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
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
285791879
label
Global Change Research Program (2) [3 of 3] [1991-92]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
285791879
contentType
document
title
Global Change Research Program (2) [3 of 3] [1991-92]
description
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
citationUrl
identifierLocal
62051-005
collections
Records of the White House Office of Science and Technology (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Allan D. Bromley Files
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
285791879
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
e2eb28e311942144
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2005-0336-F
2005-0336-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:
Science and Technology Policy, Office of (OSTP)
Series:
Bromley, D. Allan, Files
Subseries:
Global Climate Change Files
OA/ID Number:
62051
Folder ID Number:
62051-005
Folder Title:
Global Change Research Program (2) [3 of 3] [1991-92]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
0
0
0
0
001
THE WHITE HOUSE
Sqh, 1991
Dar (Darman)
Deatham The
-7826
but hourth The Findings
-7232
********
and Recommendations da The
CT 06504
waggener The NYT
arttcle concerning it
Anan
Assistant to the President for
Science and Technology
The White House
Washington DC 20500
Dear Allan,
You will recall that the Evans committee on Policy
Implications of Global Warming encompassed a panel on
Adaptation. I am chairman.
The Adaptation report was released on Friday with subsequent
notice in the papers typified by the attached story from the
New York Times.
Also I attach the Preface, Findings and Recommendations of
the report itself. My reason for attaching the Preface is
to show my obituary to Roger Revelle.
Should you or your people want to know more, I am at your
service,
300 Paul E Waggoner
Rehard Eauman
DRAFT
THE FY 1991 U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM
A Overview
What is driving the U.S. Global Change Research Program ?
World leaders are taking an increased interest in the economics and social
implications of global environmental changes, both natural and human-induced.
The 1988 midwestern U.S. drought underscored the potential effects of a warm,
dry summer, just as the climate of 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 made-made
chlorofluorocarbons (CFC's) and the current debate over humanity's role in the
green house effect have placed the environment high on the national and
international agenda. In virtually all 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 changes require policy decisions be based on adequate
scientific knowledge. To provide this knowledge, the U.S. Global Change
Research Program (US/GCRP) has been developed as the pre-cursor component
of the U.S. Government's overall approach to global environmental change.
What is the U.S. Strategy for the US/GCRP ?
The US/GCRP has been developed through the Committee on Earth and
Environmental Sciences (CEES) of the Federal Coordinating Council for Science,
Engineering, and Technology (FCCSET), chaired by the Director of OSTP. The
program is driven by carefully established priorities, and by key scientific questions
the must be addressed to establish sound national and international policies that
address issues such as the "greenhouse effect" and global climate change, ozone
depletions, etc. The Program was developed as a government-wide and integrated
research program. It has been established in cooperation with the U.S. and
international scientific community, through the National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) and internationally through the International Council of Scientific Unions
(ICSU). The Program is also linked internationally to a substantial number of
other government agencies (though an outgrowth of the White House Conference,
the International Group of Funding Agencies for Global Change Research) and
to the relevant intergovernmental organizations of the United Nations. The
central goal and fundamental objectives of the program are:
Goal: To establish the scientific basis for national and international
policy making relating to natural and human-induced changes
in the global Earth system.
This goal will be implemented through the following overall objectives:
Objectives:
Establish an integrated, comprehensive long-term program of
documenting the Earth system on a global scale.
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.
How will the US/GCRP be implemented ?
The FY 1991 President's Budget requests $1,034 million for the research program,
an increase of about 57% over the FY 1990 program. The US/GCRP is managed
through nine agencies (DOC, DOD, DOE, DOI, EPA, NASA, NSF,
SMITHSONIAN, AND US/DA), and is conducted in cooperation with a
substantial number (over 20 ) other countries. The U.S. is contributing about
50% of the total international effort, and is provide NY the leadership in virtually
every case.
September 7, 1990
Climate Change
Current Understanding and Recent Developments
The Climate System:
The Earth's climate is controlled by the input energy from the sun, 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 gases and aerosols, and the
processes that control the response of the climate system to natural and human-influenced
changes in the radiation balance.
Contemporary Changes in the Forcing of the Climate System:
Current Understanding: 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.
Recent Developments: The most significant recent result is the suggestion, based
on observational data of atmospheric and oceanic carbon dioxide and theoretical models,
that the oceans are only a minor sink for anthropogenic carbon dioxide, and that the most
significant sink for anthropogenic carbon dioxide is uptake by extratropical terrestrial
ecosystems.
Historic Changes in the Forcing of the Climate System:
Current Understanding: The most reliable information on past atmospheric carbon
dioxide and methane concentrations is obtained by the analysis of air trapped in polar ice
cores. Analyses of ice cores from Vostock, Antarctica and Greenland have covered a full
glacial interglacial cycle and show a strong correlation between changes in temperature
and changes in the atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane. However,
because of the low (limited by the rate of occlusion) temporal resolution of the ice cores it is
1
September 7, 1990
not possible to establish whether changes in temperature initiated changes in carbon dioxide
and methane, or vice-versa.
Recent Developments: One time interval of particular interest is that of the
Younger-Dryas where rapid changes in atmospheric temperatures and carbon dioxide
concentrations were observed. While there is no rigorous model that can explain the
observed carbon dioxide and temperature variations, it has recently been speculated that
they are linked to large-scale changes in the interplay between biological, chemical and
physical processes in the oceans, but the detailed mechanisms are not understood.
Predictions of Climate Change:
Current Understanding: General Circulation Models (GCM's) are currently the
best available 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 substantial
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 present climate system quite well and all predict that the Earth's
climate will warm in response to an increase in the atmospheric abundance of greenhouse
gases, it is clear that the predictions of the magnitude and timing of climate changes,
especially at the regional level, are considerably uncertain. In particular, accurate regional
predictions of changes in the mean state and variability of climatic parameters needed to
assess the impact of climatic change on agriculture, natural ecosystems, coastal regions,
and water resources (such as temperature, precipitation, evaporation, soil moisture and the
occurrence of severe storms at sub-continental scales) - all of central importance to the
modeling of economic impacts of global warming - are not possible at this time. Other
potentially important uncertainties concern feedbacks between climate change and
biogeochemical cycling, and 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
trace gas emission, recognizing that there are significant scientific uncertainties, and
assuming 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 has been
traditional in the scientific community to assume 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. If this occurs then the GCM's predictions that are considered to
be most likely are that: (i) the 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
2
September 7, 1990
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 between
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 observation of a marked retreat of mountain glaciers in all parts of the world since the
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
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 a 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:
3
September 7, 1990
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 associated with an increase in carbon
dioxide and the other greenhouse gases, lies between about 10 and 30 cm, at the time of a
radiative equivalent of a carbon dioxide doubling (sometime during the middle of the next
century). 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
photosynthesis with potential increases in net production, but the duration of "carbon
dioxide fertilization effects" is unknown. However, while there is some knowledge of the
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.
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
the structure of ecosystems. GCM's predict that global mean surface temperatures may
change much more rapidly in response to an increase in greenhouse gases, an order of
magnitude or more, than they did during ice age cycles. If this were to occur, some species
will not be 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
similarly uncertain. Warming affects vertical mixing and in turn nutrient supply, a major
determinant of ocean productivity. Again, while there is considerable knowledge of specific
processes and specific parts of the global oceans, the integration of this knowledge is
incomplete and significant gaps in understanding exist.
4
September 7, 1990
Scientific Research Needed to Reduce Scientific Uncertainties:
To improve our current understanding of: (i) the natural and human-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.
5
September 7, 1990
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.
6
September 7, 1990
Key Talking Points
1.
The Earths climate is highly variable
2.
Human activities are increasing the atmospheric concentrations of
greenhouse gases, but uncertainties about their sources and sinks limit the
formulation of effective control strategies.
3.
General Circulation Models are currently the best available tools to predict
future changes in climate. While all GCM's predict the Earth's temperature
will increase in response to an increase in the atmospheric concentrations of
greenhouse gases, it must be remembered that there are numerous scientific
uncertainties concerning the prediction of the magnitude and timing of
climate change, especially at the regional scale. These are caused by
inadequate spatial resolution in the GCM's and an inadequate understanding
of many important processes. The current models necessarily simplify the
role of clouds, oceans, and terrestrial vegetation.
4.
Observational evidence suggests that the global mean surface temperatures
have increased by between 0.3 and 0.6 degrees centigrade within the last
one hundred years, but because of natural variability is not possible to
ascertain the cause of the observed increase. The observational record
cannot be used to confirm or refute the presence of an "anthropogenic
greenhouse" signal.
5.
If a global warming were to be caused by increasing atmospheric
concentrations of carbon dioxide and other long-lived gases ( e.g. CFCs
and nitrous oxide) then even with significant reductions in their emissions it
would take a very long time, decades to centuries, to reverse the
"anthropogenic" warming.
6.
Predictions of changes in agriculture and natural ecosystems are not only
limited by a lack of reliable regional climate change predictions, but also an
inadequate understanding of how biological productivity and ecosystem
composition will respond to environmental change.
7
NASA
National Aeronautics and
Space Administration
Washington, D.C.
20546
Reply to Attn of:
Dear Dr Bromley,
Dr. Berrien Moore and I carefully read the letter from Dr. J.F. Kenney to Governor
J.H. Sununu in which Dr. Kenney suggested that the current increase in atmospheric levels
of carbon dioxide can be attributed to releases of "juvenile methane. Unfortunately, Dr.
Moore and I cannot understand how Dr. Kenney arrived at such an erroneous conclusion
given that most of the information presented in his letter was factually correct. The data
presented in the letter actually prove that his conclusions are incorrect.
Dr. Moore and I have documented what we believe to be the correct interpretation
of the carbon cycle by listing a number of key points concerning both carbon dioxide and
methane.
If Dr. Moore or I can be of any further assistance to you with respect to this letter,
or any other issue, please call either of us:
R. Watson:
telephone # 202-453-1681; fax # 202-755-2552
B. Moore:
telephone# 603-862-1766; fax # 603-862-1915
Sincerely Yours
R.T.Walin.
Critique of J.F.Kenney Letter to J.H.Sununu
Although most of the scientific and technical information presented in Dr. J.F. Kenney's
letter is correct, the author draws a totally erroneous conclusion about the source of the increase of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Juvenile methane is not the cause of the recent (since pre-industrial
times) increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide. All of the information presented in this letter was
available, and taken into account, during the IPCC scientific review. This memo will present the
correct interpretation of the carbon cycle.
While there is no dispute that the carbon cycle is complex, and the magnitude of many of
the reservoirs and gross fluxes between reservoirs are quite uncertain (i.e., by about 20% or
more), there is little doubt about the following facts:
CARBON DIOXIDE
(1)
The current (1990) average mixing ratio (often referred to as atmospheric concentration) of
carbon dioxide is 353 ppmv (750x1015g C)--known to better than 0.5%. This contrasts to
the pre-industrial (1750-1800) atmospheric mixing ratio of carbon dioxide of about 280
ppmv (594x1015g C)--decadal averages for a period of about one thousand years prior to
1750 were constant to within about ±2%, i.e., about ±5-6 ppmv. Therefore, the
atmospheric mixing ratio of carbon dioxide has increased by about 25% since the pre-
industrial era.
(2)
The atmospheric loading of carbon dioxide is currently increasing at an annual rate of
1.8ppmv (3.8x10¹⁵ᵍ C). This is three times greater than the annual rate of increase of 0.6
ppmv (1.3x10¹⁵g C) in 1958 when precise atmospheric_measurements began.
(3)
The interhemispheric gradient of carbon dioxide abundances between the northern and
southern hemispheres has increased from about 1 ppmv in 1960 to about 3 ppmv today.
