RENEWABLE RESOURCES JOURNALhis book “The Elements of Power: Gadgets,Guns,andtheStrugglefora...

RENEWABLERESOURCES

JOURNAL

VOLUME 30 NUMBER 3

CONTENTS

How to Prosper in the Rare Metal Age........................................................2David S. Abraham

A Flood of Choices: Considering Privatization of Water Utilities............10Daniel J. Van Abs

The Case for Cosmetic Safety Reform.......................................................13Scott Faber

Implications for U.S. National Security of Anticipated ClimateChange.......................................................................................................16U.S. National Intelligence Council

News and Announcements.........................................................................22

Meetings..............................................................................................................31

WWW.RNRF.ORG

2 Renewable Resources Journal Volume 30 Number 3

How to Prosper in the Rare Metal AgeDavid S. Abraham

Introduction

Rare metals are everywhere—reallyeverywhere—from soaring bridges toearphone buds. They are in couches,camera lenses, computers, and cars. Butthey are rarely used alone or as the pri-marymaterial. In essence they fill a rolesimilar to that of yeast in pizza. Whilethey are only used in small amounts,they’re essential. Without yeast there’snopizza, andwithout raremetals there’sno high-tech world.We lack awareness of them because

weneverdirectlybuy themaswedooth-er commodities suchasgasor corn.Raremetals are buried away in componentsthat are essential to almost every gadgetwe use, like the rare earth permanentmagnet.While the production of perma-nent magnets is approximately a mere$15 billion market today, if we were toadd together the value of all industriesthat rely on these magnets—automo-bile, medical, and military—the sumwould reach trillions of dollars.To paraphrase a slogan of the chemi-

cal corporationBASF, raremetals don’tmake the products we buy; they makethe products we buy smaller, faster, andmore powerful. They made [Steve]Jobs’s iPhone thinner, more functional,and more mobile. This is because eachrare metal has its own characteristicsthat serve very specific functions. For

example, it can be malleable (indium),ductile (niobium), toxic (cadmium), ra-dioactive (thorium), or magnetic(cobalt), or it canmelt in your hand (gal-lium). And like characters in theX-Mencomics, they all have their own super-powers.Terbiumproducesmorevibrantlight in television; dysprosium andneodymium make incredibly strongmagnets possible; antimony helps resistfire.Among the elements in the periodic

table, roughly two-thirds are metals ormetalloids, elements like silicon thatshare some characteristics ofmetals and

nonmetals, and are most valuable be-cause of their semiconducting proper-ties.Of these,mines producemillions oftons eachyearof thebest-knownmetals,like copper and zinc, which are called“base metals.” Others, like gold and sil-ver, have retained value for centuries,hence their name “precious metals.”Raremetals are inanumbrella catego-

ry for almost all other metals. Theirdefining feature is that they’re con-sumed in small quantities, hence “rare”whencompared tobasemetals.Onaver-age, theworld consumes individual raremetals in the hundreds or thousands oftons annually—the annual productionof eachcan fit into just a few rail cars.Bycomparison, miners produce about 1.4million tons of copper annually. Ac-cording todata fromtheU.S.Geological

Survey, if you add up the annual con-sumption of all materials that are con-sidered rare, the amount would be sub-stantially less than the quantity of cop-per consumed every year. The label“rare” does not mean that these metalsare all geologically scarce. Indeed,some are plentiful. Others are abundantbut seldom found in concentrations highenough to bemined profitably. To com-plicate labelingmatters further, some inthe industry call them “advanced” or“technology” metals because of theirprevalence in electronic applications.Others call them“strategic” or “critical”because of their irreplaceability in theirapplications. Thosewho trade thesema-terials alternatively call them “minor.”Rare metals also encompasses rare

earth elements, a set of seventeen atomi-cally similarmetals,which gained inter-national attention in 2010,when fears ofChinese monopolistic control of pro-duction and export restrictions droveprices up nearly tenfold. Rare earth ele-ments are a mere subset of rare metalsbut they share many of the same marketdynamics. For example, many raremet-als, like rare earths, must undergo chal-lenging refining techniques. They arealso traded in backroom deals ratherthan on open exchanges like other com-modities such as oil.If naming them is a challenge, classi-

fying which metals are “rare” is evenmore problematic. Even theMinorMet-als Trade Association, the organizationthat trades thesemetals, lacks a standarddefinition. By its count, members nowtrade forty-nine rare metals, up fromeight just threedecades agowhenmanu-facturers bought only a handful of them.(Many insiders can’t even agree as towhat is a rare metal and quibble about

Abraham is director of the Technolo-gy, Rare and Electronics MaterialsCenter. This article is adapted fromhis book “The Elements of Power:Gadgets, Guns, and the Struggle for aSustainable Future in the Rare MetalAge.” The book won the 2016 RNRFExcellence in Journalism Award.

Rare metals are noless transformativethan oil or coal.

Volume 30 Number 3 Renewable Resources Journal 3

whether a specific metal should be la-beled as such.)But don’t let the lack of an encom-

passing term or the small productionlevels fool you into underestimatingtheir economic and geopolitical impor-tance. These tiny quantities of metalhave fostered incredible technologicalchange. Rare metals are the base of ourmodern high-tech, green, and militaryindustries. Raremetals are no less trans-formative than oil or coal. They will in-creasingly deserve the same attentionwe afford fossil fuels, meaning thosewho control and manage their produc-tion and tradewill increasingly reapout-sized economic and geopolitical for-tune.Andyet, unlike oil or coal, they areoften more limited in supply and farmore complex to produce, and theyoriginate from just a fewplaces on earth.Many have such unique properties anduses that they cannot be switched out forcheaper or more abundant alternatives.Our reliance on raremetals is not just anabstract geopolitical issue or a topic ofconcern only to material scientists. It isa potential source of conflict.Basedonour current rate of raremetal

resource production and our consump-tion patterns, wewon’t have the dyspro-sium necessary to build magnetic reso-nant imaging (MRI) machines; yttriumcritical for military radar; or the tung-sten for oil exploration drill bits. Newhigh-tech inventions will only add ur-gency to expand our limited supplychains, meaning the future supply ofmaterials for our gadgets is at stake. Nu-merous recent government and thinktank studies highlight the risk of short-agesover thenextdecadeandsomeevenlonger. The American Chemical Soci-ety finds that over the next century,forty-four of the ninety-four naturallyoccurring elements face supply risks.While production levels of many ele-ments will rise to meet demand, theirreport highlights a real concern.The future of our high-tech goods

may lie not in the limitations of ourminds, but in our ability to secure theingredients toproduce them. Inpreviouseras, such as the Iron Age and theBronze Age, the discovery of new ele-ments brought forth seemingly unend-ingnumbersofnew inventions.Nowthecombinations may truly be unending.We are now witnessing a fundamentalshift in our resource demands. At nopoint in human history have we used

more elements, in more combinations,and in increasingly refined amounts.Our ingenuitywill soonoutpaceourma-terial supplies.This situation comes at a definingmo-

ment when the world is struggling to re-duce its reliance on fossil fuels. Fortu-nately, raremetals are key ingredients ingreen technologies such as electric cars,wind turbines, and solar panels. Theyhelp to convert free natural resourceslike the sun andwind into the power thatfuels our lives. But without increasingtoday’s limited supplies, we have nochance of developing the alternativegreen technologies we need to slow cli-mate change.Ourdemandsarenowpushingagainst

the bounds of what we can sustainablyproduce. Fluctuations in the complexsupply line will affect society in unpre-dictable ways. New supplies of dyspro-sium could speed the development ofhighly efficient wind turbines, and con-versely, a lack of it could drive up the

cost of hybrid vehicles. It’s no under-statement to say that our use of raremet-als will determine the fate of the planet.

How to Prosper in the Rare MetalAge

In 1970, yellow legal pads, typewrit-ers, and double-stacked in- and out-boxes covered desktops, not icons. Al-though computers had yet to make theirappearance on the average desk, a re-source change was coming. Centronicsintroduced the dot matrix printer, Intelbegan sellingmicrochips, and program-mers had just sent the first e-mail mes-sage on ARPANET (Advanced Re-search Projects Agency Network), theroots of today’s Internet. A few yearslater, George Pake, who headed XeroxCorporation’s Research Center, pre-dicted that by 1995, TVs attached tokeyboards on office desks would strikethe death knell for paper. “I’ll be able tocall up documents from my files on thescreen, or by pressing a button,” he said.“I can get my mail or any messages. Idon’t knowhowmuchhardcopyprintedpaper I’ll want.” As it turns out, he’dwant much more.Despite all the high-tech gadgets that

appear to negate the need for paper, pa-per use in America has nearly doubledsince Pake’s days. We now consumemore paper than ever: 400 million tonsglobally and growing. That’s roughly 2pounds of paper per officeworker everyday.Paper is not the only resource we are

using more of. Technological advancesoften come with the promise of usingfewer materials, but the reality is thatthey have historically driven more ma-terials use, making us reliant on morenatural resources. The world now con-sumes far more “stuff” than it ever has.Weuse thirty-four timesmore construc-tion minerals such as stone and cementand twenty-seven timesmoreoreand in-dustrial minerals, such as gold, copper,

Rare metals are keyingredients in greentechnologies such aselectric cars, windturbines, and solar

panels.


and rare metals, than we did just over acentury ago. We also each individuallyusemore resources.Aperson todaycon-sumesmore than ten times theamountofminerals than one did at the turn of thetwentieth century.Much of that is due toour high-tech lifestyle.In the 1980s, Americans huddled

around a TV, maybe an Atari game sys-tem. Today entertainment flat-panelsystems are hooked up to DVRs, speak-ers, and game systems repletewith cam-eras and motion sensors. The cassetteand record players of past years havebeen relegated to the antique stores, butmany new products complement exist-ing ones rather than rendering them ob-solete. The microwave revolutionizedthewestern kitchen but it did not replacethe stove, oven, or grill. Likewise, sincethe tablet computer and smartphonesyncwith each other,we find themcom-plementary despite their similar func-tionality. Americans seem to have littletrouble with this redundancy: even in2013, more than a third of Americansowned a tablet, laptop, and smartphone.Meaning Americans are purchasing alot of gadgets. According to ConsumerElectronics Association, the averageU.S. family owns twenty-eight differentelectronic devices not including kitchenappliances, power tools, orwashingma-chines.For proof of this consumption pattern

globally,weneed to lookno further thanour trash. The amount of electronicwaste the world is producing is growingat an estimated 17 percent annually,even though total amount of waste col-lection in some countries has leveled.We are on a global trajectory to toss outover a billion computers annually. Thisis not just becausewehavemoreof thesedevices but because we use them sobriefly.Theaverage lifecycleofa smart-phone is about twenty-one months.Likewise, laptops, tablets, and many ofour high tech gadgets have life spans ofless than three years. This is not becausethe product is useless when we junk it

but because its obsolescence, in manycases, is by design.iFixit, a site dedicated to repairing

those irreparable high-tech gadgets,notes, “Apple ismaking billions by sell-ing us hardware with a built-in deathclock,” referring to abuilt-inbattery thatiFixit believes starts to losepower just asthewarranty ends. To replace the smart-phone’s battery, youmust either go to anApple store or mail the phone to Applealong with $80. As few people are will-ing to forgo their phone for the time ittakes to repair, they are more likely toupgrade. American mobile telephonecompanies also institutionalize minor

metal consumption by offering to pro-vide a new, “free” phone as frequentlyas every six months. Because of this,product life cycles are nowmeasured inmonths not years. And this has a pro-found effect on our resource use.According to a Japanese industry

study, in the 1970s the average com-modity had a life cycle of five years andabout 80 percent of all the materials inthem had a life cycle of at least threeyears. Just after the turn of the millenni-um, that dynamic nearly flipped. Twen-ty percent of all commodities were dis-carded in one year, and half, in less thantwo years.

