The Arctic I.Cc.E. Project

The Gulf Stream and Other Current Events

A recent Gallup poll shows that Americans are more likely to view climate change as a future problem than a current one.  That view was in evidence last week as I did my own, miniscule, not-so-random and statiscally laughable poll of people on North Carolina's remote Ocracoke Island.  Locals there live close to nature. They're out on the sea and in the open air a lot more than those of us who live, say, in the Nation's Capitol, where walking between an air conditioned car and an air conditioned office are viewed as communing with nature.

I spent time with one Ocracoke boat captain who said that the only environmental changes he'd observed on the island in recent years involved beach erosion. He'd seen no shifts in the currents, temperatures or weather and attributed the late arrival of the flounder to Pamlico Sound this year to water that was about 8 degrees cooler than normal -- an usual, but not unheard of occurance.

Several other locals -- the guy who runs an island surf shop, a local kayaking guide, a restaurant waitress and the mate on one of the local fishing boats --agreed.  They say the wind, weather and water of Ocracoke are pretty much as they have been for years, even decades.

What's interesting about these observations is that Ocracoke -- the entire Outer Banks island system, actually -- is situated where the Labrador Current and Gulf Stream converge.  It's that convergence that creates the elbow-like crook of land on Hatteras Island.   But recent reports have suggested that the Gulf Stream may be slowing. One report points to the cold water "chimneys" in the Greenland Sea that act like pistons, powering the Gulf Stream.  Of the twelve original chimneys, only two are still functioning.  Speculation is that warming waters off the Greenland coast are causing the chimneys to sputter and stall.

If that's true, it's not being felt yet in the Outer Banks, at Diamond Shoals where the two currents collide.  There's no indication of climate change there. In this respect, Ocracoke Islanders are very much like residents of Manhattan; neither have noticed any changes to their environment. On the other hand, even without visible evidence, New Yorkers are adopting emissions policies, while the people of North Carolina, remain blissfully unaware of emission-related environmental problems.  If they think about climate change at all, it's as a issue to be dealt with way down the road.

On the other hand, most Europeans believe the climate change challenge is both immediate and urgent.  The European media has linked the 2003 heat wave, subsequent flashfloods and other extreme forms of weather to climate change. In fact, Europeans now almost automatically associate extreme weather with this environmental problem.  What's more, European environmental and energy policies are being shaped by climate change. Leaders in those countries not only recognize that the climate is being altered, they're willing to do something about it. 

But here in the U.S., the lack of tangible evidence, combined with relentless claims by the far right and the oil industry that any change in the climate is simply the result of mother nature having a growing pain, has contributed to widespread skepticism among Americans about the problem. The one surprising exception to this pattern is in U.S. business.  In the past, Americans companies have had to be dragged kicking and screaming to change.  Think of the auto industry and mandatory seat belt requirements.  Or the chemical industry and restrictions on DDT.  Or just about any industry and discussions of minimum wage hikes.  American companies have traditionally been laggards, not leaders.  So it's a pleasant surprise to see so many U.S. companies voluntarily adopting policy changes with respect to emissions and the climate.

I realize they aren't doing it out of the goodness of their hearts; their reading of research findings has convinced them that federal climate change policy change is inevitable once George Bush leaves office and they want to get the jump on it. If only we could get the people of Ocracoke Island and the rest of America to view those research findings the same way.

The Greening of America

Listen to the right and you'll hear climate change described as the greatest fraud ever perpetuated upon mankind. Listen to the left and you'll hear eulogies about the death of environmentalism.

Well, I say they're both wrong and suggest that you listen instead to the sound of the future.

Cha-ching. Cha-ching. 

That's the sound coming from Europe where environmentally conscious companies and investors are -- well -- cleaning up. Think I'm exaggerating?  Here's just a fraction of what's happening over there:

• On May 25th, Investor Relations magazine holds "Climate of Change: Carbon, Companies and the Bottom Line" a conference on how global warming is affecting commerce and how corporations can affect global warming.
• One June 6-7, Environmental Finance is hosting "Climate Change & Investment", another conference. This one is about asset allocation in a carbon-constrained world.
• After the tsunami hit Indonesia last December, Munich Re, the largest reinsurance company on earth, appealed to governments around the world to take measures to curb climate change which, the company said, is responsible for the increasing frequency and severity of natural disasters worldwide.
• On April 22nd the International Petroleum Exchange became the third exchange to list Emissions Trading Scheme contracts and the first to trade emissions futures.
• Four more trading platforms, the Energy Exchange Austria, Climax, Powernext Carbon and Sendeco2, hope to begin operation this month.
• A Budapest-based company, Vertis Environmental Finance, is the first financial advisory firm to specialize in emissions trading in Eastern and Central Europe.
• Several groups representing investor interests with respect to climate change have been created.

And on and on and on.  Why is this the future?  Because the more companies invest in environmental data acquisition, the more aware they will be of the facts.  And the more they know, the more likely they'll be to raise holy hell in with respect to national environmental policies.  The more likely they'll be to adapt corporate policies that support the environment. And the more likely we are to see real change.

Environmentalists and other liberals may swoon upon hearing the words "climate change" and "finance" used in the same sentence. But the fact is that since the first Earth Day in 1970, environmentalism in the United States has enjoyed, at best, a thin veneer of support, mostly from white, highly educated, disaffected middle-class professionals whose idea of responsible citizenship is using their index fingers to point out problems.  (And by the way, I count myself as part of this group of finger-pointing head shakers.)  I think it's one of the reasons that liberals (like myself) are viewed as whining naysayers. Clearly, someone needs to identify problems and crises. But when that's all we do, when we are defined by problems, not solutions, our usefulness is limited and we end up being marginalized. 

On the other hand, by working cooperatively with investors, companies and the financial community will not only generate new emission-curbing ideas the and focus real resources on climate change, it will also put environmentalists back at the center of the debate and position them as part of the solution.

Will a market-based approach be perfect?  I wish.  We're making all this up as we go along, so there are likely to be a lot of mistakes. But if we're smart, we will learn from them and the process will improve with time.

Which brings me to my central point.  I think it's time to learn from our mistakes as environmentalists.  It's been 35 years since the first Earth Day, when the protest-driven approach we associate with the environmental movement really took hold. To be fair, that approach has produced some successes: a number of endangered species are making a come back and the Hudson River is cleaner than it used to be.  But those victories are Bandaids on a planet suffering from metastatic cancer.   The fact is that we've tried the old, protest-centric way over and over with limited success.  It's time to try something else, to work actively and cooperatively with institutional investors, corporations and financial interests to find solutions that work for everyone.  To make the "greening of America" a double entendre.