THE WEAPONIZATION OF AI

NATO releases first-ever strategy for Artificial Intelligence

• 22 Oct. 2021 -
• |
• 
  

On Thursday (21 October 2021), NATO Defence Ministers agreed to NATO’s first-ever strategy for Artificial Intelligence (AI).

Copyright: IoT Business News

A summary of the strategy is available here.

The strategy outlines how AI can be applied to defence and security in a protected and ethical way. As such, it sets standards of responsible use of AI technologies, in accordance with international law and NATO’s values. It also addresses the threats posed by the use of AI by adversaries and how to establish trusted cooperation with the innovation community on AI.

Artificial Intelligence is one of the seven technological areas which NATO Allies have prioritized for their relevance to defence and security. These include  quantum-enabled technologies, data and computing, autonomy, biotechnology and human enhancements, hypersonic technologies, and space. Of all these dual-use technologies, Artificial Intelligence is known to be the most pervasive, especially when combined with others like big data, autonomy, or biotechnology. To address this complex challenge, NATO Defence Ministers also approved NATO’s first policy on data exploitation.

Individual strategies will be developed for all priority areas, following the same ethical approach as that adopted for Artificial Intelligence.

Summary of the NATO Artificial Intelligence Strategy

• 22 Oct. 2021 -
• |
• Last updated: 22 Oct. 2021 13:43

1. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is changing the global defence and security environment. It offers an unprecedented opportunity to strengthen our technological edge but will also escalate the speed of the threats we face. This foundational technology will likely affect the full spectrum of activities undertaken by the Alliance in support of its three core tasks; collective defence, crisis management, and cooperative security.
2. In order to maintain NATO’s technological edge, we commit to collaboration and cooperation among Allies on any matters relating to AI for transatlantic defence and security. NATO and Allies can help accelerate these efforts by building on the existing adoption efforts of several NATO and Allied bodies.
3. The aim of this Strategy is fourfold:

• To provide a foundation for NATO and Allies to lead by example and encourage the development and use of AI in a responsible manner for Allied defence and security purposes;
• To accelerate and mainstream AI adoption in capability development and delivery, enhancing interoperability within the Alliance, including through proposals for AI Use Cases, new structures, and new programmes;
• To protect and monitor our AI technologies and ability to innovate, addressing security policy considerations such as the operationalisation of our Principles of Responsible Use; and
• To identify and safeguard against the threats from malicious use of AI by state and non-state actors.

4. In the future, the NATO Alliance aims to integrate AI in an interoperable way to support its three core tasks. Such use will be conducted in a recognised, responsible fashion across the enterprise, mission support and operational levels in accordance with international law. Recognising the leading role of the civil private sector and academia in AI development, this Strategy will be underpinned by: significant cooperation between NATO, the private sector1 and academia; a capable workforce of NATO technical and policy-based AI talent; a robust, relevant, secure data infrastructure; and appropriate cyber defences.
5. Under the forthcoming Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA), national AI test centres could support NATO’s AI ambition. NATO and Allies will also conduct regular high-level dialogues, engaging technology companies at a strategic political level to be informed and help shape the development of AI-fielded technologies, creating a common understanding of the opportunities and risks arising from AI.
6. Furthermore, NATO will remain the transatlantic forum for AI in defence and security, leveraging the potential of AI while safeguarding against its (AI) malicious use by state and non-state actors.

PRINCIPLES OF RESPONSIBLE USE

7. At the forefront of this Strategy lie the NATO Principles of Responsible Use for AI in Defence, which will help steer our transatlantic efforts in accordance with our values, norms, and international law. The NATO Principles of Responsible Use (the Principles) are based on existing and widely accepted ethical, legal, and policy commitments under which NATO has historically operated and will continue to operate under. These Principles do not affect or supersede existing obligations and commitments, both national and international.
8. The Principles below were developed based on Allied approaches and relevant work in applicable international fora. These Principles apply across all types of AI applications. They are aimed at providing coherence for both NATO and Allies to enable interoperability. The Principles will be foundational to the discussion and adoption of more detailed AI best practices and should be considered a baseline for Allies as they use AI in the context of defence and security, noting that some Allies already have national principles of responsible use.

NATO Principles of Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence in Defence

9. Allies and NATO commit to ensuring that the AI applications they develop and consider for deployment will be – at the various stages of their lifecycles – in accordance with the following six principles:

A. Lawfulness: AI applications will be developed and used in accordance with national and international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law, as applicable.
B. Responsibility and Accountability: AI applications will be developed and used with appropriate levels of judgment and care; clear human responsibility shall apply in order to ensure accountability.
C. Explainability and Traceability: AI applications will be appropriately understandable and transparent, including through the use of review methodologies, sources, and procedures. This includes verification, assessment and validation mechanisms at either a NATO and/or national level.
D. Reliability: AI applications will have explicit, well-defined use cases. The safety, security, and robustness of such capabilities will be subject to testing and assurance within those use cases across their entire life cycle, including through established NATO and/or national certification procedures.
E. Governability: AI applications will be developed and used according to their intended functions and will allow for: appropriate human-machine interaction; the ability to detect and avoid unintended consequences; and the ability to take steps, such as disengagement or deactivation of systems, when such systems demonstrate unintended behaviour.
F. Bias Mitigation: Proactive steps will be taken to minimise any unintended bias in the development and use of AI applications and in data sets.

Ensuring the Safe and Responsible Use of Allied AI

10. To ensure the safe and responsible use of Allied AI, NATO will operationalise its Principles of Responsible Use. These Principles will apply across the lifecycle of an AI capability. Allies and NATO will therefore operationalise these principles across all lines of development.
11. To further inform this work, the NATO AI Test Centre(s) will develop best practices for Allies, which will include assisting overall interoperability and information security efforts.
12. Underpinning the safe and responsible use of AI, NATO and Allies will consciously put Bias Mitigation efforts into practice. This will seek to minimise those biases against individual traits, such as gender, ethnicity or personal attributes.
13. NATO will conduct appropriate risk and/or impact assessments prior to deploying AI capabilities.