Renewable Natural Resources Foundation

The Renewable Natural Resources Foundation (RNRF) is a nonprofit, public policy researchorganization. Its mission is to advance the application of science, engineering and design indecision-making, promote interdisciplinary collaboration, and educate policymakers and thepublic on managing and conserving renewable natural resources. Member organizations are:

American Geophysical Union w American Meteorological Society w American Societyof Civil Engineers w American Society of Landscape Architects w American WaterResources Association w Geological Society of America w Society of Environmental

Toxicology and Chemistry w Society of Wood Science and Technology

RNRF Board of Directors

Renewable Resources JournalRenewable Resources Journal (ISSN0738-6532) is quarterly of Renewable Natural

Resources Foundation, 6010 Executive Blvd, 5th Floor, North Bethesda, MD 20852-3827,USA Tel: +1 301 770 9101. Email: [email protected]: http://www.rnrf.org © RNRF 2017.Annual digital subscription rate is $20. RNRF assumes no responsibility for statements and

opinions expressed by contributors. Permission is granted to quote from the journal with thecustomary acknowledgement of source.Editorial Staff: Robert D. Day, editor; Nicolas H. Kozak, assistant editor

Chairman:Richard A. EngbergAmerican Water Resources Association

Vice Chairman:John E. DurrantAmerican Society of Civil Engineers

Executive Director:Robert D. Day

Directors:Sarah GerouldSociety of Environmental Toxicology andChemistry

Erik HankinAmerican Geophysical Union

Paul HigginsAmerican Meteorological Society

Lu Gay LanierAmerican Society of Landscape Architects

Howard N. RosenSociety of Wood Science and Technology

Barry StarkePublic Interest Member

Kasey WhiteGeological Society of America


Today consumers also find it far easi-er to buy many high tech goods becauseby comparison they are cheaper, insome cases drastically cheaper com-pared to other items such as food. Sincethe early 1980s, the consumer price of atelevision and other video equipmentfell by more than 90 percent. But thesetrends don’t even addresswhatmight bethe biggest use of rare metal resources:the technology of the future.With a sprinkling of rare metals,

Robert Tenent, senior scientist at theNationalRenewableEnergyLaboratoryinGolden,Colorado, turnsno-techglassinto high-tech windows. Tenent’s win-dows allow the sun’s light to shinethrough, but not its heat, or alternative-ly, the sun’s heat, but not its light. Some-times thewindowskeepbothout—flip aswitch and they darken within five min-utes. The windows are part-curtain,part-insulation, and undoubtedly con-tain advanced technology. Tenent’s se-cret ingredients are a fewgrams of tung-sten and indium.His windows are part of the laborato-

ry’s showcase building—an office of33,445 squaremeters that uses no exter-nal electricity, so keeping cold in duringthe summerandheat induring thewinteris crucial. Tenent’swindows are not justgood for the lab; they present a greatgreen opportunity: replacing old ener-gy-inefficient windows can save up to 4percent of all energy consumed in theUnited States. But at the same time, thewindows present a tremendous chal-lenge for our rare metal supply lines be-cause the United States alone has morethan 1,813 square kilometers of tradi-tional windows. The windows mark thenext stage in the Rare Metal Age whendemand soars: when the infrastructurethat underpins our modern lives be-comeshigh-tech-fleets of electric buses,roads built out of solar panels, or eleva-tors that rely on magnets instead of ca-bles.Michael Silver, the chief executiveofficer of American Elements, amateri-

al science company, tellsme, “The spig-ot [of ideas] is on full blast. You startseeing astronomical volumes of materi-al ten years out.”New innovations include not only

newproducts but also existing technolo-gies used in newways. Imagine the inte-rior walls of a bedroom lined with flatpanels that change color to adjust yourmood. Or bathroom “mirrors” that dis-play your body’s vital signs gatheredfrom sensors and cameras around thehouse. General Electric foresees akitchen designed around a hub with acooking surface that uses voice,motion,and facial recognition to help you share

your culinary creations with others viathe Internet.These products may seem far off, but

for some perspective on how quicklynew technologies can proliferate, lookback at the smartphone. In just fouryears after its introduction, 6 percent ofthe world population owned one, mak-ing such phones, by some metrics, thefastest growing technology ever. A fewyears later, the tablet accomplished thesame feat inhalf the timeandnownearlyhalf of all Americans own one. This rateof technological penetration is the newnormand it drivesup raremetal use.Cis-co, the American network equipmentcompany, reports that in 2010 over 12.5billiondeviceswere connected to the In-ternet. That number will quadruple by2020 to 50 billion. Interconnectivitywill drive raremetal demand,not just forthe products themselves, but also for the

infrastructure to power them. This isespecially true if it’s new greentechnology.At the same time that the wealthy

world is using more rare metals, thespeed at which developing countries areplaying technological catch up is un-precedented. For example, in 1995, only7 percent of Chinese city dwellersowned refrigerators, twelve years later,95 percent of them did.The U.S. government’s National In-

telligence Council predicts that theglobal middle class may nearly tripleover the next two decades, addingroughly two billion more people—theequivalent population of roughly twomore Chinas or six Americas. “Such anexplosion will mean a scramble for rawmaterials and manufactured goods,” a2012 council report says.Add to this ourglobal quest to find green energy alter-natives, and the demand for rare metalswill soar. The Japan Institute of Metals,meanwhile, reports that demand for raremetals like cobalt, tungsten, and lithiumwill increase by a factor of five by 2050,andwill outpace our current reserves formany of them.The coming resource crunch raises

the likelihood that resource-rich coun-tries will use their own increasinglyvaluable resources to gain strategic andeconomic advantage. This portendstense showdowns between individualcompanies and countries as these coun-tries continue to tighten their controlover the metals, or worse, cut rare metaltrade again. All this resource use scaresRoger Agnelli, former president andCEO of the mining giant Vale. As hetoldme in 2013, “The reality is the plan-et is very small for the number of inhabi-tantswewill see in 2025.As technologyisgettingcheaper, resourcedemandsareincreasing and we are facing changes ingeopolitics. This is real.”And yet, I would argue, the answer to

our concerns about rare metals is not toshy away from using them because of

Our demands [for raremetals] are nowpushing against thebounds of what we cansustainably produce.


ourgeopolitical supply fears.Rather it isto search for more sources, use themmore efficiently, and advance ourknowledge of geology, metallurgy, andmaterial science.To deal with potential resources

shortages, we must think about minormetal supply in several dimensions. Theworld, and indeed each country, needs asecure supply of sufficient resources, atminimal environmental cost, arrivingthrough resilient supply lines. There-fore, we need to turn rare metals intocommodities—we should strive tomake them cheaper, more abundant andproduced with the least environmentalimpact. Thatmeans international effortsare critical, including to develop, under-stand, and improve material develop-ment and flows; to invest in educationregarding the use and conservation ofresources; and to adjust regulations tobetter govern the start-up of newminingoperations.In the RareMetal Age, we either need

to get better at predicting the future orset up robust supply chains for a varietyof rare metals that could possibly be indemand (or both). But the track recordof our experts in predicting the techno-logical future is muddy at best.

• “Televisionwon’t be able toholdonto any market it captures after thefirst six months. People will soonget tired of staring at a plywoodbox,” Darryl Zanuck, founder ofTwentiethCenturyPictures (1946).

• “There is no reason anyone wouldwant a computer in their home,”Ken Olsen, founder of DigitalEquipment Corporation (1977).

• “Ipredict the Internet...will soongospectacularly supernova and in1996 catastrophically collapse,”Robert Metcalfe, founder of 3Comand the Ethernet (1995).

Sincewe don’t knowwhich inventionwill take off, we can’t estimate whichrare metal will either. Thirty years ago,

dysprosium had little use. Now, in partbecause of its use inmagnets, it is essen-tial for our new high-tech lives. Galli-um, because of its low melting point,could find itself in high demand in 3Dprinting, a type of home-based manu-facturing. Or gadolinium, a sister ele-ment to dysprosium, has long shownpromise in a magnet to produce energy-efficient cooling. This future technolo-gy could revolutionize the refrigeratormarket, putting that appliance withinreach of the billions who do not nowhave one.Or itmay always be a technol-ogy of the future.Rather than predicting the future, we

should prepare for it. And for that weneed to mint more people like ToruOkabe. Okabe, a Tokyo University ma-terial science professor, is so enamoredwith titanium that he gives it out as gifts.When we met at a conference in south-ern China, he handed me a small sealedbag with a thin titanium coil to explainthe concept of shape memory. (He toldme that if I stretched out the coil, itwould return to its original shape,whichmakes titanium useful in glass frames,for example.) Titanium is not just a ma-terial science toy, it has an abundance ofuses and if it were less expensive itwould transform our resource demandsbecause titanium is stronger than steel,45 percent lighter, and corrosion resis-tant.The challenge involved in titanium,

the fourth most common metal in theearth’s crust, is that it’s expensive toproduce because of the high tempera-tures needed in processing, making itenvironmentally taxing.Okabewants toimprove titanium’s processing efficien-cy and turn it into an abundant commod-ity. If he succeeds, a fraction of titaniumcould replace steel in bridges, buildings,and even tools. Titanium could be thegreen alternative. Products that use tita-nium instead of steel would require lessmetal, which means less mining andgreatly reduced carbon dioxide emis-sions.

Okabe has a leg up on researcherselsewhere. He lives in Japan where hisuniversity receives a modicum of gov-ernment support, whereas most metal-lurgists elsewhere have been less fortu-nate. In theUnited States, since the gov-ernment shuttered the Bureau of Minesin 1995, Colorado School ofMines pro-fessor Patrick Taylor has had almost noway of securing government funding tosupport extractive metallurgy research.So he must increasingly work with in-dustry from overseas. Funding is cru-cial, but as the industry is focused on thebottom line, corporate funders are notinterested in experimental research, thekind of work that pushes frontiers, asTaylor tells me—the research that cantruly revolutionize the industry. ForTaylor, U.S. government supportwouldbe a boon. Furthermore, the amount ofelectronic waste the world is producingis growing at an estimated 17 percentannuallyBeyond economic growth, the world

needs more university-level mining,metallurgy, and material science pro-grams to help alleviate the shortage ofmining and metals professionals. Theyare needed to create the scientific break-throughs that the world demands. In-creased government support is crucial,but it is not enough.Unfortunately, our best and brightest

who have material science and physicsdegrees aren’t conducting research.They head off to Silicon Valley or WallStreet, Elisa Alonso, a former Mas-sachusetts Institute of Technology ma-terial scientist, tells me. When I ask herwhether many of her colleagues willstay in material science after nearly adecade of study, she laughs, “You arenot going to do that.” The other jobs be-ingofferedare tooexcitingand lucrativeto turn down. We need to bring prestigeand romance to toiling with metals andto start companies that ask big ques-tions, which only advances in materialscience can answer: for example, how tocommercialize space travel.


Visionaries like Elon Musk, the co-founder of PayPal whowas admitted in-to Stanford’s material scientist doctoralprogram, has started companies that askjust those questions, Tesla andSpace-X.Weneedmore of them.Simply,weneedto create excitement around materialscienceaswehave for entrepreneurship.Now 70 percent of millennials want towork inmore entrepreneurial endeavorsoutside a corporate structure. We needthat same levelof excitement for scienceso Alonso’s colleagues will stay in thefield. They are not only critical to find-ing newbreakthroughswith raremetals,but also in developing ways to be moreefficient with the metals we currentlyuse, as well as discovering more abun-dant and greenermaterials that can limitour growing dependence on certain lim-ited resources.While research is crucial to unlock

material science secrets, we also mustchange consumer habits and businessmodels to ensure sustainable supplies ofresources. Therefore, we need to funda-mentally change our relationship withour gadgets; we cannot continue to buyanewsmartphonewhen thebatterydies.Our gadgets must last longer. Changinga cracked Smartphone screen must be-come as simple as changing a battery ina remote control. High-tech repair ser-vices need to be as ubiquitous as drycleaners. Companies like Apple, whichmake lengthening the life of its productsdifficult, must play a role in prolongingthe lifecycle of its products by sellingcomponent replacements and providingeasy access to materials under the hood.In essence, it needs to open its productsecosystem to help save our planet’s.Selling fewer products that last longer

may sound as if it is anathema to a mar-ket economy; it’s not doom and gloom.For Caterpillar, which began a remanu-facturing program in 1972, taking backequipment is a core part of its business.In fact, remanufacturing helped thecompany to open markets in the devel-

oping world and provided new profitsbecause remanufactured products areless costly to produce and they sell forup to 60 percent of the price of a newtractor. Companies could also leaseproducts much the way car dealershipsdo, taking the product back after use.They need to put as much effort into theend-of-life care of their products as theydo into its functions.Governments need to hold companies

responsible for the effects of their prod-ucts. One company that recycles mil-lions of phones is easier and createsmore profit opportunity than would be

achieved by askingmillions of people torecycle one phone each. Not only is itmore efficient, it creates recycling feed-stock and economies of scale that helpcreate a profitable recycling supplychain.Regulators would do well to require

companies to include afterlife care aspart of the products they make as DellCorporation does. Mandating that com-panies must recycle their own productsencourages companies to more effi-ciently use materials—especially raremetals; to designproducts that are easierto recycle or reuse; and to develop lessenvironmentally harmful and more eas-ily recycled alloys. Efficient recyclingwill extend the life cycle of rare metalsand reduce the need to dig for more. Butonly one quarter of U.S. electronics endup in effective recycling systems. Now,in places like South Portland, Maine,

companies are already mining landfillsfor valuablemetals the previous genera-tion junked in the 1970s. We must notset up the same dynamic by tossingaway rare metal-laced gadgets.One step to improving minor metal

resource efficiency could be as simpleas labeling. For people to begin to makeeducated decisions about their resourceconsumption, they need to know whatthey are consuming. Labeling also en-courages companies to know what ma-terials are in their products andcan facil-itate recycling when the information isplaced in bar codes on the side of aproduct.A report by the Ellen MacArthur

Foundation states that a circular econo-my, based on remanufacturing, reuse,and recycling would save $1 trillion inmaterial costs by 2025 and create onemillion jobs in Europe alone. It couldalso fuel the next generation of recy-cling techniques, which the world des-perately needs.An even better way to keep minor

metal resource use in check is decidedlylow-tech: conservation. Energy conser-vation measures—such as improvingthe efficiency of energy grids, electron-ics, and buildings—reduce the need tobuild or expand infrastructure that relieson minor metals. For example, it’s farless resource intensive to add extra insu-lation to reduce energy demand than toinstall a solar panel to produce more ef-ficient energy; it’s also a good way toconsume fewer rare metals.While the answer for resource securi-

ty won’t come solely from governmentcapitals, the right legislation and regula-tory changes can have a great influence.In addition to extending producer re-sponsibility, providing greater funds fortechnological innovation and adoptingenergy conservation measures, govern-ments should develop long-term plansto increase rare metal supply. A goodstart for countries with resources wouldbe to clarify the time frame and review

To avoid futureconflict, it would beuseful to address raremetal supply concernsin a global forum.