(4)
The annual gross fluxes of carbon dioxide between the atmosphere and the oceans are
about 90x10¹⁵g C, and the annual gross fluxes of carbon dioxide between the atmosphere
and the terrestrial biosphere are about 100x10¹⁵g C. In each case the fluxes are probably
only known to about 30%. As stated earlier, the ice core record shows that the atmospheric
concentration of carbon dioxide prior to 1750 was constant to within about ±2% (±5-
6ppmv) indicating that the gross fluxes of carbon dioxide between the atmosphere and the
oceans and between the atmosphere and the terrestrial biosphere were in a quasi-steady
state. The contemporary net fluxes are smaller and better known (see next three points)
than the gross natural fluxes, hence the uncertainty about the current carbon cycle is less
than one might suppose by examination of only the gross fluxes and their associated
uncertainties.
(5)
The current annual emissions of carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil fuel are
about 6x10¹⁵g C per year (last accurate assessment was 5.7±0.5 x10¹⁵g C in 1987). The
cumulative release of carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil fuels is estimated at
200±20 x10¹⁵g C between 1850 and 1987.
(6)
The annual emissions of carbon dioxide from "tropical deforestation" were estimated
(IPCC) to be between 0.6 and 2.5 x10¹⁵g C in 1980, i.e., (1.5±1.0 x10¹⁵g C). Recent
increases in the rate of tropical deforestation suggest that the lower limit is too low, and that
the most likely current value is towards the central or upper end of the range. The
1
cumulative release of carbon dioxide from tropical and extratropical deforestation is
estimated at 115±35 x10¹⁵g C between 1850 and 1985.
(7)
The sum of the current annual emissions of carbon dioxide from tropical deforestation and
the combustion of fossil fuels is 7.5±1.2 x10¹⁵g C, of which only about 3.5 X 10¹⁵g C
remain in the atmosphere. The remaining 4±1.2 x10¹⁵g C is being taken up by the oceans
and terrestrial biosphere, but the relative proportions are poorly quantified.
(8)
The net annual uptake of carbon dioxide by the oceans is (2±1 x10¹⁵g C).
(9)
The net annual uptake of carbon dioxide by "non-tropical" terrestrial ecosystems is highly
uncertain (0-3 x10¹⁵g C), and it has been suggested that it may have increased in recent
decades through a number of plausible mechanisms, including enhanced productivity due
to a warmer climate, carbon dioxide and/or nitrogen fertilization, and improved forest
management.
CARBON 14
(10) 14C (half-life of 5700 years) is produced in the atmosphere through the partial conversion
of 14N by cosmic radiation.
(11) Because of the rapid exchange of carbon dioxide (about 190±40 x10¹⁵g C per year)
between the atmosphere and the terrestrial biosphere and ocean waters, 14C is rapidly
equilibrated throughout the atmosphere, terrestrial biosphere and surface waters of the
ocean.
(12) The 14C content of atmospheric carbon dioxide resulting from the combustion of fossil
fuels (coal, natural gas, or oil) is zero, because the age of fossil fuels greatly exceeds the
half-life of 14C.
(13) The atmospheric abundance of ¹⁴CO₂ was approximately constant prior to 1750, then
decreased approximately 25% over the 200 year period prior to nuclear bomb testing and
nuclear power plant operation. This pattern (known as the Suess effect) is due primarily to
emission of ¹⁴C-free fossil fuel CO2, which diluted the pre-industrial 14C content of the
atmosphere. The burning of biomass also contributed to this dilution since vegetation is
partly depleted, relative to the atmosphere, in 14C because of fractionation against the
heavier isotope at the air-leaf interface. The atmospheric concentration of 14C increased
rapidly after 1952, reaching a peak in 1963/4, from which it has decreased to a value about
40% above the 1952 value.
METHANE
(14) The atmospheric loading of methane is known to about 1%. The current (1990) average
mixing ratio of methane is 1.72 ppmv (3.7x10¹⁵g C), compared to a pre-industrial value of
about 0.6 to 0.8 ppmv. (1.3 to 1.7x10¹⁵g C). Note that the corresponding contemporary
and pre-industrial values for CO₂ are 750 and 594 x10¹⁵g C, respectively.
2
(15) The atmospheric loading of methane is currently increasing at an annual rate of 0.014 to
0.017 ppmv (0.03 to 0.036 x10¹⁵g C).
(16) The current annual emissions of methane from both natural and anthropogenic sources is
between 0.3 and 0.5 x10¹⁵g C, of which about 60 to 70% is believed to be due to
anthropogenic activities. The ice core record suggests that the natural sources of methane
were relatively stable for several centuries prior to 1850.
(17) The magnitude of the sources is largely constrained by knowledge of the atmospheric sink,
primarily removal by reaction with tropospheric hydroxyl radicals. The atmospheric
lifetime is about 10 to 12 years, with an uncertainty of about 20-30%.
(18) The magnitude of the individual anthropogenic and human-influenced sources of methane
are quite poorly quantified, including rice paddies, cattle rearing, biomass burning,
landfills, permafrost, natural wetlands, coal mining and venting of natural gas, e.g., the
annual flux of methane from rice paddies is estimated to range from 0.019 to 0.13 x10¹⁵g
C.
(19) Methane from coal mining, and venting of natural gas, as well as "juvenile methane
emissions" (if any), would contain no ¹⁴C, where-as methane emissions arising from
biological sources would contain a modern day 14C signature. The best estimate of the
percentage of methane emissions with no 14C signature has recently been determined to be
about 20%, although some estimates reach as high as 32%.
Conclusions:
The total annual flux of atmospheric carbon dioxide arising from natural and anthropogenic
methane emissions is between 0.3 and 0.5 x10¹⁵g C, of which about 60 to 70% are
thought to arise from the direct influence of human activities, i.e., 0.18 to 0.35 x10¹⁵g C.
It is clear that this annual flux is relatively unimportant, in terms of total carbon, compared
to the annual fluxes of carbon dioxide arising from the combustion of fossil fuels (5.7±0.5
x10¹⁵g) and tropical deforestation (0.6 and 2.5 x10¹⁵g C).
The observed decrease, prior to 1952, in the atmospheric abundance of ¹⁴CO₂, compared
to 12CO₂, over the last 200 years is consistent with the source of atmospheric carbon
dioxide containing no ¹⁴C, i.e., from the combustion of fossil fuels (completely depleted of
¹⁴C) and the atmospheric oxidation of 14C free CH₄ (the magnitude of this source,
<0.15x1015g C per year, is only a few percent of the fossil fuel source).
The observed change in the interhemispheric gradient in carbon dioxide over the past 30
years parallels the increased combustion of fossil fuels in the northern hemisphere.
The anthropogenic fluxes of carbon dioxide are much smaller (factor of about 25) than the
natural sources and sinks, but are still large enough to perturb the natural carbon cycle and
account for the observed ~25% increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide since pre-industrial
times. The ice core record suggests that the atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide
and methane were in quasi-steady state (natural sources and sinks balanced) prior to the
industrial revolution, with rapid increases thereafter.
3
The sum of the annual emissions of carbon dioxide from tropical deforestation and the
combustion of fossil fuels is between 6 and 9 x10¹⁵g C, of which only about 3.5 X 10¹⁵g
C remain in the atmosphere. The remaining 2 to 5.5 x10¹⁵g C is being taken up by the
oceans and terrestrial biosphere, but the relative proportions are poorly quantified. The
lack of a quantitative knowledge of the sinks, hence atmospheric lifetime, of carbon dioxide
means that there is uncertainty associated with our understanding of the relationship
between future emissions and atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide.
4
Deforestation
Atmosphere 750 + 3/year
2
5
102
50
50
92
90
Land Biota
550
50
Rivers
Surface Ocean 1000 + 1/year
Soil and Detritus
36
1500
0.8
Biota 3
40
4
35
37
Intermediate and Deep Waters
Fossil Fuel
38000 + 2/year
0.2
Sedimentation
Fedru
The Role of the Amazon of the Earth System
The Amazon Basin is one of the largest continuous tropical forest
and savanna biomes in the world. Approximately 15 percent of the
terrestrial biomass is in the Amazon, making it an important
reservoir of carbon. It is host to roughly half the species on
earth, and roughly 20 percent of world's freshwater flows through
the Amazon River and its tributaries. The region is an important
natural sink for ozone and has an important role in tropospheric
chemistry.
In its undisturbed state, the region plays a significant role in
regulating regional water balance and global climate.
The water balance at the earth's surface is a key determinant of its
climate, the viability of terrestrial ecosystems and the cycling of carbon
nitrogen and phosphorus. The evaporation and condensation of water define
this balance. Rainfall and the associated release of latent heat is a
principal force defining global circulation patterns in the atmosphere.
Two-thirds of the Earth's rainfall occurs within the tropics and subtropics,
and precipitation patterns are particularly variable in these areas.
Scientists have demonstrated strong correllations between this variability
and short-period climate change such as the El Nino Southern Oscillation
which occurs once or twice each decade. Billions of people live in the
tropics, and such short-term changes have often had disastrous effects
associated with severe drought as well as severe flooding. These climatic
shifts have also been demonstrated to extend into the mid-latitudes.
The alteration of the Amazon environment by human activities has the
potential to effect global and regional climate through the
alteration of land cover. The conversion of natural land cover --
forests in particular --- influences climatic conditions in two
significant ways:
1) the alteration of vegetative cover, such as the conversion of
forests to pastures, influences changes in latent sensible heat
flux, causing and increase in temperature and and decrease in
07/09 90 15:53
9 357 9629
AD GEO
BROMLEY
1
002/002
evapotranspiration
2) deforestation results in the release of radiatively important
trace gases and carbon dioxide, which influence atmospheric
chemistry and radiative transfer properties of the atmosphere.
The Amazonian rainforest lies fully within the tropics, and
scientific consensus indicates that regional precipitation is highly
dependent on the tropical rainforest itself, which may evaporate as much as
50% of the water vapor that will once again fall as local rainfall. Climate
modeling experiments have shown that without the extant vegetation, drier
and hotter conditions may prevail. Such changes may not only increase the
incidence of fire and hence emission of trace gases, but may preclude the
reestablishment of a tropical rainforest. The scientific community realizes
that more study is required and that definitive findings will necessarily
rely enhanced modeling and monitoring of these coupled climate-biosphere
processes. The monitoring must rely on both land-based, airborne and
satellite remote sensing systems.
Twenty to thirty percent of the global deforestation occurs in
the Amazon. This has resulted in a net release of approximately
0.4 billion metric tonnes of carbon in carbon dioxide, or
approximately 20 percent of the global biogenic release, 60
percent of the terrestrial contribution from all of Latin
America, and nearly one-third the release from fossil fuel
burning in the U.S. Considering the combined contribution of
biogenic sources and fossil fuel combustion, deforestation in the
Amazon results in approximately 6 percent of the global total
carbon dioxide release.
Biomass burning in the Amazon is a significant global change
phenomenon, which has been well documented by satellite
observations. The emission of radiatively important trace gases
is associated with this activity. The exact quantity of trace gas
emission from biomass burning is uncertain and further research
is required.
file 4-P-2
"Document Control"
TYPE:
PRESIDENTIAL PRIORITY
DOCUMENT NUMBER: 9200558
RIGINATOR: 02
STATUS I
DIRECTORATE STATUS C
FROM:
SUITER, Patricia
TO:
PRESIDENT BUSH
DATE OF
CORRESPONDENCE: 01/24/92
SUBJECT: WRITES TWICE-SAME BASIC LETTER - TO EXPRESS CONCERN
OVER THE ADMINISTRATION'S POSITION ON GLOBAL
WARMING.
DIRECTORATE
STAFF
ASSIGNED: ENVIRONMENT
ASSIGNED: Nancy Maynard
ACTION
STAFF
EQUIRED: FOR DAB'S SIGNATURE
ACTION: FOR DAB'S SIGNATURE
SENDER'S DUE DATE: 02/25/92
OSTP DUE DATE:
02/25/92
STAFF DUE DATE
DATE COMPLETED:
DATE COMPLETED/DEPT: 03/03/92
COPIES TO: D. Allan Bromley
WHITE HOUSE TRACKING #:
CONTACT PERSON:
PHONE:
EXT:
REMARKS: DAB Correspondence on File; Incoming in Files in Administrative
Office; Enviro Files X-REF: File 4-P-2
STP RECEIVED: 02/21/92
DEPT RECEIVED: 02/24/92
FILE: P-EOP-PRESIDENTIAL PRIORITY
CENTRAL FILES:
OSTP STAFFING SHEET
BJECT:
Letter on Global Warming to the President
ORIGINATOR:
Nancy Maynard
X6202
PHONE:
DATE ORIGINATED:
DATE DUE
CORR TRACKING NO:
9200558
EXTERNAL COORDINATION:
COMMENTS
DATE
DIRECTOR
CHIEF OF STAFF
GENERAL COUNSEL
EXEC. ASST.
