The Two Are Becoming One, and It's All Risk

Implications: In the Paul Newman movie "The Private War of Harry Frigg", an opening scene has a bunch of generals in a steam room arguing over a map where the enemy is.  After a few minutes, the enemy shows up at the door and takes the toweled lot away.  So is the argument over what's worse, climate change or energy security.  While we quibble, they threaten to merge and crash into our steam room.

Analysis: We still tend to have an industrial age, assembly line mentality to problems and problem solving.  This mentality tends to look at conditions that appear separate and unrelated and require "either or" decision making.

The squabbling going on about which is worse, energy security or climate change ignores the paradigm shift that both are increasingly interrelated.  They will feed upon each other like fuel and oxygen.  All that's remaining is the accelerant to create the conflagration.  The complexity of the problem, if not understood, will be increasingly difficult to address.

Take the following example of petroleum and natural gas, and climate change and energy security.  Rising temperatures in Alaska and Siberia are threatening the permafrost on which pipeline run with thawing cycles.  One can argue on the cause or global impact of these rises, but all but the most recalcitrant climate "skeptics" agree they are occurring. These cycles will negatively impact oil and natural gas infrastructure, making the pipelines unstable.  Oil and natural gas extraction and transport in these regions could suffer long term or irrevocable setbacks, which will put pressure on seeking resources elsewhere, as long as we remain 'addicted" to "cheap" fossil and nuclear fuel.

Another example is the possible melting of the Arctic icecap.  This makes large fossil fuel and mineral resources at least more technically accessible for extraction.  However, that will bring every major power to contest over a very politically grey area in an increasingly desperate attempt to access these resources. 

Closer to my home, this melting icecap raises the water level of the Gulf of Mexico and the vulnerability of this energy extraction and transport region.  The increased vulnerability makes any hurricane or tropical storm action an increase in energy insecurity.

What else?  Increased summer temperatures in Europe heats up intake water for nuclear and fossil fuel power plant cooling purposes, reducing their efficiency at the very time that demand increases by more air conditioning being used and installed.

It goes beyond energy, to food and water.  Longer lasting droughts in Africa are a major factor in warfare and genocide in the eastern regions.

The arguments of human impact of climate change are becoming irrelevant, especially if human activity refuses to even adjust, much less anticipate, changes caused by whatever.  This is akin to someone driving an SUV on a curved road at 45 miles an hour with a speed limit of 40. It starts sleeting, so the response by the driver is to increase speed to 55, comfortable in the knowledge of being surrounded by glass and steel is sufficient protection while drinking coffee and text messaging. 

The argument over which is more important, climate change or energy security, is also increasingly specious.  They are rapidly becoming two sides of the same coin.  They are huge risks, if nothing else, and investors are going to have to anticipate or at least slow down and get off the Blackberry.