process for new mining operations andspecify the places that are off limits toexploration. With the length of time re-quired to open a mine extending over adecade, governments should examineways to speed up an environmentallysound development process. Wealthygovernments should not outsourcepollution.Another role forgovernment is tohelp

produce and disseminate market data tosolve market problems. This is a rolethat theU.S. Geological Survey helps tofill, although cuts in funding over theyears have adversely affected the con-sistency of the information. Such re-search can help to identify gaps in sup-ply and anticipate future trends. Gov-ernments should alsoworkmore closelywith research institutions and the techindustry to better understand future de-mands for rare metals.Governments can help to encourage

production by offering tax incentives;subsidized insurance to reduce risks formining investments; and by taking debtor equity stakes in companies. Less tra-ditional incentives, such as purchasingagreements, can ensure production andinvestment during periods of volatilepricing. And for start-ups, governmentsupport and broad statements of policysupport could be the boost needed to se-cure long-term investor funding. Butmost governments outside of Asia areless likely to “pick” winners.Some studies argue that stockpiling

rare metals is a key government policytool to ensure material in times of short-ages. However, stockpiling rare metalsis unlikely to be successful becausemanufacturers need a variety of gradesofmaterial, making it nearly impossibleto stock enough material in the rightgrades. What’s more, if a stockpilingcountry lacks processing facilities,stockpiling a rare metal is like stockpil-

ing cans of tuna without a can opener:well-intentioned, but useless. Stockpil-ingmaywell be very expensive becausegovernments often buy when prices arehigh, forcing prices even higher.What may be more useful, although

less politically palatable, is for govern-ments to set regulations or offer incen-tives for companies to stockpile the raremetals they require and the componentsmade from them. Companies knowwhat their needs are and therefore havean advantage over governments inchoosing which materials to stockpile.However, companies are reticent to tietheir cashup in resources thatmay fall invalue.Just as setting the right policy is cru-

cial, avoiding hasty decisions is like-wise important. After China restrictedaccess to rare earths in 2010, Tokyoquickly made the strategic decision toreduce the country’s relianceonChina’srare earths, encouraging companies notto use materials from China. TheJapanese looked prescient as the rareearth price skyrocketed through 2011.But the price quickly crashed becausethe spikewasmore related togeopoliticsthan to economics.And Japan’s plan be-gan to backfire.After an initial rush to stockupon rare

earth elements, Japanese companies re-duced their useof themdramatically andquickly, especially the light rare earths,the ones Japan used in copious amounts.In the following two years, when pricesdropped, they likely fell far lower thanthey would have due to the dramatic re-duction in Japan’s demand. The lowerprices leftmanywestern rare earth com-panies struggling. Many of those com-panies may not last, which would,paradoxically, make Japan morereliant on China and set up long-termdependencies.

Tokyo’s hasty decision to help com-panies to shift from using rare earth ele-ments also had another, more subtle ef-fect.Whencompanies followedgovern-ment policies and reduced the amount ofrare earths in their products, it led to lessenergy-efficient motors for productsranging from air conditioners to eleva-tors. Although the loss in efficacy fromswitching to a less efficient magnet ordifferent system may be small for eachproduct, its effect is large when theworld is buying, for example, air condi-tioners that are even just a few percentless efficient.Governments need to let companies

deal with the short-term vagaries of themarket. The truth is that unless govern-ments are willing to financially guaran-tee the development of an internationalsupply chain of raw materials, and tocontinuously assess it, there is noway toensure consistent supply. The only timegovernments should step in is to offer ashort-term solution to avoid an econom-ic collapse or to ensure that there are nogaps in a country’smilitarydefense sup-ply lines.Countries can only do so much indi-

vidually to improve resource securitybecause supply lines are global. What’smore, while rare metal supply lines areunique, many of the strategies to ensuretheir viability are similar to the strate-gies for ensuring supply lines of othernatural resources. For example, individ-ual resource-dependent countries needto bolster political ties with neighbors,especially resource rich ones, as theUnited States did with Latin America inthe first half of the twentieth century.Setting up trade missions and signingtrade agreements to increase trade andinvestment in resources benefits thehome country, but the additional pro-duction that would result will also bene-fit the world. Ultimately, however, just


as one country cannot dig itself to re-source security the world cannot do soeither. There is a role for working to-gether.To avoid future conflict, it would be

useful to address rare metal supply con-cerns in a global forum. But since noneexists, it’s time to create one. After oilshortages in the early 1970s, sixteencountries founded the International En-ergy Agency (IEA) to ensure the unin-terrupted flow of oil. The agency’s mis-sion expanded to “promotediversity, ef-ficiency and flexibilitywithin all energysectors.” We now need an InternationalMaterials Agency, an IEA for mineralresources, including rare metals.It is critical to have an organization

that collects statistics, writes market re-ports, and provides a forum for coun-tries to discuss issues related to naturalresources. An International MaterialsAgency with its own staff can developstrategies for best practices inmanagingresources. Dialogue and an attempt tomake markets transparent is the besthope we have of preventing future re-

sourceconflicts.Andamaterials agencyis a far more effective venue than theWorld Trade Organization for hashingout disagreements.Rare earth magnet manufacturers

now use lower amounts of rare earths,including dysprosium, in their magnetsthan in 2010 when China cut exports toJapan. Part of the reason is that compa-nieshavebecomebetter at usingdyspro-sium selectively. Other companies havefound that adding terbium, a rare earthelement produced only in China, canhelp reduce the need for dysprosium.When I askMasato Sagawa [inventor

of a strong, permanent magnet that re-quires no cobalt or samarium] about theswitch from dysprosium to terbium, hewarns me, “The scarcity of terbiumwillbecomemuchmore serious than fordys-prosium.” He adds that using terbium,which is four times less abundant thandysprosium, is a temporary move. Butadding terbium reminds me of a similardecision thirty years ago when he[Sagawa] added dysprosium to hismag-net recipe. Companies may be able to

reduce the amount of terbium and dys-prosium in magnets by 20–30 percentover a five-year period, but the growthrate of magnets over the same periodmay well exceed 50 percent or more.This means that despite using these rareearth elements in smaller quantities permagnet, our total demand for rare earthswill rise.We are now at a critical moment. The

speed of technological changewill soonoutpace the ability of our supply lines toproduce rare metals at the prices de-manded. Meeting this growing demandfor rare metals requires profoundchanges inhowweuseand sell ourprod-ucts.My fear is that a lack of attention toand understanding of this new dynamicin the Rare Metal Age, as well as a lackof attention and understanding in regardto these critical materials, will limit ourprosperity and undermine our environ-ment. My hope is that my book in somemeasure will serve as a rallying call toinspire a new generation to learn aboutthe ingredients of our gadgets, guns, andsustainable future.


Municipalities with publicly-ownedwater systems,whether for drinkingwa-ter or sewage, face a fundamental choiceevery day—retain control, contract formanagement (public-private partner-ships, or PPP), or sell (full privatiza-tion). These government utilities aremunicipal utilities, operated as munici-pal departments, ormunicipal utility au-thorities (MUAs) serving one or moretowns.If the municipality keeps control or

contracts out, they retain options tomake a different decision later. The de-cision to sell is essentially permanent.In every case, the choice should not bemade absent hard, public analysis.

What are the Critical Factors forConsideration?

Two major questions should be an-swered. First, why change from publicmanagement? Second, what should begained from private management?We should be very clear in our under-

standing of one point. These decisionshave nothing to do with who owns thewater, and what operational standards

must be met. The law is very clear—water resources of New Jersey areownedby thepublic andaremanagedonthe public’s behalf and in their behalf bythe State of New Jersey. The drinkingwater and wastewater treatment qualitystandards are all the same regardless ofownership, as are construction stan-dards.So what really changes with owner-

ship? The major changes may include:

1. The burden of management2. The capabilities of the utility3. The source and use of utility funds4. Rate implications

Let’s look at each of these changes inlight of the two questions noted previ-ously.

The Burden of Management

New Jersey has more public commu-nity water supply utilities than munici-palities. Some are small private compa-nies, such as for mobile home parks.Others are large investor-owned utili-ties. Many are municipal utilities orMUAs.We have fewer public sewerageentities, nearly all of them government-owned.Regardless of municipal administra-

tion, the work of a municipal utility isoverseen by the municipal governingbody, few of which have real expertisein utilities. When all is going well, thetendency is to focus on more familiarmunicipal priorities, such as police.When things go bad or a major rate in-crease looms, it is understandable that

elected officials seek ways to outsourcemanagement. The smaller the munici-pality, the more likely this is to be true.This is one reason we have municipal

utility authorities (MUAs), which haveappointed boards that can become fa-miliar with utility issues. The MUAboard can hire expertise to run the utili-ty. The appointment process keeps theboard “under the thumb” of the electedofficials. This system works well aslongasnomajor issues slopover into thepolitical realm. Unfortunately, majorrate increases, declining service quality,conflicts over service extensions, and adesire to monetize utility assets bringMUAs into trouble with elected offi-cials. The result again is that elected of-ficials may opt for privatemanagement.In this case, both small municipalitiesand cash-starved ones (regardless ofsize) may be tempted to act.What might they want to achieve

through a PPP or sale? First, to be re-lieved of a responsibility that is com-plex, costly and diverting them fromothermajor public priorities. Second, tolimit or eliminate public liability for fu-ture costs. Third, to shift control to thoseperceived to have greater expertise, ac-cess to capital, or flexibility.

The Capabilities of the Utility

Major players in the public and pri-vate sectors have told me that a waterutility of sufficient size can be operatedin a competent, cost-effective mannerunderpublicownership.Thesimpler thesystem, the smaller that “sufficient size”will be. Unfortunately, what is possibledoesn’t always happen.

A Flood of Choices: ConsideringPrivatization of Water UtilitiesDaniel J. Van Abs

Van Abs is an associate professor ofpractice for water, society and envi-ronment at Rutgers University. Thisarticle is adapted from an article thatappeared in a 2016 issue of NewJersey Municipalities, the New JerseyLeague of Municipalities’ magazine.The views in the article are his andhavenot been reviewedor endorsedbyRutgers.


It is reasonable that larger organiza-tions will have greater capabilities, asthey are sufficiently complex to justifyand afford staff with greater expertise.However, most large water utilities inNew Jersey are investor-owned compa-nies. Government utilities generallyavoid mergers, acquisitions, public-public partnerships and the like. Theyremain static while the private sectorgrows.The desire for enhanced capabilities

might drive elected officials toward pri-vate sector involvement.Theygenerallyneglect to investigate similar public sec-tor opportunities, or give up due to lackof willing partners.

The Source and Uses of UtilityFunds

Municipal utilities and MUAs mayreceive their funding from customers(through rates), from the municipal advalorem tax (paid to the utility through

the local budget), or both. Municipalutility and MUA revenues should serveutility purposes. However, under exist-ing law municipalities may divert somerevenues for other municipal purposes.Some do, some don’t.PPP firms get their funding through

the contract. Going to a PPP contractmay increase utility revenues throughbetter collections, butmaydecrease rev-enues to the municipality by redefiningwhat can be diverted. A private utilitygets its funding from the ratepayers.Both PPP contracts and outright salesoften come with upfront cash paymentsthat benefit taxpayers by offsettingproperty tax revenue needs for a year orso, but are paid for by utility customersthrough rates long term.A recent state law reduces oversight

of these payments. All in all, that seemslikeabaddeal for ratepayers, but electedofficials may see the funding as a boonthat helps get them through another badbudget year.

Rate Implications

Some interests oppose private owner-ship of water utilities, in part because ofthe profitmotive.As noted above, elect-ed officials can also find ways for gov-ernment utilities to provide a “profit”but in this case it benefits taxpayers atthe expense of ratepayers, who are notnecessarily the same entities.What the elected officials may hope

for, especially in the case of a PPP, isthat the private company will be able toreduce costs sufficiently to allow fortheir profit margin without a significantincrease in rates. The rates are oftenspecified in the PPP contract. However,those contracts also generally make themunicipality responsible for major cap-ital costs, either entirely or beyond afixed amount in the contract. So whileonepart of the ratemaybe fixed, anothercritical part is not – and that part is high-ly likely to grow as our infrastructureages and crumbles. For a sale, the rates


become the problem of the Board ofPublic Utilities, and the municipal offi-cials are off the hook.

So, Does Privatization Cost More?

The best response: To whom and forwhat?My teamatRutgerswas unable tofind a statewide inventory ofwater utili-ty rates, and so complied 2013 drinkingwater and sewer rates in municipalitieswith combined sewer systems, for aNew Jersey Future study. For a nominalhousehold in municipalities with com-bined sewer systems use of 60,000 gal-lons per year, annual average drinkingwater costs $380. For investor-owneddrinking water systems, the average an-nual cost for the utilities was $424, 11.6percent higher. None of the sewer sys-tems were investor-owned utilities.The problem with comparing rates is

that we have no real sense of how wellmaintained each system might be. Areinvestor-owned rates higher because ofgreater capital investments, higherfinancing costs, or profit margins? The

latter two can be determined, but thefirst one requires an understanding ofthe overall capital needs for both thegovernment-owned and investor-owned systems, which are not generallyavailable.The problem with comparing rates is

that we don’t really know what we arecomparing. The entire debate degradesinto unsupportable claims. Therefore,municipalities are likely to use the fourissues above as their benchmarks for de-cision-making.Well-run systems in financially

sound municipalities are unlikely to beprivatized—the problems that drivechange don’t exist, and so inertia willwin. Problematic utilities, or those infiscally-strained municipalities, offerperceived benefits. PPP contractsoffload responsibility and gain short-term cash. For sales, negotiations set theprice even though the utility may nothave much real net worth (assets minusliabilities).BPU and the Ratepayer Advocate no

longer have much leverage to ensure afair price, and so the costs probably will

be folded into the broader rate structureof theprivate company.The result is thatthe rates of many people go up a little,and the rates of a few people could dropsignificantly. It’s a local political win,but a societal loss.

Final Thoughts

My conclusions include several points:

• Public enterprises should be able tomatch private sector capabilitiesbut are too often constrained fromdoing so.

