceanographer of the Navy, and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers).
(3) Agencies and offices of the Executive Branch that con-
tribute to the overall guidance of the Program. These agen-
cies and offices contribute to the architecture of the Program
and are key vehicles for coordinating and linking the Program
with overall national and international policy on global change.
These include the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ),
Departments of State (DOS) and Transportation (DOT), Office
of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Science and
Technology Policy (OSTP), and the White House Office of
Policy Development.
12
Benefits
The U.S. Global Change Research Program is founded on
the premise that effective strategies to address environmental
issues can be built only on sound scientific information.
Therefore, a hallmark of the Program strategy is linking the
U.S. scientific program for global change to the policy process,
including:
Predicting the magnitude and timing of environmental vari-
ations, thereby providing the means to plan or avoid their
impacts.
Separating natural changes from human-induced changes,
thereby balancing regulatory needs with economic and
social development and providing the ability to focus on
those parts of the problem that are traceable to human
intervention.
Specifically, this is accomplished by supporting a robust,
prioritized research effort that can address important policy
issues (see box on page 13) and address public needs for pre-
dicting and dealing with environmental change through:
(i) Providing Timely Information - making available the
results of scientific research through special briefings and
other information products for the Congress, the
Executive Branch, and others immediately after new
insights are obtained;
(ii) State of the Science Assessments - providing periodic
assessments of the "state of the science" in the critical
areas of global change (as has been done regarding the
stratospheric ozone layer), employing both domestic and
international mechanisms, such as the Committees of the
NAS and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC);
13
Benefits of the U.S. Global Change Research Program:
Examples
Greenhouse Gases. A better understanding of the
processes, both natural and human-influenced, that
govern the sources and fates of greenhouse gases will
provide a basis for analyzing integrated control strate-
gies and cost-benefit analyses.
Ozone Depletion. Maintaining the "Montreal Protocol
on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer" will
require an improved knowledge of the mechanisms
controlling the stability of the stratospheric ozone
layer.
Energy. Establishing links between carbon dioxide
emissions and atmospheric abundances with energy
policy scenarios will facilitate the assessment of
different energy technologies.
Agriculture/Ecosystems. Better knowledge of the
linkages of crops, forests and other ecosystems to
environmental conditions will enhance the ability to
make sound decisions regarding food security, forest
management, and conservation of natural resources,
including crop selection, reforestation, and deforesta-
tion practices.
Water Policy. A more complete knowledge of the
interaction of the climate and hydrological cycles will
help resolve issues involving water supply and
demand and will allow better planning for the alloca-
tion of water resources during extreme events.
Sea Level. Elucidation of the processes that control
sea level will provide the predictive capability to
guide policies regarding coastal human settlements
and wetlands.
14
(iii) Regular Prediction/Forecasting Products - providing a
line of information products that address three time scales:
seasonal, interannual, and interdecadal.
Seasonal Projections - It is expected that research
already under way (including developments from the
sciences associated with weather forecasting) will lead
to seasonal forecasts (i.e., 30- to 60-day projections)
within three to five years. These products will likely be
derived from the existing weather forecasting systems
operating throughout the countries of the world. Ocean
forecasting is in an earlier state of development and will
require increased effort to achieve this goal.
Interannual Projections - The advent of a greatly
improved understanding of how the tropical ocean
induces changes in heating patterns within the atmos-
phere (El Niño and the Southern Oscillation) is leading
toward one of the next realizable lines of predictive
products. It is expected that within about 10 years
regular assessments and forecasts will be produced
quarterly, each providing three- to six-month forecasts,
a one-year prognosis, and a two-year outlook of inter-
annual climate variability for selected climatic
processes.
Interdecadal Projections - It is expected that prediction
of selected climatic processes on interdecadal (ten to
twenty years) time scales will emerge during the com-
ing decade. The products will consist of interpretive
reports and model predictions. This process is begin-
ning with the science assessment of the IPCC and the
Second World Climate Conference in late 1990.
In summary, the overall benefits of the Program are sub-
stantial: (i) providing critical data to minimize economic or
other adverse impacts by supporting prudent near-term actions
where justified, while accelerating the development of more
15
reliable scientific understanding on which to base long-term
policies; (ii) contributing to the Nation's environmental leader-
ship and credibility, both domestically and internationally; and
(iii) serving as a catalyst for similar scientific commitments
from other nations.
16
Research Program and Budgets
The following sections summarize the FY 1991 activities
and budgets of the U.S. Global Change Research Program in
the seven interdisciplinary science elements, by agency, by
scientific objective including data management, by Federal
budget function, and by the balance between space- and
ground-based components. Because of the complex nature of
the Program, examples of important research, data collection,
and modeling activities will be mentioned along with how they
address the research priorities and related policy-relevant
questions.
Budget Overview
Table 1 shows the U.S. Global Change Research Program
budget proposal by science element, by agency, and by scien-
tific objective. In FY 1990 funding for the U.S. Global Change
Research Program is $659.3 million.* The President's FY
1991 budget proposes a funding level of $1,034 million, a
$374.8 million (57 percent) increase over the FY 1990 level.
Table 2 shows the budgets for programs that contribute to
global change research and provide important support to the
Program objectives but were initiated for reasons other than the
focused Program goal.
The FY 1990 Program as outlined in the President's FY
1990 Budget to Congress was $190.5 million (see Our Chang-
ing Planet: A U.S. Strategy for Global Change Research,
January 1989). The FY 1990 Program was adjusted to $659.3
million over the past year reflecting subsequent FY 1990
Appropriations actions by the Congress and the reevaluation of
"focused" and "contributing" programs. The bulk of this
increase is due to the transfer of several NASA programs from
the "contributing" category.
17
Budget by Science Element
This section summarizes the FY 1991 activities in the
seven interdisciplinary science elements and data management.
Figure 2 shows the FY 1990 enacted and FY 1991 proposed
budgets for the U.S. Global Change Research Program by
science element. At this time the U.S. Global Change
Research Program focuses primarily on the three highest
priority science elements: Climate and Hydrologic Systems,
Biogeochemical Dynamics, and Ecological Systems and
Dynamics. However, the Program maintains an appropriate
level of effort in all seven science elements consistent with the
policy needs, science priorities, and the current state of scien-
tific program development.
Figure 2
U.S. Global Change Research Program Budget
by Science Element
Science Element
291.7
Climate & Hydrologic
Systems
461.5
198.7
Biogeochemical
Dynamics
265.8
90.2
Ecological Systems
& Dynamics
178.6
7.7
Earth System History
19.1
4.8
Human Interactions
15.0
FY 1990
57.4
Solid Earth Processes
FY 1991
80.9
8.8
Solar Influences
13.2
0
100
200
300
400
500
Millions of Dollars
18
Table
FY 1990-1991 U.S. Global Change
(Dollars
Climate & Hydro-
Biogeochemical
Focused Program
Total Budget
Ecological
logic Systems
Dynamics
and
FY90
FY91
FY90
FY91
FY90
FY91
FY90
Agency Totals
659.3
1034.1
291.7
461.5
198.7
265.8
90.2
DOC/NOAA
18.0
87.0
14.2
67.6
3.3
13.5
0.0
DOE
50.0
66.0
32.0
44.0
7.0
9.0
9.0
DOI
13.3
43.7
4.9
12.2
0.8
2.0
0.9
EPA
13.2
26.0
1.0
3.3
2.5
3.1
9.7
NASA
488.6
661.0
221.4
302.5
162.2
198.3
51.0
NSF
55.0
103.0
16.8
29.8
20.2
32.2
3.5
USDA
21.2
47.4
1.4
2.1
2.7
7.7
16.1
Scientific Objective
Observations
137.2
255.0
89.1
148.9
17.2
38.9
14.1
Data Management
65.2
129.4
32.9
64.0
21.2
34.7
5.5
Understanding
409.7
560.0
143.1
200.3
148.1
176.2
65.5
Prediction
47.2
89.7
26.6
48.3
12.2
16.0
5.1
19
1
Research Program Focused Budget
in Millions)
Systems
Earth System
Human
Solid Earth
Solar
Dynamics
History
Interactions
Processes
Influences
FY91
FY90
FY91
FY90
FY91
FY90
FY91
FY90
FY91
178.6
7.7
19.1
4.8
15.0
57.4
80.9
8.8
13.2
4.9
0.5
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.3
2.4
8.0
0.9
5.3
3.4
5.9
0.0
0.0
19.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
90.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
47.7
63.0
6.3
7.2
8.5
4.5
9.0
1.2
5.5
6.3
12.0
2.5
6.0
35.3
0.3
1.1
0.7
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
39.6
0.0
0.2
0.0
2.2
13.1
20.8
3.7
4.4
17.7
0.5
2.2
0.4
1.0
3.8
8.8
0.9
1.0
103.2
6.1
13.1
2.9
10.6
40.5
50.1
3.5
6.5
18.1
1.1
3.6
1.5
1.2
0.0
1.2
0.7
1.3
20
Table
FY 1990-1991 Budget of Contributory Programs
(Dollars
Contributing
Total Budget
Climate & Hydro-
Biogeochemical
Ecological
Program
logic Systems
Dynamics
and
FY90
FY91
FY90
FY91
FY90
FY91
FY90
Agency Totals
853.8
918.2
432.4
443.1
63.6
80.1
209.1
DOC/NOAA
300.6
315.9
254.2
268.0
10.4
10.4
36.0
DOD
31.2
31.0
22.3
22.1
1.1
1.1
6.0
DOE
39.3
39.5
0.0
0.0
21.8
22.4
8.6
DOI
225.1
227.7
97.4
91.0
2.7
2.9
51.4
EPA
83.3
50.6
11.0
8.3
1.6
2.0
70.7
NASA
24.7
25.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
NSF
124.2
132.5
45.2
47.2
23.1
26.6
18.9
USDA
25.4
95.7
2.3
6.5
2.9
14.7
17.5
21
2
to the U.S. Global Change Research Program
in Millions)
Systems
Earth System
Human
Solid Earth
Solar
Dynamics
History
Interactions
Processes
Influences
FY91
FY90
FY91
FY90
FY91
FY90
FY91
FY90
FY91
234.4
24.3
25.7
71.4
77.4
44.9
47.3
8.1
10.2
37.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.8
1.8
0.0
0.0
8.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.9
7.7
1.0
1.0
54.9
0.4
0.4
65.1
70.4
6.1
6.1
2.0
2.0
40.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
24.7
25.3
0.0
0.0
20.8
23.8
24.3
4.6
4.9
3.5
3.6
5.1
5.1
66.5
0.1
1.0
1.7
2.1
0.9
2.8
0.0
2.1
22
Climate and Hydrologic Systems
Table 1 shows that the FY 1991 request for this element is
$461.5 million, a $169.8 million or 58 percent increase over
the FY 1990 level.
