We are accepting registrations for the next two-day workshop on Adirondack Regional Responses to Climate Change to be held on June 15 and 16 at the Chestertown Town Hall. This workshop requires pre-registration. It offers the opportunity dig deeply into the issues that climate change presents for our region and the possible responses we might make. The report on the previous workshop can be found in an earlier blog post. If you are interested please email firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Adirondack Diversity Advisory Council (ADAC) is holding a training workshop at the Wild Center on Saturday May 16 from 9:30am to 1:30pm. The workshop is designed to hep participants provide a more welcoming environment for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people who want to live in or visit the Adirondack Park. The workshop will be led by well known author and educator Brian McNaught. This is part of a growing effort to raise awareness of diversity issues in the Park and to take steps to be more welcoming to a broader set of visitors and new residents.
Dave and I know Brian personally and can say that he is really good. You may think that you are fine with gays, etc., but are you really aware of the issues that transgender people face? There is a lot for us all to learn. We will be there and hope to see you there.
The annual CGA Forum will be in Long Lake on Wednesday July 15, 2015.
As they did last year, the CGA Core Team has prepared an online survey of potential work group topics for this year’s Forum. Please take the survey as part of designing this year’s forum.
The survey asks you to identify the issues you want to work on in small groups at the Forum. We need you to pick some from a long list of ideas. Please complete the survey by April 1st even if you can’t attend the Forum.
Near the end of the December 2014 workshop on Adirondack region responses to climate change, someone asked a really good question. Why was the “(C)Sustainable Life” scenario in the ADK Futures workshops of 2011 and 2012 considered most desirable AND most attainable while the “(A)Minimize our Carbon Footprint” scenario in this new workshop was considered most desirable but LEAST attainable?
A big difference between the two scenarios was the level of government, especially Federal government, intervention required. The new scenario explicitly requires that governments put a price on carbon to create the necessary economic incentives to spur rapid adoption of clean energy. Participants had already expressed their lack of faith in the top-down government led approach to capping emissions and thus it was consistent to believe that this regional scenario would be unattainable – Federal government is not functioning well today and no improvement is expected.
Another factor in our view is that the new scenario explicitly called for solving the harder parts of actually getting emissions in the region down by 80% of 2005 levels by 2040. The older “Sustainable Life” scenario was much vaguer about doing good things to reduce our carbon footprint. In the new scenario we focus on how to move away significantly from dependence on fossil fuels for transportation using a combination of electric and hydrogen vehicles coupled with efforts to reduce the total number of miles driven, a much more demanding scenario.
The new scenario posits that, over the next 25 years, regulations are enacted that put a price on GHG emissions all over the world. The logic goes that the perception of the seriousness of threat of destructive climate change later in the century will increase during this period as the science will improve and impacts on the climate system begin to manifest themselves. Large-scale change in the energy system requires engaging market forces by making energy sources that emits GHGs expensive relative to those that don’t. As carbon prices increase, the rural northern lifestyle would be penalized because it consumes more transportation and heating energy than urban living. Seeing this coming, the region can work proactively to minimize our fossil fuel use so are not impacted much as GHG prices increase.
Clearly the Adirondack region would not be the only part of the country hurt by placing a price on GHG emissions. States that are big suppliers of fossil fuels (e.g., Wyoming, West Virginia, Texas, Louisiana, North Dakota, etc.) would see their economies hurt as their markets shrink. It seems clear that to get a carbon tax adopted, those hurt by it will have to be compensated in some way. This is how our political system works. One idea, for example, is to grant most of these funds collected back to individuals and small businesses as a ‘carbon dividend’. Thus, rural life might not be as hurt as thought at first glance, and adoption of such a tax might not be impossible after all. It depends how the revenues are used. Still, global adoption of carbon taxes in some form is hard to imagine as easily attainable.
Other aspects of this new scenario minimizing our carbon footprint that might be difficult to imagine are an almost complete abandonment of heating oil in favor of biomass, solar thermal, geothermal or electric heat. Biomass for thermal is a competitive option vs heating oil in our region. In its Renewable Heat initiative, NY State is targeting replacement of old wood stoves largely for health reasons. But soot and other black carbon particles are also a driver of climate change as they settle on arctic snow fields and cause them to absorb more solar energy. The State will pay you to remove and dispose of your old wood furnace, AND give you a grant to buy a new state-of-the-art unit.