• Privatization can be a valid ap-proach, but is certainly no panacea.

• Privatization is seen as a method tooutsource problematic issues.

Finally, we lack the information tocredibly compare the costs of public andprivate ownership, in part, because welack decision-making systems that re-quire analysis before action.


Each day, American women use anaverage of 12 personal care productsthat contain 168 different chemicals.Men use an average of 6 personal careproducts that contain 85 different chem-icals. Few consumer products con-tribute as many exposures to chemicalsas cosmetics and other personal careproducts.Under current law, however, theFood

and Drug Administration has no duty toreview the safety of these chemicals.While most cosmetic chemicals likelypose little or no risk to human health,exposure to somechemicals used in cos-metics and other personal care productshas been linked to serious health prob-lems, including cancer and reproductiveharm. Chemicals found in cosmeticsand other personal care products thathave been linked to health problems in-clude phthalates, parabens,methylisothiazolinone, lead acetate,triphenyl phosphate, and formaldehydeand chemicals designed to releaseformaldehyde. Some chemicals poserisks at low doses. In addition to risks

posed to consumers, hair and nail salonworkers are especially susceptible tocosmetic chemical exposures.Certain cosmetic chemicals can inter-

ferewith the hormone system, and someof these “endocrine-disrupting” chemi-cals are found in personal care products.Chemicals like phthalates and triphenylphosphate can disrupt the hormone

system bymimicking or blocking a nat-ural hormone. When an endocrine-dis-rupting chemicalmimics ahormone, thechemical tricks the hormone’s receptorinto thinking the chemical is the hor-mone. When the chemical blocks a hor-mone, the chemical can bind to a recep-tor and the hormone may not be activat-ed.Endocrine-disrupting chemicals pose

unique risks to vulnerable populations,such as pregnant women and infants,where the impacts may take years to be-come apparent. Research shows that en-docrine-disrupting chemicals may posethe greatest risk during prenatal and ear-ly postnatal development, when organand neural systems are forming. Expo-

sure to these chemicals has been linkedto endocrinediseases includingdiabetesand some types of cancer.Somechemicals in cosmetics andoth-

erpersonal careproducts alsoposeacuterisks. Formaldehyde-based hairstraightening procedures, referred to as“keratin treatments,” have been linkedto hair loss, rashes, blisters, nosebleeds,bleeding gums, and loss of taste andsmell. Thousands of women and girlsrecently reported losing some or all oftheir hair after using a shampoo promot-ed by a celebrity hair stylist. Some skinlightening creams contain mercury. Ifproduced in unsanitary conditions,products can become contaminatedwith bacteria and mold—includingshampoos, shower gels, makeup, andmouthwash—and cause serious harm,including infections. For example, twobaby wipe companies recently manu-factured products contaminated withbacteria.Under current law, the FDA has little

authority to review or restrict chemicalsin cosmetics. In general, substancesused in cosmetics and other personalcare products are not subject to reviewor regulationbyFDAand fewhavebeenrestricted. FDA can only restrict chemi-cals that render the product “adulterat-ed,” and FDA has only banned or re-stricted nine ingredients under this au-thority. Only products that pose acuterisks, such as contaminated products,are “adulterated” and the FDA mustwork with the Department of Justice todemonstrate that a product meets thistest. By contrast, many chemicals incosmetics have been restricted by ourtrading partners in Canada, Japan, and

The Case for Cosmetic Safety ReformScott Faber

Faber is the senior vice president forgovernmental affairs for Environmen-tal Working Group. This article isadapted from his testimony on explor-ing current practices in cosmetics de-velopment and safety before the Sen-ate Committee on Health, Education,Labor and Pensions on September 22,2016. His complete testimony is avail-able at http://www.ewg.org/testimo-ny-official-correspondence/ewg-tes-timony-exploring-current-practices-cosmetics-development.

Under current law, theFDA has little

authority to review orrestrict chemicals in

cosmetics[and personal care

products.]


the European Union. For example, theuse of certain parabens linked to hor-mone disruption is restricted in the Eu-ropean Union—especially in productsfor use by infants—but there are no suchrestrictions in the United States.By contrast, other agencies—and

even other branches of the FDA—havebroad authority to review and regulateother chemicals found in consumerproducts. For example, FDA has the au-thority to review chemicals in prescrip-tion and over-the-counter drugs andchemicals found in food. The Environ-mental Protection Agency (EPA) hasthe authority to reviewchemicals in pes-ticides used in our homes and on farmsand to set limits for pesticide residues onfood. This year, Congress expandedEPA authority to review chemicals incleaners, paints, solvents, andmanyoth-er consumer products. The ConsumerProduct Safety Commission (CPSC)has the authority to develop standardsand bans for many consumer products.Updates to the Consumer Product Safe-ty Act gave CPSC specific authority toset content limits for lead in children’sproducts, paint, and electronic devices,promulgate standards for durable infantor toddler products, limit toxic sub-stances in toys, and ban certain phtha-lates in children’s products.FDA and other agencies also have

broad authority to collect data on chemi-cals found in consumer products. WhenFDAreviews food chemicals, for exam-ple, FDArequires the submissionof cer-tain safety and use data. EPA also hasbroad authority to require safety data onchemicals used in industrial and con-sumer products. This year, Congressgave EPA broader authority to obtainnew information about chemicals. Forpesticides, EPA has guidelines specify-ing what kind of data must be includedwith a pesticide registration. The CPSChas specific authority to require anymanufacturer of a consumer product tosubmit data.

WhyhasCongress failed to give FDAthe power to review the safety of cos-metic chemicals? One reason is that in-dustry has argued that self-regulation isadequate to ensure safety. But, unlikeindustry-financed review programs,government regulatory programs aregoverned by minimum standards forcollection and reviewof chemical expo-sure and toxicity data. These self-regu-latory programs lack the same access todata about chemical use and toxicity asgovernment regulators. As a result,these bodies often fill gaps in data byassuming very large groups of struc-turally-similar chemicals have the sameimpacts on human health.What’s more,cosmetic formulators have no obliga-tion to abide by self-regulatory programrecommendations, and these recom-mendations frequently lack specificlimits or instructions on chemical use,manufacture, or processing.Self-regulatory bodies may down-

play long-term health risks in favor ofshort-termrisks. Ingeneral, self-regula-tory programs tend to focus on short-term effects, such as allergic reactions,and lack the capacity to review healthimpacts from chronic exposures. Sub-stances such as endocrine-disruptingchemicals may cause health effects thatwill not be apparent for many years. Inaddition, some self-regulatory panelsincorrectly assume that exposures tochemicals in cosmetics are too low toimpact health. For example, some pan-els have improperly asserted that expo-sures via routes such as inhalation can-not occur.As a result, some findings by industry

self-regulatory bodies are inconsistentwith the findings by other regulatory au-thorities or experts. For example,methylisothiazolinone, iodopropynylbutylcarbamate, and methyldibromoglutaronitrile—preservatives deemedtoo risky for certain uses by governmentregulators—were found safe for use byindustry panels at higher concentrations

or without similar restrictions. Two hairdye chemicals that have been linked tohealth problems byCanadian regulatorsand the National Toxicology Program(NTP), respectively, have been deemed“safe as used” as well. Another chemi-cal is used in fragrance without restric-tion, even though anNTP study found itis a likely carcinogen.It’s also important to recognize that

consumers expect that government, notindustry, has reviewed the safety of per-sonal care products. Recent polling con-ducted by American Viewpoint and theMellmanGroup found that two-thirdsofconsumers believe chemicals in cos-metics are already reviewed by theFDA. Three-fourths of consumers—re-gardless of age, race or party affiliation—support stricter regulation of chemi-cals in cosmetics and nearly nine-in-tenconsider stricter rules very important. Inaddition, nine-in-ten consumers believecosmetic companies should have to no-tify FDA if their products harm con-sumers, support giving FDAmandatoryrecall authority, and support rules thatensurecosmetics areproduced inacleanenvironment.Despite these expectations, FDA

lacks thebasic toolsneeded toensure thesafety of cosmetics and other personalcare products. Under current law, cos-metic companies do not have to registerwith FDA, submit cosmetic ingredientstatements, adopt good manufacturingpractices, provide access to safetyrecords, report adverse events, or sharethe cost of a modern regulatory system.FDA also lacks the authority to quicklysuspend production or recall contami-nated products when a company fails toinitiate a voluntary recall.By contrast, food, drug and device

manufacturers must register their facili-ties with FDA; maintain and give FDAaccess to records; and report any ad-verse events to FDA. Drugs, devices,and biologics cannot be sold withoutprior FDAapproval, including approval


of a product’s ingredients. If food, drugsor devices are unsafe, FDA can suspendproduction and product licenses. Whenunsafe food, drugs, anddevices do reachthe market, FDA can order recalls offood, biologics, and devices and cantake legal action against drug makerswho do not recall their products.In the absence of meaningful federal

regulation, non-federal actors have be-gun to review and, effectively, regulatesome cosmetic chemicals. In particular,several states have enacted chemicalsafety review programs that cover cos-metic chemicals and have taken steps tolimit the use of particular cosmeticchemicals. Some retailers have devel-oped lists of chemicals that cannot beused in products, and some non-govern-mental organizations have developedtools to rank the safety of cosmetics. Inresponse, many cosmetic companieshave finally concluded that a law enact-ed in 1938 to prohibit the use of “filthy,putrid, or decomposed” substances iswoefully out of date.As a result, many cosmetic compa-

nies and public health organizationshave supportedCongressional efforts tocreate a modern regulatory program forcosmetics and other personal care prod-ucts, as proposed in the Personal CareProduct SafetyAct. Amodern regulato-ry program would give FDA the powerto review cosmetic chemicals of con-cern, expand FDA’s ability to knowwhen contaminated products threatenpublic health, give FDA the resources todetect and respond to threats to publichealth, and grant FDA the power to actwhen companies decline to voluntarilyrecall contaminated products.In particular, FDA should have the

power to review and regulate cosmetic

chemicals to ensure that these chemicalsposea reasonablecertaintyofnoharmtohuman health. Once chemicals of con-cern have been identified, FDA shouldquickly collect data on chemical use andtoxicity to determinewhether the chem-ical is safe or should be subject to re-strictions.Although dangerous cosmetic chemi-

cals should be subject to FDA reviewand regulation, industry review pro-

grams should also be strengthened. Inparticular, cosmetics law should clarifythe role of industry self-regulatory pro-grams and clearly establish the duty ofcosmetic companies to substantiate thesafety of their products. Industry-fi-nanced programs that are not based up-onwidely-accepted scientific principlesshould not be the basis uponwhich com-panies can claim that personal careproducts are safe.Finally, cosmetics law should place

the sameduties on cosmetics companiesas federal lawnowplacesonotherFDA-regulated industries. In particular, cos-metic companies should be required toregister with FDA, provide FDA withcosmetic ingredient statements, andshould be required to provide FDAaccess to safety records. To prevent mi-crobial contamination, cosmetic com-panies should be required to adopt good

manufacturingpractices thatwill ensurethat cosmetics areproduced in a safe andclean environment.In addition, cosmetic companies

should be required to quickly report se-rious adverse events and to frequentlyprovide FDA with all adverse event re-ports. If a contaminated product posesserious health risks and a company hasdeclined to conduct a voluntary recall,FDA should have the power to order amandatory recall and to suspend pro-duction of contaminated products.Cosmetic companies should also be

required to provide consumers more in-formationabout cosmetic chemicals, in-cluding fragrance ingredients. Any dis-closures required for cosmetics and oth-er personal care products should applyto sales of salon products and to salesmade through internet retailers.All of these reforms have been en-

dorsed by the personal care products in-dustry, including large and small manu-facturers. These are reasonable and fa-miliar reforms that will boost consumerconfidence in the safety of cosmeticsand other personal care products and en-sure that these essential, everyday prod-ucts are safe.

Two-thirds ofconsumers believe

chemicals in cosmeticsare already reviewed

by the FDA.

Editor's note: The EnvironmentalWorking Group maintains a databaseof chemical assessments of 1000s ofcosmetic and personal care productsknownas“SkinDeep.” SkinDeepwaslaunched in 2004 to fill in whereindustry and government leave off.For more information, visit: http://www.ewg.org/skindeep/.


Implications for U.S. National Security ofAnticipated Climate ChangeU.S. National Intelligence Council

Foreword

This memorandum was prepared bythe National Intelligence Council andwas coordinated with the U.S. Intelli-gence Community (IC).In the Intelligence Community’s

analysis of the possible impacts of cli-mate change on national security overthenext 20 years, the IC takes as a scien-tific baseline the reports produced bythe Intergovernmental Panel on Cli-mate Change (IPCC), the internationalbody responsible for assessing the sci-ence related to climate change. Thismemorandum does not assess effects onthe homeland, nor does it evaluate thescience of the IPCC reports.Climate change is projected to pro-

ducemore intense and frequent extremeweather events,multipleweatherdistur-bances, alongwith broader climatologi-cal effects, such as sea level rise. Theseare almost certain to have significant di-rect and indirect social, economic, polit-ical, and security implications duringthe next 20 years. These effects will beespecially pronounced as populations

continue to concentrate in climate-vul-nerable locales such as coastal areas,water- stressed regions, and ever-grow-ing cities. These effects are likely topose significant national security chal-lenges for the United States over thenext two decades, though models fore-

cast themost dramatic effects further in-to the future. While specific extremeweather events remain difficult to at-tribute entirely to climate change, un-usual patterns of extreme and record-breakingweather events are likely tobe-come more common, according to theIPCC.Extreme weather events, such as

heavy rainfalls, floods, droughts, cy-clones, andheatwaves,will disrupt criti-cal human and natural systems. Theycould trigger crop failures, wildfires,energy blackouts, infrastructure break-down, or infectious disease outbreaks.The frequency and magnitude of suchevents are increasing as the climatechanges, according to the IPCC.Moreover, multiple weather distur-

bances—when several extremeweather

events occur within a small region orshort time—compound their impactwhile undercutting efforts by peopleand governments to cope. Clusters orrapid sequences of relatively modestweather eventsmay causemore damagethan very powerful single events.Global climatological stresses—such

as sea-level rise, ocean acidification,permafrost and glacial melt, air qualitydegradation, changes in cloud cover,and sustained shifts in temperature andprecipitation—could substantially alterbroader natural and manmade systemsinvolving where and how humans liveand patterns of infectious disease out-breaks, as well as critical ecosystems.The table on the following page lays

out the IPCCbaseline for likely increas-es in extreme weather events in thedecades ahead. Such events may occurat different rates of frequency, intensity,and location compared to historical pat-terns, and lack of preparedness for thosechanges—such as weather-related dis-asters, drought, famine, supply chainbreakdown, or damage to infrastructure—may prove a primary cause of disrup-tion.