Minimising Interference in Allied AI

14. Some state and non-state actors will likely seek to exploit defects or limitations within our AI technologies. Allies and NATO must strive to protect the use of AI from such interference, manipulation, or sabotage, in line with the Reliability Principle of Responsible Use, also leveraging AI-enabled Cyber Defence applications.
15. Allies and NATO should develop adequate security certification requirements for AI, such as specific threat analysis frameworks and tailored security audits for purposes of ‘stress-testing’.
16. AI can impact critical infrastructure, capabilities and civil preparedness—including those covered by NATO’s seven resilience Baseline Requirements—creating potential vulnerabilities, such as cyberspace, that could be exploited by certain state and non-state actors.
17. Some state and non-state actors may also leverage disinformation opportunities within Allied societies by creating public distrust of the military use of AI. Allies will seek to prevent and counter any such efforts within the context of the Principles of Responsible Use and utilise strategic communications, where appropriate. NATO will support Allies as required.

Standards

18. NATO will further work with relevant international AI standards setting bodies to help foster military-civil standards coherence with regards to AI standards.

Big bomb cyclone is set to wallop the NORTH AMERICAN West Coast

By Alex Sosnowski, Accuweather.com

A beast of a bomb cyclone will take shape just off the coast of the northwestern United States and western Canada later this week, and AccuWeather forecasters say it will rival, in some aspects, the intensity of strong hurricanes from the Atlantic this season.

The powerful storm will bring dangerous and damaging impacts up and down the West Coast, but the precipitation it will deliver to parts of California, Oregon and Washington is greatly needed.

The storm will have some tropical origins. Energy from former Severe Tropical Storm Namtheun, which churned over the western Pacific, will join forces with a non-tropical system sitting over the northern Pacific on Wednesday, according to AccuWeather meteorologist Randy Adkins. Rapid strengthening will result. As the storm comes together a few hundred miles off the coasts of Washington and British Columbia, its intensification could easily surpass the criteria for bombogenesis.

Meteorologists define a bomb cyclone as a rapidly strengthening storm with a central pressure that plummets by 0.71 of an inch of mercury (24 millibars) or more within 24 hours. The process is referred to as bombogenesis. As the pressure drops rapidly in the center of the storm, air rushes in to replace the vacuum created in the atmosphere and can produce damaging winds.

The central pressure of the storm is forecast to dip to about 28 inches of mercury (948 millibars), putting the bomb cyclone at or even below the intensity level of Hurricane Larry, which was a long-lived and intense cyclone that churned across the Atlantic in early September. At peak strength, Larry was a major Category 3 hurricane with maximum sustained winds of 125 mph and higher gusts. Its central pressure dropped as low as 28.20 inches of mercury (955 millibars).

Future radar shows the bomb cyclone off the coast of western Canada on Friday evening. Image courtesy of AccuWeather

It will not, however, come close to the strength of Hurricane Ida, which, at its peak, was a strong Category 4 storm with a minimum central pressure of 27.43 inches of mercury (929 millibars).

Damaging winds are possible from the northwestern tip of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, and the Haida Gwaii archipelago in British Columbia as the storm rapidly intensifies at midweek. In this area, wind gusts of 40-60 mph are expected as the storm's associated cold front charges eastward, Adkins explained.

RELATED Shifting pattern to dump mountain snow, raise flood threat across the West this week 

The monster storm will act as an anchor or axle for other storms with plenty of moisture and wind energy to whip around like spokes on a giant wheel and the Pacific coast of the United States and Canada will be the targets. Each storm will have its own level of strengthening but not likely to the same intensity of the offshore bomb cyclone.

As the circulation of the bomb cyclone ramps up, winds and wave action will increase over the coastal Northwest into Thursday.

"Strong wind gusts of 40-50 mph can also be expected for coastal sections of Washington and Oregon from Wednesday to Thursday, but with the center of the bomb cyclone forecast to remain offshore, wind damage will be relatively minor and will certainly pale in comparison to the bomb cyclone from Thanksgiving week in 2019," Adkins added.

Conditions are likely to remain stormy in the coastal Northwest into next week and are likely to expand southward through the coast of Southern California into next week.

As the pattern evolves and more storms spin southeastward across the Pacific, the rounds of rain and mountain snow will ramp up significantly. Through later next week, when the pattern will finally ease up, some west-facing slopes of the Coast Ranges and lower slopes of the Cascades and the Sierra Nevada are expected to pick up a general 6-12 inches of rain with locally higher amounts.

Snow will fall at varying elevations over the course of several days as each storm blows through. By the middle of next week, several yards of snow could pile up across the high country of the Sierra Nevada, Cascades and the Olympics.

The snow that accumulates in the mountains may provide bonus runoff into streams this fall or next spring, should snowpack remain in place through the winter. Significant drought caused several of California's critical reservoirs to reach historic lows this year.

AccuWeather meteorologist Alex DeSilva said the storm has the potential to "be a tremendous shot in the arm due to the long-term drought in the region." As of Oct. 12, 46% of California was in exceptional drought, the highest level of drought severity, according to data from the U.S. Drought Monitor.

The unfolding stormy pattern will knock temperatures down and may also effectively shut down the wildfire season in much of California, just as other storms earlier this autumn and late this summer have done in the coastal Northwest, DeSilva added.

While all of the storms will have their benefits, one, in particular, may be especially problematic.



The biggest storm in the bunch, in terms of rain and mountain snow, is forecast to roll ashore from Sunday to Tuesday and is likely to target California in general and bring soaking rain as far south as coastal areas in Southern California and spotty showers to some of the deserts.

"Storms prior to the 'big one' early next week will prime the landscape and set the stage for quick runoff with the big storm carrying the potential for enough rain to cause widespread flash flooding and mudslides, especially in, but not limited to the burn scar areas in Northern California, Oregon and Washington," AccuWeather senior meteorologist Joe Lundberg said.

More than half of all of the rain in the week-long pattern and the majority of the high-country snow in California may fall during that single storm early next week.

People with homes built along the hillsides in recent burn scar locations will need to be extra vigilant with the stormy pattern unfolding into early next week. As the rounds of rain soak the ground, the topsoil can become progressively unstable.