X
ACTION REQUESTED:
Damar:
Please transmit letter to DAB and return signed copies so I can transmit
to Sally Kelly
Kara Kelly X6202
B:70 COMMENTS your review, pls.
COORDINATION
DATE
Concur
Henderson. D.A.
Nanconcur
Concur
Phillips, W.
Nonconcur
Conour
Ratchford, J.T.
Nonconcur
Concur
Wong, E
Nonconcur
Concur
X
Maynard, N
3/3/92
Put in Final Form
Nonconcur
Concur
as
Nonconcur
Aquick look- Looks ok.
Concur
Nonconcur
Concur
Nonconcur
Concur
Nonconcur
Concur
Nonconcur
Concur
Nonconcur
Conour
Nonconcur
Concur
Nonconcur
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 3, 1992
Dear Ms. Suiter:
The President has asked that I respond on his behalf to your letters on the
the Framework Convention on Climate Change because your concerns are
very relevant to the underlying scientific aspects of the issue.
We appreciate your interest in this important subject. It is unfortunate that
you have the impression that the Bush Administration is doing less than
other countries about global warming and other environmental problems.
That impression is entirely mistaken. If we measure progress in terms of
concrete actions, we would find that the US is doing more than any other
country to understand and address these problems.
President Bush has long been committed to responsible stewardship of the
Earth and has established a comprehensive strategy that includes the
promotion of sound environmental policies and economic growth. A key
component to the President's overall approach to global stewardship is a
Presidential Initiative, initially launched in FY 1990, called the US Global
Change Research Program (USGCRP). The world's largest program of
research and development on global change, the initiative is seeking to
provide the best possible scientific and economic understanding of global
change so as to produce a sound base of knowledge for policy decisions.
Because of the President's belief in the importance of the USGCRP, the FY
1993 Budget requests $1.37 billion for the program. The US commitment to
the USGCRP has grown dramatically since its inception, doubling over the
last three years. A copy of the report describing our research program, "Our
Changing Planet: the FY 1993 US Global Change Research Program", is
attached for your reference.
In addition, there are many other discrete actions being taken by the
Administration which directly address the climate change issue. The US
advocates a "comprehensive approach" that encompasses all the relevant
anthropogenic factors potentially influencing the climate. This approach is
scientifically sound and maximizes both the environmental and economic
benefits of any actions. It ensures that all factors - including sources and
sinks of all greenhouse gases - are taken into account, so that actions to limit
one source of one gas do not inadvertently increase emissions of another.
Also, it affords the flexibility to choose the most cost-effective and suitable
actions with maximizing environmental benefits for each investment. The
Page 2 - - Ms. Suiter
comprehensive approach was described in America's Climate Change
Strategy: An Action Agenda (February 1991) and I have attached a copy for
your reference.
The February 1991 Action Agenda set forth the initial set of concrete actions
taken by the Administration which would limit net greenhouse gas emissions.
We are now updating the set of actions with new and expanded initiatives.
The updated US climate action strategy was most recently summarized by our
delegation to the international climate negotiations taking place in New York
last week. A copy of the statement by our head negotiator is attached.
Finally, President Bush, on February 11, 1992, announced that the US will
unilaterally accelerate the phaseout of substances that deplete the Earth's
ozone layer and called upon other nations to agree to an accelerated phaseout
schedule. The US has, from the beginning, taken a leadership role in
domestic and international efforts to protect the ozone layer. I refer you to
the attached summary of the most recent US actions on ozone-depleting
substances.
The President and the Administration are committed to help negotiate a
successful climate change convention. I believe that the actions described
above constitute a thorough and responsible approach to those negotiations
and to the very important issue of global change.
Thank you for expressing your interest and concern. We share that concern
and we hope to obtain support from you and others as we confront these
difficult issues in the coming years.
Sincerely yours,
Allan D. Allan Bromley Fremky
The Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Ms. Patricia Suiter
P.O. Box 557953
Miami, Florida 33255
enclosures
OSTP:EVIRONMENT:NGM:kk:March 4, 1992:#9200558
A 0558
THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE
REFERRAL
RECEIVED
FEBRUARY 21, 1992
32 ΓEB 21 A10: 52
TO: OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
ATTN: MAYNARD
03TP
MAIL ROOM
ACTION REQUESTED:
DRAFT REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:
WHITE HOUSE STAFF MEMBER
DESCRIPTION OF INCOMING:
ID:
309486
MEDIA: LETTER, DATED JANUARY 9, 1992
TO:
PRESIDENT BUSH
FROM:
MS. PATRICIA SUITER
POST OFFICE BOX 557953
MIAMI FL 33255
SUBJECT: WRITES TWICE - SAME BASIC LETTER - TO EXPRESS
CONCERN OVER THE ADMINISTRATION'S POSITION
ON GLOBAL WARMING
PROMPT ACTION IS ESSENTIAL -- IF REQUIRED ACTION HAS NOT BEEN
TAKEN WITHIN 9 WORKING DAYS OF RECEIPT, PLEASE TELEPHONE THE
UNDERSIGNED AT 456-7486.
RETURN CORRESPONDENCE, WORKSHEET AND COPY OF RESPONSE
(OR DRAFT) TO:
AGENCY LIAISON, ROOM 91, THE WHITE HOUSE, 20500
SALLY KELLEY
DIRECTOR OF AGENCY LIAISON
PRESIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE
ID # 509486
WHITE HOUSE
CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET
0. OUTGOING
H - INTERNAL
X
1. . INCOMING
Date Correspondence
Received (YY/MM/DD) 92/02/19
Name of Correspondent: Patricia Suiter
MI Mail Report
User Codes: (A)
(B)
(C)
Subject: Writes twice (same basic letter) to express concern over the
Administration's position on global warming.
ROUTE TO:
ACTION
DISPOSITION
Tracking
Type
Completion
Action
Date
of
Office/Agency (Staff Name)
Date
Code
YY/MM/DD
Response
Code YY/MM/DD
DPC
CAHILL
ORIGINATOR
92/ 02/
RL
C 92 02/
RL
Referral Note:
OSTP Maynard
D
92/ 02/
RL
/ /
Referral Note:
/ /
-
/ /
Referral Note:
/ /
-
/ /
Referral Note:
/ /
I
/ /
Referral Note:
ACTION CODES:
DISPOSITION CODES:
A - Appropriate Action
1. Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary
C Comment/Recommendation
A - Answered
R. Direct Reply w/Copy
C Completed
D - Draft Response
B - Non-Special Referral
S. For Signature
S Suspended
F - Furnish Fact Sheet
X Interim Reply
to be used as Enclosure
FOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:
Type of Response = Initials of Signer
Code = "A"
Completion Date = Date of Outgoing
Comments:
Keep this worksheet attached to the original incoming letter.
Send all routing updates to Central Reference (Room 75, OEOB).
Always return completed correspondence record to Central Files.
Refer questions about the correspondence tracking system to Central Reference, ext. 2590.
5/81
# 30 9486
February 9, 1992
President Bush
Domestic Policy Council
Room 231
Old Executive Office Building
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President Bush,
Re: Global Warming Treaty
I am an environmentally concerned citizen deeply concerned about
what I consider the Bush Administration stonewalling of the
Global Warming Treaty talks. I feel your actions are endangering
the entire planet and threatening us with environmental disaster.
World scientific bodies agree that we should act promptly to
avert further global warming and as the United States is the
world's leading emitter of carbon dioxide I feel we must reduce
our dependence on fossil fuels, promote energy efficiency and
reduce carbon dioxide emissions starting now. We should support
a global warming treaty to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and
other ozone-destroying gases.
You say you want to be the "environmental President" yet you ap-
pear reluctant to take advantage of opportunities to demonstrate
leadership on critical environmental issues. The United States
must play a lead role in encouraging environmental protection.
Your delay to commit to attending UNCED next June is but one ex-
ample of your apparent lack of leadership.
I urge you to support crucial environmental laws before it is too
late.
Sincerely,
Pat Suiter
Patricia Suiter
P. O. Box 557953
Miami, FL 33255
January 24, 1992
President Bush
Domestic Policy Council
Room 231
Old Executive Office Building
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President Bush,
Re: Global Warming Treaty
I am an environmentally concerned citizen deeply concerned about
what I consider the Bush Administration stonewalling of the
Global Warming Treaty talks. I feel your actions are endangering
the entire planet and threatening us with environmental disaster.
World scientific bodies agree that we should act promptly to
avert further global warming and as the United States is the
world's leading emitter of carbon dioxide I feel we must reduce
our dependence on fossil fuels, promote energy efficiency and
reduce carbon dioxide emissions starting now.
You say you want to be the "environmental President" yet you ap-
pear reluctant to take advantage of opportunities to demonstrate
leadership on critical environmental issues.
Your delay to on the Global Warming Treaty talks is but one ex-
ample of your apparent lack of leadership.
I urge you to support crucial environmental laws before it is too
late.
Sincerely,
Pat Suiter
Patricia Suiter
P. O. Box 557953
Miami, FL 33255
MRS. PAT SUITER
P O BOX 557953
MIAMI, FL. 33255-7953
10000
29
President Bush
Domestic Blicy Council
Room 231
Old Executive Office Bldg,
Washington, DC 20500
MRS. PAT SUITER
PM
PO BOX 557953
MIAMI, FL. 33255-7953
27 JIN
1
29
President Bush
Domestic Policy Council
Room 23
Old Ex ecutive office Bldg,
Washington, DC 20500
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 13, 1992
Dear Mr. Willardson:
On behalf of President Bush, thank you for your very kind comments on US
activities related to the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) on
a framework convention on climate change. The President appreciates your
support and has asked that I respond to your letter of March 25, 1992
regarding this issue.
The President strongly believes that US policies in this area must be based
on the most solid scientific and economic information base available. The US
Global Change Research Program is the world's largest such program and
thus provides much of the scientific foundation for international agreements
on climate change and ozone depletion. In fact, the Bush Administration has
invested $2.6 billion in global change research to date, with an additional
$1.3 billion proposed for fiscal 1993. Research on the scientific and economic
aspects of global climate change will enable policy makers to make better
judgements about potential impacts and policy actions.
Thank you for taking the time to express your interest on this issue and we
appreciate your support.
With the President's best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
DoMan D. Allan Bromley Ramley
The Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Mr. Glen P. Willardson
General Manager
Garkane Power Association, Inc.
P.O. Box 7900
Richfield, Utah 84701
Bromley citondray
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
5/4/92 7:30pm
The most recent draft from Reinstein.
It will be debated tonight until mid-
night or later. The EC Environment
ministers will take it up in Brussels
tomorrow morning.
The written comments are by Rein-
stein. As you can see, he believes
most of the changes tilt our way.
If you feel otherwise on any of them,
please let me know.
Note the substitution-of "goal"
for "guideline" in paragraph b.