The increasing abundances of greenhouse gases in the
Earth's atmosphere are altering the radiative balance of the
planet. However, the impact on the climate is uncertain. The
response of the Earth's climate is strongly tied to the natural
variability of the climate and hydrologic systems, including the
atmospheric, oceanic, cryogenic, and land surface processes
that govern the distribution of temperature, moisture, clouds,
and rainfall. Effective policy formulation requires quantifica-
tion of the natural and human-induced variability in the climate
and hydrologic systems, and reliable predictions of the magni-
tude and timing of regional and global changes in response to
the increasing abundances of greenhouse gases.
The FY 1991 research efforts listed below reflect the
Program's research priorities (see Figure 1) and involve the
following policy-relevant questions:
(1) What is the role of clouds in the Earth's radiation and
heat budgets?
Clouds and water vapor play a pivotal role in the Earth's
radiation and heat budgets. They control the amount of solar
energy absorbed by the climate system as well as the infrared
radiation emitted to space, and they strongly influence the
redistribution of heat throughout the climate system. A change
of a few percent in global mean cloud cover or type could
either dramatically enhance or counteract the radiative effects
of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.
To understand the role of clouds in controlling the Earth's
radiative and heat budgets requires knowledge of their
distribution, radiative properties, and cloud-radiation feedback
23
mechanisms. For example, ongoing and new research pro-
grams that are focused on this area include: NASA's Earth
Radiation Budget Experiment; the NASA, NOAA, and NSF
International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project (ISCCP) and
associated field campaigns; and a broad range of proposed
studies and measurements (NASA's Earth Observing System
[EOS] and DOE's Atmospheric Radiation Measurements
[ARM] program).
(2) How do the oceans interact with the atmosphere in the
storage, transport, and uptake of heat?
The oceans and atmosphere play a vital role in the transport
of energy from the equator to the polar regions. The rate at
which the oceans exchange heat with the atmosphere controls
the magnitude and timing of the predicted global warming due
to greenhouse gases.
The prediction of climate change will require ocean obser-
vation systems analogous to the existing atmospheric systems
used to predict the weather. Understanding the role of the
oceans in exchanging energy with the atmosphere requires
knowledge of ocean circulation and air-sea energy fluxes.
Numerous ongoing and new research programs contribute
to these areas. In situ (NOAA, NSF, and DOI) and remote
(NASA scatterometer [Earth Probes] and altimeter [TOPEX])
ocean observation systems will contribute to studies of ocean
circulation and the coupling of the ocean and the atmosphere.
Interannual climate change (Tropical Ocean-Global Atmos-
phere [TOGA]: NOAA, NSF, and NASA), and the general cir-
culation of the oceans (World Ocean Circulation Experiment
[WOCE]: NSF, NOAA, and NASA) are critical investigations.
Other key research includes the NOAA Atlantic Climate
Change Project, and the proposed new generation of space-
based measurements of ocean altimetry, temperature, and wind
stress (NASA EOS).
24
(3) How will changes in climate affect temperature, precipita-
tion, and soil moisture patterns, and the general distribution
of water and ice on the land surface?
Changes in seasonal temperatures, precipitation and soil
moisture patterns could have significant ramifications for water
resources, agricultural productivity, natural ecosystems, and
the exchange of water between oceans and glaciers.
Understanding the distribution of precipitation and the
impacts of a changing climate on the distribution of water and
ice on land surfaces requires knowledge of the fluxes of energy
and water within the Earth system, water resources on the land,
and changes in the area and volume of glaciers.
Ongoing and new research programs that will contribute to
these areas include: the Global Energy and Water Cycle
Experiment (GEWEX: NOAA, NSF, DOI, and NASA); the
proposed new generation of space-based measurements of pre-
cipitation, winds, water vapor, clouds, and ice extent (NASA
Earth Probes and EOS); long-term observational networks of
water resources (DOI, NOAA, and DOE); field and modeling
studies of the climate sensitivity of watersheds (DOI and
USDA); continental-scale hydrologic processes (NSF and
DOE), water budgets in managed and manipulated ecosystems
(USDA) and in temperate and arctic regions (DOE); and
compilation of glacier extent worldwide, but especially in the
Arctic and Antarctic, using ground-based and satellite data
(NSF, DOI, and NASA).
(4) How can the reliability of global- and regional-scale cli-
mate predictions be improved?
Accurate predictions of climate change, whether natural
and/or human-induced, are vital for evaluating environmental
and socioeconomic impacts. The current generation of climate
prediction models is inadequate to confidently predict the
magnitude and timing of climate change. This is particularly
true at the regional scale.
25
Improving the reliability of model predictions will require
the development of climate diagnostics, model assimilation of
climatic data, modeling shorter space and time scales, and an
improved parameterization of key Earth system processes.
Ongoing and new research programs that will contribute to
these areas include: enhanced climate modeling and diagnos-
tics efforts (NOAA, NASA, NSF, and DOE); mechanistic
studies of climatic change through analysis of observations
(NOAA and NSF); development of climate modeling data
assimilation techniques (NOAA and NSF); a critical review of
data needs both for detection of climate change and for climate
modeling (DOE); development of regional climate and hydrol-
ogy models linked to global climate models (EPA and USDA);
and the development of the capability to forecast seasonal
conditions through coupled ocean-atmosphere modeling and
extension of conventional weather prediction techniques
(NOAA). Results from a number of process-oriented studies
will be utilized to parameterize key interactions in models,
including cloud-radiation interactions (NASA, NOAA, NSF
ISCCP, and DOE ARM), and land-ocean-cryosphere-atmos-
phere interactions, including land surface hydrology (NSF,
NOAA, DOI, and NASA).
Biogeochemical Dynamics
Table 1 shows that the FY 1991 request for this element is
$265.8 million, a $67.1 million or 34 percent increase over the
FY 1990 level.
There is compelling scientific evidence that the atmos-
pheric concentrations of several key radiatively and chemically
active gases are increasing, due both to natural processes and
human activities. The rates of increase of these gases depend
not only on their emissions, but also on the fate of these gases,
which involves the cycling of carbon and other key nutrients
between the ocean, atmosphere, and terrestrial biosphere.
Currently, there are significant uncertainties in understanding
26
these processes, thus limiting the ability to quantitatively
predict future increases in atmospheric trace gas concentra-
tions. This restricts the formulation of effective policies regard-
ing trace gas emissions.
The FY 1991 research efforts listed below reflect the
Program's research priorities (see Figure 1) and involve the
following policy-relevant questions:
(1) What is the relative importance of the oceans and terres-
trial biosphere as sinks for fossil fuel carbon dioxide, and
how do they change with time?