Forecasters also warn motorists never to attempt to drive through flooded roads. The reasons include, but are not limited to, the risk that the water may be deeper than it appears, water may still be rising and road surfaces can wash away beneath floodwaters.

Large waves are likely to sweep southward along the coast of Southern California later this week to next week and are likely to be a boon to surfers, but large breakers and strong rip currents will pose dangers to bathers.



The stormy pattern will bring rain and hazards to some communities along the West Coast, particularly in California, and it could be a bellwether of what's to come this winter.

"The pattern unfolding this week to next week may be one of the biggest series of storms for the rainy season for California, but there is still potential for a couple of bigger storms over the winter," AccuWeather lead long-range forecaster Paul Pastelok said.

A precursor to the stormy pattern will bring a batch of rain and high-country snow from British Columbia to part of Northern California and northern Idaho into Wednesday evening.

This mild-mannered storm, in comparison to the coming storms, is slated to bring a general 0.50 of an inch to 2 inches of rain in the western portions of Washington, Oregon and Northern California with a few inches of snow above pass level in the Cascades and over the peaks in the Olympics.

What near-term climate impacts should worry us most?

Supporting the most exposed and vulnerable societies to reduce regional and global climate risks

CHATHAM HOUSE

RESEARCH PAPER

19 OCTOBER 2021

ISBN: 978 1 78413 499 0


Show authors

This research paper – drawing on insights from 200 experts – highlights that, within the current decade, climate hazards are expected to have increasingly serious disruptive impacts. While many hazards may now be inevitable, action on adaptation has the potential to limit the worst expected climate impacts, at regional and global levels.

The 10 hazard-impact pathways of greatest near-term concern all relate to regions of Africa and Asia. The impacts of greatest concern – food security and migration and displacement of people – may arise from hazards such as drought, changing rainfall patterns or heatwaves. Impacts will be greatest where communities are already most vulnerable, but will also set off interacting, compounding cascades of secondary impacts that cross borders and continents.

That ‘no one is safe until everyone is safe’, often repeated during the COVID-19 pandemic, is just as critical in relation to climate hazards. Between now and 2030, support for adaptation measures to address socio-economic vulnerabilities in the most at-risk regions will be vital. Without such support, it will be impossible to avert systemic climate impact cascades that translate local hazards into impacts felt across the globe.
Image — People rest at the Oregon Convention Center cooling station in Portland, Oregon, on 28 June 2021, as a heatwave moves over much of the US. Photo: Copyright © Kathryn Elsesser/AFP/Getty Images

Topics
AGRICULTURE AND FOOD
CIVIL SOCIETY
CLIMATE POLICY
G7 AND G20
GENDER AND EQUALITY
HUMAN RIGHTS AND SECURITY
MANAGING NATURAL RESOURCES
REFUGEES AND MIGRATION
UNITED NATIONS (UN)

Departments

ENVIRONMENT AND SOCIETY PROGRAMME Download PDF

What near-term climate impacts should worry us most?

Summary
01 Introduction
02 Approach and methodology
03 Results and discussion
04 Conclusion and recommendations
About the authors
Acknowledgments




This short video explainer outlines how, within the current decade, climate hazards are expected to have increasingly serious disruptive impacts.

This research paper draws on the findings of a structured, multi-round expert elicitation exercise, involving 200 climate scientists and specialists in other relevant disciplines, to assess which near-term climate hazards and impacts should most concern decision-makers in the coming decade.

Findings and conclusions
Between now and 2030, climate hazards will have increasingly significant, disruptive impacts.
The 10 direct hazard-impact pathways of greatest near-term concern all relate to Africa or Asia.
Many socio-economic vulnerabilities to climate hazards have been identified in these regions. If left unaddressed, such vulnerabilities have the potential to initiate complex chains of impacts that are likely to have a destabilizing effect on national and international security in the near term.
Decisive action is urgently needed to address socio-economic vulnerabilities to climate hazards in these regions. Such action can help prevent devastating local and regional impacts, and forestall cascading and compounding global climate impacts within the next decade.

The near-term impacts of greatest concern are:

Cascading impacts on food security, migration and global supply chains, originating in the most vulnerable countries and affecting regional country groups and the wider global community.

Food security impacts in South and Southeast Asia, and Australasia.

Global food security impacts arising from multiple climate hazards, including extreme heat, drought, storm damage, flooding and multiple breadbasket failure.

Migration and displacement impacts in East Africa, South, Southeast and East Asia, the Caribbean and Central America.

Cyclones and typhoons in Southeast and South Asia causing significant infrastructure loss and damage, with global cascading impacts on international supply chains.

Drought and crop failure driving displacement and migration of people from East Africa and the Sahel into Southern Europe.

Drought directly creating conditions for conflict in Africa, with particular vulnerability in East Africa.

Changing rainfall patterns and drought impacting livelihoods and income in Africa.

Recommendations

Adaptation measures are urgently needed. In the near term, global adaptation efforts must focus on addressing socio-economic vulnerabilities in the most threatened regions. Already, 33 concrete food security measures have been identified by 21 African countries. These provide a starting point for action.

Urgent adaptation action in vulnerable countries and regions should be financed and supported by richer countries. Such action is in the interests of all nations, to prevent cascading food insecurity, migration and conflict across the world. That ‘no one is safe until everyone is safe’, repeated so often during the COVID-19 pandemic, is just as critical in relation to climate hazards.

Adaptation measures should, at a minimum, not increase the risk of conflict, and should where possible enhance peacebuilding, given that many socio-economic vulnerabilities are interlinked with domestic and regional tensions. Efforts to combine adaptation and peacebuilding require improved governance, security and economic growth, and – crucially – the buy-in of affected communities.

A comprehensive and up-to-date climate risk register is needed, incorporating near-term climate impacts (including cascading impacts), socio-economic vulnerabilities and associated adaptations. This should complement the outputs of climate impact models to enable more targeted action from the private sector and governments. Many experts recommend that a UN body such as the Security Council should hold this risk register.
Mitigation of climate change is fundamental. In the absence of more ambitious NDCs and sector initiatives leading to drastic emissions reductions in the very near term, by 2030 the world may well be locked into impacts so severe they go beyond the limits of what nations can adapt to.