Effects of Climate Change onNational Security: PossiblePathways

Climate andweatherhave longaffect-ed the national security of countriesworldwide, although most often as acontributing factor that might be recog-nized only in retrospect. Sometimes the

This article is adapted from a 2016memorandum by the National Intelli-gence Council. The complete memo-randum is available at https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/re-ports-and-publications/214-reports-publications-2016/1415-implica-tions-for-us-national-security-of-an-ticipated-climate-change.

Climate change isprojected to producemore intense andfrequent extremeweather events.


effects are dramatic—such as the brutalRussian winter that contributed toHitler’s failed invasion inWorldWar II—but more often weather and climateexert indirect effects that shape underly-ing social, political, and economic con-ditions. Academic research on the im-pacts of climate on political and securityoutcomes is still sparse, but we judgethat climate will affect U.S. national se-curity interests over the next 20 yearsthrough the following pathways.

Threats to the Stability ofCountries

Many countries will encounter cli-mate-induced disruptions—such asweather-related disasters, drought,famine, or damage to infrastructure—that stress their capacity to respond,copewith, or adapt. Climate-related im-pacts will also contribute to increasedmigration, which can be particularlydisruptive if, for example, demand forfood and shelter outstrips the resources

available to assist those in need.When climate-related effects over-

whelm a state’s capacity to respond orrecover, its authority can be so under-mined as to lead to large-scale politicalinstability. Countries with weak politi-cal institutions, poor economic condi-tions, or where other risk factors for po-litical strife are already present will bethe most vulnerable to climate-linkedinstability. In the most dramatic cases,state authority may collapse partially orentirely. Climate-related instability islikely to create strong pressure for for-eign aid, disaster assistance, or militaryresponses. Even if climate-related dis-ruptions do not undermine stability,however, some governments could beso preoccupied with managing the ef-fects that they have little time or energyleft to engage on broader foreign policyissues.Fueled by unusually warm Arabian

Sea waters, two separate tropical cy-clones hit Yemen in 2015 in the spanof just 10 days, including the first

hurricane-strength storm tohit the coun-try in recorded history. Already suffer-ing a humanitarian crisis from war andwater shortages, Yemen was unable toprovide adequate relief for its citizenry.Heavy rains have since fueled thebreed-ing of an unusually large population ofdesert locusts that threaten to devastateYemen’s agriculture, and efforts toeradicate the locusts have been stymiedboth by the difficult security situationand by fear of killing bees, a crucial pol-linator for the region’s honey and cropproduction.

Heightened Social and PoliticalTensions

Decreases in water and disputes overaccess to arable land will increase therisk of conflict between people whoshare river basins, aquifers, or land ar-eas. Although historically water dis-putes between states have led to morewater-sharing agreements than violentconflicts, according to academic


studies, we judge that this trend couldchange over the next 20 years as waterscarcity and variability intensify, possi-bly leading to disputes that pose greaterchallenges to security. Although envi-ronmental stress is rarely the sole cause,disputes between groups within coun-tries over land and water resources areincreasingly common as triggers for so-cial violence and internal conflict, par-ticularly when social and political ten-sions already exist.In 2014, citizens in a village on the

outskirts ofMexicoCity, alreadywater-stressed by drought, battled antiriot po-lice during a protest over the diversionof spring water to a new developmentnearby. More than 100 police were in-jured, many seriously.In 2014, farmers and herdsmen in

Nigeria clashed over access to grazingland and dwindling well water. ThenPresident Goodluck Jonathan orderedmilitary operations to reduce the vio-lence.In 2012, mass protests and violence

erupted over water shortages in Nouak-chott, Mauritania. More than 70,000refugees had migrated to Mauritania byJuly that year because of deterioratingconditions in neighboring Mali, puttingadditional pressure onMauritania’s wa-ter and soil resources, already strainedby drought and desertification.Even if climate-induced environmen-

tal stresses do not lead to conflict, theyare likely to contribute to migrationsthat exacerbate social and political ten-sions, some of which could overwhelmhost governments andpopulations.Sud-den extreme weather—such as fromfloods, droughts, and severe tropicalstorms—almost certainly will increasethenumber of displacedpeople, particu-larly in regions that are unaccustomed toor unprepared for such events. Risingsea levels and unexpectedly large stormsurges could threaten small island statesand low-lying coastal regions—includ-ing many megacities—with floodingand saltwater contamination of fresh-

water. Over 20 years, the net effects ofclimate change on the patterns of globalhuman movement and statelessnesscould be dramatic, perhaps unprece-dented. If unanticipated, they couldoverwhelm government infrastructureand resources, and threaten the socialfabric of communities.TheArctic region iswarming twice as

fast as the rest of the planet, transform-ing rapidly, according to the NationalOceanic and Atmospheric Administra-tion. The resulting retreat of sea ice iscreating new possibilities for resourceextraction, tourism, fishing, and ship-ping routes between the Atlantic and

Pacific. Unpredictable ice floes, re-moteness, andharshconditionswill lim-it operations in the Arctic over the com-ing decade, but disputes over unre-solved maritime boundary claims, mili-tary posturing, and economic activitycould increase as the Arctic opens.Contention over Russia’s claim to 1.2

million square kilometers of Arcticshelf, which Moscow submitted to theUN inAugust 2015, could increase fric-tion with rival claimants, includingDenmark and Canada.Openingwaterways have encouraged

a Western cruise line to plan the firstmonth-long cruise through the North-west Passage this summer, carryingmore than 1,000 passengers. Maritimeauthorities have cautioned that the voy-age is high-risk in terms of navigational

security and because of limited searchand rescue capabilities.Significant thawing of Arctic and

sub-Arctic permafrost could rupture theChina–Russia crude oil pipeline—animportant shared resource between thetwo countries—and could threaten theintegrity of other Russian pipelines, ac-cording to recent scientific studies.Political disputes could arise over cli-

mate change responses and policies.Some adversely affected countries mayseek relief through international judicialmechanisms. Countries not meetingtheir pledges to reduce carbon emis-sions may face heightened politicalpressure andeventually punitive actions—such as sanctions or pricing carboninto trade—even though the pledgesnow are voluntary, with no current en-forcement mechanism.Unilateral efforts by countries or

groups to test or deploy geoengineering—a largely theoretical field exploringhow the climate might be modified in-tentionally through methods such as in-jecting aerosols into the stratosphere orchemically changing the reflectivity ofclouds—would almost certainly height-en regional or international tensions, es-pecially in the absence of multilateralframeworks or institutions to governsuch activities. Some forms of geoengi-neering experimentation are probablywithin the financial and technical capac-ity of some major powers and individu-als, although there are fundamental sci-entific uncertainties about the efficacyand possible unintended consequencesof such methods.If, for example, geoengineering

methods suppressed global tempera-tures below the point assumed to bringdangerous climate change, such effortswould almost certainly need to be sus-tained and probably would alter globalweather patterns, benefitting some re-gions at the expenseofothers, accordingto the National Academy of Sciences.

More frequent extremeweather events,

ranging from droughtsto extreme rainfall,would significantlythreaten agricultural

production.


Adverse Effects on Food Prices orAvailability

More frequent extreme weatherevents, ranging from droughts to ex-treme rainfall, would significantlythreaten agricultural production. More-over, long-termclimate trends—such asmore very hot days, changing precipita-tion patterns, and poleward shifts oftropical clouds—along with constraintson land, water, and energy also put up-ward pressure on food prices. We judgethat in countries with weak political in-stitutions, climate-induced threats tofood security sharpen the risk of socialdisruption,migration, or large-scale po-litical instability.The terrorist group Al-Shabaab ex-

ploited the 2011-13 famine in Somaliato coerce and tax international aid agen-cies, and it withheld food from those itdeemed uncooperative, according toHuman Rights Watch.In 2015, insurgent groups in northern

Mali exploited deepening desertifica-tion, worsened by persistent drought, toenlist locals in a “food for jihad” ar-rangement.Heatwaves threaten livestockdirectly

and also reduce fertility, decrease milkproduction, and make them more vul-nerable to disease. Droughts, wildfires,and extended periods of reduced precip-itation threaten pasture and food sup-plies, indirectly threatening livestock.In Australia, the world’s third-largest

beef exporter, the direct and indirect im-

pacts of heatwaves have contributedheavily to adecline in cattle stocks to thelowest levels in 20 years.Increased ocean temperatures and

more frequent and more intense stormswill increasingly threaten fisheries,many of which are already under stressfrom overfishing and pollution, accord-ing to the UN Food and Agriculture Or-ganization. As oceans become moreacidic as they absorb atmospheric car-bon dioxide, ecosystems on which fishand other sea life depend are furtherjeopardized.Warm ocean temperatures have

helped fuel an unprecedented, ongoingbloomof toxic redalgaealong the south-ern coastline of Chile since early May2016. The damage to Chile’s important


aquaculture industry has sparkedprotests from fishermen, who haveblocked access to ports over what theyview as inadequate governmental com-pensation for their losses.

Increased Risks to Human Health

Extreme heat increasingly will con-tribute directly to deaths from cardio-vascular and respiratory disease acrossthe globe, particularly among the elder-ly, according to the U.S. National Insti-tutes of Health. High temperatures alsoraise the level of ozone andother air pol-lutants that exacerbate cardiovascularand respiratory disease. Rising sea lev-els and severe weather events will in-creasingly threaten medical infrastruc-tureandother essential services, accord-ing to the UN World Health Organiza-tion.The 2003 heatwave in Europe fueled

their hottest summer on record since atleast 1540, and contributed tomore than70,000 deaths, according to a peer-re-viewed study by the French Institute ofHealth and Medical Research. WesternRussia’s most extreme heatwave inrecorded history was in 2010, causingmore than 11,000 deaths in Moscowalone, according to scientists.Heatwave-related deaths in South

Asia in 2015 numbered 2,500 in Indiaand more than 100 in Pakistan. Anotherintense heatwave beginning in April2016 produced India’s highest tempera-ture ever recorded (124°F) and hascaused more than 400 deaths so far.Higher temperature and, in some re-

gions, more rainfall and flooding arelikely to increase the frequency of wa-ter-borne diseases and diseases trans-mitted by insects, snails, and other coldblooded animals in those areas. Extend-ed transmission seasons of importantvector-borne diseases are expectedacross a potentially larger geographicrange, according to the National Insti-tutes of Health.For instance, the mosquito Aedes al-

bopictus, which is capable of transmit-

ting a broad range of viruses to humans,is likely to live longer in Western andCentral Europe in the next few decadesbecause of increasing temperatures, ac-cording to academic research. In con-trast, projected changes on theMediter-ranean coast of Spain are likely to di-minishmosquito survival in that region.The Vibrio cholerae bacterium,

which causes cholera, thrives in warm,salty waters. Higher surface-water tem-peratures and rising sea levels could in-troduce cholera to previously unaffect-ed areas.

Stress on Military Operations andBasing

Globally, more frequent and intensenatural disasters will strain the capacityof U.S. and allied armed forces to deliv-er humanitarian assistance and disasterrelief. The U.S. military may be calledupon more frequently to respond to for-eign crises if its counterparts in affectedcountries are overstretched, unable tohandle their own crises or those in theirneighborhood.We also judge that rising sea levels,

flooding, droughts, higher tempera-tures, andmore frequent extremeweath-er eventswill increasingly threatenmili-tary capabilities and facilities on bothU.S. and foreign territory, includingmilitary bases and training ranges.

Continued reductionof sea icewill in-crease the importance of the Arctic as adomain for military access and opera-tions, although the environment therewill remain challenging and unpre-dictable.

Implications for Investments andEconomic Competitiveness

Past and anticipated extreme weathereventsmaydiscourage investment in re-gions deemed particularly vulnerable.Infrastructure will be increasinglythreatened by more extreme conditionsin the near future, and freshwater fromaquifers will be increasingly jeopar-dized by saltwater intrusion. Expecta-tionsof future losseswill almost certain-ly increase insurance premiums andpayouts, and insurance rates may in-crease well before real effects are felt inregions deemed vulnerable.The chairman of Lloyd’s of London,

one of the world’s largest and most in-fluential insurance markets, has statedthat climate change is its primary con-cern. Allianz, Europe’s largest insurer,has said that climate-change-drivenlosses from extreme events could in-crease by 37 percent within a decade.The financial burden of responding to

emergent climate trends and severeweather events, including the cost of ef-forts to mitigate greenhouse gas emis-sions, will reduce financing availablefor other investments, except in caseswhere those climate investments lead togreen-growth opportunities. Increasingheat stress is likely to adversely affectagriculture, manufacturing, and othersectors requiring physical labor andcould significantly contribute to GDPloss.Low-income countries are less

equipped to rebound from the economicsetbacks caused by extreme weatherevents, and an increase in the frequencyof these events could contribute to oreven push some people into poverty.