That is bracketed by the U.S. (though
the brackets are not shown here) pending
a response from us. You will remember
that we've discussed these two words
and "aim" in this context. I'd ap-
preciate your view of "goal" since
it apparently translates more attrac-
tively to the Germans,
Clayton G Yeutter
05. 04. 92 07:00 PM *US MISSION *ECOSOC* P O 1
OUTGOING FAX
U.S. MISSION - ECOSOC SECTION
UNCLASSIFIED ONLY
(212) 415-4141 (DEPT DIAL 44141)
DATE:
5/4
FROM:
Bob Prinstein
TO:
1) CLAYTON yeatter
OFFICE/TEL# (202)456-2216 FAX* (202)456-2878
2)
#781/821620
FAX#
SUBJECT: revised commitments TEXT
\
ROUTINE
PRIORITY
URGENT
COMMENTS:
AS discusses
05. 04. 92 07:00 PM *US MISSION *ECOSOC* P O 2
2 May 1992
18:00 hours
Possible reformulation of Article 4.3. (a)
3. The developed country Parties listed in Annex commit themselves specifically as follows:
(a) In giving effect to its commitment in para.1 (b) above, each of these Parties shall adopt nationall/
NEW LANG.
policies and take corresponding measures that will demonstrate that developed countries are taking the
(No LEGAL
lead in modifying longer-term emission trends consistent with the Objective of this Convention,
recognizing that the return by the end of the present decade to earlier levels of emissions of carbon
controlled
dioxide and other greenhouse gases, resulting from human activity and not covered by the Montreal
Protocol,* would contribute to such modification. and taking into account the differences in these
ADD/T7 HELP POSSIBLE NEW ON PO
Parties' starting points and approaches. economic structures and resource bases, the need to maintain
available technology
Emissions
METHANG
strong and sustainable economic growth, and other individual circumstances. as well as the need for
equitable and appropriate contributions by each of these Parties to the global effort regarding that
ADDED CHANGUAGE
Objective. These Parties may implement such policies and maasures jointly with other Parties and
TO CLARIFY ALL
FLEXI BILITY ON
may assist other Parties in contributing to the achievement of the Objective of the Convention and, in
JOINT IMPLEMENTA
non (EMISSIONS
particular, that of this sub-paragraph.
TRADING)
1/ This would include policies and measures adopted by regional economic integration organizations.
The relationship to the Montreal Protocol and in particular to its reduction schedules needs to be further
clarified. [This note is a reminder, to be removed once the text is finalized.]
4.
07:00
FM
*US MISSION *ECOSOC* F03
LINK BACK TO 4 (a) TO GIVE
EQUAL WEIGHT TO NATIONAL
ACTIONS As HOME IN OTHER
COUNTRIES (+RADING)
(b) In order to promote progress to this end, each of these Parties shall communicate, within six months
of the entry into force of the Convention for it and periodically thereafter, and in accordance with
Article 12, detailed information on its policies and measures referred to in sub-paragraph (a) above,
as well as on its resulting projected emissions from sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse
gases for the period referred to in that sub-paragraph, with the goal of returning individually or
REQUEST
BY GEEMANY
jointly to their 1990 levels their controlled emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases resulting
+
OTHERS.
CAN WE
from human activities and not covered by the Montreal Protocol. This information will be reviewed ACCEPT TO
CLOSE THE
by the Conference of the Parties, at its first session and periodically thereafter, in accordance with
DEAL ?
Article 7.
(c) Calculations of emissions from sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases should take into
account the best available scientific knowledge, including the effective capacity of sinks and the
respective global warming potentials of such gases, in accordance with methodologies to be agreed by
the Conference of the Parties, where available. The Conference of the Parties shall take decisions
regarding such methodologies at its first session and review them regularly thereafter.
FLEXIBILITY MAKES THAT is
SINKS +
OTHER GHC
(d) The Conference of the Parties shall. at its first session. review the adequacy of sub-paragraphs (a)
and (b) above. Such review shall be carried out in the light of the best available scientific
information and assessment on climate change and its impacts, as well as relevant technical. social
and economic information. Based on this information. the Conference of the Parties shall take
appropriate action, which may include the adoption of amendments to existing commitments. The
ALLOWS
JOINT
IMPUERTEN-
Conference of the Parties, at its first session, shall also take decisions regarding criteria for joint
TAJION
(TRADING)
implementation as indicated in sub-paragraph (a) above. A second review shall take place not later
UNLESS
CONF. OF
PARTIES
than 31 December 1998, and thereafter at regular intervals determined by the Conference of the
OVERRULES
Parties, until the Objective of this Convention is met.
05. 04. 92 07:00 PM *US MISSION *ECOSOC* P 0 4
(e) Any Party not listed in Annex may, in its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval. or
accession, or at any time thereafter, notify the Depositary that it intends to be bound by sub-
paragraphs (a) and (b) above. The Depositary shall inform the other Parties of any such notification.
The Conference of the Parties shall review, not later than 31 December 1998, available information
with a view to taking decisions regarding such changes in the list in the Annex as may be
appropriate.
Consequential changes in Article 12:
In para.2 (a), line 2, and in para. 2 (b), line 3, refer to "Article 4.3 (a)."
In para. 4, line 1/2, replace "one year" by "six months".
Dr. Browley-
This is a memo
I have drafted
fleshing out the
Forests Initiative idea
on which the us
could lead at Rio.
As you know,
Boyden and Bill
Reilly are very
keen on this
fonather
Weire
Document Originally
Attached to
Following Page
Gobal Chunge aile
Staff Diaft
5/8/92
TOWARD STABILIZING GLOBAL FORESTS
At Houston in 1990 the United States, Germany and their G-7 partners announced support for a
Global Forests Agreement to assure sound and sustainable use of the world's rich forest resources.
The immense ecological and economic importance of forests is under stress around the world. If
we wait too long, the forests will be gone. Developing countries have called for an investment to
stabilize global forests. We share that vision, and today we offer a first step: a significant and
immediate investment toward the goal of stabilizing global forests by early in the next century.
This initiative reconfirms and reinvigorates our commitment to successful agreement on Forests
Principles and a consensus Global Forests Agreement. We recognize that efforts toward those ends
have moved slowly because they have implied that the burden of curbing deforestation would fall
disproportionately on poorer countries. Our initiative demonstrates that we envision a Global
Forests Agreement in which all countries would share in the investment to conserve forest
resources: countries with forests would not bear the entire burden; countries without forests would
also benefit and would also share in the investment.
THE CLEAR AND PRESENT NEED
Forests provide invaluable goods and services, including timber and fuelwood; soil and watershed
protection; carbon sequestration; and habitat for a vast diversity of living things. For example,
tropical closed forests currently occupy about 7% of the earth's surface and harbor about 50% of
its species. This diversity is of enormous ecological importance, and holds the secret to new
medicines and other products of economic value.
o
Yet forests are under serious stress. In the 1980s tropical forests disappeared at the rate of 17
million hectares (42 million acres) per year (FAO 1991), often because of incentives that also lead
to economic losses. Temperate and boreal forests, although expanding in some places, are
degraded in other places due in part to air pollution and inefficient harvesting (WRI 1992).
Forest loss contributes about 20% of net anthropogenic CO2 emissions, and forests, particularly
temperate and boreal forests, constitute a half or more of the global sink for CO2. Stabilizing global
forests by 2000 would abate 70-90 billion tons of projected emissions through 2050.
AN INVESTMENT INITIATIVE
As a first step toward stabilizing global forests, we propose an ambitious increase in efforts toward
forests conservation: to double current international forests assistance of $1.3 billion to a global total
of $2.7 billion in 1994 if other countries will join us. Shares of this investment would be allocated
among voluntary investors on a fair basis (such as the World Bank formula). This initiative is
consistent with calls for a forest conservation strategy, such as the strategy to stabilize forests
mapped out by WRI, IUCN, WWF and UNEP starting with a contribution of $1 billion. Sudden
increases in contributions above this level could be of limited use before better capacities and
infrastructures are developed to receive such funding.
Investor countries would offer funds through existing bilateral and multilateral mechanisms.
Recipient countries and organizations would design and propose programs or projects for funding.
Examples might include establishing local institutes and methodologies to screen biodiversity
resources and attract private investment (e.g. Costa Rica's INBio); debt-for-forest exchanges;
research and inventory; creating parks and reserves; education and training; revising tax and
subsidy policies; national forest planning; improving agricultural efficiency. Programs would be
reviewed regularly and further investment based on progress in achieving results.
Diaft
I.
THE CHALLENGE
o
Forests are a cherished resource around the world. They provide shelter, fuelwood, timber and
countless other products to billions of people. They harbor the treasures of biological diversity
nurtured over millennia. They are the lungs of the world, removing carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere and replenishing oxygen.
Forests Under Stress
o
Yet forests are disappearing before our eyes. Forests conservation and sustainable use is perhaps
the greatest ecological and economic challenge the world faces today.
o
In the 1980s, tropical forests were lost at an average annual rate of 17 million hectares, according
to the latest UN Food & Agriculture Organization study (FAO 1991). This rate is 50% faster than
estimated in 1980, and appears to be increasing today.
o
At this rate, it will be a matter of years before most of these forests are gone. The result will be an
irrevocable loss of biological riches nurtured over millennia -- a resource we will probably never be
able to replace. And this loss is occurring now, not 50 years from now. It is directly observable
today, not predicted by computer models. If we fail to act today, then by the time climate change
is predicted to occur in the middle of the next century, the world will already have lost most if not
all tropical forests.
Precious resources under stress include the Amazon, the Everglades and Cypress Forest in Florida,
the forests of West Africa, Southeast Asia, Madagascar and Central America. The owners and
custodians of these resources are working toward conservation and sustainable use -- but additional
global investment may be needed. [add further specifics ?]
Although temperate forests are now growing in industrialized countries, some are now under stress
from air pollution. One report is that 50-75% of Europe's forests are being damaged by industrial
pollutants, leading to an economic loss of nearly $30 billion in annual timber harvest revenues (WRI
1992, pp. 198-99).
In the words of Harvard's E.O. Wilson, "The worst thing that can happen during the 1980s the one
process ongoing in the 1980s that will take millions of years to correct is the loss of genetic and
species diversity by destruction of natural habitats. This is the folly that our descendants are least
likely to forgive us." (Harv. Magazine Jan.-Feb. 1980.)
Losing forest resources faster than we can replenish them is also an economic problem. Although
there are short-term revenues from clearing and farming the land, over the mid- to longer-term there
are significant net economic costs to depleting this natural resource. Better forests conservation
can therefore be a net economic plus for the economies of developing and industrialized countries
alike.
The Need for an Initiative
o
Given the imminent prospect of serious and irreversible environmental and economic damage, we
are proposing this cost-effective precautionary investment as a first step toward a global Agreement.
Forests conservation is not a matter of all countries agreeing to stop clearing forest lands. Nor
2
Draft
does "forests conservation" or "stabilizing forests" indicate that forests could no longer be managed
and used as an economic resource; on the contrary, it includes the idea that forests do have
economic value that can be sustainably generated by managing land as forest for multiple uses
rather than by converting it permanently to non-forest status.
In particular, developing countries will not -- and should not -- be told or asked to stop using their
forest resources on their own. That strategy is bound to fail. If there are globally shared benefits
to forests conservation, then the global beneficiaries should contribute to the investment in those
benefits.
We therefore propose an investment initiative to create voluntary partnerships between interested
countries. Instead of spending years trying to bend the will of forested countries to forego the use
of their domestic natural resources, we propose to create the market incentives needed to make
forests conservation economically attractive for both investor and recipient countries. And instead
of vesting sole authority in a central funding body, we propose to let this market function through
diverse, innovative efforts designed by mutually agreed parties.
Benefits of an Initiative
Economic gains for countries with forests
Forests produce valuable products, including timber, fuelwood, nuts, and natural chemicals. Forests
lost to short-term clearing can no longer provide these products.
Forests also provide important ecological services that support economic activity. Forests help
protect watersheds and prevent soil erosion. As just one example, the 1991 landslides in the
Philippines, which killed thousands, were reportedly seriously worsened because stabilizing forest
cover had been cleared. Forests also help microclimates maintain moisture supplies for local
agriculture.
Rapid forest clearing in many countries is induced by perverse policy incentives, including tax
credits for "development" defined as cleared land; timber concessions whose duration is less than
the time needed to regenerate a forest; and land rights that arise only upon clearing.
