Global analysis of where the diversity of vertebrate animals would most benefit from aggressive reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Figure from Warren et al., Nature Climate Change 2013.

We already knew that the rising temperatures and shifting rainfall patterns brought about by climate change was bad news for the world’s rare and endangered species, likely pushing many to extinction. A new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change now finds that even their more common and widespread relatives are in danger. An international team of researchers, lead by the UK’s Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research, looked at nearly 50,000 plant and animal species worldwide and compared how their distributions align with current climatic conditions as well as possible future conditions.

They found that more than half of plants (57%) and more than a third (34%) of vertebrate animals would lose the majority of their climatically suitable habitats in the absence of serious actions to reduce carbon pollution.

Reductions in suitable climatic ranges for such a large number of the world’s plants and animals would not only lead to considerable losses of many unique life forms, but would have far-reaching and likely devastating effects on the many ecological benefits that people derive from our natural ecosystems.

Although comparisons between current species ranges and future climates have been carried out before, there are a couple of things that distinguish this new study.

• Scale – this research looked at a huge number of species around the world, focusing on those that currently are widespread and abundant.
• Dispersal capacity – Rather than assume that species would be capable of keeping pace with rapid shifts in climate (as many past studies have), the researchers incorporated estimates of realistic dispersal capacity for different groups of plants and animals.
• Carbon reduction – the researchers also evaluated the degree to which common species would suffer range contractions under various scenarios for carbon reduction, in order to quantify the biodiversity benefits of climate mitigation.

Understanding the implications for biodiversity of varying levels of carbon in the atmosphere takes on particular significance in the wake of last week’s news from the Mauna Loa Observatory that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have topped 400 parts per million for the first time in at least three million years.

Providing More Time to Adapt

Dealing with the underlying cause of climate change (climate mitigation), and addressing the impacts of climate change (climate adaptation) have often been viewed as separate approaches to addressing global warming, and some environmentalists have even considered a focus on adaptation as undercutting the urgency of reducing carbon emissions.  This study clearly demonstrates the tight and complementary relation between climate mitigation and adaptation efforts. These researchers found that early aggressive action on carbon reduction has the capacity to greatly reduce the projected impacts on common species—with losses reduced by 60% under the most stringent carbon reduction approaches. At the same time, reducing these pressures would have the effect of increasing the likely success of adaptation efforts, and lengthening the time—by up to 50 years—for society to put climate-smart conservation strategies into place.

Drawing on the Power of Networked Biological Data

This study was only possible thanks to an enormous investment over the past two decades to computerize and network together the world’s biological collections.  Natural history museums and botanical gardens around the world have for centuries served as biological archives, with their preserved specimens documenting the distribution and condition of the world’s biological diversity. In order to make this historical record more accessible and useful to society, these institutions have been investing in the laborious task of digitizing these collections and linking them online in something called the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF).  Indeed, the US node for this network—known as BISON—was just launched in April by the US Geological Survey. This global network now links together millions of plant and animal distribution records, and served as the primary source for the biological data on which this new and groundbreaking study of climate change was based.  It is truly an example of how better access to the historical record can shed new light on the future of biodiversity.

Wildlife in a Warming World

Although this new study focuses on how these changes are likely to play out over the next 70 years, impacts of climate change on our wildlife are already here.  National Wildlife Federation considers climate change to be the conservation issue of the twenty-first century, and recently issued a report—Wildlife in a Warming World—that details the many ways in which our wildlife already are being affected. In addition to advocating for meaningful action to reduce the carbon pollution driving global warming, NWF is working to identify ways to better safeguard our wildlife and their habitats in the face of climate change. There are many things that conservationists and natural resource managers can do now to help wildlife survive in the face of these threats, and our recently published Quick Guide to Climate Smart Conservation summarizes the findings of a broad collaboration of adaptation experts convened by NWF.

An Urgent Call to Action

While there is much that we can do to prepare for the impacts of climate change on people and wildlife, this new study makes clear that even with aggressive action – on both mitigation and adaptation—we stand to lose a substantial amount of our biological heritage. This has profound implications not only for the diversity of life on Earth, but for the very ecological life support systems, like water and food production, that humans rely on. The study underscores the urgency with which we need to achieve real and meaningful reductions in carbon emissions, if we wish to leave our children with a planet still capable of inspiring awe in our wildlife and wild places.

Speak Up for Polar Bear Cubs: Urge President Obama to start limiting carbon pollution that comes from coal fired power plants — our nation’s largest source of carbon pollution.

NWF: On First Ever Carbon Pollution Limits, We Can’t Wait

March 15-The Obama administration may delay first-ever limits on carbon pollution from new power plants, according to a report Friday by the Washington Post.

