[Fortune]: The climate could change radically, and fast. That would be the mother of all national security issues.
Reaction to a Petagon 'future scenarios' study may signal a sea change in the debate about global warming. At least some federal thought leaders may be starting to perceive climate change less as a political annoyance and more as an issue demanding action.
If so, the case for acting now to address climate change, long a hard sell in Washington, may be gaining influential support, if only behind the scenes. Policymakers may even be emboldened to take steps such as tightening fuel-economy standards for new passenger vehicles, a measure that would simultaneously lower emissions of greenhouse gases, reduce America's perilous reliance on OPEC oil, cut its trade deficit, and put money in consumers' pockets. Oh, yes[~]and give the Pentagon's fretful Yoda a little less to worry about.
George Mokray summarizes:
'Seems the Pentagon did a study of cataclysmic climate change, using Peter Schwartz and the cohorts at Global Business Network to do some scenario planning around the possibilities (Scenario 1: how long can you dog-paddle while avoiding monsoons, tidal waves, or icebergs; Scenario 2: only the French and old folks, like in Chicago, die in the summer-long heat waves; Scenario 3: George W. is right and there is no such thing as Global Warming so we don't have to do anything at all except fight another couple of wars against terrorism and non-existent WMDs).'
Enough to snap me out of my work-induced blogging hiatus...
8:39:06 PM 
|
|