Short-term forest clearing can often be economically wasteful as well as ecologically unsound. For
example, tax credits supporting land-clearing in Brazil for cattle ranching imposed a net annual
national loss of $1.4 billion (and a federal budget loss of $2.9 billion) (WRI 1988). If depletion of
forest resources were counted in real economic growth rates, Costa Rica's economic growth rate
would have to be adjusted downward by 30% from its reported economic growth rate (TSC/WRI
1991). In the U.S., below-cost timber sales cost the federal budget between $100 million a year
(WRI; GAO) and $365 million a year (Project '88).
Hence recognizing and investing in the full economic value of forests can yield positive economic
benefits.
Biodiversity
o
Forests are the vital habitats for the enormous biological diversity that sustains the complex web
of life on earth. Although tropical closed forests occupy only 7% of the world's land area, they
contain 50% or more of the species on earth (WRI 1992).
3
Diaft
The genetic resources of this biodiversity promise new drugs and other products that will save lives.
Taxol, a drug derived from the bark of the Pacific Yew, offers a cure for ovarian cancer. Vinblastine,
derived from the rosy periwinkle, has increased the ten-year survival rate for Hodgkins disease from
2% to 60%; vincristine, also from the rosy periwinkle, has increased the ten-year survival rate for
childhood lymphomatic leukemia from 20% to 80% (E.O.Wilson 1992).
o
The very diversity of life is itself a natural resource of immense importance. Barely a fraction of the
species and genes in this diversity has been identified by humans. Complex food webs and
supportive biological interrelationships help undergird the success of ecosystems with long-term
implications that are probably not yet recognized.
Carbon storage
o
Forests produce oxygen and store carbon dioxide during photosynthesis. Forest loss is
contributing some 15-25% of global CO2 emissions (IPCC 1992). Forests -- especially Northern
Hemisphere forests - constitute from 1/2 to perhaps 2/3 of the global sink for CO₂ (Quay et al.
1992; Tans et al. 1990).
o
Stabilizing global forests by 2000 could make an impressive contribution to reducing net global CO2
emissions.
Cumulative Net Anthropogenic Carbon Emissions
Billion tons of Carbon (% reduction from Projected)
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
Cumulative Stabilize OECD Fossil Stabilize Forests
Stabilize Forests
Projected
Fuel CO2 Emissions by (no net forest
by 2000 at 1990
Period
(no action)
2000 at 1990 level
clearing) by 2000
level of cover
1990-2020
278.6
264 (5%)
243.7 (13%)
233.1 (16%)
1990-2050
672.7
630 (6%)
601.1 (11%)
585.5 (13%)
Based on analysis by EPA/OPPE (1992). Scenario (A) is IPCC Scenario
IS92a, in which no policy action is taken. In scenario (B), for comparison,
all OECD member countries return their fossil fuel CO2 emissions to 1990
levels by 2000 and keep them at or below that level thereafter (some
countries reduce below 1990 levels). In scenario (C), net forest loss
declines from 17 million hectares per year in the 1980s to zero by 2000
and thereafter. In scenario (D), net forest loss declines from 17 million
hectares per year in the 1980s to zero by 2000 and thereafter, and
afforestation returns forest cover to 1990 levels by 2000.
Sensitivity analysis indicated little change in cumulative emissions
impact under alternative forests stabilization scenarios: 1990 cover levels
achieved in 2000 via higher afforestation rates, coupled with a reduction in
forest clearing by only 50% through 2000; afforestation achieved through
regrowth of closed tropical forests as opposed to plantations; or net forest
clearing reduced to zero as late as 2020 and 1990 cover levels reattained
only in 2040.
4
Diaft
II.
MEETING THE CHALLENGE
o
Funds alone will not solve the local and global problems of forest loss. Specific programs and
projects need to be fashioned with care and a coherent vision in order to achieve real results.
We do not contemplate the creation of any new central funding mechanism. The variety of existing
funding mechanisms offers an adequate set of funding opportunities. These include:
Bilateral assistance agencies and programs
Multilateral development banks
Debt-for-conservation exchanges
Non-governmental organizations
Tropical Forestry Action Plan (TFAP)
Moreover, we welcome the constructive participation and contribution of organizations such as
NGOs, TFAP, ITTO, and FAO in the investment initiative and its implementation.
We envision each investor country doing its best to identify and fund creative, effective efforts in
numerous recipient countries. Every actual investment would be wholly voluntary and based on the
mutual interest of the parties involved. In particular, we would look to recipient countries to identify
and propose programs that support their own priorities and efforts and match their own investments.
Through this flexible and diversified process, the cost-effectiveness of specific investments can be
better ensured. Investors will compete to locate the best opportunities, and potential recipients will
compete to offer the best opportunities. This flexibility will also allow countries to find partners that
can offer not only funding but expertise, technical abilities, and a shared outlook. In this way
programs can be better directed at (and by) the needs of recipient countries and less by the
dictates of a central funding body.
The investment initiative will aim at achieving the goal of stabilization of global forests by the end
of the decade. Investor countries will issue regular reports to the world community on their
progress.
Specific efforts could include:
Help interested countries establish effective institutes to study and inventory the biological
resources of their forests. As Costa Rica's INBio is demonstrating, this capability is the key
to attracting private investment in local biodiversity, and thereby making biodiversity a
valued and sustainable resource in the face of pressures to convert forest land to other
uses. INBio has well-developed expertise and has trained local citizens as
"parataxonomists" to help survey the biological resources. In return for the right to examine
INBio's inventory, Merck & Co. (US) recently agreed to provide Costa Rica with $1 million
in up-front funding for conservation efforts, as well as a share of future royalties on any
drugs Merck develops from the inventory. Similar institutes, designed as appropriate in the
context of different countries, could be established through partnerships between investor
countries and interested tropical countries.
Invest in additional programs modeled on the imaginative Brazil Pilot Program. Led by
Germany, several countries are investing in the Brazil Pilot Program with a view to
improving fundamental structural features of forests use in Brazil. Similar efforts could be
pursued with other interested countries.
5
Draft
Establish or improve national parks systems. The US has one of the world's oldest and
most successful parks systems, including both federal and state parks. Federal parks
include the Everglades, Yosemite, and Yellowstone.
Further engage publicly held debt in debt-for-conservation exchanges that support forests
conservation. Under the Enterprise for the Americas Initiative (EAI), the US has already
reached agreements with Bolivia, Chile and Jamaica in which $263 million in official debt
is canceled and $32.4 million in local currency is devoted to local environment and
conservation programs.
Create a revolving loan fund to help non-governmental organizations finance private debt-
for-conservation swaps. A key to these swaps can be finding funding to enable the NGO
to purchase debt from the debt market and then negotiate its sale to the national
government in return for local conservation funding.
Establish a bilateral or multilateral program to finance competitively selected conservation
easements, agroforestry, agricultural improvements, studies of policy changes (e.g. taxes,
subsidies, land tenure, concessions), and other projects that help recognize the economic
value of forests and give land users more complete incentives to conserve that value.
Enhance the global forests observation system, in cooperation with the space agencies of
OECD countries, Brazil, Asia and Africa.
Create a boreal forests study center. The US is pursuing this effort with Canada, CIS
republics, and Nordic nations. Negotiations with Russia are almost complete.
Assist interested countries in identifying and revising policies that accelerate forests clearing
while also imposing economic losses. These may include a variety of tax, subsidy, and
property rules. Changing these policies can be analytically and politically difficult, but can
bring significant economic as well as environmental rewards.
Invest in improving the productivity of non-forest uses of land, such as agricultural
productivity. Often the best way of conserving forests is to reduce conversion pressure by
improving the yield of non-forest lands. For example, in the US over the past 80 years the
total size of our forest area has remained roughly constant. Yet at the same time we have
managed to feed a population that has almost tripled, plus significant new exports overseas.
We have done so while actually reducing the total amount of land devoted to agriculture -
- by increasing the productivity of agriculture by about a factor of four. Put another way,
if we had to feed today's US population and export markets while relying productivity as
it existed in 1910, we would have to farm over 1200 million acres; in fact we farm under 300
million acres. Without the increase in productivity, our agricultural needs could have utterly
overwhelmed our forests and wetlands.
Engage in partnerships with specific countries and regions. [to come]
What we propose today is an offer to invest in the future. We eagerly seek proposals by interested
countries for sound, successful programs and projects.
6
Droft
III.
COSTS OF THE INITIATIVE
Estimating the costs of conserving forests is extremely difficult. Costs may vary depending on local
terrain, forest type, competing land uses, local economic circumstances, and pre-existing
government policies. Costs may also change over time; most estimates contemplate an initial
investment that grows over time.
P.
The most prevalent method used to estimate the cost of conservation is to calculate the "opportunity
cost of not converting forest land," that is, the difference between the revenue stream to be gained
from converting land and the revenue stream to be gained from managing the land as forest. Both
are positive, but if the former is larger than the latter there will be a cost to foregoing conversion.
Such studies yield a wide of estimates of the marginal opportunity cost of not converting,
from $120 per hectare to $1150 per hectare.
The total cost estimates derived from these marginal costs begin at around $0.5-1.5 billion per year
and rise to $15 billion per year or higher. At best these are useful referents for the "ballpark" global
cost. The real cost would be defined by the size of the investment countries are willing to make,
and not by a particular quantitative goal. Also, the calculated total costs typically are upper bound
estimates of preserving every hectare. Meanwhile, observed marginal costs of real forests
protection have been substantially lower.
Assembling data on real prices in several tropical countries, Panayotou (1992) estimates
that for a "hypothetical typical" tropical country, the net present value of converting forest
land to non-forest uses is on the order of $2350 per hectare. The net present value of
maintaining the land as a forest for timber production is on the order of $2000/ha., and for
non-timber production (including local ecological services and tourism) is about $1200/ha.
Facing these expected values, the gain from clearing -- the opportunity cost of not clearing
-- is about $350 to $1150 per hectare.
The opportunity cost of not converting forests vary across countries and types of forests.
Panayotou's estimates vary from about $3000 in Malaysia to $(-3000) in Peru (where non-
timber forest production is apparently more valuable than land clearing).
Sedjo (Dec. 1991) reports average net present opportunity costs of not converting
(revenues from conversion minus revenues from use as forest) of $100/ha. in Africa, $122
in Latin America, $140 in most of Asia and $1500 in select forests in Asia.
McKinsey (Protecting the Global Environment: Funding Mechanisms, 1989, p. C-2) asserts
that the "cost of stopping the deforestation process
is
estimated
by
various
sources
at
up to $800 per currently deforested hectare in pure economic terms." "Up to" is
ambiguous, and the "various sources" are not identified. The phrase "pure economic terms"
suggests an opportunity cost calculation similar to those by Panayotou and Sedjo.
The observed marginal cost of protecting forests against degradation (as contrasted to conversion)
is often lower.
The cost of debt-for-nature swaps in Latin America has averaged about $2/ha. (EPA 1992).
On-site management costs to prevent incursion and degradation are reported to be about
$2/ha. in most tropical settings (Dixon et al. 1991).
7
Draft
Although the royalty stream is not publicly known, the initial $1 million fee suggests that the
Merck/INBio agreement may reflect significantly lower cost per hectare to generate
resources for forests conservation, monitoring and investment. Of course this deal is
occurring in a country (Costa Rica) with an already well-developed national forests and park
system.
These low costs may reflect low-cost measures available to supplement or catalyze local
protection efforts at chosen sites by enhancing local property rights, monitoring, or
enforcement of the perimeter, or by removing perverse local disincentives to conservation.
These protection costs are also dependent on the perimeter:area ratio, which generally falls
as contiguous area protected rises.
The total cost of stabilizing global forests is therefore uncertain, dependent as it is on these marginal
cost estimates.
WRI/IUCN/UNEP (Global Biodiversity Strategy, 1992, p. 73) reports that stopping
deforestation would cost $52 billion over 10 years, starting at $1 billion per year and rising
to $8 billion per year in each of the last three years. WRI states that this figure includes
costs to manage standing forests and neighboring agricultural activities.
This estimate is based on a table in IUCN/WWF/UNEP (Caring for the Earth, 1991, App.