Repeating this exercise, with modifications and improvements, would be valuable while more comprehensive systems for tracking emerging and near-term climate risks are established.

FROM THE CHEEKY RIGHT, 

STEERPIKE

Shock, horror! COP26 has an electric car problem

22 October 2021,

If absurdity were a source of renewable energy, the COP26 climate change summit might achieve its aim of saving the planet. Yesterday Mr S brought news that local lawyers are set to join rail engineers, transport operators, catering staff and refuse collectors in timing industrial action to coincide with next week’s eco-jamboree. Now Steerpike learns of a fresh crisis afflicting the UN conference: there’s not enough places to power the luxury electric cars needed to ferry delegates around the city.

Some 240 Jaguar Land Rover vehicles including its I-PACE SUVs will be laid on by the UK government to move the 120 visiting heads of state and their entourages between their hotels and the SEC venue. Unfortunately a lack of charging points means the fleet now has to be re-charged by cooking oil-powered generators. A COP26 spokesperson has confirmed that the substitute generators may have to run on hydrogenated vegetable oil – recycled cooking oil – derived from waste products.

Compounding the problem is the lack of hotel capacity in the city which means longer energy-zapping journeys to get to the conference centre. The numbers of temporary generators provided and their locations have yet to be finalised, but there is speculation sites could include the Gleneagles Hotel, 47 miles from Glasgow.

Between 20,000 to 25,000 satraps, apparatchiks and flunkies will descend on the city for COP26. There are just not enough beds to accommodate them all. Wily Glaswegians, bless them, are cashing in: the Charing Cross Hotel is charging £3,818 for the first three nights of COP.

Entrepreneurial home owners, meanwhile, are renting out their properties for between roughly £400 and £600 a night for a two bedroom house. Mr S hears that even UK ministers are struggling to get rooms anywhere near the city, such is the demand. If the organisers can’t even foresee a hotel shortage, how can they be expected to achieve Net Zero?

And it’s not just officials. Steerpike understands that BBC staff going to COP have been told they can only ride in electric taxis rather than petrol-powered vehicles. To add insult to injury, the Beeb’s finest have been told that if their hotel doesn't have recycling facilities, they must dispose their waste into the correct recycling bins themselves.

Given Glasgow council is currently embroiled in a stand off with its bin-men, will anyone even be there to empty them?

WRITTEN BY Steerpike

Steerpike is The Spectator's gossip columnist, serving up the latest tittle tattle from Westminster and beyond. Email tips to steerpike@spectator.co.uk or message @MrSteerpike

Gunpowder factory catches fire, explodes in Russia; at least 16 dead
By UPI Staff

Firefighters work at the site of an explosion at a gunpowder workshop at a plant near Ryazan, Russia, on Friday. Photo by Russian Emergencies Ministry/EPA-EFE

Oct. 22 (UPI) -- More than a dozen people were killed on Friday when a gunpowder factory in Russia caught fire and exploded, authorities said.

At least 16 people were killed in the accident at the Elastik factory in the Ryazan region of Russia, located about 170 miles southeast of Moscow, the Emergencies Ministry said.

One person was seriously hurt and was taken to a hospital.

"He sustained burns of 80% of his skin's surface," health ministry aide Alexei Kuznetsov said, according to Interfax.

Officials said the fire and explosion were likely caused by violations in the plant's technological processes.

Sveral people at the factory were reported missing.

Glasgow showdown: Pacific Islands demand global leaders bring action, not excuses, to UN summit

Pacific island countries have refused to be the canary in the world’s coal mine at CoP26

By Wesley Morgan
Published: Friday 22 October 2021

The Pacific Islands are at the frontline of climate change. But as rising seas threaten their very existence, these tiny nation states will not be submerged without a fight.

For decades this group has been the world’s moral conscience on climate change. Pacific leaders are not afraid to call out the climate policy failures of far bigger nations, including regional neighbour Australia.

And they have a strong history of punching above their weight at United Nations climate talks — including at Paris, where they were credited with helping secure the first truly global climate agreement.

The momentum is with Pacific island countries at next month’s summit in Glasgow and they have powerful friends. The United Kingdom, European Union and United States all want to see warming limited to 1.5℃.

This powerful alliance will turn the screws on countries dragging down the global effort to avert catastrophic climate change. And if history is a guide, the Pacific won’t let the actions of laggard nations go unnoticed.

A long fight for survival

Pacific leaders’ agitation for climate action dates back to the late 1980s, when scientific consensus on the problem emerged. The leaders quickly realised the serious implications global warming and sea-level rise posed for island countries.

Some Pacific nations — such as Kiribati, Marshall Islands and Tuvalu — are predominantly low-lying atolls, rising just metres above the waves. In 1991, Pacific leaders declared “the cultural, economic and physical survival of Pacific nations is at great risk”.

Successive scientific assessments clarified the devastating threat climate change posed for Pacific nations: More intense cyclones, changing rainfall patterns, coral bleaching, ocean acidification, coastal inundation and sea-level rise.

Pacific states developed collective strategies to press the international community to take action. At past UN climate talks, they formed a diplomatic alliance with island nations in the Caribbean and the Indian Ocean, which swelled to more than 40 countries.

The first draft of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol — which required wealthy nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions — was put forward by Nauru on behalf of this Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS).

Read more: Australia ranks last out of 54 nations on its strategy to cope with climate change. The Glasgow summit is a chance to protect us all

Climate change is a threat to the survival of Pacific Islanders. Mick Tsikas/AAPSecuring a global agreement in Paris

Pacific states were also crucial in negotiating a successor to the Kyoto Protocol in Paris in 2015.

By this time, UN climate talks were stalled by arguments between wealthy nations and developing countries about who was responsible for addressing climate change, and how much support should be provided to help poorer nations to deal with its impacts.

In the months before the Paris climate summit, then-Marshall Islands Foreign Minister, the late Tony De Brum, quietly coordinated a coalition of countries from across traditional negotiating divides at the UN.

This was genius strategy. During talks in Paris, membership of this “High Ambition Coalition” swelled to more than 100 countries, including the European Union and the United States, which proved vital for securing the first truly global climate agreement.