Increasing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide
are predicted to contribute to global warming. Presently some
portion of the emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels
and deforestation stay in the atmosphere, with the remainder
being taken up by the oceans and the terrestrial biosphere, but
the proportions and responsible processes are not well under-
stood. For a given anthropogenic emission scenario, the
prediction of atmospheric growth rates of carbon dioxide
depend upon an understanding of this sequestering of emitted
carbon dioxide.
To understand the relative importance of the oceans and
terrestrial biosphere as sinks for fossil fuel carbon dioxide
requires knowledge of biogeochemical and physical processes
and the fluxes of carbon and nutrients among and between the
atmosphere and land and ocean surfaces.
Numerous ongoing and new research programs contribute
to these areas. In situ studies of the processes responsible for
controlling the concentration, distribution, and cycling of oce-
anic carbon (NSF, NOAA, and DOE), complemented by
remote sensing measurements of ocean productivity, sea
surface temperatures, and winds (NASA) contribute towards
the Joint Global Ocean Flux Study (JGOFS). In situ studies of
the sequestering of carbon dioxide and the storage and cycling
of carbon and other key nutrients within natural and disturbed
terrestrial ecosystems (DOI, NSF, EPA, DOE, and USDA)
27
will be complemented by estimates of standing biomass and
the biological productivity of terrestrial ecosystems using
satellite imagery (NASA EOS).
(2) What are the major sources responsible for the current
increases in atmospheric nitrous oxide and methane?
The well-documented increases in the atmospheric concen-
trations of methane and nitrous oxide are predicted to contrib-
ute to global warming, affect stratospheric ozone, and, in the
case of methane, to increase tropospheric ozone. The natural
and anthropogenic sources of these gases have been qualita-
tively explained, but not adequately quantified. Hence, effec-
tive emission control strategies cannot be formulated.
Understanding current and future trends in the atmospheric
concentrations of methane and nitrous oxide requires knowl-
edge of their emissions from industrial and ecological sources;
the processes that control their fluxes between the atmosphere,
biosphere, and land and ocean surfaces; the impact of changing
environmental conditions upon their fluxes; and their atmos-
pheric distribution and transformations.
Many ongoing and new research programs will contribute
to these areas including: studies of the fluxes of methane and
nitrous oxide, the processes controlling them, and their re-
sponse to environmental changes from one or more of the key
sources, including natural ecosystems, agricultural systems,
managed forests, cattle, biomass burning, and gas hydrates
(NASA, NOAA, NSF, EPA, DOI, DOE, and USDA); quantifi-
cation of the areal extent and environmental and ecological
conditions conducive to methane and nitrous oxide emissions
from terrestrial ecosystems (NASA EOS); atmospheric distri-
butions and trends of methane and nitrous oxide (NASA and
NOAA); and the atmospheric distribution and transformations
of species (such as tropospheric ozone, hydroxyl radicals,
oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, and non-methane hydro-
carbons) that control the distribution and lifetime of methane
(NSF, NASA, NOAA, DOE, and EPA).
28
(3) What are the implications for stratospheric ozone, glob-
ally and in polar regions, of increased concentrations of
chlorine and bromine?
Current scientific understanding indicates that the antarctic
ozone hole will seasonally reoccur until the stratospheric
chlorine levels decrease by 30 percent from today's level.
However, it is not yet possible to quantify, under conditions of
enhanced chlorine and bromine concentrations, the impact of
the antarctic ozone hole on ozone levels at mid-latitudes in the
southern hemisphere or the probability of significant ozone
depletion over the Arctic. An improved quantitative under-
standing of the processes controlling stratospheric ozone,
particularly in the polar regions, would allow improved envi-
ronmental impact assessments to be conducted and improve
policy formulation concerning chlorine and bromine containing
chemicals, including proposed substitutes.
To understand the response of stratospheric ozone to
changes in chlorine and bromine requires knowledge of their
fluxes into the stratosphere; the chemical composition and
physical structure of the stratosphere; and the coupling between
chemical, dynamical, and radiative processes in the strato-
sphere.
Ongoing and new research programs that will contribute to
these areas include: monitoring the atmospheric distribution of
the source gases (NOAA and NASA); monitoring the chemical
composition and dynamical structure of the stratosphere using
a ground-based network of remote sensing, aircraft and bal-
loons, and satellite observations (NASA, NOAA, and NSF);
and studying the atmospheric cycling and transformations of
compounds that influence the chemistry of the stratosphere
(NASA, NOAA, NSF, and EPA).
29
Ecological Systems and Dynamics
Table 1 shows that the FY 1991 request for this element is
$178.6 million, a $88.4 million or 98 percent increase over the
FY 1990 level.
Ecological systems are important in global change research
for two principal reasons. First, changes in climate, atmos-
pheric composition, and solar radiation can affect the produc-
tivity, diversity, and habitat associated with both natural and
managed ecosystems. Indeed, much of the policy concern over
global change is explicitly linked to such possible ecosystem
impacts. Second, photosynthesis, deforestation, and other
biospheric processes can affect the chemical composition of the
atmosphere, hence contributing to global change. Human
influences on ecosystem changes are increasingly a part of
current policy debates.
Thus, ecological systems are intrinsically linked to global
change through interwoven roles in biogeochemical dynamics,
physical climate and the hydrologic cycle, and the actions of
humans. However, the scientific uncertainties associated with
the composition, distribution, and processes of ecosystems
currently slow the formulation of sound, science-based policy
options.
The current key questions in these research areas, their
relevance to the evolution of public policy of global change,
and the associated research of the FY 1991 U.S. Global Change
Research Program include the following:
(1) What ecological systems are most sensitive to global
change, and how can natural change in ecological systems be
distinguished from change caused by other factors?
The diverse climates of the Earth support an equally di-
verse array of species and ecosystems. Separating the intrinsic
natural dynamic changes of ecosystems from those changes
30
induced by human activities is a challenge that has plagued the
ecological sciences and the public policy arena for some time.
The highest priority for determining the sensitivity, types,
and causes of possible changes in ecosystems is the documen-
tation of past, current, and future variation in ecosystem prop-
erties. Several ongoing monitoring programs and proposed
research initiatives will address this need with regard to sensi-
tive ecosystems (e.g., boreal forests, grasslands, and arid and
high-elevation areas): DOE's research parks, USDA's forests
and experiment stations, DOI's parks, wildernesses and other
public lands, and NSF's Long-Term Ecological Research Sites.
NASA's EOS satellite-based instruments will extend global
observations of ecosystem type, state, and spatial extent.
Furthermore, EPA, USDA, NSF, DOI, NOAA, and DOE will
examine the ecosystem responses (e.g., alpine treeline change
in the western U.S., shrub encroachment into rangeland, eco-
logical succession, small-animal ranges and habitats, and
marine ecosystems) to carbon dioxide increases, climatic
stresses, and other disturbances.
(2) What are the likely rates of change in ecological systems
due to global change, and will natural and managed systems
be able to adapt?
Ecosystem change is controlled by the physiological proc-
esses of the individual species, as well as by the environments
in which they exist. The photosynthetic response of plants to
increased carbon dioxide concentrations is relatively fast and
often accompanied by higher biological productivity and
drought and salinity resistance. However, the full responses of
complex ecosystems, such as forests and rangelands, to
changes in the climate system and in the chemical composition
of the atmosphere may take decades or longer.
Understanding the ecological response to rates of change
and how well ecological systems can adapt to change is clearly
linked to quantifying impacts for the formulation of policy
options. This will require (i) knowledge of ecological re-
sponses to specific forcing agents (e.g., temperature stress, soil
31
moisture, chemical exposure, ocean circulation, and ultraviolet
radiation), (ii) research on the interactions between biotic and
abiotic processes, and (iii) modeling of interactions, feedbacks,
and ecological responses.
The proposed and ongoing research of several agencies will
contribute to closing these knowledge gaps. EPA and DOI will
develop correlations and models to investigate rates of change
in forested and semi-arid ecosystems. USDA, DOE, NSF, and
DOI will acquire data on physiological and ecosystem re-
sponses in seedling productivity; variation of plant growth due
to carbon dioxide, temperature, and ultraviolet exposure;
ecosystem changes in high-desert rangeland and coastal re-
gions; successional change of vegetation across climate gradi-
ents; and response of managed forests to drought stress. Fur-
thermore, DOE, DOI, USDA, NOAA, and NSF will investigate
the responses of particularly sensitive species (e.g., arctic
marine mammals, reef corals, commercial fish stock, grasses,
grains, and endangered or limited-habitat species) to climatic
and other stresses.
(3) How do ecological systems themselves contribute to proc-
esses of global change?
The biogeochemical and physical feedbacks from living
systems strongly influence the fluxes and amounts of methane,
nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide, and the reactive trace gases in
the atmosphere, as well as albedo and water fluxes. Decisions
regarding land-use policies require that these causative interac-
tions be understood and that their feedbacks be represented
correctly in global system models.