7) which shows a funding path starting at $1 billion in 1991 and rising linearly to $8 billion
in 1998, followed by a steady $8 billion per year in 1999 and 2000. This is the cost to halt
deforestation, but not to replant forest cover up to 1990 levels, which costs several billion
more. These estimates are then referenced to McKinsey (Protecting the Global
Environment: Funding Mechanisms, 1989), which bases its estimate on the $800/ha.
maximum noted above. McKinsey reports (p. C-2) that "Reducing deforestation by 70% of
its current level is estimated to cost roughly $8 billion per year."
Sedjo takes his regional opportunity costs and multiplies them by the number of tropical
closed forest hectares in each region. From this he calculates that the total cost to
dissuade conversion on all closed tropical forests -- the opportunity cost of not converting
those lands -- would be a net present value asset of $264 billion. He states that the annual
cost to maintain this asset would be $13-26 billion (depending on real interest rates of 5%
or 10%).
This must be a high upper bound estimate because it multiplies the marginal opportunity
cost of not converting the immediately accessible lowland forest hectares by the sum of all
tropical forest hectares, upland as well as lowland. The marginal revenue gain to
conversion should fall as the land is more inaccessible.
Faced with this uncertainty and the pressing need to take cost-effective precautionary measures,
it seems reasonable to define an initial investment and observe progress over time. Doubling
current international forests assistance to a total of $2.7 billion would mean an increase of $1.3
billion, squarely on the path identified by WRI et al. to halt deforestation. Any more would be
too much overwhelm insti-
O
Any global investment would be disaggregated into investment shares for each investor country.
tutional
Ideally these shares should reflect the global benefit being internalized by that investor. A proxy for
that benefit may be national income. On the World Bank formula, the US share of the $2.7 billion
capacity.
would be 18% or about $485 million. Shares would be
% for Japan,
% for the EC and
% for the countries of the Persian Gulf.
8
us
This
to page go but TO not should outside go to w/in ust Diaft
These costs should be seen in perspective.
For comparison to an issue that has received more in-depth cost analysis, the costs of
stabilizing forests by 2000 may be compared to the costs of stabilizing OECD member
countries' fossil fuel CO2 emissions at 1990 levels by 2000.
Stabilizing industrialized country CO2 emissions by 2000 is estimated to cost OECD
countries about 0.1-0.6% of GDP in 2000, based on a survey of economic models
performed by the OECD Secretariat. As this stabilization is maintained, estimated costs rise
express it as ton Carbon- compared
to 0.3-1.5% of GDP by 2020, and 0.4-2.1% of GDP by 2050. See OECD, "Costs of Reducing
CO2 Emissions: Evidence from Six Global Models," Restricted (13 March 1992), Chart 6 and
revision from Andrew Dean, OECD, 17 April 1992; EMF 12, "Executive Summary" draft
2/12/92; CBO, "Carbon Charges as a Response to Global Warming: the Effects of Taxing
Fossil Fuels" (Aug. 1990), Tables 3. 5 and 6. Cost to a particular OECD member country
toopical per to frests 10-20 is + Thel-
would vary from the cost to the OECD group as a whole. A best estimate of the cost to
all OECD countries may be a drop in GDP of 0.4% below baseline in 2000 and 1% below
baseline in 2020.
Total OECD country GDP in 1990 was about $16 trillion, and will grow to about $30 trillion
by 2020 (assuming a real growth rate of just over 2% per year). In that context, an $5-15
billion per year investment cost (the high end of the WRI et al path) would cost under onforest
less 0.1% than
0.04% of total GDP in 2000, or less than 10% of the GDP loss in 2000 from stabilizing
OECD country fossil fuel CO2 emissions. (Note that the forests policy would bear this lower
cost while achieving net CO2 reductions between three and six times greater, as shown in
the table above).
2
4
The global benefits of forests conservation may justify an investment to overcome the local
incentives favoring forest clearing. As noted above, Panayotou found the opportunity cost
of not converting to lie between $350 and $1150 per hectare. He estimated the global
external benefits of conserving the forest (benefits not paid to the local land user and thus
not incorporated in his opportunity cost calculation) to exceed the private opportunity cost.
He calculates a value for biodiversity of $220/ha. (based on current "existence value"
(chiefly tourism) and not including future discoveries of genetic resource uses or ecological
services), and a value for carbon storage of $1250/ha. (assuming a tropical forest stores
125 tons of carbon/ha., and assuming that carbon abatement costs $10 per ton in the
industrialized world). The total global gain would thus be $1470/ha., exceeding the local
opportunity cost. These calculations are necessarily highly approximate and only
illustrative; nevertheless they suggest that there can be net gains to global beneficiaries who
invest in tropical forest conservation.
9
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE: 5/12/92
TO: OSTP
FROM: PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President and
Staff Secretary
Please forward your comments
directly to this office
by 10:00 a.m., WED. 5/13/92.
Thank you.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
May 13, 1992
The President today announced that the United States has joined
eight other countries of the Americas in signing an agreement
that will formally establish an Inter-American Institute for
Global Change Research. The Institute will bring together the
critical resources and capabilities needed to address important
issues of global change in the Western Hemisphere.
The agreement was signed today by D. Allan Bromley, Assistant to
the President for Science and Technology at a meeting hosted by
President LaCalle of Uruguay in Montevideo.
The President first announced the concept of a network of
regional institutes to study global change in his closing remarks
to the White House Conference on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change, which was convened by the President in
April, 1990. Since then, the United States has actively
developed this concept and has promoted the establishment of the
first of these institutes which will be located in the Western
Hemisphere. The United States will continue to work with senior
representatives in the areas involved to establish institutes in
the European/African region and in the Western Pacific region.
This signing affirms the President's commitment to global
stewardship and his desire to further promote responsible
environmental policies and reiterates that protecting the
environment and encouraging economic growth can be mutually
beneficial.
# # #
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 18, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR KATHY SUPER
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY
Anan
SUBJECT:
A POSSIBLE PRESIDENTIAL ACTIVITY
Enclosed herewith is a letter from William T. Golden, the Chairman of the Board of the
American Museum of Natural History.
Depending upon how things go in Rio it might well be that the President might wish to
stop by to see their global warming exhibit later in the summer.
I promised Bill that I would pass on his request but I would certainly not advise that
the President respond positively until we see how the Rio conference goes and can then
make a much better judgment as to whether this would be a profitable expenditure of
Presidential time. For the moment this is just a heads up and I will get back to you
after Rio.
Enclosure
1565 I
AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY
CENTRAL PARK WEST AT 79TH STREET
NEW YORK. N.Y. 10024-5192
769-5752
OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN
April 29, 1992
40 Wall St., 4201
New York, NY 10005
MAILROOM
93 MAY P4: 00
Dear Allan:
It was a joy to see Lynn (and you!) again at the AAAS dinner
on Friday night and to learn of Lynn's romantic and happy marriage (how
pleased Pat would be) and to learn of the "dinosaur" book that Lynn's writing.
Now I revert to our brief conversation about the global warming
exhibit that will open at the American Museum of Natural History in mid-May.
It will be a pioneering presentation, done jointly with the Environmental
Defense Fund. It will be highly informative, stimulating, and noncontrover-
sial. It has been two years in preparation under fine scientific oversight.
As you know, the Museum is one of the three great institutions
of its kind in the world. It is visited by some three million people a
year, including some half million school children, has a distinguished
scientific staff, and important educational programs. And we have an outstanding
board of trustees, greatly strengthened in the past two years under the
leadership of the new management. It would be splendid and attract much
attention if President Bush, on some occasion when he is in New York, would
seize the opportunity to visit the Museum and specifically to see this
exhibit. President Langdon, the trustees, and I would be honored to welcome
him. If you think well enough of this idea to broach it to President Bush
and the appropriate staff members, I would be grateful.
With warm regards,
Sincerely,
Bil
William T. Golden
Dr. D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for Science and Technology
Old Executive Office Building
Suite 358
17th St. &. Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20506
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 19, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY
Anan
SUBJECT:
U.S. Signs Agreement Establishing the
Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research
I am pleased to report to you that an unprecedented international agreement for
research on global change was signed last week in Montevideo, Uruguay, at a high-level
meeting of governments of the inter-American region. The United States was joined by
ten other countries of the region. in signing the agreement which establishes the Inter-
American Institute for Global Change Research. This number represents only the
charter group and it is anticipated that the remaining eleven countries that have
participated actively in the discussion leading to the formation of the Institute will also
sign in the near future. President LaCalle of Uruguay hosted and addressed the
meeting. I signed the agreement on your behalf in Montevideo.
The Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research is a major U.S.-led initiative
which you can be proud to carry into UNCED. You introduced the concept of the
Institute during your closing remarks at the 1990 White House Conference on Science
and Economics Research Related to Global Change. I believe that it is the most
successful product of that conference thus far.
Following are some background notes on the establishment of the Institute which may
prove useful to you in your preparations for UNCED and in your discussions with Prime
Minister Brian Mulroney, whom I understand will wish to raise this issue with you in
his visit later this week.
I would welcome an opportunity to meet with you, at your convenience, to discuss
further the development of this Institute, how you might include it as part of the U.S.
message at UNCED, and the plans for completing your envisioned global system through
the establishment of similar regionally-focused institutes in the Euro-African and
Western Pacific areas.
Background
Your proposal to establish several north-south regional research institutes to bring
together the critical mass of resources and capabilities needed to address global change
research was first presented by the United States during the White House Conference on
Science and Economics Research Related to Global Change in April 1990 and was
highlighted in your closing remarks. More recently, this concept has been further
endorsed by the United States during negotiations on a framework convention on
climate change.
The United States has participated actively in promoting the establishment of the first
of these institutes in the Western Hemisphere -- by: hosting (and chairing) the first
developmental workshop in San Juan, Puerto Rico, in July 1991; providing funding and
sending personnel to the international Interim Working Group; and chairing the second
workshop for the development of the Institute, held in Mar del Plata, Argentina, in
March 1992.
The United States has also participated in and supported meetings of scientific and
legal experts to negotiate the legal agreement and scientific agenda for the Institute.
From the beginning, however, we have emphasized that we were developing a cooperative
activity among equals. The cooperation among the participating countries has been
unprecedented and remarkably effective.
International Involvement
To date, twenty-two different countries from the Americas have participated -- at senior
policy levels -- in the development of the Institute. They are the following:
Argentina
Colombia
Guyana
Paraguay
Bahamas
Costa Rica
Jamaica
Peru
Bolivia
Dominican Republic
Mexico
Suriname
Brazil
El Salvador
Nicaragua
U.S.
Canada
Guatemala
Panama
Uruguay
Venezuela
Chile
Eleven of these countries (underlined) became founding charter members of the Institute
by signing the agreement in Montevideo last week. Others are expected to join in the
near future as they complete the necessary domestic procedures and approvals.
In addition to the countries of the region, the European Community, Germany, Italy,
Japan, The Netherlands, Spain, and international organizations including the
International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) and the Organization of American
States (OAS) have actively supported the development of the Institute and have
participated in the meetings. The Japanese have indicated their willingness to play a
leading role in establishing the Pacific Institute - as have the Indonesians.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Dear Phil
may 19, 1992
Sma The attached memo is
is impertand Thathe Preedent ham
purily informational and puna it
this infarmation priorto lin
meeting with Brian
would he able to
gotthin to The Specident wr that
The statting.
Mengthanks.
Avan
-
NOV-06-1992 10:24 FROM
TO
93953719 P.02
gobalthange pile
DOMESTIC REGULATION OF METHYL BROMIDE
*
Section 602 of CAA unambiguously states that the
Administrator shall list "all substances with an ozone
depletion potential of 0.2 or greater.' "
#
-- the Act does not allow us to consider costs,
benefits, substitutes etc.
*
A major international scientific assessment under the Montreal
Protocol was just completed in July and concluded the "best
estimate" of the ozone depletion potential of methyl bromide
was 0.7.
-- assessment co-chaired by NASA and NOAA
-- reviewed all available data and involved world's
top scientists
-- Sec 606 of the CAA explicitly cites Protocol
science assessment as basis for
regulatory decisions
-- delaying action based on need for assessment
would simply not be credible
*
Meeting held by Bromely with NASA and NOAA and USDA in August
concluded that adequate basis existed for regulating now.