When then-US President Barack Obama met with island leaders in 2016, he noted “we could not have gotten a Paris Agreement without the incredible efforts and hard work of island nations”.

The High Ambition Coalition secured a shared temperature goal in the Paris Agreement, for countries to limit global warming to 1.5℃ above the long-term average. This was no arbitrary figure.

Scientific assessments have clarified 1.5℃ warming is a key threshold for the survival of vulnerable Pacific Island states and the ecosystems they depend on, such as coral reefs.

Read more: Who's who in Glasgow: 5 countries that could make or break the planet's future under climate change

Warming above 1.5℃ threatens Pacific Island states and their coral reefs. Shutterstock

De Brum took a powerful slogan to Paris: “1.5 to stay alive”.

The Glasgow summit is the last chance to keep 1.5℃ of warming within reach. But Australia — almost alone among advanced economies — is taking to Glasgow the same 2030 target it took to Paris six years ago. This is despite the Paris Agreement requirement that nations ratchet up their emissions-reduction ambition every five years.

Australia is the largest member of the Pacific Islands Forum (an intergovernmental group that aims to promote the interests of countries and territories in the Pacific). But it’s also a major fossil fuel producer, putting it at odds with other Pacific countries on climate.

When Australia announced its 2030 target, De Brum said if the rest of the world followed suit:

the Great Barrier Reef would disappear […] so would the Marshall Islands and other vulnerable nations.

Influence at Glasgow

So what can we expect from Pacific leaders at the Glasgow summit? The signs so far suggest they will demand CoP26 deliver an outcome to once and for all limit global warming to 1.5℃.

At pre-CoP discussions in Milan earlier this month, vulnerable nations proposed countries be required to set new 2030 targets each year until 2025 — a move intended to bring global ambition into alignment with a 1.5℃ pathway.

COP26 president Alok Sharma says he wants the decision text from the summit to include a new agreement to keep 1.5℃ within reach.

This sets the stage for a showdown. Major powers like the US and the EU are set to work with large negotiating blocs, like the High Ambition Coalition, to heap pressure on major emitters that have yet to commit to serious 2030 ambition — including China, India, Saudi Arabia, Mexico and Australia.

The chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, Fiji’s Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama, has warned Pacific island countries “refuse to be the canary in the world’s coal mine.”

According to Bainimarama:

by the time leaders come to Glasgow, it has to be with immediate and transformative action […] come with commitments for serious cuts in emissions by 2030 — 50 per cent or more. Come with commitments to become net zero before 2050. Do not come with excuses. That time is past.

Wesley Morgan, Researcher, Climate Council, and Research Fellow, Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Fighting climate change: Why we need more policy experts, green jobs in India

We cannot leave the creation of green jobs to the future; they need to be created now


By Tanya Mittal
Published: Friday 22 October 2021


Climate change has come a long way since it faced scepticism and resistance: 2021, with all its trappings of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic aside, has made a clear case that the crisis is real. The task at hand is huge — at the individual, national and international levels.

Transitioning to a decarbonised economy is a crucial step to halt the impending crisis. It also drives economic growth by creating green jobs.

Green jobs not only provide much-required employment opportunities for the youth, but they also give youngsters an outlet to contribute directly and actively to planetary health. The non-use of natural resources such as fossil fuels can considerably change people’s lifestyles.

The other resources — power from hydroelectric, solar and (made-safe) nuclear energy — should be made available in a quantity that we can do without the natural resources (coal, fuels, gas, wood, etc.).

Discarding the use of plastic and other synthetic materials, replacing them with biodegradable materials, discarding potentially toxic fertilisers and insecticide sprays, are among the well-documented can help restore the skewed balance in nature.

We need to take responsibility of change on ourselves:
Transitioning to cleaner fuel, using electric cars, walking and cycling more
Avoiding wastage of resources, including water and food items
Sparingly using consumables and energy (like electricity, gas, fuels)

The need to pre-stage public resistance by educating people appropriately is filled by climate policy professionals and specialists. Various think tanks and climate organisations have a good vantage point to directly combat a worsening climatic environment and extinguish the citizen ire regarding fuel price hikes or similar government measures.

Floods, landslides, droughts, forest fires, melting glaciers and rising temperatures have wreaked havoc all over the world. Even climate change deniers are not delusional anymore. And this is a good development.

Several studies anticipated that low-lying coastal lands and delta-lands (like in Bangladesh) would go under seawater in the near future. This would result in the forced climate-induced migration of large populations.

We cannot leave the creation of green jobs to the future; they need to be created now. Incentives should be provided for people to actively fight climate change and lead a lifestyle that is gentle to the environment. At the international level, all stakeholders need to cooperate promptly and effectively to bring about these changes.

There is a common misnomer about green jobs: That the work is only related to sustaining a healthy environment. The ambit has, however, expanded to cover a larger portion of the economy, with principles of environmentalism, conservation, regulation and equity and investment at core.

New information comes to light every day, including data, research and recommendations by the scientific fraternity. The transition to adopting green jobs and practices would advance social change too.

Climate policy action is for the common man and green jobs are meant to promote inclusive growth strategy for poverty reduction, environmentally sustainable paths and local development initiatives.

The Green Jobs Initiative by the International Labour Organisation and its partners seeks to address such issues by promoting economies and small enterprises with reduced carbon footprint, environmental ramifications and conservation of natural resources.

What is CoP26? Here’s how global climate negotiations work and what’s expected from the Glasgow summit

CoP26 will be a complex process, but it’s how international law and institutions can help solve problems that no single country can fix on its own

By Shelley Inglis
Published: Thursday 21 October 2021

Over two weeks in November, world leaders and national negotiators will meet in Scotland to discuss what to do about climate change. It’s a complex process that can be hard to make sense of from the outside, but it’s how international law and institutions help solve problems that no single country can fix on its own.

I worked for the United Nations for several years as a law and policy adviser and have been involved in international negotiations. Here’s what’s happening behind closed doors and why people are concerned that CoP26 might not meet its goals.

What is CoP26?