DOE, EPA, USDA, NSF, and DOI ongoing and new
programs will address these needs through projects that deter-
mine the influence of soil biology, total biomass, land-cover
type, and transpiration on biogenic gas fluxes and
evapotranspiration in different vegetation types, and that
characterize the interactions between climate, vegetation, and
soils in diverse ecosystems.
32
Earth System History
Table 1 shows that the FY 1991 request for this element is
$19.1 million, a $11.4 million or 148 percent increase over the
FY 1990 level.
Geological and historical records document the natural
variability of the physical environment, climate, and ecosys-
tems from interannual to millennia time scales. These data
reveal periods that were significantly colder and warmer than
today, as well as past abrupt climate changes and subsequent
environmental responses. Understanding this past behavior of
the natural system is essential for detecting predicted human-
caused perturbations against the background of normal vari-
ability and for providing data sets to test climate models.
Confidence in model predictions of future change will be
increased if the models can reproduce these past climates.
Uncertainties in the predictions of climate models is al-
ready a key factor in policy debates, as is whether a greenhouse
"signal" can be found in the record of recent decades. In
addition, past evidence of the impact of climate changes on
ecosystems demonstrates the vulnerability or resilience of these
systems to change.
The FY 1991 research efforts listed below reflect the
Program's research priorities (see Figure 1) and involve the
following policy-relevant questions:
(1) What are the natural ranges and rates of change in the
climate and environmental systems?
The paleoclimatic record can provide insight into the cause
and effect of global changes. The history of atmospheric
carbon dioxide and methane along with records of past cli-
mates can be reconstructed from ice core samples. Similarly,
the temporal covariations in the terrestrial biosphere, the
carbon cycle, and climate need to be reconstructed from fossils,
ocean sediments, and the geological record.
33
To address these opportunities and needs, DOI and NSF
will focus on developing new paleoclimate methods, recon-
struct past abrupt climate transitions and past warm intervals
on Earth, and emphasize studies in the sensitive arid (DOI) and
polar (NSF and DOI) regions.
(2) How rapidly have ecosystems adapted to past abrupt
transitions in climate?
The long-term geologic record contains evidence for a
number of minor- to large-scale, rapid changes that have had
profound effects on Earth systems and hence offers the oppor-
tunity to observe the environmental effects (e.g., extinction and
replacement of biota) of a large sudden perturbation.
While the general characteristics and timing of major
abrupt changes throughout the geological record are known,
the existing studies are generally incomplete and limited in
scale and scope. Better understanding of their effects on Earth
systems will require the integrating of records on regional to
global scales for selected events.
The programs of USDA, DOI, and NSF will contribute
studies that emphasize the effects on the biosphere. The
ongoing paleoclimate programs of USDA focus on the impacts
of fire severity and frequency on the life histories and distribu-
tions of biota. New initiatives will study the effects of climate
change on arid regions (DOI), and the impact of abrupt climate
changes on ecosystems (NSF).
(3) Do past warm intervals in Earth history provide
appropriate scenarios to test model predictions of future
global warming?
The assessment of the regional predictions of general
circulation models will benefit from a comparison to data
showing how representative regions responded during past
warm periods. Intervals of past warm climates are known, but
34
most of the environmental reconstructions of those times are
qualitative and the scope of the variables is not comprehensive,
which is a limitation in assessing the reliability of the models.
The Program will focus on determining if regional re-
sponses to global warming are similar regardless of local con-
ditions or causes of the warming. This goal will be addressed
by existing paleoclimatic research projects, such as the Climate
of the Holocene Mapping Project (COHMAP) (NSF and DOE)
and the Pliocene Project (DOI), as well as by augmenting
existing and supporting new interdisciplinary programs.
NOAA will augment its study of integrated paleoclimate
investigations and global model assessment for these warm-
Earth scenarios.
Human Interactions
Table 1 shows that the FY 1991 request for this element is
$15.0 million, a $10.2 million or 212 percent increase over the
FY 1990 level.
A comprehensive picture of global change must include the
relationship between biological, atmospheric, hydrologic, and
terrestrial changes and the human activities that stimulate or
mediate them. These relationships include both the cumulative
effects of individual or group actions over long periods of time
and the less-concentrated, but equally influential, effects of the
actions of social and economic institutions. For example,
greenhouse gas emissions are due to several social and eco-
nomic factors, including growth of human population, energy
consumption, agricultural and industrial practices, and regula-
tions.
Without an understanding of human behavior and its
consequences for the environment, models will be inadequate
to explain, or to develop policies to deal with, global change
phenomena. The following research efforts reflect the
Program's research priorities (see Figure 1) and involve the
following policy-relevant questions:
35
(1) What kinds of empirical data are needed to measure and
understand human interactions in global change?
The study of human interactions is dependent on having
time-series data on a wide variety of human activities and
related phenomena, ranging from energy demands to food
consumption patterns. The necessary first step is to establish
baseline data on environmentally significant human activities
that reflect the differing technological, economic, and cultural
forces in various societies.
NSF is supporting the collection of baseline data in envi-
ronmentally critical areas and will establish Long-Term Re-
gional Research Sites. These will support research on meth-
odological problems in creating data bases which span the
range of human activities in various regions and societies and
will also encompass historical data. DOI will develop data sets
for research that addresses the human factors which influence
supply and demand of water and land resources. USDA will
organize the data necessary for studying the role of human
behavior in natural and managed ecosystems, and in the extent
and severity of fires. DOE will continue its data collection on
fossil fuel utilization and carbon dioxide emissions.
(2) How and why do human beings and human systems influ-
ence physical and biological systems?
The development of an accurate predictive understanding
of human influences on global change (and hence appropriate
public policy responses) is dependent upon the availability of
data bases that span time and space, characterizing the funda-
mental processes of change in human systems, and the interac-
tions of these systems with the physical and biological proc-
esses. Therefore, a critical early step in understanding human
interactions in global change is the support of process studies.
36
NSF will expand its Human Dimensions of Global Envi-
ronmental Change Program to put additional emphasis on
social processes such as the economic influences in deforesta-
tion and the effectiveness of legal and regulatory controls over
water resources. NSF's Long-Term Regional Research Sites
will be the focus of research on long-term patterns and proc-
esses of social, economic, and ecological change. DOI will
support the development of methods to estimate: (i) tradeoffs
among competing social, environmental, and economic goals,
and (ii) the role of human choices on water supplies and in
coastal erosion and inundation. USDA's research program will
include the effect of fires on rural population distributions.
Solid Earth Processes
Table 1 shows that the FY 1991 request for this element is
$80.9 million, a $23.5 million or 41 percent increase over the
FY 1990 level.
Many solid Earth processes are directly involved in the life-
sustaining elements of the regional and global environment.
Melting of glaciers, especially polar ice sheets, would cause
sea level to rise; large volcanic eruptions can cause climatic
cooling for short periods of time; and methane released from
permafrost and gas hydrates in response to climatic warming
can change atmospheric composition. An improved under-
standing of solid Earth processes will allow for more effective
long-term planning in those coastal regions most vulnerable to
rising sea level and for the protection of human populations
most apt to be endangered by volcanic eruptions and other
catastrophic solid earth processes.
The FY 1991 research efforts listed below reflect the
Program's research priorities (see Figure 1) and involve the
following policy-relevant questions:
37
(1) How do different coastal regions respond geologically and
ecologically to higher sea level, and how can the contribu-
tions from changes in climate (e.g., glacier melting and ocean
warming) be differentiated from those due to tectonic proc-
esses?
Sea level is predicted to rise as a consequence of global
warming, but the absolute magnitude, rate, and timing of the
sea level rise are uncertain. Elevated sea level could have
serious consequences for coastal environments and human
populations, and an improved predictive capability for sea level
rise is required for the effective formulation of adaptation or
mitigation strategies.
Understanding sea level changes and their consequences
requires measurements of the absolute magnitude and rate of
sea level rise; differentiation between the contributions of
climatic change from those due to movements of the Earth's
crust; and prediction of the geological and ecological response
of different coastal environments.
Ongoing and new research programs that contribute to
these areas include: studies of glaciation and deglaciation
during periods of climatic change (NSF and DOI); in situ
global sea level network (NOAA); satellite ocean altimetry
(TOPEX: NASA); the NOAA, NSF, and NASA programs to
use the space-based Global Positioning System (GPS), Satellite
Laser Ranging (SLR), and Very Long Baseline Interferometry
(VLBI) to measure sea level changes; studies of coastal erosion
and inundation on the East Coast of the United States (DOI and
NASA); Coastal Wetlands Change and Dynamics Program
(DOI); and the application of new isotopic methods for dating
of landforms, soils, and sediments (NSF).
38
(2) What are the magnitude, geographic location, and fre-
quency of volcanic eruptions and their effect on climate?