*
While scientific uncertainties exist,
-- they could increase or decrease ozone depletion
potential
--extrcmoly unlikely number would fall below 0.2
*
month Montreal Protocol Parties will regulate methyl bromide this
-- widespread support among developed nations for
freezing production with a reduction of 25%
by 2000 also likely
- next Protocol assessment due in 1994 and will
likely lead to further reductions/phase-out by
2000 (and achieve consistency with CAA
position)
*
Substitutes for methyl bromide in soil fumigation (its major
use) arc highly likely by 2000.
-- dazamid has been tested in strawberries, tree
nurseries, and tobacco which are the major uses
of methyl bromide. It appears to be as
effective.
NOV-06-1992 10:24 FROM
IU
93953719 P.03
-- it has been approved for non-food uses in U.S.
and its producer has already been in to EPA to
begin process of approval for food use (field
trials could begin this year with approval
likely to take 1-2 years)
-- EPA's proposed rule freezes production at current
levels, allows production to be maintained
at that level through 2000 and then calls for
a phase-out
-- allows maximum legally allowable
flexibility to reduce costs
-- gives maximum time for substitutes to
be developed and approved.
* Bottom line: Science cannot legitimately used as an excuse for
inaction. Protocol negotiations reinforce scientific basis for
will likely end up at or close to a 2000 phase-out in 1994.
action, will begin regulation of methyl bromide this month, and
does not give us luxury of regulating mothyl bromide in this two- CAA
and internationally.
step process, but end result is likely to be similar domestically
Land Monitoring and
Remediation Workshop
Hosted by the Bechtel Corporation in San Francisco,
California, September 1991, with BHP-Minerals
International as a contributing sponsor
Two working groups reviewed areas of potential
government / industry interest in GCRP
Resource / site characterization and monitoring
Reclamation and remediation
Both groups developed recommended areas of interest
and pilot projects, with these considerations
Need to validate remote sensing observations with
ground truth data
Specifics on ground truth data validation part of pilot
project planning
Global Change Effects Workshop
Held in conjunction with the International Aeronautical
Federation Conference in Montreal, Canada, October
1991, with the Canadian Advisory Council on Remote
Sensing as a contributing sponsor
Two working groups reviewed areas of potential
government/industry interest in GCRP
Atmospheric and climate modeling
Land / ocean
Both Groups developed recommended areas of interest
and pilot projects with these general considerations
Begin with small projects in well-defined research
areas
Select projects based on pre-existing capabilities and
expertise found within the Geosat Committee member
companies
Global Change Effects Workshop
Pilot Project 5: Optimizing Utilization of In Situ data
Goals
Provide vehicle for researchers in government, academia
and industry to participate in a joint project with both
scientific research and data management value
Demonstrate potential for leveraged value through
utilization of combined government / industry in situ
sensors and data holdings
Explore potential for coordination of government and
industry in situ data gathering campaigns in areas of
mutual value
Global Change Effects Workshop
Pilot Project 5: Optimizing Utilization of In Situ Data
Objectives
Collaborate on research in area of mutual interest,
utilizing in situ data from government and industry
sensors and archives
Emphasize use of data from industry provided sensors:
ocean platform, aircraft, ship, ground
Develop an inventory of in situ data bases for access by
government, industry and academia
Explore benefits of stronger industry role in forums
defining standards for catalogs and data exchange
Global Change Effects Workshop
Pilot Project 5: Optimizing Utilization of In Situ Data
Implementation
Joint government / industry planning group defines
specific application research objectives:
Research of interest to GCRP
Application in which industry has relevant in situ data
Project team implements the project
Refine research objectives
Defines data requirements, identify and obtain
commitment of data source
Carry out the research project, utilizing data obtained
from industry and government sources
Issue reports describing successes, lessons learned, and
recommendations for future steps
Global Change Effects Workshop
Pilot Project 6: Establishing Universal Definitions and
Protocols in Global Environmental Change Related
Measurements
Goals
Facilitate understanding among government, industry and
academia in definition of key environmental parameters
Improve parameter definition and measurement
techniques in general as a basis for added value to the
GCRP
Global Change Effects Workshop
Pilot Project 6: Establishing Universal Definitions and
Protocols in Global Environmental Change Related
Measurements
Objectives
Collaborate to develop standard definition and
measurement protocols in specific areas of common
interest
Emphasize applicability of industry provided source data
and measurement techniques that add value to the GCRP
in these areas
Explore benefits of stronger industry role in forums
defining standards for data measurements and data
interchange
Global Change Effects Workshop
Pilot Project 6: Establishing Universal Definitions and
Protocols in Global Environmental Change Related
Measurements
Implementation
Joint government / industry planning group defines specific
focus of the project, choosing from such issues as
Land based measurement and reporting of atmospheric
gas emission data for acid precipitation precursors and
greenhouse gases
Standard definition for wetlands
Project team implements the project based on the planning
group's recommendations
Identifies specific problem areas in measurement and
parameter definition standards
Recommends standard measurement and parameter
definitions in these specific areas
Issues reports describing recommendations and proposed
follow-on actions
Land Monitoring and
Remediation Workshop
Pilot Project 1: Plant Stress
Goals
Yield a better understanding of various sources of
vegetation stress
Provide opportunities to measure and monitor stress with
remote sensing techniques
Land Monitoring and
Remediation Workshop
Pilot Project 1: Plant Stress
Implementation
Review resource industry in situ data and previous
interdisciplinary research in remote sensing of plant
stress
Select several categories of sites known to show
vegetation stress
Mines
Industrial facilities
Landfill sites
Disease or insect-infested forests
Identify the sensors and spectral and spatial resolution
required at each type of site
Land Monitoring and
Remediation Workshop
Pilot Project 2: Coastline Processes
Goals
Promote better management of delta and coastal areas
Support global sea level measurements for studying the
effects of global warming
Land Monitoring and
Remediation Workshop
Pilot Project 2: Coastline Processes
Objectives
Establish techniques and procedures for monitoring
natural or human - induced modification of the coastline
Support studies on plant stress, especially as it relates to
coastal vegetation
Executive Summary
U.S. resource industry not in "Mission to Planet Earth"
Need sound industry-government-academid
partnership to mutually understand natural and
man-made environmental change in order to mitigate,
adapt and respond to need for improved
environmental management throughout society
International planning by IPCC, IGBP, IPECA
The Geosat Committee 1991
Environmental Workshops
Identify resource industry research and priorities
relevant to U.S. GCRP
Identify areas for enhanced industry - government
cooperation
Propose simple pilot projects to start cooperative
research efforts
Objectives Of This Meeting
Review Geosat committee environmental workshops
and proposal for government / industry cooperation
in global change study, environmental management
and earth observations
Discuss linkages to ongoing government research
and relative priorities of suggested pilot projects
Discuss plan for follow up action
The Geosat Committee 1991
Environmental Workshops
Identify resource industry research and priorities
relevant to U.S. GCRP
Identify areas for enhanced industry - government
cooperation
Propose simple pilot projects to start cooperative
research efforts
Resource Industry Background
Escalation of global environmental concern
Resource industries provide for society's energy,
mineral, food and fiber needs
Conduct research relevant to government global
change research program but
Resource industry not involved in government
environmental programs
Benefits of Industry-Government
Cooperation
Leverage resources, costs, facilities, personal and
technology transfer
Example: Industry provides in-situ data to help
government validate remote sensing for global
environmental issues
Proactive industry opportunity to understand relevant
new government Earth observing technology for
imposing government policy, legislation and regulation
on industry.
The Geosat Committee Environmental
Initiative
15 years of geological, oceanographic, and
engineering cooperative remote sensing applications
research
Now focusing on environmental remote sensing
applications research to enhance business
opportunities and minimize negative impact on
business
Geosat environmental workshop report is a response
to CEES/OSTP question of what industry is doing in
global change research issues
Government Research Initiatives under
FCCSET
NASA EOS (Earth Observing System) $30 Billion
High Performance Computer and Communications
Program
National Technology Initiative (NTI)
U.S. Global Change Resarch Program (GCRP) $1.5
Billion / year
Benefits of Cooperative Research to
Resource Industries
Participation in defining global change phenomena
leading to government environmental policies and
regulations impacting business
Help define Industry-Govenment research program
potential for leveraging government research assets
Demonstrate industry willingness to cooperate in
environmental research to help assure sound
government policy legislation effecting industry
Benefits to Global Change Research
Program
Access to industry assets such as expertise, ground
truth data and specialized data collection facilities
Demonstrate relevance of GCRP to U.S. economic
growth through enhanced technology transfer
Increase public support of GCRP through unified
program based on government, industry and
academic participation
Executive Summary
U.S. resource industry not in "Mission to Planet Earth"
Need sound industry-government-academic
partnership to mutually understand natural and
man-made environmental change in order to mitigate,
adapt and respond to need for improved
environmental management throughout society
International planning by IPCC, IGBP, IPECA
Executive Summary (Continued)
U.S. GCRP: "Establish scientific basis for national and
international policy related to natural and human
induced changes to global earth systems
Industry-government cooperative research will depend
on mutual access to data and scientific information
Industry - Government Interfaces
CEES/GCRP part of White House FCCSET without
industry participation
CEES/OSTP with help of GEOSAT, EPRI, and Global
Climate Coalition formed the private enterprise -
government interface (PEGI) in 1991
Encourage Industry-government synergism to reduce
duplication and leverage assets
Facilitate sharing of data, information and resources
Catalyst for cooperative research projects
The Geosat Committee 1991
Environmental Workshops
Land Monitoring and Remediation, San Francisco:
Bechtel, BHP Minerals sponsors
Global Change Effects, Montreal: CACRES sponsor
Oil Seeps and Spills, Houston: AMOCO sponsors
Attendance: representatives of 35 resource industry, 6
government and 5 academic organizations
The Geosat Committee 1991
Environmental Workshops
Identify resource industry research and priorities
relevant to U.S. GCRP
Identify areas for enhanced industry - government
cooperation
Propose simple pilot projects to start cooperative
research efforts
Pilot Project Elements
Base line data
Technology
Global change effects observed
Site specific interaction
Leverage research assets
The Next Step for Pilot Project
Cooperation
PEGI response for agency priorities for GEOSAT pilot
projects
Propose industry - government project planning panel
co-chairs
Identify linkages to on-going related projects