Larry Schweiger, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation, said today:

“The Environmental Protection Agency went through a rigorous process to design the first-ever limits on carbon pollution from new power plants. They’re long overdue, desperately needed to protect America’s wildlife and communities from climate change, and over three million Americans have spoken up in support of them. Any signal they’re stalled just ensures further delay in confronting climate change at a time when the Americans are looking for momentum.

On Sunday, the National Wildlife Federation and our supporters took part in the largest climate rally in history. And that’s exactly what it felt like: being a part of history. Over 35,000 people came out in the blistering cold to show their unwavering devotion and commitment to our planet and its wildlife. Thousands of us stood in solidarity to push the most powerful man on earth to stand on the right side of history.

If President Obama is serious about tackling climate change, he needs to reject the Keystone XL pipeline. Scientists have overwhelmed us with evidence that climate change is happening now and that we need to take serious steps to mitigate its effects. Wildlife all across the country are already feeling the impacts of climate change, and the upstream emissions alone from filling the Keystone XL pipeline would be equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions from 6.3 coal-fired power plants or more than 4.6 million passenger vehicles. This project is moving America in the wrong direction. We have a moral obligation to protect our children’s future from climate change.  So, what do people do when they want change but their elected officials don’t, won’t or can’t: we move, we march, we build, we take action.

On February 17th, we took to the streets. In a historic moment for the climate movement we stood up and said “yes we can” solve the climate crisis. However, the fight is not over, and the President still needs to be pushed.  In order to move towards a clean energy future we need to reject the Keystone XL pipeline. Make your voice heard by telling the President that it is his turn to take action.

Share on Facebook to add your support for wildlife threatened by climate change and dirty energy.

Here are some more photos from the rally — if you attended, please add yours to the pool:

Click here to view the embedded video.

The moose population in northeast Minnesota is being devastated by climate change. (Dick Forehand)

But this week, the chances for action on reducing the severity of climate change by reducing carbon pollution are starting to look up.  The President and Congress are giving ever more attention to the need for bold climate action, and we’re seeing growing momentum across the country.

Bold Words From President Obama

In his State of the Union address on Tuesday, President Obama built upon the promise he made in his inaugural address—to “respond to the threat of climate change, knowing the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations”—by laying out his commitment to reducing carbon pollution and fighting climate change with a set of concrete proposals.

“The good news is, we can make meaningful progress on this issue while driving strong economic growth. I urge this Congress to pursue a bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one John McCain and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago. But if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.”

Congress is paying attention

President Obama’s inaugural address and State of the Union speech emphasized the need to take strong climate action, and it looks like Congress is paying attention. On Wednesday, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held a briefing on the latest climate science for members of Congress.  Four distinguished scientists testified that the impacts we’re seeing from climate change are just beginning: the next few years will see increasing sea level rise and extreme weather events, and failure to take serious action to cut carbon emissions will only increase the damage to wildlife, fragile ecosystems, and public health.

Senators Bernie Sanders and Senator Barbara Boxer introduced comprehensive legislation on climate change, an important first step in taking action on climate in Congress.  The legislation would tax carbon emissions at $20 a ton, with the goal of cutting U.S. carbon emissions 20% from 2005 levels for 2025.  More than half of the revenue—as much as $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years—would be returned to taxpayers as a monthly rebate.  Much of the remaining revenue would be used to fund energy efficiency and clean energy programs.  NWF sees putting a price on carbon as a key tool in fighting carbon pollution, and will continue to work with members on both sides of the aisle to advance climate solutions.

Ignoring climate change is risky

Yesterday, we got another sign that the government is starting to realize the dangers of continued inaction on climate change. The Government Accountability Office (GAO), the independent, nonpartisan “congressional watchdog” that submits reports to Congress on how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars, announced today that it is adding the financial risks posed by climate change to its “high-risk list.” The high-risk list, released at the start of each new Congress, includes 30 federal programs that are at high risk of waste, fraud, abuse and financial loss—essentially, the GAO identifies areas where the federal government is mismanaged or inefficient.  The addition of climate change to this list is huge news: the watchdog is telling the government that the failure to address climate change is putting us at huge financial risk.  Ignoring climate change is, simply, bad business.

In the announcement, the GAO confirmed what we’ve always known: carbon pollution puts people, property, and the environment at risk, and we must both fight future pollution and adapt to become more resilient to the changes that are already occurring.  Climate change adaptation just makes sense, and ignoring climate change and its risks puts the federal government—and the country—in an incredibly vulnerable position.