Lastly, the new low carbon scenario called for more clustering of our residents in fewer towns where people walked and biked more. By living closer together, and closer to work, we drive less. Clustered homes and businesses could share a district heating system. Also, as storms worsen, we can better fortify and upgrade key community infrastructure (communications, water, power, fire, EMT, etc.) in the larger towns, not in every town. Communities where people know each other and see each other daily are stronger, more cohesive than communities where most people live outside of town, isolated from each other. Once again this raises the specter of smaller remote, more marginal, Adirondack towns fading away, a possibility that was raised before in the ADK Futures workshops and something that is widely rejected.
This new low carbon scenario is primarily about efforts to mitigate the impact of our emissions. One certain contribution we make is keeping our forests healthy and functioning as a major carbon storage system. Assuming a push to reduce emissions gets into gear nationally, we can benefit from cost reductions in new technologies as they are adopted widely, just like everyone else, e.g. electric and hydrogen vehicles. But developing and testing new technologies will happen elsewhere.
To expect the Adirondack region will be a leader in mitigation is almost certainly a stretch, except for maintaining our forest carbon storage. But we can do our part. A common argument against aggressively mitigating our region’s GHG emissions is that we have a negligible impact on the global situation. But most regions could say the same – no place matters much, but everywhere matters – and therein lies the conundrum. Creating a global economy that doesn’t depend on wrecking the atmosphere and the oceans requires everyone, everywhere, to make changes, including us. To have these changes in energy use adopted widely in the region, we will need to get more people to see the consequences of not acting. At the State level, there is recognition of the need to act. At the county and local level less so, but talk about storms and you find support. Getting local leaders, citizens and youth to the point of being aware of the problem, and participating in sensible changes, remains our biggest opportunity.
On December 11 and 12, 2014 a diverse set of 32 scientists, policy makers, government officials, non-profit leaders and concerned citizens mapped out different ways in which our region might respond to the threat of disruptive climate change. As we did for the ADK Futures project, we are using a scenario planning approach in which we consider multiple plausible outcomes for 25 years from now and map out pathways to get to them using events that could happen between now and the outcome horizon. The full documentation of the workshop is available. Here we present a summary of results. Future posts will explore some of the issues raised.
The issues and options with regard to climate change are notoriously complex and because what we do will be affected by what happens elsewhere, we can’t just consider scenarios at the regional level. Therefore, we set the context for our regional thinking with two sets of global scenarios. First, we presented 5 scenarios for how the global climate system might evolve over the next 25 years. These global climate scenarios are labeled:
- C1: Gradual Change
- C2: Faster Change
- C3: Pause Ends
- C4: Non-Linear
- C5: Unpredictable
After some discussion, we asked the participants to rank order these climate scenarios from most probable over the next 25 years to least probable. Here are the results:
The result is pretty clear: the most difficult to deal with climate possibilities (C4 Non-Linear and C5 Unpredictable) are the most likely (tied for first) and the most benign ones are the least likely. Get ready for more bad weather.
Next, we presented 5 scenarios for the human race might respond to the threat of climate change at the global level. Climate change is a problem whose worst consequences can only be prevented by global action. These global response scenarios are labeled:
- G1: Governments in Gear
- G2: Bottom Up Progress
- G3: Private Sector Leads
- G4: The Oblique Path to Progress
- G5: Panic!
Again, after some discussion, we asked the participants to rank order these climate scenarios from most probable over the next 25 years to least probable. Here are the results:
This result puts most faith in the private sector(G3) and bottom up efforts (G2) and has the lowest expectations of success for top-down, national government-led efforts (G1). This is realistic but it isn’t clear that we can avert damaging climate change without G1 and a truly global solution.
With this as context, the workshop focused on 6 scenarios about how the Adirondack Region responds over the next 25 years. These regional responses are labeled:
- A: Minimize Our Carbon Footprint
- B: Prepare for the Worst
- C: Hyper-Green Human Refuge
- D: Climate Change Laboratory
- E: Don’t Panic
- F: Reaching a Regional Tipping Point
After almost a full day of analysis and then a spirited half-day of plenary debate, we asked the participants to rank order these six regional response scenarios on desirability and attainability, just as we did with the Adirondack Futures endstates in 2011 and 2012. Here are the results:
Unlike in the Adirondack Futures result (which we said at the time was highly unusual), the most desirable outcome here A, where we lower our carbon footprint, is the least attainable. Why this is so will be the subject of a future post. The scenario that got the most endorsement for action in the workshop is B, the one focused on proactive adaptation with the expectation of serious climate change in the future. Scenario C, which says the region will be a winner on balance because of climate change, was viewed skeptically. The narrowly focused science and research scenario D was viewed as difficult to pull off and didn’t address enough of the region’s needs. Scenario E that took a pragmatic, measured approach was seen as easy to do but undesirable. Scenario F in which the region is badly wrecked by climate change was obviously undesirable but received a fairly high attainability score.