Over 20 years, the neteffects of climate

change on the patternsof global humanmovement and

statelessness could bedramatic, perhapsunprecedented.


Potential Climate Discontinuitiesand Secondary Surprises

While current climate models projectlong-term increases in global averagesurface temperatures, climate scientistswarn that more sudden, dramatic shiftscould be possible, given the complexityof the system and analogs in the climaterecord. Looking back over the past100,000 years, the earth’s climate peri-odically has undergone extreme shifts,sometimes in as little as a decade. Suchabrupt swings canoccur in complex sys-tems when seemingly small shifts in theforces in play suddenly trigger dramaticnonlinear change, such as when a slightdrop in temperature can suddenly turnwater into ice. A body of scientific re-search indicates that the current rate ofincrease of carbon dioxide in the atmo-sphere is the highest in perhaps as longas 66 million years, sea levels are risingfaster than in the past 2,700 years, andthe oceans are acidifying more rapidlythan in the past 56 million years.Many climate scientists warn that the

risk of abrupt climate change—current-ly low—will increase over the next sev-eral decades and beyond. We judge thatthe possibility of abrupt climate changecannot be discounted over any time-frame because research has not identi-fied indicators to forecast potential tip-pingpoints andother thresholds. Even ifsudden shifts in the climate do notmate-rialize, gradual shifts in climate couldnonetheless spark surprising secondaryeffects—such as a massive release ofgases from melting permafrost, persis-

tent megadroughts, extreme shifts incritical ecosystems, emerging reser-voirs of new pathogens, or the suddenbreakup of immense ice sheets. The na-tional security implications of suchchanges could be severe.

Effects of Climate Change on U.S.National Security: PossibleTimeframes

The major forces driving climate areunderstood well enough for models toforecast climate trends for general re-gions, but complex interactions in theclimate system,modeling uncertainties,and human choices make it difficult toproject when and where specific weath-er and climate effects will most signifi-cantly affect national security.Most sci-entists expect that climate change gen-erally will exacerbate current condi-tions—for example, making hot, dryplaces hotter and drier.Future climate conditions could be al-

tered significantly by government poli-cies, industrial practices, or consumerbehavior regarding greenhouse gasemissions. That said, IPCC scenariomodeling suggests that aggressive envi-ronmental policies would not begin toslow the growth of global average sur-face temperatures for another 15-20years because of the lag time for com-plex global climate systems to respondto changes in human behavior (see charton page 19).The long time horizon for climate

change makes for different assessments

of the national security implications fordifferent periods. We make these as-sessments based on the IPCC’s findingsof projected climate change and our un-derstanding of the possible pathways bywhich climate change affects nationalsecurity.At present, the growing implications

for humans of extreme weather eventssuggest that climate-change related dis-ruptions are well underway. Individualweather occurrences remain difficult toattribute entirely to climate change,however.Looking forward, we assess that dur-

ing the next five years national securityrisks linked to climate change will arisemostly from distinct extreme weatherevents, especially in regions with weakgovernance, poor living conditions, orpersistent conflict that limit the capacityof governments and societies to copewith additional stress. When extremeevents occur where they have not be-fore, that toowill be disruptive, even foradvanced industrial countries.We assess that during the next 20

years—in addition to increasingly dis-ruptive extreme weather events—cli-mate change effects will play out inbroader, systemic ways, such as moreacidic oceans, degraded soil and air-quality, and rising sea levels, resultingin sustained direct and indirect effectson U.S. national security. Weatherevents ofmodest severitywill bedisrup-tive when their impacts are compound-ed as part of a rapid sequence or inclusters.


News and AnnouncementsRenewable Natural Resources

Foundation

RNRF Welcomes New ProgramDirector

Nicolas H.Kozak of Bethesda,Md. isRNRF’snewprogramdirector.Hestart-ed workingwith RNRF in September of2016.Kozak recently earned a B.S. in

environmental science and policy at theUniversity of Maryland - College Park.While at Maryland, he was selected forand participated in the College ParkScholars - Environment, Technology,and Economy Program.Kozakwasa sustainability internwith

the Apartment and Office Building As-sociation of Metro Washington(AOBA) where he performed extensivework on LEED and Energy Star certifi-cation.He also internedwithTheTowerCompanies and advanced their LEEDagenda through his work on 1707 L

Street’s LEED Dynamic Plaque.In his position as program director,

Kozak works with RNRF committeesand staff in developing and implement-ing programs such as public policy con-ferences, congressional forums,RNRF’s Washington Round Table onPublic Policy, and the annual awardsprogram.He also serves as assistant edi-tor of theRenewable Resources Journaland as RNRF’s webmaster.

Summer Meeting on “Big Data” forAssessing Global Water Risk, andImproving Urban Planning

The RNRF Board of Directors andguests met on June 28, 2016, in Wash-ington,D.C. to discuss how“big data” isbeing used to assess global water risk,and improve urban planning.

Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas

Charles Iceland, Aqueduct Director;Foods, Forests, and Water Programs,World Resources Institute (WRI), de-scribed its online mapping tool to helpcompanies, investors, governments,and communities to better understandwhere and howwater risks are emergingaround the world. He also described thedata and technologies that have madeAqueduct possible, how is it used, itslimitations, and plans for its expansion.Iceland’s PowerPoint presentation canbe accessed at http://www.rnrf.org/RN-RF_06282016.pdf.

Big Data Applications to UrbanPlanning

Architect Klaus Philipsen, presidentof ArchPlan Inc. of Baltimore, Md., de-scribed the ways in which big data

concepts have been applied to improveurban planning and design. He alsospoke about the early challenges andlimitations associated with big data ap-plications for integrated, sustainable de-sign. Philipsen’s PowerPoint presenta-tion can be accessed at http://www.rnr-f .o rg /2016%20RNRF%20Smar t%20Cities%200628.pdf.

Round Table on Methane Emissions

The RNRFWashington Round Tableon Public Policy met with DavidMcCabe, atmospheric scientist with theCleanAirTaskForce (CATF), inWash-ington, DC on June 22, 2016. TheRoundTable took place at theWashing-ton, DC-office of the American Societyof Civil Engineers on Capitol Hill. Mc-Cabediscussed recent efforts to regulatemethane emissions.He observed that CATF welcomes

EPA’s first-ever standards to directlyaddress methane pollution, a highly po-tent greenhouse gas, over 80 timesmorepowerful than CO2 over the short run.By placing robust safeguards on new

Nicolas H. Kozak David McCabe


and modified sources of methane fromthe oil and gas industry, now the leadingemitter of methane in this country, theObamaAdministration has taken an im-portant step to protect our climate, aswell as our public health.EPA’s action is important to stem the

emissions from new and modified oiland gas infrastructure, as the Energy In-formationAdministrationestimates thatnatural gas production will grow by 13percent by2025.This action is also criti-cally important as a stepping-stone to re-quired emissions reductions from theexisting equipment that constitutes thelion’s share of methane pollution fromthe oil and gas industry. The proposedInformation Collection Request repre-sents a second step, aimed at providingEPA with the data it feels it needs toissue comprehensive safeguards on ex-isting sources of methane across the oiland gas industry.Reducingmethane pollution from the

oil and gas sector represents one of themost cost-effective climate mitigationopportunities, as a number of controlmeasures can pay for themselves withinjust a few years. The standards are pro-jected to reduce methane pollution by510,000 tons a year—the equivalent ofabout a dozen coal-fired power plants—and save Americans about a hundredmillion dollars worth of natural gas.Methane is not only responsible for aquarter ofman-madeclimate changebut

it also contributes to unhealthy levels ofozone pollution—which is linked toasthma attacks, hospital admissions, aswell as premature death.

The Path Ahead Will Benefit from theFollowing Measures:

• Cleaning up older equipment—compressors and gas-driven pneu-matic equipment—with proventechnologies and practices can re-duce methane pollution by an esti-mated 1,200,000 to 1,350,000met-ric tons per year. Current EPA stan-dards require these technologiesand practices for some new com-pressors and gas-driven pneumaticequipment in select segments of theindustry,while states likeColoradoextend some requirements to exist-ing sources.

• Capturing natural gas that wouldotherwise be released from oil andgas wells can reduce methane pol-lution by an estimated 260,000 to500,000 metric tons per year.

These methane abatement potentialsare conservative estimates based ongovernment inventories. They don’t ac-count for the research indicating that ac-tual emissions could be twice the inven-tory estimates, or higher. The problemand the upsides of controlling it—arelikelymuch greater. The cost of the new

standards will be low—less than onepercent of the industry’s sales revenue.McCabe has been with CATF as

atmospheric scientist since Jan. 2010,working primarily on short-lived pollu-tants. He holds a Ph.D. in chemistryfrom the University of Colorado and aB.A. in geography and chemistry fromthe University of Chicago. Visit http://www.rnrf.org/Mind_the_Gap.pdf toaccessCATF’s report onmethane emis-sions - “Mind the Gap”

Round Table on the Smart Grid

The Brattle Group hosted RNRF’sWashington Round Table on PublicPolicy at itsWashington, D.C. office onApril 20, 2016. Heidi Bishop, a seniorpolicy and marketing analyst with thegroup, discussed the status of smart griddevelopment, renewable energy trends,and the integration of renewables intosmart grids.According to theDepartment ofEner-

gy (DOE), “smart grid” generally refersto a class of technologyusing computer-based remote control and automation,including two-way communicationtechnology and computer processingthat has been used in other industries fordecades. In essence, a smart grid “com-puterizes” the electric utility grid.

Status of Smart Grid Development

Bishop highlighted DOE’s descrip-tion of the functional characteristics of asmart grid. These include:

• Self-healing from power distur-bance events, i.e., a smart grid canidentify when and where power isdown, and respond either by self-healing or sending an alert.

• Enabling active participation byconsumers in demand response.

• Operating resiliently against physi-cal and cyber attack.

• Providing power quality for 21st

Charles Iceland (L) and Klaus Philipsen (R) at RNRF’s summer meeting.


century needs.• Accommodating all generation andstorage options.

• Enabling new products, services,and markets.

• Optimizingassets andoperatingef-ficiently.

A smart grid involves deployment ofthese technologies across the entire sys-tem, from transmission, to distribution,to consumption. On the consumer end,almost 60 million households havesmartmeters today. For example, Pacif-icGas andElectricCompany (PG&E), aCalifornia electric utility, implements a“SmartMeter” program that is part of astatewide effort driven by theCalifornia

Public Utilities Commission to upgradethe state’s energy infrastructure. Thenewmeters provide two-way communi-cation between PG&E and the con-sumer. These meters help PG&E pro-vide more reliable service by using theinformation from two-way communica-tion to quickly identify outages and re-solve other service problems. Con-sumers canmakemore informed energydecisions with detailed informationabout their usage, including alerts thatnotify consumers when their energy useis on pace to exceed a personalized billalert amount. Additionally, consumerscan opt into a rate structure based on thetime of day electricity is used. PG&Ealso offers the options to opt into a net-

work that connects smart devices in thehome that automatically respond to en-ergy usage from the grid.

Status of Renewable Development

According to the U.S. Energy Infor-mation Administration (EIA), the mixof fuels used to generate electricity inthe United States has changed signifi-cantly since 1990. For example, coal-fired power plants accounted for 42%ofU.S. electricity generation capacity in1990 (and produced more than half ofthe total electricity supply), but de-creased to28%ofgeneration capacity in2014 (and produced 39% of electricitysupply). Electricity generation from

Figure 1. Electricity generation by fuel, 2000-2040.


wind has experienced significant gainsin its share of electric generation capaci-ty, growing from 0.2% in 1990 to about6% in 2014. Electricity generated fromsolar energy rose from almost 0% in1990 to 1% in2014.EIAprojects that by2040, renewableswill be responsible for18% of all electricity generation (seefigure 1)According toBishop, electrici-ty generation from renewable sources isexpected to grow by 9% this year alone,consisting primarily of wind, with somesolar.Bishopnoted that renewable ener-gy development has been driven by Re-newable Portfolio Standards (RPS), theClean Power Plan, declining solarprices, concerns about energy re-silience, and consumer preference. Pho-tovoltaic (PV) energy in particular hasreceived increased attention. Techno-logical advances have driven modulecosts down, and third-party financinghas expanded the residential market forrooftop solar. The penetration of dis-tributed energy resources (DER),whichincludes solar, has been increasing inkey states, including California, NewJersey, and Arizona.

Integration of the Smart Grid andRenewables

Bishop stressed that renewable inte-gration is a key component of smart griddevelopment and distribution plans.The “grid of the future” requires themeshing of several different systems.Smart grid functions support renewableintegration through better forecasting,smart inverters, demand response, inte-grated storage batteries tied to solar, andreal-time system awareness and man-agement. According to the DOE, thegoal of renewable energy integration isto:

• Reduce carbon emissions andemissions of other air pollutantsthrough increased use of renewableenergy and other clean distributedgeneration.

• Increase asset use through integra-tion of distributed systems and cus-tomer loads to reduce peak load andthus lower the costs of electricity.

• Support achievement of renewableportfolio standards for renewableenergy and energy efficiency.

• Enhance reliability, security, andresiliency from microgrid applica-tions in critical infrastructure pro-tection and highly constrained ar-eas of the electric grid.

• Support reductions in oil use by en-abling plug-in electric vehicle(PHEV) operations with the grid.