Large volcanic eruptions emit gases, ash, and aerosols into
the atmosphere that can cause significant short-term perturba-
tions to the Earth's climate by changing the radiative budget. It
is essential to quantify climate change induced both by vol-
canic eruptions and by increased abundances of greenhouse
gases.
Understanding the impact of volcanic eruptions on the
Earth's climate requires an improved understanding of the
magnitude, frequency, and geographic location of subaerial and
submarine volcanic events and the nature and amount of
emitted material. Hydrothermal venting from the ocean floor is
a major source of heat from the Earth's interior, and it influ-
ences the global carbon cycle.
Several ongoing and new programs contribute to this
research effort including: studies of gas and ash emissions and
degassing processes from U.S. volcanoes (DOI); satellite
measurements of atmospheric volcanic aerosols and sulfur
gases (Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer, Earth Probes, and
EOS: NASA); and studies of the fluxes of energy, gases, fluids,
and particulates from submarine eruptions on the mid-ocean
ridges (Ridge Interdisciplinary Global Experiment [RIDGE]:
NSF, NOAA and DOI).
(3) How do permafrost regions of the Northern Hemisphere
respond to climate warming?
An accelerated release of methane trapped in arctic perma-
frost and gas hydrates due to a climatic warming would alter
the chemical composition of the atmosphere and further en-
hance the greenhouse effect. Ongoing and new research will
contribute to this area through projects that study the dynamics
of permafrost change (NSF) and by assessing whether there is a
current climatic warming on a local, regional, or hemispheric
scale by monitoring subsurface temperatures in arctic perma-
frost (DOI).
39
Solar Influences
Table 1 shows that the FY 1991 request for this element is
$13.2 million, a $4.4 million or 50 percent increase over the
FY 1990 level.
The sun influences two of the most important current
policy-related phenomena: the depletion of ozone by chloro-
fluorocarbons and climate warming due to greenhouse gases.
In both areas, the main scientific problem is one of separating
the effects that are due to human influences from changes
induced by natural forcing agents, such as the sun.
The FY 1991 research efforts listed below reflect the
Program's research priorities (see Figure 1) and involve the
following policy-relevant questions:
(1) What aspects of solar variability are influencing the
stratospheric ozone layer?
Since ozone is generated by the breakup of oxygen by solar
UV radiation, observed ozone changes will depend, in part, on
solar activity. Thus, the detection of human-caused ozone
depletions requires that the solar component of ozone change
be properly accounted for. This understanding requires long-
term UV observations of adequate precision (±1%) over the
solar cycle. The required observations will be provided by
instruments on NASA's Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite
(UARS) and EOS.
(2) What impact do other inputs, e.g., particles, have on the
upper atmosphere and how are they coupled to other atmos-
pheric regions?
The physical properties of the upper atmosphere (e.g.,
temperature, composition, and density) are sensitive to human-
influenced gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, and to
solar particles. Changes induced by these agents could be quite
substantial and hence could affect satellite orbits and provide
40
insight into potential sun-atmosphere couplings. NSF's
Coupled Energetics and Dynamics of Atmospheric Regions
(CEDAR) and Geospace Environment Modeling (GEM)
programs will begin the establishment of data bases on solar
inputs relevant to the global circulation and couplings.
(3) How does the sun's output vary and what is the impact on
terrestrial climate?
A key factor in establishing the Earth's radiation budget is
the total solar radiation reaching the planet. This requires
continuous measurements of the total solar radiation with very
high long-term stability (0.1%). These observations will be
provided by Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitors
(ACRIM) on NASA's UARS and EOS.
Data Management
Table 1 shows that the FY 1991 request for data manage-
ment is a $129.4 million, a $64.2 million or 98 percent increase
over the FY 1990 level.
Data and information management will provide a bridge
between global change observations and scientific understand-
ing, and will be a key factor in the success of programs carried
out within all seven interdisciplinary science elements. The
traditional concepts and present practices of data management
are inadequate for global change studies. The interdisciplinary,
interagency, and international aspects of these studies, coupled
with a long-term view, pose unprecedented challenges to the
data management and research communities alike. Conse-
quently, cooperation in seeking new approaches to archiving
and management of data is essential.
Data management includes the means and mechanisms to
describe, gather, transmit, validate, process, archive, and
disseminate data. The initial thrust will be on data base
development in the highest priority science elements and
41
strengthening the infrastructure required to process, manage,
and improve access to the great variety of ground- and space-
based observations.
The key data management questions with policy implica-
tions include:
(1) How can the data handling and access capabilities be best
organized and strengthened?
Data management systems for global change must be able
to accept and archive dissimilar types of data collected from
different data collection systems, i.e., both ground- and space-
based data by different organizations in different formats and
on different media.
Interactions among CES agencies through the Interagency
Working Group on Data Management for Global Change and
with the science community have begun to facilitate improved
access to data and data handling capabilities. A major problem
facing scientists attempting to use global change data sets is
that it is extremely difficult to find out who has what data and
how good the data are. Using existing facilities, NASA,
NOAA, NSF, DOE, and DOI will continue to develop and
expand a Master Directory for Global Change Data by linking
with a common architecture, directories, catalogs, and invento-
ries of data in all global change science elements. Hundreds of
global change data sets already have been documented and
entered.
Studies have been initiated to develop archives with
improved quality control, documentation, and ease of access to
satellite data, including formation of the EOS Data and Infor-
mation System (NASA, NOAA and DOI), and procedures are
being developed for better distribution of digital data bases.
Access to and assimilation of the DOD environmental data
bases are being addressed. Bilateral agreements have been
signed between NASA and NOAA and between NASA and
42
USGS for the development of data systems to manage satellite
data. The exchange of satellite information between NASA,
NOAA, European Space Agency (ESA), Canada, and Japan
has been instituted. NASA and NOAA are gathering relevant
foreign data to combine with U.S. data.
(2) How can the agencies build the data sets needed to facili-
tate early results from the Program?
Long-term global measurements must routinely be sup-
ported by documentation regarding instrument calibrations,
coverage, sampling, data editing, data reduction algorithms,
including ancillary data, algorithm validation, assimilation or
analysis procedures, and correlative measurements.
Many ongoing and new research programs contribute to the
task of developing integrated global-scale satellite and in situ
data sets that will support model development including the
development of data bases in support of: biological responses
to climate, abrupt climate change, anthropogenic forces in
global change, long-term ecological research, studies of eco-
system stress, land-surface data, fire severity and occurrence,
sea surface temperature fields, and regional ecosystem vari-
ables that are sensitive to global change. (All CES agencies are
involved in one or more of these activities.) DOE will support
a critical review of data for climate modeling, and NSF will
support a geosystems data base activity that includes the devel-
opment and quality control of model-generated data sets. On a
priority basis, data sets are being extended into the past, both to
document global change and to test and validate diagnostic and
predictive models. NOAA and NSF data management ele-
ments provide resources for the development of historical and
paleo data bases. DOE and DOI have similarly focused pro-
grams.
43
Budget by Scientific Objective
Figure 3 shows the FY 1990 enacted and FY 1991 pro-
posed budgets for the U.S. Global Change Research Program
by scientific objective: observations, data management, under-
standing, and prediction. These budgets reflect a balance
between each of the scientific objectives, with a strong com-
mitment to data management.
Figure 3
U.S. Global Change Research Program Budget
by Scientific Objective
Scientific Objective
137.2
Observations
FY 1990
255.0
//
FY 1991
65.2
Data Management
129.4
409.7
Understanding
560.0
47.2
Prediction
89.7
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Millions of Dollars
44
Budget by Agency
Figure 4 shows the FY 1990 enacted and FY 1991 pro-
posed budgets for the U.S. Global Change Research Program
by agency. The individual agency efforts build upon their
respective scientific and technical strengths.
Figure 4
U.S. Global Change Research Program Budget
by Agency
Agency
DOC/
18.0
NOAA
87.0
FY 1990
50.0
FY 1991
DOE
66.0
13.3
DOI
43.7
13.2
EPA
26.0
488.6
NASA
661.0
55.0
NSF
103.0
21.2
USDA
47.4
0
200
400
600
800
Millions of Dollars
45
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
In FY 1991, NOAA has proposed an $87 million Climate and
Global Change Program in support of the U.S. Global Change
Research Program. This represents a $69 million or 383
percent increase above the FY 1990 level. The FY 1991
NOAA contribution involves enhancements to ongoing efforts
in: operational in situ and satellite observation programs with
an emphasis on oceanic and atmospheric dynamics (including
sea level), circulation, and chemistry; focused research on
ocean-atmosphere interactions, the global hydrological cycle,
the role of oceanic circulation and biogeochemical dynamics in
climate change, atmospheric trace gas/climate interactions, and
the response of marine resources to climate change and related
stresses; and programs to improve climate modeling, predic-
tion, and information management capabilities.
