Water Wars

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by HectortheInspector, Oct 21, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. You'll love this one. Remember the floods in Houston amongst all those nice new very expensive houses? It turns out the subdivisions were built on the dry beds of the flood reservoirs which then filled up with rain like they were supposed to. Everyone knew Houston’s reservoirs would flood — except for the people who bought homes inside them

    Some of the land in the flood reservoir boundaries is privately owned. When the dams were built, that land was farmland and pasture, so it if flooded it was no big deal. Now that the city has grown, it's prime development property, especially as it can be sold as being near a lake and park land.

    The flood reservoir boundaries were marked on the official maps, but property developers in Houston pretty much run the city, so they got those maps buried in the backs of the official filing cabinets and built on the land and sold it anyway. Today the developers are still baulking at the notion of stopping development in areas intended to be under water during floods, and from the story it sounds like the municipal and state politicians haven't the backbone to stand up to them.

    After all, who needs government regulation when the free market can sort all these things out by itself?
    • Informative Informative x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Buyer beware ("Caveat Emptor").
    Although I suspect that a number of Houston property lawyers will be busy
    (when their offices have dried out).
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. Israel's water worries return after four years of drought
    Four years of drought for Israel which recently ceased a longstanding nationwide awareness campaign. They use some of the same water sources as Syria and Jordan and are also in control of water supplies to the West Bank with Palestinians complaining about a lack thereof, denied by Israel:
  4. Good report from a NGO I hadn't really heard of before.
    Links climate change impacts to a whole range of political and strategic impacts such as forced migration.

    P32-37 covers the Syrian Civil War.
    Executive summary:

    Each of the last three decades has been successively warmer than any preceding decade since 1850, and in 2015 temperature rise exceeded 1.0°C, compared to preindustrial times, for the first time. These changes will have an escalating, negative impact on our environment, economies, livelihoods and security globally. These impacts will disproportionately affect the most vulnerable groups in society, and those who have contributed least to climate change will be first and worst affected by it. If unchecked, some predict that climate change could draw up to 720 million people back into extreme poverty and create millions or even billions of climate refugees. A study published in 2013 suggested that the effects of climate change could precipitate as much as a 56% increase in the frequency of intergroup conflicts across the world.

    • Climate change can take the form of slow-onset environmental degradation, such as the melting of polar ice caps and rising sea levels, increased salinization of groundwater and soil, droughts and desertification from changed precipitation levels. It can also take the form of sudden-onset disasters including storms and floods, heatwaves and wildfires. The number of weather-related natural disasters has risen on all continents since 1980. From 1970 to 2012 there were 8,835 disasters related to climate, of which 3,496 took place between 2001 and 2010. More than half of these were related to rainfall patterns; both floods and droughts are increasingly evident in many parts of the world.

    • Climate change is resulting in the destruction of livelihoods, infrastructure and communities and – without further action – is likely to force people to leave their homes and drive forced migration. In 2016 extreme weather-related disasters displaced around 23.5 million people. Since 2008, an average of 21.7 million people were displaced each year by such hazards. This does not include the people forced to flee their homes as a consequence of slow-onset environmental degradation, such as droughts.

    • EJF defines all these people as climate refugees: “persons or groups of persons who, for reasons of sudden or progressive climate-related change in the environment that adversely affects their lives or living conditions, are obliged to leave their habitual homes either temporarily or permanently, and who move either within their country or abroad.”

    • Rising temperatures and changing rainfall patterns will have widespread, large-scale negative impacts on food production and food security. Between 1985 and 2007, droughts drove a 13.7% loss in cereal production, compared to just 6.7% in losses between 1964 and 1984. Drought is one of the key factors for agricultural failure and it is expected that the increase in intensity, frequency and duration of such droughts - all consequences of climate change - will bring about significant declines to crop yields.

    • Environmental change can be seen to drive conflicts over land or resources, which in turn can lead to the displacement of people. Forced migration can be triggered by environmental conflicts, but forced migration due to the scarcity of food or extreme weather events can also in itself trigger conflicts.The interaction between different social, economic and political variables – as well as environmental factors – are strong influencers of wars and armed conflicts in vulnerable countries.

    • This report includes a focus on impacts of changing weather patterns on food security, and how this helped fuel the Syrian war. The Syrian war, now in its seventh year, has resulted in more than 470,000 deaths and 13.5 million people require humanitarian assistance. 6.6 million people have been internally displaced and nearly five million people are residing in camps in Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon as well as an estimated 1.2 million seeking refuge in Europe. Whilst the war was not solely a result of climate change, the intertwining effects of drought, rural to urban migration, and the increasing unrest due to a lack of government measures to avoid water scarcity, unemployment and growing inequality, corruption and political oppression are clear.

    • EJF urges the international community to acknowledge the reality of climate change and take urgent action to limit the crippling effects on our global community. We note the imperative for greater consensus and support for vulnerable nations to increase their resilience to climate risks and adapt to their impact. We call for an international agreement that will clarify the rights and ensure the protection of climate refugees, with the immediate appointment of a United Nations Special Rapporteur to convene, initiate and guide preparatory discussions towards this end. Most important of all, is the need to end our ‘carbon addiction’ and meet our shared international commitment under the Paris Agreement, to cut greenhouse gas emissions and ensure that temperature rise is kept below 1.5°C on pre-industrial levels.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. YarS

    YarS On ROPs

    Sorry for my English, does this centence means, that there is chance (in near future) on the melting of South Polar cap, and that melting of North Polar cap can cause "rising of sea levels"?
  6. YarS

    YarS On ROPs

    Ha! Funny guys. Does they really think, that in case of Golfstream changing, and freesing of England, warmed Canada should to accept hundreds of millions of freezing European refugees and feed them? I'm sure, Canadians will sunk transports with such a "refugees".
    And what are a problems with warming to levels of HCO? I think, it will be a good thing.
    Holocene climatic optimum - Wikipedia

    And yes, returning to biosphere almost lost Carbon - is a good thing for ecosystems. More Carbon - more productive of plants.
  7. Both caps. However, the North pole is not likely to raise sea water levels much , as it is effectively frozen water anyway.
    The significant rises will come from Antarctic glaciers and ice pack. There is quite a lot of evidence tharlt excessive groundwater pumping has also had an effect on rising sea levels.
    Melting ice packs are only one from of 'slow-onset degradation'.
    Desertification, deforestation would also be the same thing.
  8. ... and there goes the sanity again.
    The report is saying nothing that you can't twist with your xenophobic preconceptions.
    Read it again. Like an adult.