In 1992, countries agreed to an international treaty called the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which set ground rules and expectations for global cooperation on combating climate change. It was the first time the majority of nations formally recognised the need to control greenhouse gas emissions, which cause global warming that drives climate change.

That treaty has since been updated, including in 2015 when nations signed the Paris climate agreement. That agreement set the goal of limiting global warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 F), and preferably to 1.5 C (2.7 F), to avoid catastrophic climate change.


CoP26 stands for the 26th Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC. The “parties” are the 196 countries that ratified the treaty plus the European Union. The United Kingdom, partnering with Italy, is hosting CoP26 in Glasgow, Scotland, from October 31 through November 12, 2021, after a one-year postponement due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Why are world leaders so focused on climate change?

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s latest report, released in August 2021, warns in its strongest terms yet that human activities have unequivocally warmed the planet and that climate change is now widespread, rapid and intensifying.

The IPCC’s scientists explain how climate change has been fueling extreme weather events and flooding, severe heat waves and droughts, loss and extinction of species and the melting of ice sheets and rising of sea levels. UN Secretary-General António Guterres called the report a “code red for humanity.”

Enough greenhouse gas emissions are already in the atmosphere and they stay there long enough, that even under the most ambitious scenario of countries quickly reducing their emissions, the world will experience rising temperatures through at least mid-century.

However, there remains a narrow window of opportunity. If countries can cut global emissions to “net zero” by 2050, that could bring warming back to under 1.5 C in the second half of the 21st century. How to get closer to that course is what leaders and negotiators are discussing.

U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres called the latest climate science findings a ‘code red for humanity.’ 

UNFCCCWhat happens at CoP26?

During the first days of the conference, around 120 heads of state, like US President Joe Biden and their representatives will gather to demonstrate their political commitment to slowing climate change.

Once the heads of state depart, country delegations, often led by ministers of environment, engage in days of negotiations, events and exchanges to adopt their positions, make new pledges and join new initiatives. These interactions are based on months of prior discussions, policy papers and proposals prepared by groups of states, UN staff and other experts.

Nongovernmental organisations and business leaders also attend the conference and CoP26 has a public side with sessions focused on topics such as the impact of climate change on small island states, forests or agriculture, as well as exhibitions and other events.

The meeting ends with an outcome text that all countries agree to. Guterres publicly expressed disappointment with the CoP25 outcome and there are signs of trouble heading into CoP26.

Celebrities like youth climate activist Greta Thunberg add public pressure on world leaders.

UNFCCCWhat is CoP26 expected to accomplish?

Countries are required under the Paris Agreement to update their national climate action plans every five years, including at CoP26. This year, they’re expected to have ambitious targets through 2030. These are known as nationally determined contributions, or NDCs.

The Paris Agreement requires countries to report their NDCs, but it allows them leeway in determining how they reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The initial set of emission reduction targets in 2015 was far too weak to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

One key goal of CoP26 is to ratchet up these targets to reach net zero carbon emissions by the middle of the century.

Another aim of CoP26 is to increase climate finance to help poorer countries transition to clean energy and adapt to climate change. This is an important issue of justice for many developing countries whose people bear the largest burden from climate change but have contributed least to it.

Wealthy countries promised in 2009 to contribute $100 billion a year by 2020 to help developing nations, a goal that has not been reached. The US, UK and EU, among the largest historic greenhouse emitters, are increasing their financial commitments and banks, businesses, insurers and private investors are being asked to do more.

Other objectives include phasing out coal use and generating solutions that preserve, restore or regenerate natural carbon sinks, such as forests.

Another challenge that has derailed past CoPs is agreeing on implementing a carbon trading system outlined in the Paris Agreement.

Chinese street vendors sell vegetables outside a state-owned coal-fired power plant in 2017. Kevin Frayer/Getty Images

Are countries on track to meet the international climate goals?

The UN warned in September 2021 that countries’ revised targets were too weak and would leave the world on pace to warm 2.7 C (4.9 F) by the end of the century. However, governments are also facing another challenge this fall that could affect how they respond: Energy supply shortages have left Europe and China with price spikes for natural gas, coal and oil.

China — the world’s largest emitter — has not yet submitted its NDC. Major fossil fuel producers such as Saudi Arabia, Russia and Australia seem unwilling to strengthen their commitments. India — a critical player as the second-largest consumer, producer and importer of coal globally — has also not yet committed.

Other developing nations such as Indonesia, Malaysia, South Africa and Mexico are important. So is Brazil, which, under Javier Bolsonaro’s watch, has increased deforestation of the Amazon — the world’s largest rainforest and crucial for biodiversity and removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

What happens if CoP26 doesn’t meet its goals?

Many insiders believe that CoP26 won’t reach its goal of having strong enough commitments from countries to cut global greenhouse gas emissions 45 per cent by 2030. That means the world won’t be on a smooth course for reaching net zero emissions by 2050 and the goal of keeping warming under 1.5 C.

But organisers maintain that keeping warming under 1.5 C is still possible. Former Secretary of State John Kerry, who has been leading the US negotiations, remains hopeful that enough countries will create momentum for others to strengthen their reduction targets by 2025.

The world is not on track to meet the Paris goal. Climate Action Tracker

The cost of failure is astronomical. Studies have shown that the difference between 1.5 and 2 degrees Celsius can mean the submersion of small island states, the death of coral reefs, extreme heat waves, flooding and wildfires and pervasive crop failure.

That translates into many premature deaths, more mass migration, major economic losses, large swaths of unlivable land and violent conflict over resources and food — what the UN secretary-general has called “a hellish future.”

[Get The Conversation’s most important politics headlines, in our Politics Weekly newsletter.]

Shelley Inglis, Executive Director, University of Dayton Human Rights Center, University of Dayton

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


UNEP production gap report: Net-zero targets by countries are empty pledges without plans

Governments are planning to produce more than double the production of fossil fuels than what the world requires to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius

By Samrat Sengupta
Published: Wednesday 20 October 2021


The climate crisis has become clearer than ever, but it has not been able to compel major emitters to improve action on the ground so far. Governments across the world are still planning to produce more than double the fossil fuels than what the world requires to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

This was flagged by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) report released October 20, 2021.