Department of Energy (DOE). In FY 1991, DOE has pro-
posed a $66 million budget for global change research, a $16
million or 32 percent increase above the FY 1990 level. The
DOE maintains a research program directed at the impact of
energy production and use on the global Earth system by
focusing primarily on climate, atmosphere, ocean, and ecosys-
tem responses. DOE will augment research on climate model-
ing; studies of carbon dioxide sources in the atmosphere,
oceans, and land; impacts on vegetation and ecosystems; and
research efforts to quantitatively describe the radiative balance
and the cloud-climate feedback in the atmosphere. New initia-
tives focus on critical data needs for global change research
and the climatic variables that may serve as indicators of global
change; and on funding to provide education and training to
the next generation of scientists.
Department of the Interior (DOI). In FY 1991, DOI has pro-
posed a $43.7 million budget for global change research, a
$30.4 million or 229 percent increase above the FY 1990 level.
DOI efforts include studies of: paleoclimates; interaction and
sensitivity of hydrologic, ecological, and landscape systems
with climate; arid, polar, and coastal regions and systems;
volcano-atmosphere interactions; methane hydrates; changing
46
land surface characteristics; ocean heat fluxes; social, environ-
mental, and economic consequences of global change including
human activities, water resources, biological species variation,
and land management; and carbon cycle variation studies; as
well as archiving and distributing space- and land-based Earth
science data.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In FY 1991, EPA
has proposed $26 million for global change research, an
increase of $12.8 million or 97 percent above the FY 1990
level. EPA's research efforts are focused on evaluating the
processes and quantifying the relative contributions of anthro-
pogenic and biological sources of trace gases, quantifying and
modeling the consequences of climate change on ecosystems
and their subsequent feedback to the atmosphere, and the
interaction of trace gases in the atmosphere. Special emphasis
will be given to climate sensitive regions, e.g., tundra, wetlands
and forests. EPA's research will help provide the process-level
understanding and modeling capabilities to predict global
change.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). In
FY 1991, NASA has proposed $661 million for global change
research, an increase of $172.4 million or 35 percent above the
FY 1990 level. NASA research efforts are primarily focused
on space-based studies of the Earth as an integrated system.
These activities include ongoing research and satellite pro-
grams (e.g., the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite, Ocean
Topography Experiment, etc.) that are important precursors to
the FY 1991 initiatives: Earth Probes (a series of satellite
measurements prior to EOS to monitor atmospheric ozone,
ocean color, precipitation in the tropics, and ocean surface
winds) and the Earth Observing System (EOS). EOS will
provide an integrated, comprehensive monitoring and data
management program of simultaneous measurements of key
global change variables.
47
National Science Foundation (NSF). In FY 1991, NSF has
proposed $103 million for global change research, an increase
of $48 million or 87 percent above the FY 1990 level. NSF
proposes to augment and initiate programs coordinated interna-
tionally to observe, understand, and model atmospheric, oce-
anic, terrestrial, and social processes and their coupled interac-
tions. Studies include ocean circulation, ocean-atmosphere
interactions, cloud-radiation interactions, global atmospheric
chemistry, biogeochemical processes, land-sea interactions,
past climate change, crustal and related processes impacting
global change, ecosystems, solar processes, human dimensions
of global change, data base research and development, and a
multi-agency education initiative for global change.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). In FY
1991, USDA has proposed $47.4 million for global change
research, an increase of $26.2 million or 124 percent above the
FY 1990 level. USDA research efforts are focused on ground-
based research programs studying agricultural, forest and range
ecosystems as influenced by factors such as water balance,
atmospheric deposition, plant responses to changes in atmos-
pheric constituents, UV-B radiation and other global change
variables. Some representative studies that will focus on
agricultural effects on environmental variables will include
mechanisms of methane generation and nitrous oxide release;
soil properties including moisture, erosion, organic matter
dynamics, nutrient fluxes, and microbes; relationship of global
change to forest and range fires, insects, and plant pathogens;
and agricultural management systems.
48
Budget by Federal Budget Function
Scientific, environmental, energy, and agricultural re-
sources are vital to the health of our Nation. Table 3 shows the
FY 1990 enacted and FY 1991 proposed budgets for the U.S.
Global Change Research Program by Federal Budget Function.
In FY 1991, significant increases above FY 1990 levels are
proposed for each budget function. The U.S. Global Change
Research Program must be viewed as a single integrated
research effort with its success dependent upon cooperation
and contributions from each of the individual agency programs.
Table 3
FY 1990 - 1991 U.S. Global Change Research Program
by Budget Function
(Dollars in Millions)
Budget
Budget Function
Function
Number
1990
1991
TOTAL
659.3
1034.1
General Science, Space
and Technology
250
543.6
764.0
NASA
488.6
661.0
NSF
55.0
103.0
Energy (DOE)
270
50.0
66.0
Natural Resources and
Environment
300
44.5
156.7
DOI
13.3
43.7
EPA
13.2
26.0
DOC/NOAA
18.0
87.0
Agriculture (USDA)
350
21.2
47.4
49
Budget by Ground- and Space-Based Research
Figure 5 shows the FY 1990 enacted and FY 1991 pro-
posed budgets for the U.S. Global Change Research Program
by space- and ground-based research activities. Maintaining an
appropriate balance between ground- and space-based research
programs is essential for a successful U.S. Global Change
Research Program. In situ and theoretical studies of physical,
chemical, biological, and geological processes must be comple-
mented by a comprehensive space-based program to provide
the global observations of key environmental variables. The
combination of ground- and space-based measurements is
required given the temporal and spatial variability of the
systems being studied, and the need to scale the processes
occurring at the local level to the regional and global levels.
The ground-based program is essential to interpret some of the
global satellite observations (e.g., long-term trends), as well as
to obtain scientific information not attainable from space (e.g.,
trace gas fluxes). Both types of program need to be strongly
supported, and the FY 1991 budget reflects a reasonable
balance.
Figure 5
U.S. Global Change Research Program Budget
by Ground- and Space-Based Programs
Activity
FY 1990
N
FY 1991
326.7
Ground-Based
531.5
332.6
Space-based
502.6
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Millions of Dollars
50
Ground-based: The FY 1991 request for the ground-based
program is $531.5 million, a $204.8 million or 63 percent
increase over the FY 1990 level. The budgets of NOAA, DOE,
DOI, EPA, NASA, NSF, and USDA include support for a
broad range of ground-based and modeling research activities.
The activities range from small individual investigator research
programs to participation in complex international scientific
projects. The budgets would initiate multi-agency research
thrusts in several critical areas including: the role of the oceans
and terrestrial biosphere in trace gas fluxes; the exchange of
energy between the oceans and atmosphere; the cycling of
water throughout the Earth system; and expanded monitoring
of responses to global change, such as sea level.
Space-based: The FY 1991 request for space-based programs
is $502.6 million, a $170.0 million or 51 percent increase over
the FY 1990 level. The NASA budget includes continued sup-
port for TOPEX and UARS, as well as the Earth Probes and
EOS initiatives. The TOPEX, UARS, and Earth Probes mis-
sions will provide key global measurements, prior to the EOS
era that starts in late 1997, including stratospheric composition;
surface topography of the global oceans and sea surface wind
velocity in order to advance the understanding of ocean circu-
lation; rainfall in the tropics in order to determine the role of
tropical precipitation in climate; and ocean color to improve
the understanding of ocean productivity. EOS will provide an
integrated, comprehensive monitoring program of simultaneous
measurements of key global change variables, coupled with a
comprehensive data and information system.
U.S. scientific agencies are playing a key role in a number
of interdisciplinary international scientific programs involving
the land, oceans, and atmosphere, and interactions between
them, that require a combination of ground- and space-based
measurements for successful implementation. These programs
include: World Ocean Circulation Experiment; Tropical Ocean
- Global Atmosphere; Global Ocean Flux Studies; Global
Ocean Ecosytems Dynamics; Global Energy and Water Cycle
Experiment; Global Tropospheric Chemistry Program; Interna-
tional Satellite Cloud Climatology Program; and International
Satellite Land Surface Climatology Program.
51
The Carbon Cycle: An Example of
Interdisciplinary Research
Modification of the global carbon cycle by human activities
spans both science and policy concerns. This section of the
report presents a case study of how the U.S. Global Change
Research Program approaches a complex multidisciplinary
research area like the carbon cycle.
Policy Needs
Emission of carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil
fuels and changes in land-use practices, and of methane from
cattle, rice paddies, permafrost, natural wetlands, gas hydrates,
and natural gas production are partly responsible for perturba-
tion of the carbon cycle. Changes in the carbon cycle may
affect regional and global climate, the chemistry of the atmos-
phere, the hydrologic cycle, and the productivity and function-
ing of ecosystems. Consequently, prudent environmental
policy formulation will require a solid scientific understanding
of how the carbon cycle varies naturally, how human activities
change it, and how it might respond to future changes in
environmental conditions.