Geosat Committee Goals
"Industry serves at the will of the people"
lan Parker, Chairman, Newmont
U.S. GCRP: 1992 Issues
Integrating climate modeling and prediction
Global water and energy cycles
Ecological systems
Population dynamics
Sea level changes
Geosat Environmental Workshops
Responses to CEES/OSTP query to inventory industry interests
in global change research
Focus industry interest on earth observations applications for:
Resource Development, Global Environment Change Study,
Improved Environmental Management
Crosscut industry interests with GCRP agency research
programs
Industry - government cooperation in critical environmental
research essential to U.S. sustained resource development
commensurate with acceptable environmental stewardship
Cooperative Research Mechanisms
Parallel research Programs:
Self Funding, communication and exchange
Joint Programs (e.g., CRADAs):
Shelf funding, Joint planning of shared goals,
Information and Data
Contract Research:
Government contracting for specific research with
industry asset support
US Global Change Research
Interdisciplinary Science Elements
Climate and hydrologic systems
Biogeochemical dynamics
Ecological systems and dynamics
Earth system history
Human interactions
Solid earth processes
Solar influences
U.S. Global Change: Research Program FY93
Candidate Opportunities for Private
Enterprise/Government Interactions on
Global Change Research
Greenhouse Gases, global warming potential and emissions
trading
Advanced computers for climate modeling
Biological mechanisms of CO2 - enhanced growth of plants
Identify, estimate and analyze sources of greenhouse gas
emissions
Land characterization and land use
Economic methods for assessing cost of climate change
New instrumentation for measuring global change
Biotechnology and genetic engineering to mitigate greenhouse
gases and to adapt to climate change
The Geosat Committee, Inc. 1991
Environmental Workshops
Land Monitoring and Remediation
Resources/site characterization and monitoring,
Reclamation and remediation
Global change Effects
Atmospheric / climate modeling,
Land / ocean
Oil Seeps and Spills
Characterization and detection,
Technology and monitoring,
Remediation
Land Monitoring and Remediation
Workshop Resource / Site
Characterization and Monitoring Panel
Common Themes
Data quality control
Data standardization
Baseline data
In situ Ground truth for remote sensing system
Priority Research Areas
Gas monitoring
Plant stress
Sensor technology
Data base management
Hydrologic process
Image processing
Land Monitoring and Remediation
Workshop Reclamation and
Remediation Panel
Common themes:
Baseline Data
Global change effects
Human interactions
Ecological interactions
Site specific interactions
In situ ground truth for remote sensing systems
Global Change Effects Workshop
Atmospheric and Climate Modeling
Panel
Common Themes:
Atmospheric emissions
Climate modeling and prediction
Global Change Effects Workshop Land
and Oceans Panel
Common Themes: Observable with remote sensing
Ocean productivity
Sea level
Sea ice
Land / water cycles
Soil characteristics
Vegetation and ecological boundaries
Land ice / snow
Oil Seeps and Spills Workshop
Common Themes: Exploration and Environmental
Applications
75+% oil slicks are natural
Mean ocean flow remote sensing
Sensor technology
Radar
Airborne laser fluoroscope
CZCS
Pilot Project 3: Baseline Data
Goals
Solve environmental problems in an effective and cost
- efficient manner
Make better resource and environmental decisions at
reduced costs
Pilot Project 3: Baseline Data
Objectives
Make remote sensing data more readily accessible
and known
Demonstrate effectiveness of using remote sensing
data to solve environmental problems
Pilot Project 3: Baseline Data
Implementation I
Survey available data sets from industry, government
and academia
Develop mechanisms to make data sets accessible in
a user - friendly manner
Publications
Software
Seminars, workshops
Pilot Project 3: Baseline Data
Implementation II
Select a specific example of environmental concern
Industrial contamination
Water pollution
Reduced agricultural productivity
Stressed natural vegetation
Mine closure
Use several types of remote sensing data
Upgrade and standardize data
Determine cause and extent of problem
Develop plan for remediation
Pilot Project 3: Baseline Data
Examples Presented at Workshop
Urban water use efficiency
Soil differences
Vegetation growth
Vegetation stress
Irrigation efficiency and distribution
Leaks in water aqueduct
Remedial site investigations
Sanitary landfill siting
Pilot Project 4: Site Specific Interactions
Goals
Develop more effective cost - efficient procedures to
prioritize and clean-up Superfund sites
Develop criteria to determine optimum level of
clean-up at Superfund sites
Pilot Project 4: Site Specific Interactions
Objectives
Use remote sensing to assist in effective and
cost-efficient clean-up of Superfund sites
Use remote sensing to assist in developing optimum
clean-up levels at each site based on human and
environmental conditions
Pilot Project 4: Site Specific Interactions
Implementation
Select Superfund sites
Obtain remote sensing data for the sites
Explore ways to improve effectiveness of assessment
and clean-up process
Site characterization (historic development)
Risk assessment
Targeted field sampling
Assist in development of criteria to determine optimum
clean-up level at each site
Environmental features
Human considerations
Recommendations for Cooperative Research
Enhance economic growth through technology transfer from GCRP
Facilitate growth and development by;
Resolving intellectual property issues mutual access to remote
sensing and ground truth data
Develop environmental data standards and cooperative data bases
Develop joint research mechanisms (i.e. CRADASs)
Consider industry in GCRP planning
Joint programs more cost effective and mutually beneficial than
parallel or contract programs
Encourage academic involvement
Establish criteria level verifiability remote sensing technology for
industry compliance
Take next steps to identify industry - government pilot project priority,
linkages to existing programs, and initiate joint planning
Concluding Remarks I
Global environmental change effects all nations, all
economies, all life
Effective industry - government partnership is critical
Environmental policies must be based on sound
analyses of scientific research
Concluding Remarks II
Organizations working globally to develop predictive
understanding of earth systems
Observing systems and long term baseline data critical
to science leading to informed government policies
US GCRP should adopt spirit of national technology
initiative NTI and CRADAs to leverage industry -
government research access
Concluding Remarks III
Cooperative synergistic industry - government role is
critical in developing and evaluating remote sensing
technology for studying global environmental change,
environmental management and policy implementation
and compliance.
"We need the collective money expertise people and time of
government, universities and industry in a strong and
common commitment to provide timely, cost effective
research. We then need to report and communicate the
best predictive models of what is happening to our
environment and what the solutions and impacts of these
actions will be."
Dr. Kenneth Ciriacks
V.P., AMOCO Production Company
Director, the Geosat Committee
Applying Resource Industry
Research to the U.S. Global Change
Research Program
A Proposal for Industry / Government
Cooperation in Global Change Study,
Environmental Management and Earth
Observation Applications from the GEOSAT
Committee 1991 Environmental Workshops
A Report by the GEOSAT Committee, Inc.
Robert F. Brammer and
Frederick B. Henderson III
Co-chairmen and Editors
An Assessments of Resource Industry
Issues and Research Priorities
Industry Research Compared with
Government Plans for Global Change
Study, Mitigation Adoption and
Research Strategies
Recommendations for Industry /
Government Cooperative Research and
Suggested Pilot Projects
Summary
An assessment of resource industry issues and
research priorities
Industry research compared with government plans for
global change, study, mitigation, adaption and
research strategies
Recommendations for Industry / Government
cooperative research and suggested pilot projects
1992 Geosat Membership
as of May 1992
AMOCO
Japex
ARCO
Loral Aero Systems Division
ASARCO
MacDonald-Dettwiller Assoc.
Barringer Patents Inc.
Marathon
Barringer Laboritories Inc.
Marine Spills Response Corp.
Bechtel Corporation
Mobil
BHP Minerals Int.
Noranda Exploration Co. LTD.
BHP Petroleum Int.
Petroscan
British Petroleum
Placer Dome Inc.
CCRS
Radarsat International Inc.
Chevron
RESTEC
CRA Exploration
Sedona Scientific
DE Gasparis/Hawthorn
Shell
Desert Research Institute
SI Corporation
Earthsat
Spot Image
EOSAT (GE, Hughes/SBRC) TASC
ERIM
Terra-MAR, Inc.
ERSDAC
Texaco
GER
Unocal
Hunt Oil Company
THE GEOSAT COMMITTEE
1991 ENVIRONMENTAL WORKSHOP:
OIL SEEPS AND SPILLS
CHAIRED BY:
DR. R.N. BAKER
AMOCO PRODUCTION COMPANY
HOUSTON, TX
OIL SEEPS AND SPILLS WORKSHOP
GOALS
IDENTIFY INDUSTRY CONCERNS, INTERESTS AND RESEARCH DIRECTIONS.
PROPOSE PILOT PROJECTS FOR INDUSTRY/GOVERNMENT COLLABORATIVE
RESEARCH PROGRAMS.
DISCUSS METHODS OF DETECTION, MONITORING AND REMEDIATION OF OIL
SEEPS AND SPILLS, AND RELEVANT APPLICATIONS TO GLOBAL CHANGE
RESEARCH.
RNB 6/92
OIL SEEPS AND SPILLS WORKSHOP
PARTICIPANTS
NOVEMBER 1991
AMOCO PRODUCTION COMPANY
ERIM
SHELL OIL COMPANY
TEXACO
PECTEN INTERNATIONAL
TEXAS A & M UNIVERSITY
MARATHON
UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA
BRITISH PETROLEUM
INTERA
MOBIL OIL
TERRAMAR
TASC
BATTELLE LABS
MPB CORP., QUEBEC
EARTHSAT CORP.
MARINE SPILLS RESPONSE CORP.
RNB 6/92
OIL SEEPS AND SPILLS WORKSHOP
WORKING GROUPS
OIL SPILL CHARACTERIZATION AND DETECTION
TECHNOLOGY AND MONITORING
REMEDIATION
RNB 6/92
OIL SEEPS AND SPILLS WORKSHOP
PILOT PROJECT 7:
CHARACTERIZATION AND DETECTION PROTOTYPES
PURPOSE
DETERMINE MOST IMPORTANT
IMPROVE OUR ABILITY TO
PARAMETERS FOR DETECTION
PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT AND
AND MONITORING OIL SEEPS AND
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN MAN
SPILLS
MADE AND NATURAL SEEPS
IDENTIFY INDUSTRY NEEDS FOR
ANALYZE KNOWN OIL SEEPS TO:
SEEP/SPILL DETECTION:
- DETERMINE PARAMETERS SUCH
- TYPES OF MEASUREMENTS
AS CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL AND
- MONITORING REPETITION RATE
BIOLOGICAL PROPERTIES OF OIL
- GROUND/SEA TRUTH
REQUIREMENTS
- OCEANOGRAPHIC AND WEATHER
INFLUENCES
- REMOTE SENSING AND IMAGE
PROCESSING TECHNIQUES
OIL SEEPS AND SPILLS WORKSHOP
CHARACTERIZATION AND DETECTION
PROTOTYPES
IMPLEMENTATION
PANEL OF INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT EXPERTS
ORGANIZE JOINT TASK GROUP TO STUDY KNOWN SEEP/SPILLS, POSSIBLE
CONTROLLED SPILL EXPERIMENT
TEAM MEMBERS ANALYZE DATA AND PROCESSING TECHNIQUES, COMPARE
RESULTS AND DETERMINE MOST EFFECTIVE (BOTH COST AND TECHNICAL)
APPROACH
RNB 6/92
OIL SEEPS AND SPILLS WORKSHOP
PILOT PROJECT 8:
REMEDIATION STUDIES OF THE PAST AND PRESENT
PURPOSE
STUDY THE EFFECTS OF OIL IN THE
MODEL AND EVALUATE
ENVIRONMENT USING HISTORICAL
RESULTS.
(TIME LAPSE) DATA FOR AN OIL
CONTAMINATED SITE.
IMPROVE OUR UNDERSTANDING
OF THE ELEMENTS INVOLVED IN
SYSTEMATICALLY DOCUMENT THE
OIL SEEPS/SPILLS, E.G.:
EFFECTS OF AN OIL SPILL OVER TIME.
- GROUNDWATER
TEST VARIOUS REMEDIATION
- TEMPERATURE
APPROACHES.
- SOIL CHEMISTRY
- TYPES OF POLLUTANTS
- VEGETATION
RNB 6/92
OIL SEEPS AND SPILLS WORKSHOP
REMEDIATION STUDIES OF THE PAST AND PRESENT
IMPLEMENTATION
FORM A GROUP OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT TO
SELECT A CONTAMINATED STUDY SITE. ESTABLISH MEASURABLE PARAMETERS
AND REMEDIATION STANDARDS.
REVIEW HISTORICAL REMOTE SENSING AND GROUND DATA FROM THE SITE.
PERIODICALLY SAMPLE SITE TO MONITOR PROGRESSIVE DEGRADATION OR
REMEDIATION.
IDENTIFY KEY FACTORS INVOLVED IN ABOVE.
DOCUMENT RESULTS AND ENCOURAGE INDUSTRY TO CONDUCT "PROOF OF
METHOD" JOINT PROJECT.
RNB 6/92
OIL SEEPS AND SPILLS WORKSHOP
COOPERATING ORGANIZATIONS
THE GEOSAT COMMITTEE
MAJOR PETROCHEMICAL COMPANIES
UNIVERSITIES
AMOCO
CHEVRON
TEXAS A & M
EXXON
TEXACO
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS
SHELL
CONOCO
LSU
RICE
GOVERNMENT LABS
ONR/NRL
OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTES
BATTELLE
LAMONT - DOHERTY
U.S. NAVY
WOODS HOLE
SCRIPPS
PRIVATE COMPANIES
FEDERAL AGENCIES
EARTHSAT ERIM
NOAA
INTERA
MSRC
DOD
US COAST GUARD
RNB 6/92