    The point is that environmental refugees will be increasing worldwide. Russia is by no means going to be immune. You watch to see what happens when the Central Asian republics start to collapse.

    'Warming' isn't the problem. I know Russia sees some geopolitical advantages from the thawing of Siberia and the arctic sea ways.

    Everyone else sees this as potential disaster. Changing oceanic currents and disruptions to global weather systems are far more hazardous.
  9. The Arctic also includes ice caps in Greenland and the Canadian Arctic Islands. In addition to these, there are glaciers in Iceland, Norway, Svalbard, and various Russian Arctic islands.

    These are similar to the Antarctic ice cap in that they sit on land, and so their melting will raise sea levels. They may be smaller than the Antarctic ice cap, but I believe they are melting at a more rapid rate. The rate of melting is as important as the total amount of ice in place if we are looking at climatic effects over the next century, as not all of the ice in the larger ice caps or glaciers will melt under current projections.

    Temperatures in the Arctic are increasing at roughly twice the rate of the global average.
  10. "Climate refugees" will be from the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, and South Asia. Some people may argue that the world is already seeing them, with long term drought being a major underlying cause of the wars in Syria and Yemen.

    In that sense, Russia is already seeing the effects of this in the form of having to assist the government of Syria in dealing with rebellion and terrorism.

    Russia will see more direct effects in the form of instability along its southern border in the Caucasus and Central Asia, and further afield in the Middle East and western China. This will in turn result in more people seeking to emigrate to Russia from those regions. Many of these may be ethnic Russians or Ukrainians from those regions, but will also include Kazakhs, Uzbeks, and many others.

    Within Russia itself there will likely be increased internal migration due to farming becoming unprofitable in marginal areas of the North Caucasus and the areas bordering on Kazakhstan.

    Some forested areas of Siberia may turn into open steppe as more frequent fires render the areas no longer suitable for boreal forest. There is speculation that similar effects will be seen in Canada's own extensive boreal forest. This in turn will have effects on the pulpwood and lumber industries.

    I wouldn't attempt to extend the observed effects of the Holocene climatic optimum onto current climate changes, as the root causes are believe to be very different. The Holocene changes are widely believed to have been the result of Milankovitch Cycles (changes due to interactions between the Earth's axial tilt and orbital eccentricity) while the current ones are due to the greenhouse effect. The two can result in very different distributions of rainfall and temperature. There's far more to it than just looking at an average temperature in certain areas.
  11. YarS

    YarS On ROPs

    @terminal , as for me, "Global warming" is good for cold states like Russia and Canada.
    We can see it by increased productivity of Russian agricultural.
    About droughts in Central Asia it is more political and economical question - 100G$ and there will be build system of canals for delivering water from Syberian rivers to Kazakstan. Only question is how much they are ready to pay for our water. Another positive effect will be inceasing of salinity in the North Ocean, and changing of Gulfstream. Europe will become much more cold, that will cause at least increasing of their fuel usage and additional money for us, in the best way - depopulation of Europe, and minimisation of European threat.
  12. YarS

    YarS On ROPs

    And it is totaly near three Gm^3. If average temperature will be returned to temperatures of Pliocene (+5 С) this glaciers will be melted for near one thousand of years, with increasing of sea level less that 0,7 centimeter/year.
    But I'm sure, that we have no practical possibility to increase average temperatures to this levels even if we shall burn all aviable gas, oil and coal.
  13. YarS

    YarS On ROPs

    Bla-bla-bla... Human is different from other animals, by ability to change environment to better, not only by migrations, but also by active work - building houses, wearing clothes, digging chanels, making melioration, etc...
    [quote[Russia is by no means going to be immune. [/quote]
    We don't accept "climatic refuugees". We can accept limited, but sufficient amount "working migrants".

    Nothing special. If they will be loyal - we can sell them any amount of water they need. If not - they can cut the throats to each other for a water (as it was before "Russian colonisators" were came). For those who love Russia and have enough education to be integrated in Russian society - there are chance to migrate in Russia.
    Every potentional disaster is a potentional possibility.

    Changing oceanic currents and disruptions to global weather systems are far more hazardous.[/QUOTE]
  14. You may find the following of interest. One of the following posts includes a link to a Russian study on the effects of climate on Russia. That includes agriculture. We also debated some additional related matters.
    Water Wars
    Water Wars
    Water Wars
    Water Wars
    Water Wars
    Water Wars

    Some time prior to that we also discussed the effects on Lake Baikal and the Siberian rivers, although you will have to find that yourself.

    With reference to diverting Siberian rivers to Central Asia, that is very unlikely. There is little direct benefit to Russia and the negative environmental consequences would make it very unpopular with the Russian people. Such sacrifices could have been made for the sake of the country during the days of the Soviet Union or before that during the Russian Empire, but not now when the Central Asian states are independent.

    More likely is that water shortages will cause political instability in those states, making any sort of adjustment even more difficult.