Scientific Background
Atmospheric carbon dioxide is a radiatively active trace gas
with concentrations 25 percent greater now than in the pre-
industrial era (prior to 1850) and increasing at about 0.4 per-
cent annually because of human activities. Annual anthropo-
genic emissions of carbon dioxide are currently about 5.5
billion metric tons from fossil fuel combustion, plus an addi-
tional 0.8 to 3.0 billion metric tons from tropical deforestation.
Over the past century, fossil fuel use and cement manufactur-
ing released about 200 billion metric tons of carbon into the
atmosphere. In the same time period, land-use changes (pri-
marily deforestation) may have released as much as an addi-
tional 115 billion metric tons of carbon. However, only 130
52
billion metric tons of these combined releases remain in the
atmosphere. A critical question concerning the global carbon
balance is, "What has happened to the remaining carbon diox-
ide and what will happen to it in the future?"
The natural fluxes of carbon dioxide into and out of the
atmosphere from the oceans and terrestrial biosphere are an
order of magnitude greater than the anthropogenic fluxes. The
oceans, which contain about 50 times more carbon than does
the atmosphere, are known to be an important long-term sink
for carbon from the atmosphere. In addition, while terrestrial
vegetation has always assimilated atmospheric carbon dioxide
by photosynthesis, it recently has been suggested that vegeta-
tion and soils at northern mid-latitudes may be becoming more
effective in sequestering carbon from the atmosphere because
of either changes in land management (e.g., reforestation) or
because the increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentra-
tions may be stimulating plant productivity. These oceanic,
terrestrial, biogeochemical, and ecological processes ultimately
determine the fate of carbon dioxide from human activities.
However, uncertainties in the knowledge of the magnitude of
the oceanic and terrestrial sinks limit the accuracy of forecasts
of the future fraction of "anthropogenic" carbon dioxide that
will remain in the atmosphere.
Atmospheric methane is a radiatively and chemically active
trace gas whose concentration is now a factor of two greater
than it was in the pre-industrial era and is increasing at about 1
percent annually, presumably because of human activities. The
atmospheric abundance of methane is controlled by emissions
from oxygen-deficient sources such as natural wetlands, per-
mafrost and gas hydrates, rice cultivation, biomass burning,
cattle, natural gas venting, and removal by atmospheric chemi-
cal reactions.
Uncertainties in the knowledge of the magnitude of the
individual sources and sinks of carbon dioxide and methane
severely limit the accuracy of forecasts of their future atmos-
pheric concentrations.
53
Required Understanding
Biological and physical processes control the uptake and
release of carbon by the oceans, and ecosystem dynamics are
equally important on land. Economic and human factors
dictate the magnitude of fossil fuel emission and the intensity
of land disturbance. The task of predicting future abundances
of atmospheric carbon dioxide, methane, and other carbon-
containing gases requires scientific information, spanning
numerous scientific disciplines, including: the exchange of
carbon dioxide between the oceans and the atmosphere; the
exchange of carbon dioxide and total carbon between the
shelves and open oceans, and between the surface waters, deep
ocean and sediments; the exchange of gases between terrestrial
ecosystems and the atmosphere; the storage and cycling of
carbon within terrestrial ecosystems; the extent and ecological
state of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems; atmospheric distri-
butions and transformations of gases; paleocarbon budgets; and
the influence of human choices on the carbon cycle.
U.S. Global Change Research Program Approach
After evaluating the policy needs, scientific background,
and required understanding, a responsive, multidisciplinary
research effort was developed. The box on page 54 gives
examples of specific U.S. Global Change Research Program
activities related to the carbon cycle. Synthesis and integration
of results obtained by investigators working within their
numerous disciplines is a critical challenge guiding the U.S.
Global Change Research Program. This diversity of research,
data collection, and modeling activities is typical of global
change research.
54
Examples of
Carbon Cycle
Research Activities in the
FY 1991 U.S. Global Change
Research Program
Climate and Hydrologic Systems
General Circulation Models (GCM). Conduct carbon
dioxide scenario experiments in GCMs using coupled
atmosphere-ocean models. (DOE, NASA, NSF, and
NOAA)
Biogeochemical Dynamics
Earth Probes: Satellite Ocean Color Imager and Scatter-
ometer. Determine ocean productivity and the wind stress
at the ocean surface, which will help characterize the
carbon dioxide flux across the air/sea interface. (NASA)
Ocean Carbon Studies. Initiate a program of high-preci-
sion measurements of carbon dioxide and total carbon,
investigate the cycling of carbon in the world's oceans, and
determine the air-sea flux of carbon dioxide. (NSF,
NOAA, and DOE)
Global Carbon Dioxide and Methane Trends. Monitor the
changing abundance of the radiatively active trace species
at globally distributed sites. (NOAA, NSF, NASA, and
DOE)
Terrestrial/Atmospheric Carbon Cycling. Determine the
fluxes of methane and non-methane hydrocarbons from
terrestrial ecosystems and the atmospheric processes that
establish their lifetime. (NASA, NSF, NOAA, DOE, EPA,
and DOI)
55
Ecological Systems and Dynamics
Carbon Cycling in Ecosystems. Study carbon cycling in
terrestrial ecosystems and the processes controlling
carbon dioxide fluxes from photosynthesis, respiration,
and land-use changes. (DOE, EPA, DOI, USDA, and
NSF)
Land-Surface Characterization. Develop data bases for
improved vegetation characterization, such as vegetation/
land-cover maps, and vegetation greenness indices. (DOI,
NOAA, and NASA)
Earth System History
Paleo-Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Abundances. Carry
out ice core studies of carbon dioxide concentrations and
other associated variables. (DOE and NSF)
Geological History of the Carbon Cycle. Reconstruct
changes in the distribution of carbon isotopes in the
Earth's systems. (NSF and DOI)
Modeling the Past Carbon Cycle. Develop models of the
long-term partitioning of carbon between the atmosphere,
ocean, and terrestrial reservoirs. (DOI)
Human Interactions
Carbon Dioxide Emissions. Develop second-generation
carbon dioxide emission models. (DOE)
Carbon Dioxide and Standard of Living. Examine the
national differences in fossil fuel consumption and its
relation to the standard of living. (NSF)
Solid Earth Processes
Volcanic Carbon Dioxide. Assess long-term volcanic
contributions of carbon dioxide to the oceans and
atmosphere. (DOI, NSF, and NOAA)
Methane Emissions from Permafrost and Methane Hy-
drates. Assess the volume and potential release of
methane from permafrost and methane hydrates. (DOI
and NSF)
56
Special Issues
The CES has addressed several issues that are important
to the success of the U.S. Global Change Research Program.
The sections below describe those issues and the approach that
CES has taken.
Education
The science of global change is complex and inherently
multidisciplinary. While unraveling answers to scientific
questions undoubtedly will require new approaches and tech-
nology, another important concern is the development of the
human resources and scientific talent to conduct multidiscipli-
nary global change research.
To address this need NSF and DOE will initiate human
resources programs in FY 1991 that will annually support
several hundred postdoctoral appointments, graduate students,
and undergraduate students as research participants, as well as
several summer institutes on interdisciplinary global change
research problems. The NSF program will be managed by
representatives from each of the CES agencies. Training
opportunities, both in the U.S. and abroad, will include: (i)
support at the individual project level, (ii) training centered at
major research centers or technology centers, and (iii) opportu-
nities for students to pursue training at institutions of their
choice. The DOE program will encourage basic training at
universities offering interdisciplinary programs and operational
experience in team research at national laboratories and other
science and technology centers. In addition, one component of
the NASA EOS program is for educational scholarships.
Emerging Disciplines
The U.S. Global Change Research Program presented here
should not be viewed as a full exposition of the details of the
program in the outyears. The program will evolve as new
projects are developed in response to scientific developments
57
and policy needs. Each of the U.S. scientific agencies has
programs at various stages of planning, and furthermore, there
are major scientific planning activities related to global change
within U.S. (Committee on Global Change of the National
Academy of Sciences) and international (e.g., the International
Geosphere-Biosphere Programme [IGBP] of the International
Council of Scientific Unions [ICSU], and the World Climate
Research Programme [WCRP] of the World Meteorological
Organization [WMO]) scientific communities that have not
reached the point of submission to agencies for any formal
consideration. Examples include work on paleontology,
hydrology, experimental ecology, and human interactions.
International Dimension
The U.S. Global Change Research Program is founded on
the premise that international cooperation and coordination are
fundamental to the scientific planning and the-implementation
of the entire Program. Research programs like the IGBP and
the WCRP are truly international in scope and in design. The
complex scientific agenda and the infrastructure needed to
address the programs outlined here require a careful assessment
and integration of the Program's components with programs of
other governments; intergovernmental bodies (e.g., U.N.
bodies such as the IPCC); and international non-governmental
science coordinating and facilitating mechanisms (e.g., ICSU).