Speak up for the polar bears, moose and wildlife across the country threatened by climate change–send a message to President Obama urging him to move forward on limits to carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants.

Especially since 2012 was the hottest year ever recorded, the arctic sea ice extent set a new record low in recorded history, the northeast was devastated by Hurricane Sandy, and drought and wildfires struck all over the western part of the United States.

But there is one group who may just need a report to actually show them that climate change is real and is happening now. You guessed it, it’s Congress.

Back in 1990 when the U.S. Congress passed (and President George H.W. Bush signed) the U.S. Global Change Research Act, it actually mandated that federal agencies produce just such a report every four years. The latest installment of this National Climate Assessment was recently released in draft form for public review.  This draft report is the most comprehensive review of U.S. climate impacts to date. It includes analyses of how climate change is already affecting specific regions and sectors of national relevance, from agriculture to health to transportation.

Flickr simm0ns777

It’s like the kid who has a math book with all the answers in the back, but refuses to do the work to find the solutions. That kid usually fails the class. In this case, Congress is failing its country. Let’s make them do the math.

So when the President addressed climate in his Inauguration speech, saying,

“We, the people, still believe that our obligations as Americans are not just to ourselves, but to all posterity.We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.

“Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.

“The path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. But America cannot resist this transition; we must lead it. We cannot cede to other nations the technology that will power new jobs and new industries—we must claim its promise. That is how we will maintain our economic vitality and our national treasure—our forests and waterways; our croplands and snow-capped peaks. That is how we will preserve our planet, commanded to our care by God. That’s what will lend meaning to the creed our fathers once declared.”

I think he’s saying, “Hey, we can’t deny or ignore science any longer. It is time to take action.”

As we know, action is not something that Congress is particularly keen on these days. That’s why we’ve got to push them. Right now is the time to raise our voices so that when the report lands on their desks next year they know what to do with it. And they know we’re paying attention.

Tell Congress to limit carbon pollution contributing to climate change!

I am a firm believer that climate change is real, that it is impacted by human behavior and carbon emissions. And as a consequence, I think we’ve got an obligation to future generations to do something about it.

Now is the time to urge the President to match his words with action by moving forward carbon pollution limits.

Tell President Obama to finalize limits on carbon pollution from new coal-fired power plants. 

President Must Move Forward on Historic Pollution Limits

flickr: Nick Humphries

Putting in place these air pollution from new power plants is a critical step towards the cutting pollution that causes climate change. Right now, power plants, especially coal-burning power plant, are the nation’s single largest source of global warming pollution representing over40 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions.

And coal is a dirty business from the mine to the plant, and beyond. Coal mining destroys vast amounts of land — including entire mountains — pollutes our rivers and streams, and has significant environmental effects on local communities and wildlife

Superstorm Sandy a Vision of What’s to Come

Piping Plover | Photo by NatureFramingham / flickr

Superstorms like Sandy could become stronger and stronger as global temperatures continue to increase–and scientists are warning that we must reduce the carbon pollution causing climate change now.

Hurricane Sandy was so big and so powerful that it damaged more than 40 National Wildlife Refuges–flooding crucial habitats of many coastal bird species, including Atlantic Coast piping plovers, a threatened species which depends upon the shorelines affected by Sandy for breeding habitat.

The devastating effects of climate change that scientists have been warning us about for years–bigger, more powerful storms with more rainfall and higher storm surge–are becoming impossible to miss.

Take action

Delivery of comments in April, 2012 in support of limiting carbon pollution.

This summer as heat waves, drought, wildfires, and extreme weather swept the nation, over three million people like you spoke up in support of the Environmental Protection Agency and President Obama’s efforts to limit carbon pollution from new coal-fired power plants.

Today, as our nations sees the impacts to communities, ecosystems, and wildlife from climate change turbo-charged extreme weather, we cannot delay finishing what was started this summer–and put in place limits on carbon pollution that stop new mega-polluting coal plants now.

Speak up for endangered piping plovers whose habitat was overcome by Superstorm Sandy–take action in support of new limits on carbon pollution.