Grid modernization poses technolog-ical and regulatory challenges for bothutilities and their regulators. Utilitiesmustweight the value of DER to the restof the system, cost andbenefits ofdiffer-ent strategies for deploying DER, andmany other considerations. State PublicUtilitiesCommissions are becomingac-tive in guiding smart grid developmentthrough dockets on grid modernizationand “utility of the future” dockets. Thecurrent U.S. electric grid is beingstretched to its capacity as energy useincreases and shifts. To move forward,the gridmust bemodernized and built tomanage the increasing complexity andneeds of energy consumers in the 21stcentury.

American Geophysical Union

AGU Aspires to Achieve Net ZeroGoal

TheAmericanGeophysicalUnion re-cently announced formal approval fromits board of directors to undertake a$41.7million complete renovation of its62,000-square-foot headquarters build-ing, located in the Dupont Circle neigh-borhood. AGU is aspiring to be the firstorganization in theDistrict of Columbiato renovate an existing commercialbuilding to achieve net zero goals.AGU is an organization dedicated to

advancing science and ensuring a sus-tainable future. Recognizing that the ag-ing building and infrastructure wouldrequire amajor renovationafter 20yearsof service, AGU seized upon an oppor-tunity to lead by example. In addition tocreating a welcoming and collaborativespace for itsmembers and theD.C. com-munity that would facilitate the under-standing of Earth and space science, theorganization chose to design and engi-neer the modernization of the buildingtomeet net zero goals. In so doing,AGUwill be able to showcase real-world sci-entific advancement through innovativesustainable technology. The project isexpected to be a model for reducing thecarbon and environmental impacts ofbusiness operations in a cost-effectiveand replicable way.“AGU strives to be an innovative

leader and partner that advances andcommunicates science’s power to en-sure a sustainable future—which mustinclude re-envisioning our workplacesas livable, interconnected environmentsthat are energy efficient, minimize ourcarbon footprint in the public space, andprovide a healthy and dynamic ecosys-tem for our members and staff,” saidAGU’s Executive Director and CEOChrisMcEntee. “Itmust also provide anopportunity to pave the way for otherslooking to incorporate similar ap-proaches and designs into new and ex-isting facilities throughout our city.”The renovated headquarters building

will also provide a collaborative, state-of-the-art conference center and workspace for AGU members, the public,and staff. As a scientific destination inthe nation’s capital, the new buildingwill includean interactivepublic exhibitthat highlights the impacts and innova-tions of Earth and space science.The board approval represents a sig-

nificant milestone capping off an 18-month-longapproval process.Through-out, AGU’s goal has been to respect thehistoric values of the surrounding area,and ensure public understanding of the


project and its potential impacts. Theproject has received unanimous en-dorsements from Advisory Neighbor-hood Commission 2B (ANC 2B), andunanimous approvals from the HistoricPreservation Review Board and theBoard of Zoning Adjustment.With approval secured from the prop-

er agencies and regulatory bodies, con-tractors are now preparing for the firstphase of construction to begin inMarch2017. The building is expected to re-open in 2018 in time for the organiza-tion’s 51st annual Fall Meeting, whichwill bringmore than 20,000 scientists tothe District in December 2018. This re-opening will also serve as the unofficialkick-off for AGU’s centennial celebra-tion, which will take place in 2019.“Weareexcited tohostAGU’sannual

meeting for the first time in Washing-ton,” saidDestinationDCPresident andCEOElliott Ferguson. “It is perfect tim-ing as they have completed a world-class renovation of their headquarters inDupont Circle that their members canvisit while meeting in the nation’s capi-tal.”Whereas other development projects

are striving for net zero in their initialplanning stages, this project is differentin that it requires the overhaul of an ex-isting commercial building. A buildingreaches net zero when it realizes an an-nual balance between energy demandand the creation of energy on-site. Thisbalance will be achieved through a vari-ety of architectural, engineering, andadvanced technology methods whichreduce, reclaim, absorb, or generate en-ergy or water, including:

• 11-foot-6-inch high solar rooftopphotovoltaic (PV) array to helpgenerate on-site renewable energy

• Municipal sewer heat exchangesystem to recover thermal energyfrom wastewater beneath FloridaAvenue

• Green wall to help reduce energyload and improve indoor air quality

• Water cistern to collect rainwaterfrom the roof, aswell as condensatewater from the dedicated outdoorair system, to produce all the waterneeded for flushing low-flow toi-lets and irrigating on-site

• Direct current (DC) electrified gridwith DC LED lighting, which willallow the building to be more ener-gy efficient and use power generat-ed by the solar PV array

• Radiant cooling system that circu-lates chilled water through a net-work of pipes and uses less energythan a traditional forced-air system

• Enhanced building envelope insu-lation, dynamic glass shading, andtriple-pane glazing, among otherinterior and exterior high perfor-mance strategies

Furthermore, theprojectgoeswellbe-yond net zero energy usage to includeother sustainability elements by reusingunique architectural elements, repur-posing existing building materials, andoffsite recycling of demolition and con-struction debris.AGU looks forward to continued col-

laboration and support with the sur-rounding neighborhood, city officials,and stakeholders as the constructionphase begins. For more information onthe project, please visit http://building.agu.org.

American MeteorologicalSociety

AMS Releases Report on “ExplainingExtreme Events from a ClimatePerspective” for the Year 2015

In December 2016, the AmericanMeteorological Society released a re-port on “Explaining Extreme EventsfromaClimate Perspective” for the year2015 as a special supplement to volume97-issuenumber12, of itsBulletinof theAmericanMeteorologicalSocietyMag-azine. This report is the fifth of its kind

in a series of reports focused on explain-ing extreme events of the previous year.This fifth edition continues to provide

evidence that climate change is alteringsome extreme event risk. Without ex-ception, all the heat-related events stud-ied in this year’s report were found tohave been made more intense or likelydue to human-induced climate change.This was discernible even for thoseevents strongly influenced by the 2015El Niño. Furthermore, many papers inthis year’s report demonstrate that attri-bution science is capable of separatingthe effects of natural drivers includingthe strong 2015 El Niño from the influ-ences of long-term human-induced cli-mate change.Other event types investigated in-

clude cold winters, tropical cyclone ac-tivity, extreme sunshine in the UnitedKingdom, tidal flooding, precipitation,drought, reduced snowpack in the U.S.mountainwest, arctic sea ice extent, andwildfires inAlaska.Twostudies investi-gated extreme cold waves andmonthly-mean cold conditions over easternNorth America during 2015, and findthese not to have been symptomatic ofhuman-induced climate change. In-stead, they find the cold conditionswerecaused primarily by internally generat-ed natural variability. One of these stud-ies shows winters are becomingwarmer, less variable, with no increasein daily temperature extremes over theeastern United States. Tropical cycloneactivitywasextreme in2015 in thewest-ern North Pacific (WNP) as measuredby accumulated cyclone energy (ACE).In this report, a study finds that human-caused climate change largely increasedthe odds of this extreme cyclone activityseason. The 2015 Alaska fire seasonburned the second largest number ofacres since records began in 1940. In-vestigators find that human-induced cli-mate change has increased the likeli-hood of a fire season of this severity.Confidence in results and ability to

quickly do an attribution analysis de-


pend on the “three pillars” of event attri-bution: the quality of the observationalrecord, the ability of models to simulatethe event, and our understanding of thephysical processes that drive the eventand how they are being impacted by cli-mate change. A result that does not finda role for climate change may be be-cause one or more of these three ele-ments is insufficient to drawa clear con-clusion. As these pillars are strength-ened for different event types, confi-dence in the presence and absence of aclimate change influence will increase.This year researchers also link how

changes in extreme event risk impacthuman health and discomfort duringheat waves, specifically by looking atthe role of climate change on the wetbulb globe temperature during a deadlyheat wave in Egypt. This report reflectsa growing interest within the attributioncommunity to connect attribution sci-ence to societal impacts to inform riskmanagement through “impact attribu-tion.”Many will watch with great inter-est as this area of research evolves in thecoming years.To view this and past reports, please

visit the following webpage: https://www.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/publications/bulletin-of-the-american-meteorological-society-bams/explain-ing-extreme-events-from-a-climate-perspective/.For more information on the Ameri-

can Meteorological Society’s “Bulletinof the American Meteorological Soci-ety Magazine,” please visit: https://www.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/publications/bulletin-of-the-american-meteorological-society-bams/.

American Society of CivilEngineers

ASCE Announces World’s FirstComprehensive Tsunami Resilient

Design Standards

Despite disastrous tsunamis strikingJapan, Chile, Samoa, and the IndianOcean in recent years, and the very realthreat of a similar tsunami hitting theUnited States, no consensus standardexists to design against the impact of atsunami. Today, the American Societyof Civil Engineers announced theworld’s first comprehensive tsunami-resilient design standards, incorporat-ing the lessons learned from these pastdisasters to define an enforceable, state-of-the-art design code for the construc-tionof safer buildings on theWestCoastof theUnitedStates,Alaska, andHawaii- all high-risk areas for tsunamis.Asapart of the tsunamidesigncriteria

and methodology, ASCE collaboratedwith theUniversity ofWashington JointInstitute for the Study of the Atmo-sphere and Ocean (JISAO) andAECOM to develop region-specificmaps graphically depicting the extent oftsunami inundation. The maps revealthat nearly 3.5 million residents on theWest Coast of the U.S., Alaska andHawaii are at risk to the impacts of atsunami.Formore information, contactASCE,

1801AlexanderBellDrive, Reston,VA20191; (800) 548-2723. http://www.asce.org.

American Society of LandscapeArchitects

ASLA Releases New Guide toResilient Design

A new online guide launched by theAmerican Society of Landscape Archi-tects (ASLA) explains how communi-ties can better protect themselves fromnatural disasters through resilient land-scape planning and design. The Re-silient Design Guide is found here:https://www.asla.org/resilient.According to the guide, the goal of

resilient landscape planning and designis to retrofit communities to recover

more quickly from extreme events, nowand in the future. The guide is organizedaround disruptive events that communi-ties now experience: drought, extremeheat, fire, flooding and landslides. Bio-diversity loss is an underlying threat al-so explored.The guide includes hundreds of case

studies and resources demonstratingmulti-benefit systems as well as small-scale solutions. It also explains land-scape architects’ role in the planningand design teams helping to make com-munities more resilient.Resilient design involves working

with nature—instead of in opposition toit. It provides value to communities, in-cluding:

Risk Reduction

As events become more frequent andintense due to climate change, commu-nities must adapt and redevelop to re-duce potential risks and improve eco-logical and human health. It’s also timeto stop putting communities and infras-tructure in high-risk places. And com-munitiesmust reduce sprawl,which fur-ther exacerbates the risks.

Scalability and Diversity

Resilient landscape planning and de-sign offers a multi-layered system ofprotection, with diverse, scalable ele-ments, any one of which can fail safelyin the event of a catastrophe.

Multiple Co-Benefits

Resilient landscape designs offermultiple benefits. Designed coastalbuffers can also provide wildlife habitatand recreation opportunities; urbanforests made up of diverse species cleanthe air while reducing the urban heat is-land effect; and green infrastructure forcontrolling flooding alsoprovides need-ed community space and creates jobs.


Regeneration

Disruptive natural events that are nowoccurring more frequently worldwideharm people and property. Resilient de-sign helps communities come backstronger after these events. Long-termresilience is about continuously bounc-ing back and regenerating. It’s aboutlearning how to cope with the ever-changing “new normal.”In an erawhen disasters can cause tra-

ditional, built systems to fail, adaptive,multi-layered systems can maintaintheir vital functions and are often morecost-effective andpractical solutions. Inan age of risingwaters and temperaturesand diminishing budgets, the best de-fenses are adaptive, like nature.Formore information, contactASLA,

636 Eye Street, NW, Washington, DC,20001; (202) 898-2444.

American Water ResourcesAssociation

AWRA to Host Free Webinar onWestern Water

John R. Fleck, director of the Univer-sity of NewMexico’s Water ResourcesProgram, argues in his new book, “Wa-ter is for FightingOver andOtherMythsAbout Water in the West” that the“water is for fighting over”mantra is ac-tually a myth in the western US. Whenpeople have lesswater, they actually useless water. Using the over-allocatedColorado River as an example, Fleckshows that collaboration and coopera-tion among the seven basin states is farmore prevalent than the media accountswould have us believe. He weaves acompelling tale, one that will have usmore carefully scrutinize the “Westernwater wars” headlines that are all toocommon today. AWRA will be hostinga freewebinarwithFleck on January 18,2017 at 1:00 pmEST. Q&Awill followand PDH credit will be available to at-tendees.

For more information, contactAWRA, P.O. Box 1626, Middleburg,VA 20118; (540) 687-8390. http://www.awra.org.

Geological Society of America

GSA Releases Annual MeetingAbstract

The Geological Society of Americahas released an abstract of its 2016 An-nual Meeting, which took place inDenver, Co. on September 25-28.In navigating the abstract, one can

view all sessions for a selected day, andview all presentations within that ses-sion. For more information and detailedinstructions, visit the page for GSA’sannual meeting at https://gsa.confex.-com/gsa /2016AM/webprogram/start.html.