There is no "international" budget item included in the U.S.
Global Change Research Program because it is integral to each
project element. A major CES coordinating effort has been
initiated with ICSU and the international scientific community,
the intergovernmental organizations, and CES-like bodies in
other countries. During 1990, it is expected that an integrating
infrastructure will begin to evolve; will be endorsed by the
various participating agencies, organizations, and institutions;
and will involve to some extent the private and industrial
sector. Bilateral and multilateral research agreements and
programs between the U.S. and other countries are an essential
part of this international framework.
58
Appendix
FY1990-1991 Global Change Research Program by Project
Agency
Project
Program Status
DOC
NOAA
TOGA-Tropical Ocean-Global Atmosphere,, incl.
Enhanced
COARE-Coupled Ocean Atmos. Response Expt.
DOC
NOAA
Ocean Dynamics&Circulation: Atlantic Variability
DOC
NOAA
WOCE-World Ocean Circulation Experiment
DCO
NOAA
Chemical Tracers & WOCE Hydrography
DOC
NOAA
Global Hydrological Cycle/GEWEX
DOC
NOAA
Upper Ocean/Marine Surface Observations
DOC
NOAA
Stratospheric Monitoring
DOC
NOAA
Global Sea Level
DOC
NOAA
Ocean Carbon
DOC
NOAA
Climate Data Assimilation System
DOC
NOAA
Long-Term Data Mgmt Planning & Infrastructure
DOC
NOAA
Climate Modeling & Analytical Centers
DOC
NOAA
Climate Diagnostics & Database Development
DOC
NOAA
Paleoclimate Diagnostic Studies
DOC
NOAA
Marine Sulfur Emissions/Cloud Feedbacks
DOC
NOAA
Trace Gases/Radiatively Important Trace Species
DOC
NOAA
Operational Ocean Modeling
New
DOC
NOAA
Long-Term Observing System Planning
DOC
NOAA
Measurement Technique Development & Testing
DOC
NOAA
GESDM-Global Environ. Sciences Data Mgmt
DOC
NOAA
Near-Term Forecasting Improvement
DOC
NOAA
Marine Ecosystem Response
DOC
NOAA
Model-Based Fluxes
DOE
OHER
Core CO2 Research
Existing
DOE
OHER
Effects
DOE
OHER
Information/Coordination
DOE
OHER
Human Interactions
DOE
OHER
Oceans
DOE
OHER
Quantitative Links
Enhanced
DOE
OHER
ARM-Atmospheric Radiation Measurements
DOE
OHER
Data for Climate Modeling/Detection
New
DOE
OHER
Education
DOI
USGS
Coastal Erosion & Inundation
Existing
DOI
USGS
Permafrost
Enhanced
DOI
USGS
Interaction of Climate & Hydrologic Systems
DOI
USGS
Land Surface Data System
DOI
USGS
Paleoclimates Research
DOI
USGS
Climate Arid Regions
DOI
USGS
Biogeochemistry of Greenhouse Gases
DOI
FWS
Coastal Wetland Change & Dynamics
New
DOI
FWS
Monitoring Fish & Wildlife Impacts
DOI
MMS
Ecosystem Stress
DOI
MMS
Physical Oceanography
DOI
NPS
Integrated Studies NPS Ecosystems
59
DOI
NPS
Dynamics of Coastal Systems
New
DOI
PBA
MESEEC- Methodologies to Estimate Social,
Economic, and Environmental Consequences
DOI
PBA
TOCSEEG-Tradeoffs between Competing Social,
Environmental & Economic Goals
DOI
BLM
Ecological Change in Environmentally Stressed
Ecosystems of the Western & Northern U.S.
DOI
USGS
Biogeochemical Research
DOI
USGS
Sensitivity Hydrologic Systems
DOI
USGS
Land Characterization
DOI
USGS
Volcano Emissions
DOI
WBR
Regional Studies
DOI
WBR
Sensitivity Hydrologic Systems
EPA
ORD
Emissions Research
Existing
EPA
ORD
Stratospheric Ozone
EPA
ORD
Ecological effects
Enhanced
EPA
ORD
Regional Climate
EPA
ORD
Biofeedbacks
EPA
ORD
Tropospheric Chemistry
NASA
OSSA
Space-Based
NASA
OSSA
UARS-Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite
Existing
NASA
OSSA
TOPEX-Ocean Topography Experiment
NASA
OSSA
Payload & Instrument Development
NASA
OSSA
Scatterometer
NASA
OSSA
Operations & Data Analysis
Enhanced
NASA
OSSA
Earth Observing System (EOS) Platform
NASA
OSSA
EOS-Earth Observing System
New
NASA
OSSA
Earth Probes
NASA
OSSA
Ground-based
NASA
OSSA
Solid Earth Science
Existing
NASA
OSSA
Interdisciplinary Research & Analysis
NASA
OSSA
Suborbital Research Observations
NASA
OSSA
Model & Data Hydrology/Circ./Physical Climate
Enhanced
NASA
OSSA
Model & Data Solid Earth/Ecological Systems/
Biogeochemical Dynamics
NASA
OSSA
Hydrologic/Circulation/Physical. Climate Processes
NASA
OSSA
Upper Atmosphere Research Program
NASA
OSSA
Laser Network
NASA
OSSA
Ecosystem Dynamics & Biogeochemical Processes
NSF
GEO
Stratospheric Ozone
Existing
NSF
GEO
Antarctic Ecosystems
NSF
GEO
TOGA-Tropical Oceans-Global Atmosphere
Enhanced
NSF
GEO
GTCP-Global Tropospheric Chemistry Program
NSF
BBS
HDGEC-Human Dimensions of Global
Environmental Change
NSF
GEO/BBS
LMER-Land-Margin Ecosystems Research
NSF
GEO
RIDGE-Ridge Interdisciplinary Global Experiment
NSF
GEO
Geodynamics
NSF
GEO
ARCSS-Arctic Systems Science
NSF
GEO
Geologic Record
NSF
GEO
CEDAR-Coupling, Energetics, & Dynamics of
Atmospheric Regions
60
NSF
GEO
GOFS-Global Ocean Flux Study
Enhanced
NSF
GEO
WOCE-World Ocean Circulation Experiment
NSF
BBS
Bioresponse to Climate
NSF
GEO
GEWEX-Global Energy&Water Cycle Experiment
NSF
GEO
GEM-Geospace Environment Modeling
New
NSF
CES/NSF
Education & Training Program
NSF
GEO
Abrupt Climate Change
NSF
GEO
GLOBEC-Global Ocean Ecosystems Dynamics
NSF
GEO/BBS
Geosystems Databases
NSF
GEO
CHP-Continental Hydrologic Processes
USDA
ARS
Biological Response to UV-B
Existing
USDA
CSRS
Atmospheric Deposition
USDA
CSRS
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Enhanced
USDA FS
Water Yield, Erosion & Sedimentation
USDA FS
Wildlife/Domestic Species Interactions
USDA FS
Aquatic Ecosystems & Fisheries Habitat
USDA FS
Fire Severity
USDA FS
Energy, Water, Carbon & Nutrient Cycles
USDA FS
Microbes, Plant Pathogens & Insects
USDA FS
Species Life History
USDA ARS
Ecosystem Modeling
New
USDA ARS
Biogeochemical Fluxes
USDA
ARS
Ozone Effects
USDA
CSRS
Methane & Trace Gases
USDA SCS
Pedosphere-Paleoecology
USDA SCS
Pedosphere-Processes
Key to Program Status
Existing Program
Enhancement of Existing Program
New Initiative
Agency Acronyms
DOE
OHER
Office of Health & Environmental Research
DOI
FWS
Fish & Wildlife Service
MMS
Minerals Management Service
NPS
National Park Service
PBA
Policy & Budget Administration
WBR
Bureau of Reclamation
USGS
U.S. Geological Survey
EPA
ORD
Office of Research & Development
NASA
OSSA
Office of Space Science & Applications
NSF
GEO
Geosciences Directorate
BBS
Biological, Behavioral & Social Sciences Directorate
USDA
ARS
Agriculture Research Service
CSRS
Cooperative State Research Service
FS
Forest Service
SCS
Soil Conservation Service
Global phytoplankton concentrations change seasonally. This three-month
composite of phytoplankton concentrations for April-June in 1979 and 1980
shows the "blooming" of phytoplankton over the entire North Atlantic with the
advent of northern hemisphere spring. Phytoplankton pigment concentrations
range from red (most concentrated) to purple (least concentrated). These
measurements were made by the Coastal Zone Color Scanner (CZCS), a
radiometer that operated on NASA's Nimbus 7 satellite from 1978 to 1986.
The U.S. Global Change
Research Program
April-June
NASA/GSFC