The end of the workshop was devoted to sketching out ways in which multiple endstates and layers of endstates might be integrated into a more complete roadmap for the next 25 years and beyond. One synthesis depicted change over time at both the global climate level (top), global response level (x-axis) and regional level (bottom).
The climate will worsen, eventually changing non-linearly. The G2 (Bottom Up) and G3 (Private Sector) global responses predominate at first followed by more of a G4 (Oblique) approach and then finally as the climate worsens still, G1 (Top-Down) kicks in. Regionally there is a lot of focus on mitigation and clean energy (A) especially as the private sector brings the costs down. The intensity of our regional efforts will follow the triggers of the global scenarios with B (Adaptation) and C (Human Refuge) dominating over time. Seems likely that B and C will end up dwarfing everything else as the climate gets bad. In their view, D (Laboratory) is flat over time and so is E (Don’t Panic). You continue to do smart, practical things (E) and you do great science although funding might be tighter in the future as money goes to adaptation.
In future posts we will dig into specific scenarios and their implications.
On December 11 and 12 we held our first workshop in a new series about how the region responds to the threat of disruptive climate change. Despite a big snow storm the two days prior, 32 people made it to Paul Smith’s College to spend two days examining six alternative scenarios for how the region might respond. Although there are some tweaks to make to the starting framework, in general the group found the framework useful. We plan to hold more of these workshops starting sometime in May 2015. We would like to develop a half-day version as we did in the original ADK Futures workshop series. In the weeks to come we will be writing a few posts about issues and conclusions raised in this first climate change workshop. For now, you can read the full report on the workshop.
I like the report because it starts right out with measures of success. It also explains this is rooted in some 100 plans and reports already done and instead points action steps. The meeting last Monday was organized into working group to begin work on moving ahead. Public comment is also requested.
If this works, begins the report, we should expect the following benefits:
- wage and payroll growth
- increased business revenue
- improved health and wellness statistics
- alternative energy consumption increase
- educational attainment increase
- real estate values for year round property increase
- level of private capital investment in leverage increase
- availability of cultural and recreational assets grows
- increasing school enrollment
Wow. Now I’m interested! How to we get to this place?
It lays out these 7 business opportunities. They can be done park-wide or at least in more than one location.
- Sustainable forest and natural products
- Sustainable construction and building products
- Recreational equipment manufacturing and retail
- Ecosystem services and nature conservation
- Value added agriculture and food processing
- Non profit employment
Next it lays out four goals, each with metrics, strategies and actions. Here they are:
Goal One: Inspire a culture of entrepreneurship with a globally competitive workforce and diverse business base
Six specific strategies and their actions are described. They include a small and micro business program, a lend local idea, teaching programs, higher ed collaborations, and a leadership program.
Goal Two: Promote a sustainable and connected rural life with quality infrastructure and community amenities.
Ten strategies are described, each with a couple of actions, They begin with be happier, and cover broadband, hamlet restoration, affordable housing, health care, road/pedestrian/bike infrastructure, improve access to water, assistance for towns with larger projects, improving financing for grant funded projects, non profits, first responders and reuse of vacant sites.
Goal Three: Reinvent traditional industry across the working landscapes in forest products, naturals resources and agriculture
Fives strategies and their actions are described. They cover natural resources protection including invasives, promoting local building materials, alternative energy, wood products, and local farming, local food.
Goal Four: Advance the park as a world class destination
It describes 10 strategies and several actions for each one. They cover the trail towns initiative, lodging renovations, tourism ambassadors, more types of lodging moving people across the park, integrated web presence, world class sports, wellness/health tourism, branding, upgrades of non-lodging tourism facilities.
This is the link to the whole report.
This is the link to the web site, Advantage Adirondacks, which has a lot more material and supporting documents.
The project was organized and run by the Adirondack Partnership and AATV. Funding came from the NYS Dept of State, DEC and the ADK Futures Project of the Common Ground Alliance was used as the local match to get the State funding.
The meeting on Monday was associated with AATV and had lots of local government people there. This effort looks like it has traction.