Society of EnvironmentalToxicology and Chemistry

SETAC North America’s 38th AnnualMeeting

SETAC is seeking experts in a rangeof environmental toxicology and chem-istry fieldswilling to aid in the advance-ment of research and to share theirknowledge at the SETACNorth Ameri-ca 38th Annual Meeting, which will beheld from November 12-16, 2017 inMinneapolis, Minnesota. Researchersand scientists are encouraged to submita session proposal and professionaltraining course proposal on the meetingwebsite.Proposals should address timely and

relevant topics in environmental toxi-cology and chemistry, be related to themeeting theme, “Toward a Superior Fu-ture: Balancing Chemical Use andEcosystem Health,” or reflect local(Minneapolis orMinnesota), national orinternational research interests.Accepted session formats include

platforms and posters, Oxford-style de-

bates, educational games or activities,and interactive platforms and posters.The deadline to submit a session pro-

posal is February 22. The deadline forprofessional training course proposalsis May 1.For more information, contact

SETAC, 229 S. Baylen Street, Pensaco-la FL 32502; (850) 469-1500.

International News

Conservation International

OHI announces 5th Annual GlobalOcean Health Assessment Score

On December 8, 2016, the OceanHealth Index (OHI) announced its 5thannual global ocean health assessmentscore, 71 out of a possible 100, at the18th annualGlobal Environment Facili-ty Large Marine Ecosystem meeting inParis. The 2016 score remains overallthe same as global scores for 2012-2015(despite a minor, yet statistically in-significant, increase in 2013), all ofwhich are based on updated data andgoal score calculations. TheOHI, estab-lished in 2012, is a partnership led byscientists from the National Center forEcological Analysis and Synthesis atthe University of California, Santa Bar-bara and Conservation International.A consecutive global score of 71 indi-

cates that, while the ocean has remainedat a stable state, it is far from the desired100 indicative of a fully sustainableocean. At the individual Exclusive Eco-nomic Zone (EEZ) scale, however, highscores for populated areas such Ger-many (ranked 4th among the 220 EEZsassessed, with a score of 85 and a popu-lation of 81 million) and Seychelles(ranked 8th, with a score of 84 and apopulation about 97,000) exemplify thenecessity of effective social and envi-ronmental governance systems for im-proving ocean health.The OHI combines and compares the

biological, physical, economic and


social elements of ocean health to assesshowsustainablyocean resources areuti-lized within a given region. The scores,which range on a scale from 0 to 100,provide decision makers with a tool toholistically understand, track and com-municate the status of ocean health and,thus, promote themost effective actionsfor improvedoceanmanagement at sub-national, national, regional and globalscales.“Understanding all of the factors con-

tributing, both positively and negative-ly, to thecurrent stateofouroceans is thefirst step toward ensuring the ocean cancontinue to provide benefits to hu-mans,” said Dr. Johanna Polsenberg,Senior Director of Governance and Pol-icy for Conservation International’sCenter for Oceans. “By also offering ameans to advance ocean policies at dif-ferent scales and measure futureprogress, the Ocean Health Index pro-vides a cross-sectoral coordinating plat-form for informing decisions about howto manage and protect marine ecosys-tems in an integrated way.”The Ocean Health Index team is

working directly with more than 25countries leading their own independentOHI assessments, also known as theOHI+, across priority marine regionssuch as the Pacific Oceanscape, EastAfrica, and Southeast Asia. OHI+ as-sessments have already driven marineconservation actions at the national lev-el, such as helping shapeChina’s 13th5-year plan, Ecuador’s National Plan forGood Living and Mexico’s NationalPolicyonSeas andCoasts.Byprovidingan annual comprehensive databasebaseline for global ocean health, theOHI offers all coastal countries, at anylevel of capacity, a starting place for as-sessing the status of their marine re-sources and environments and utilizingan ecosystem-based approach towardmanagement.

“What is really exciting about havingseveral years of assessment done is wecan start to see where and by howmuchscores are changing year to year, and be-gin to understand the causes and conse-quences of those changes,” said BenHalpern, Chief Scientist for the OceanHealth Index project. “We’ve given theoceans their annual check-up and the re-sults aremixed. It’s as if youwent to thedoctor and heard that, although youdon’t have a terminal disease, you reallyneed to change your diet, exercise a lotmore and get those precancerous skinlesions removed.You’regladyou’renotgoing to die but you need to change yourlifestyle.”Five years of global Ocean Health In-

dex assessments have identified poten-tial trends in ocean health. The Liveli-hoods & Economies goal showed themost rapid score increase between 2012and 2013, possibly reflecting recoveryfrom the recession that began in 2008;and Lasting Special Places, a sub-goalofSenseofPlace, scores improvedbyanaverageof 0.5 points per year, likely dueto the designation of marine protectedareas.Consistently low scores for Tourism

& Recreation (47) highlight that coun-tries are not sustainably maximizingbenefits that can be derived from ahealthy tourism sector and scores forFood Provision (54) and Natural Prod-ucts (48) indicate that many regions areeither harvesting unsustainably or arenot maximizing their sustainable poten-tial to produce more food from the sea.Furthermore, the overarching issue ofpoor quality data (or nodata at all) limitsthe ability to estimate the status of fishstocks in many regions as well as theoverall status of fisheries.While Biodiversity (91) and Coastal

Protection (87) remain the highest scor-ing goals, reference points for bothgoals include maintaining coastal habi-tats at or about their extent in 1980, so

decline of their scores from 100 haveoccurred in less than four decades. Con-tinuing threats to habitat conditionwould lower scores further.“We believe the Ocean Health Index

gives reason for hope by providing a de-tailed diagnosis of the state of oceanhealth and also a framework that allowscountries to identify and prioritize themost necessary resilience actions to im-prove ocean health,” said Polsenberg.“This is where our work is most valu-able. It may take some time for such ac-tions to be reflected in the scores—butthe steps being taken are essential to en-sure a healthy ocean into the future.”For more information, visit http://

www.conservation.org/NewsRoom/pressreleases/Pages/Ocean-Health-Index-Releases-5th-Annual-Global-O c e a n - H e a l t h - A s s e s s m e n t -Score-71100.aspx.

Arctic Council

Arctic Resilience Report Released

Thesignsof changeareeverywhere inthe Arctic: Temperatures nearly 20°Cabove the seasonal average are beingregistered over the Arctic Ocean. Sum-mer sea-ice cover has hit new recordlows several times in the past decade.Infrastructure built on permafrost issinking as the ground thaws underneath.Yet those are only snapshots of a

much larger trend. The Arctic Re-silience Report shows that Arcticecosystems are fundamentally threat-ened by climate change and other im-pacts of humanactivities. It identifies 19tipping points (or “regime shifts”) thatcan and have occurred in Arctic marine,freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems.These regimeshifts affect the stability

of the climate and landscape, plant andanimal species’ ability to survive, andIndigenous Peoples’ subsistence andways of life.


The Arctic Resilience Report, pro-duced by an international team of re-searchers under the auspices of theArctic Council, highlights the need toenhance cooperation, both to tackle thedrivers of Arctic change, and to buildresilience among Arctic people. The re-port finds that policies and actions ofArctic countries’ governments havesometimes hurt resilience, which callsfor increased work to support and em-power local communities.“The resilience of Arctic social-eco-

logical systems depends not only on thecommitment and imagination of Arcticpeople, but on the support provided byArctic countries’ governments, non-governmental organizations, industryand others,” it concludes.“Ultimately, realizing resilience in

the Arctic will depend on empoweringthe people of the North to self-organize,define challenges in their own terms,and find their own solutions, knowingthat they have the flexibility and exter-nal support to implement their plans.”Responding toArctic change: a selec-

tion of 25 case studies from across theArcticwere analysed for this report. Thecases illustrate both loss of resilienceand resilience, including instances oftransformational change.The Arctic Resilience Report is the

culmination of a five-year scientificeffort to better understand the nature ofArctic change, including critical tippingpoints. It also examines the factors thatsupport resilience, and the kindsof choices that strengthen adaptivecapacity.

The report builds on a large and grow-ing body of research on environmentalchange in the Arctic, but adds substan-tial new insights by drawing on re-silience science to integrate social andecological perspectives.“One of the study’s most important

findings is that not only are regimeshiftsoccurring, but there is a real risk that oneregime shift could trigger others, or si-multaneous regime shifts could haveunexpected effects,” said Johan L.Kuylenstierna, executive director of theStockholm Environment Institute.Johan Rockström, executive director

of the Stockholm Resilience Centre andco-chair of the project, added: “Howregimeshifts interactwithoneanother ispoorly understood. If multiple regimeshifts reinforce each other, the resultscould be potentially catastrophic. Thevariety of effects that we could seemeans that Arctic people and policiesmust prepare for surprise. We also ex-pect that some of those changes willdestabilize the regional and global cli-mate, with potentially major impacts.”The study also examines how Arctic

people are adapting to change. It findsmultiple examples of communities thathave lost their livelihoods and are strug-gling to survive ormaintain their cultur-al identity.Still, the report highlights several ex-

amples of resilient Arctic communitiesthat have maintained traditional whal-ing, reindeer herding andother practicesdespite external shocks. Others havetransformed themselves: from nomadichunters to internationally recognizedartists in Cape Dorset, Nunavut,

Canada, for instance, and from fishingto whale-watching tours in Húsavík,Iceland.The single most important factor in

resilience, the analysis shows, is theability to self-organize and respond tochallenges as a community.“For those of us in the policy arena,

this provides an important reminder thatempowerment and training for northerncommunities is paramount for address-ing resilience in the region,” said JoelClement, co-chair of the Arctic Re-silience Report project.Other key factors for resilience are the

ability to draw on diverse knowledgesources, including local traditions aswell as science; having diversity (e.g. inlivelihoods); and being able to navigatechange and uncertainty.The study also examines the role of

the Arctic Council in building re-silience, which is complex not least be-cause diverse Arctic actors define theirinterests and goals in the region in verydifferent ways: Some see it as a home,others as a source of minerals and otherresources, others mostly for its role as akey part of a global system of climateregulation.TheArcticCouncil has been effective

at fostering cooperation in a variety ofimportant ways; now it just needs to en-hance its efforts, the report finds.Source - StockholmResilienceCentre

To download the original report, pleasego to https://oaarchive.arctic-coun-cil.org/bitstream/handle/11374/1838/A R R _ f u l l _ r e p o r t _ l o w -res_161114b.pdf?sequence=1&isAl-lowed=y.


January 2017

World Economic Forum AnnualMeeting. January 17-20, 2017. Davos-Kloster, Switzerland. https://www.weforum.org/events/world-economic-forum-annual-meeting-2017/

American Meteorological Society’s97th Annual Meeting: ObservationsLead the Way. January 22-26, 2017.Seattle, WA. https://annual.ametsoc.org/2017/

American Geophysical UnionChapman Conference on ExtremeClimate Event Impacts on AquaticBiogeochemical Cycles and Fluxes.January 22-27, 2017. San Juan, PuertoRico, USA. http://chapman.agu.org/extremeclimate/

NCSE 2017 National Conferenceand Global Forum. January 24-26,2017. Washington, DC. http://www.ncseconference.org/

American Geophysical UnionChapman Conference onSubmarine Volcanism: NewApproaches and ResearchFrontiers. January 29-February 3,2017. Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.http://chapman.agu.org/submarinevolcanism/

February 2017

New Partners for Smart Growth2017 Conference. February 2-4, 2017.St. Louis, MO. https://www.newpartners.org/about-the-event/

Fourth Santa Fe Conference onGlobal and Regional ClimateChange. February 5-10, 2017. SantaFe, NM. http://www.cvent.com/d/wfq4zq

AAAS Annual Meeting: ServingSociety Through Science Policy.February 16-20, 2017. Boston, MA.http://meetings.aaas.org/

March 2017

50th International Conference onWater Management Modeling.March 1-2, 2017. Toronto, Canada.http://www.icwmm.org/

Multi-State Salinity CoalitionAnnual Salinity Summit. March 2-3,2017. Las Vegas, NV. http://multi-statesalinitycoalition.com/events/

82nd North American Wildlife andNatural Resources Conference.March 4-11, 2017. Spokane, WA.https://wildlifemanagement.institute/conference

2017 GIS/CAMA TechnologiesConference. March 6-9, 2017.Chattanooga TN. http://www.urisa.org/events/2017/03/06/conference/2017-gis-cama-technologies-conference/

Sustainable Water ManagementConference. March 19-22, 2017. NewOrleans, LA. http://www.awwa.org/conferences-education/conferences/sustainable-water-management.aspx

Global Forum for Innovations inAgriculture 2017. March 20-21,2017. Abu Dhabi, UAE. http://www.innovationsinagriculture.com/

DC Environmental Film Festival25th Anniversary. March 14-26,2017. Washington, DC. http://dceff.org/

April 2017

253rd American Chemical SocietyNational Meeting and Exposition.April 2-6, 2017. San Francisco, CA.https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/meetings.html

Northeast Association of Fish andWildlife Agencies 73rd AnnualConference. April 9-11, 2017.Norfolk, VA. http://www.neafwa.org/conference.html

2017 Spring AWRA Conference.April 30- May 3, 2017. Snowbird,UT. http://www.awra.org/meetings/Snowbird2017/

May 2017

National Hydropower AssociationAnnual Conference.May 1-3, 2017.Washington, DC. http://www.hydro.org/news-and-media/events/details/2017-waterpower-week-in-washington-annual-conference-imrec-and-mets/

Offshore Technology Conference.May 1-4, 2017. Houston, TX.http://2017.otcnet.org/

MeetingsSee http://www.rnrf.org for additional meetingsSubmit Meeting Notices to: [email protected]

Renewable Resources JournalRenewable Natural Resources Foundation6010 Executive Boulevard, 5th FloorN Bethesda, MD 20852-3827 USA

RENEWABLE RESOURCES JOURNALhis book “The Elements of Power: Gadgets,Guns,andtheStrugglefora...

Documents

Transcript of RENEWABLE RESOURCES JOURNALhis book “The Elements of Power: Gadgets,Guns,andtheStrugglefora...