The production gap to achieve the climate goal is the widest for coal: Production plans and projections by governments would lead to around 240 per cent more coal, 57 per cent more oil, and 71 per cent more gas in 2030 than global levels consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C.

The modelling analysis has considered carbon dioxides removal (CDR) technologies to be deployed widely and methane emissions and leakages to be arrested. These assumptions are yet to be proven workable in practice and any deviation from the assumptions will lead to further widening of the gap.



Global fossil fuel production under four pathways from 2019 to 2040, denominated in extraction-based CO2 emissions in units of billion tonnes of CO2 per year (GtCO2/yr). This reflects the amount of CO2 emissions expected to be released from the combustion of extracted coal, oil, and gas. Source: Production Gap Report 2021, UNEP

The most worrying factor is that almost all major coal, oil and gas producers are planning to increase their production till at least 2030 or beyond.

This has been fuelled by incremental capital flow towards fossil fuels in comparison to clean energy in the post novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) recovery phase. The Group of 20 countries has channelised $300 billion to fossil fuels since the beginning of the pandemic, and the sector is still enjoying significant fiscal incentives.

The world does not have any more time to alter its trajectory of energy use from fossil to clean energy, and a slight deviation in the coming decade will have a substantial burden of adversaries to our future generations, as we will be locked into long-term human-induced global warming beyond 2 degrees Celsius.



The world leaders have planned to meet during the first half of November 2021, at the 26th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 26) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Glasgow, United Kingdom, to negotiate on pathways to avert this crisis.

The report has underlined massive gaps between our pledges and actions, which need to be rectified with a real policy plan and finance.

Why we must ponder on carbon capture technology to reduce GHG emissions

CCS is a technology-driven activity that requires capturing carbon dioxide produced by industrial activity, transporting it, and storing it deep underground

By Siddartha Ramakanth Keshavadasu

Published: Monday 18 October 2021

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a potent greenhouse gas. It is abundant and stays in the atmosphere for a long time. It is responsible for about 66 per cent the total energy imbalance that has been causing the Earth’s temperature to rise.

It also dissolves in the ocean water, producing carbonic acid and lowering the ocean’s pH. This adversely affects the marine life. CO2 is one of the most notorious gases contributing to the changing climate.

To achieve the results pledged under Paris Agreement, 2015 to limit future temperature increases to 1.5 degree Celsius, emission reduction may just not be sufficient.

Literal removal of carbon from the atmosphere is vital to achieve the target, without which the cascade effect will result in catastrophic events, including sinking of the world’s important cities. It will pose risks to roads, railways, ports, underwater internet cables, farmland, sanitation and drinking water pipelines and reservoirs as well as even mass transit systems.

Some cities will disappear from the world map; others will need to become resilient to this change. Around 90 per cent of all coastal areas will be affected to varying degrees, according to the World Economic Forum’s 2019 Global Risk Report.

To address the risks, we need to deploy technologies to remove carbon from the atmosphere apart in addition to reducing emissions. Mass and Aggressive Afforestation (MAA) and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) are the primary ways of doing it.

MAA is more of a natural process, which also requires land recovery from existing use. CCS is a technology-driven activity that requires capturing carbon dioxide produced by industrial activity; transporting it; and then storing it deep underground.

Afforestation and CCS are the only most effective ways of reducing atmospheric CO2.

More than 190 countries have signed the Paris Agreement designed to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Even with pledges of massive reductions in emissions, however, many scientists believe carbon removal technologies would be needed to meet the goal.

Without a firm action to deliver 1 Gigatonne (Gt) of negative emissions globally by 2025, keeping global warming within the Paris Agreement target of 1.5°C cannot be achieved, according to a report by Coalition for Negative Emissions (CNE) published June 2021.

The current cost of carbon removal is around $900-1000 a tonne of CO2. Currently, only one mega-scale project is commissioned in Iceland, which now houses the world’s largest CCS plant that aims to capture about 4,000 tonnes of CO2 every year viz 0.036 Mt by 2030.

So, the world needs 50,000 such CCS plants by 2024-25 to achieve a one-Gt reduction. This is in addition to addressing the new emissions that are likely to increase with post-novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) revival plans.

The massive afforestation programme set up by the Government of Telangana in India — which aims to plant 2.3 billion samplings with a target sustaining rate of 60 per cent — will absorb at least 46 Mt by 2030. Yet, the net removal of CO2 is likely to be around 1.9 Mt by 2030.

But MAA is difficult to execute in a sustained manner given the pressure of population, jobs and wealth distribution. But technological interventions like CCS are the only solution that can be adopted for countries to meet the target and eventually become net-zero.

A few European countries and China have pledged to be carbon neutral by 2050 and 2060 respectively. For them to meet the target, the carbon absorption should be in the range of 0.3-1 Bt of CO2 per annum, according to Arunabha Ghosh, chief executive, Council on Energy, Environment and Water.


The math seems simple but given the cost and the disturbed economies in the post-pandemic world, the funding of such projects is a billion-dollar question.

Let us try to devise a conceptual strategy to source the funds. Luckily, most developed cities are near the coasts and are the most vulnerable to climate change.

These cities may put restrictions on the products or services that are not responding to climate change by way of direct action, which will put pressure on the companies to start making provisions in their budgets and start investing in the CCS projects.

The economically underdeveloped states also need to start preparing an action plan for CO2 removal by way of MAA parallelly devising plans to penalise the companies.

But then not all the companies are large enough to set up or directly invest in CCS and need a market to indirectly contribute to CCS by paying a price, a market for carbon credits already exists but with discriminative pricing. Such pricing is detrimental in convincing the companies and states to invest in such projects.

The current market needs to facilitate trade of carbon credits, which are generated by reducing greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. A new market or a new mechanism for trade of such carbon credits with a flat price mechanism for the initial 10 years and mandatory purchase of the same by each country with a defined quota should be developed.

Views expressed are the author’s own and don’t necessarily reflect those of Down To Earth

Down To Earth | Latest news, opinion, analysis on environment & science issues | India, South Asia

UK

Scots council told it can't book homeless people into hotel during the week of the COP26 conference

West Lothian Council says that thirty people, including families, will not be allowed to stay at the Mercure Livingston Hotel.

