I’ve always assumed that the Pentagon has a contingency plan for pretty much everything, from fighting simultaneous wars in the Middle East and the Korean peninsula to quarantining parts of the United States in case of a bioterrorism attack. So I was not too surprised to hear about the existence of a Pentagon-commissioned study that examines the national security impact of global warming—or, to be more specific, the impact of warming temperatures on the Gulf Stream. Although news of the study was played up in some quarters—particularly the always subtle and nuanced British press—as proof that the Pentagon was planning for climatic Armageddon, even a cursory reading of the study reveals it purely as a blue-sky, what-if exercise conducted by some outside consultants, including well-known futurist Peter Schwartz. As Schwartz and coauthor Doug Randall state upfront:
Next News: Today's exploration of science and technology
Archive: A comprehensive listing of Next News columns
"The purpose of this report is to imagine the unthinkable—to push the boundaries of current research on climate change so we may better understand the potential implications on United States national security. . . . Our goal is merely to portray a plausible scenario, similar to one which has already occurred in human experience, for which there is reasonable evidence, so that we may further explore potential implications for United States national security."
The study looks at a possible effect of the gradual warming of Earth’s climate (without reaching any conclusions about whether or not human activity is driving it): rising temperatures could reach a tipping point leading to an abrupt alteration in ocean circulation. In short, the runoff of fresh water from melting Arctic ice would prevent the saltier, warmer water of the Gulf Stream from reaching the North Atlantic, where it sinks into the depths, driving a global system of currents called the thermohaline circulation. Possible consequences of the disruption, according to the authors, are as follows:
Annual average temperatures drop as much as 5 degrees Fahrenheit over Asia and North America and 6 degrees Fahrenheit in northern Europe.
Annual average temperatures increase as much as 4 degrees Fahrenheit in key areas throughout Australia, South America, and southern Africa.
Drought afflicts critical agricultural regions and the water resource regions for major population centers in Europe and eastern North America.
Winter storms and winds intensify, amplifying the impacts of the changes. Western Europe and the North Pacific experience enhanced winds.
This scenario isn’t based on computer models of dubious forecasting prowess. Rather, the authors look at history. Ice core records from Greenland indicate an extended period of warming, followed by a sudden cooling 8,200 years ago. The cooling may have been caused by a collapse of the Gulf Stream like the one the report describes. The same may have been true for the "Little Ice Age" that started in the 14th century and lasted until the mid-19th century, bringing a dramatic cooling to the North Atlantic region that, among other things, drove the Vikings out of Greenland.
The purpose of the report isn’t to assess the likelihood of such climatic changes but rather to analyze the impact of phenomena such as a shorter growing season in the United States and a Siberia-like climate in northern Europe. The authors say these changes could increase geopolitical tensions and spark military skirmishes over water, food, and natural resources like oil and natural gas. They also see the military’s being used to secure national borders against waves of refugees from less-hospitable regions like Scandinavia. As for how America should prepare, the authors mostly limit themselves to recommending more studies and the creation of better predictive computer models. But they also recommend exploring "geo-engineering options that control the climate. Today, it is easier to warm than to cool the climate, so it might be possible to add various gases, such as hydrofluorocarbons, to the atmosphere to offset the effects of cooling."
That’s right, we might have to fight global warming with more global warming.