Stuart Sommerville

Local Democracy Reporter
04:30, 22 OCT 2021

One councillor described the Mercure’s refusal as 'pure greed'

A Scots council has been told that it can't book homeless people into a hotel during the week of the COP26 conference.

West Lothian Council says that thirty people, including families, will not be allowed to stay at the Mercure Livingston Hotel.

With the climate change conference soon approaching, hotels in Edinburgh have been reporting high demand.

It comes as accommodation in the host city of Glasgow has been fully-booked, according to Edinburgh Live.

The council has had to use hotels as emergency accommodation as it has a statutory duty to house the homeless.

It is up to hotels whether they take bookings from councils but one councillor described the Mercure’s refusal as 'pure greed.'

In a statement this week depute group leader Frank Anderson said: “The council has been given notice by the hotel that they can’t accept anyone from the 30 October for the period of COP26.

He continued: “This is absolutely unacceptable. Homeless people are being decanted so that the Mercure can charge exorbitant prices to profit from COP26 delegates, rather missing the point of reducing carbon footprint.

"This is pure greed on the part of the Mercure and says a lot about their attitude to corporate responsibility.

“The fact that homeless people are in the middle of a crisis and need a roof over their head as quick as possible but are being decanted from this hotel, to who knows where, is totally unacceptable and beggars belief that a large company such as Accor, the owners, have even implemented this action.”

He added: “I urge the Mercure to change this decision, show that corporate greed is not the moral business way to do business and continue to cooperate with the council in tackling the homeless crisis we have in West Lothian.”

A spokesperson for West Lothian Council said it was moving people because it had to, and alternative accommodation had been sought.

He added: “West Lothian Council has not chosen to decant anyone from privately owned accommodation as a result of COP26 .

“Owners of hotels control their bookings and advise us of their availability. Councils have no control over that aspect and will place people into temporary/emergency accommodation where it becomes available.

“Over several weeks we have had to move approximately 30 individual clients to alternative accommodation. The council has a legal obligation to find alternative temporary accommodation for anyone identifying as being homeless.”


A spokesperson for the Mercure Livingston Hotel, said: “During the pandemic, we were contracted by West Lothian Council to provide temporary accommodation for vulnerable people from a range of different backgrounds.

"We were proud to support those in need during the crisis.


"The contract ended in August and we have been working closely with the Council to support the transition of guests into more permanent accommodations extending their stay at the hotel where necessary until their new accommodation was ready.

"The hotel has been open to business and leisure guests throughout.”

Nicola Sturgeon urged to intervene over ScotRail strikes ahead of COP26 summit in Glasgow

Rail workers voted for a strike, which could severely disrupt the international climate crisis summit.

Paul Hutcheon

Political Editor, Daily Record
12:03, 22 OCT 2021

Rail workers have voted for strike action (Image: Getty Images)

Nicola Sturgeon is being urged to personally intervene to resolve a rail dispute which could see staff strike during the COP26 climate change summit.

Mick Lynch, general secretary of the RMT union, accused rail bosses of having “dragged their heels over further talks”, despite the fact that the “clock is ticking” to the start of the summit.

Thousands of delegates from across the globe, including US president Joe Biden, will be in Scotland for the crucial climate change talks, which get under way on October 31.

With that in mind, Lynch said he had now written to the First Minister “calling on her to intervene as a matter of urgency to bring about a fair resolution” to the dispute.

In his letter to Sturgeon, he said: “It is completely within the Scottish Government’s powers to resolve these disputes before Cop26 commences – it needs to stop stonewalling these key workers and give them the justice, respect and reward they deserve.”

Nicola Sturgeon (Image: Getty Images)

Earlier this week, members of another rail union, the TSSA, voted to accept the pay offer from ScotRail.

It comes after Scotland’s railways have seen months of industrial action, with most Sunday services cancelled.

The RMT union, meanwhile, still plans to strike during the Cop26 climate conference.

Lynch said: “It is frankly disgraceful that rather than getting all parties round the table for meaningful talks to bring about a fair resolution to these disputes, the Scottish Government is still failing to intervene, despite being in control of the ScotRail franchise and having a major interest in the Sleeper service.”

He added: “RMT has made clear from the outset that it is open to meaningful talks.

Scotrail confirmed a strike during COP26 yesterday (Image: Getty)

“Therefore, it is disappointing that with the clock ticking and just days to go until COP26, ScotRail and the Sleeper have dragged their heels over further talks, preferring instead to issue inflammatory and misleading communications to its workforce.

“I have, therefore, today, written to the First Minister calling on her to intervene as a matter of urgency to bring about a fair resolution to these disputes.

“As I said in the letter to the First Minister, the Scottish Government needs to stop stonewalling ScotRail and the Sleeper workers and give these green railway workers the justice, respect and reward they deserve.”

However, a spokeswoman for Transport Scotland, the Scottish Government’s transport agency, said it was “disappointing” that the RMT had not put the pay offer to its members in a ballot.

She said: “We acknowledge that the RMT has at last contacted ScotRail to reject this offer nearly two weeks after it was made.

“This is a disappointing response from the RMT leadership, particularly as we understand Aslef and TSSA have accepted the pay offer and Unite is recommending it to its members, who they are currently balloting.

“It is therefore disappointing that RMT leadership did not put this very good pay offer to a democratic vote to its members.”

The spokeswoman continued: “In the interest of collective bargaining, we understand that ScotRail would need to re-engage all four unions to determine next steps.

“The RMT leadership has made clear its problem is with rest-day working and that would need to be the focus for any further discussions.”

She added: “We are keen to see this issue resolved ahead of Cop26 so everyone who works in Scotland’s railways can play their part in welcoming the world to our country and showcase our efforts towards building a greener, cleaner railway.”

Meanwhile, a ScotRail spokesman said: “It’s extremely disappointing that the RMT have rejected a very good pay offer, negotiated over several weeks, and opted to continue with this highly damaging strike action, particularly when the other three unions have either accepted the offer or have recommended that their members do so.

READ MORE
Nicola Sturgeon's Covid advisory group warns of 'risks' posed by Glasgow hosting COP26