The following individuals are featured in the roundtable:

• Dr. Richard Ready, professor of Agricultural and Environmental Economics at Penn State University
• Pastor Marvin Friesen of the University Mennonite Church in State College
• Ed Perry, National Wildlife Federation Outreach Consultant

Pennsylvania’s C-NET was on hand to broadcast the roundtable:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Satellite image of Hurricane Sandy off the shores of Florida and an approaching cold front across the Midwest. (NASA GOES, 10-25-2012)

Meteorologists did not pick the name Frankenstorm only because of the Halloween timing. The name also reflects the highly unusual nature of this storm. Here’s what the meteorologists are forecasting right now:

• Sustained winds of at least 50-60 mph for a large swath of the coast for at least 24 hours, with windy conditions for as long as a week.
• Rainfall totals of 4-8 inches or more for a large region. Many areas will experience rainfall amounts maybe only seen once a century.
• Storm surge of 3-6 feet resulting from days of winds blowing sea water toward the coast combined with full moon conditions.
• Collision with an eastward moving cold front, setting up conditions even worse than the famous “Perfect Storm” of 1991.
• Mountainous areas are likely to get snow.
• Sandy is already huge – extending more than 500 miles across – and expected to grow before making landfall.

If the forecasts are correct, chances are very good that this is a storm that no Americans alive today have ever witnessed. In other words, if you live along the coastal areas where landfall is expected and think you know what to expect, think again.

The Frightening Forecast

Folks, this storm is exactly the sort of thing climate scientists have been worried about for years. Global warming is putting hurricanes on steroids and we’re beginning to see the effects:

• Global warming puts more energy into storms. This means stronger winds and larger storms. And this means storms that sustain their powerful winds longer as they make their way out of the tropics.
• A warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture, meaning that storms bring more rainfall.
• Higher sea levels – resulting from thermal expansion, melting glaciers and ice caps – lead to higher storm surge and more flooding damage. Sea levels along the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic are rising up to four times faster than the global average.
• From power outages to oil rig disruptions, extreme weather threatens America’s energy infrastructure.

With the record-setting temperatures we’ve had in 2012, getting a big hurricane comes as no surprise. Globally and for the United States, 2012 is on track to be the hottest year on record. Sea surface temperatures along the hurricane’s forecasted tract are about 5°F above average, providing continued energy to this storm as it moves northward.

Unusual and Extreme Are Becoming the New ‘Normal’

Every time another one of these disasters begin unfolding, I think that maybe this will be the one that makes people realize that global warming is something we need to address now. How many lives must be lost and billions of dollars of losses incurred before we start taking real action? How many people must have their homes threatened by wildfires, their livelihoods decimated by drought, or their families in the crosshairs of a Frankenstorm before we realize that global warming is not a hoax or a joke? But so far, mainstream media coverage has completely ignored Sandy’s connection to climate change.

I live in Reston, VA – right in Sandy’s current forecast path. This weekend, I’ll be getting my kids ready for Halloween: making sure that all the parts of their costumes are in order, carving pumpkins, and loading up on candy. But I’ll also be preparing for another kind of fright, by stocking up on water, food and batteries, while stowing our outdoor furniture and other things that could easily blow away.

The timing of this storm also happens to coincide with a chance that we as Americans can make our voices heard. We need to let political candidates know – from the Presidential race to local elections – that our nation needs to have a plan to protect our communities by addressing the root cause of climate change, as well as the effects. If we don’t take steps to curb carbon pollution, these sorts of freak storms will be a more and more frequent part of our reality.

Take Action

Barack Obama and Mitt Romney were never asked about climate change or extreme weather at the presidential debates. Take a moment to urge Obama and Romney to tell us their plans to address climate change now.

On Tuesday, August 28th, the Obama administration finalized the Environmental Protection Agency Fuel Economy Standards that will double the fuel economy of our cars and trucks to 54.5 MGPG by 2025—an enormous step to curb carbon pollution. National Wildlife Federation supporters, staff (including our “clean-car guy” Zoe Lipman), and partners have worked for years towards this success.

Over the past two years NWF supporters have sent over 47,000 messages to the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Transportation, and the President in support making cars more efficient and advocating for cleaner cars to protect wildlife from global warming. Earlier this year in Detroit, NWF’s CEO Larry Schweiger and over 90 other partners spoke in support of the new standard.

Speaking Directly with Leaders at Michigan Event

The day after the strong fuel efficiency rule was finalized, I was able to hear first hand about the positive impacts of the new rule on the environment and how it will drive economic growth. White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley, Michigan U.S. Representative John Dingell, United Auto Workers Union Vice President Cindy Estrada, and the BlueGreen Alliance took part in a roundtable event at the University of Michigan where the next generation of engineers are coming up with newer, cleaner technology, minutes from the heart of the car industry.

Thank President Obama for the new limits on carbon pollution from cars that are a critical step to protecting pika impacted by climate change.

Attending the event to speak with and hear directly from our leaders on this most recent step toward reducing carbon pollution was a great opportunity to show the strong support for addressing climate change.

Midwest Cities to Produce Cleaner Cars

I started hearing even more good news before I even arrived at the event. As I was driving, I heard coverage on the radio as I passed by the towns of several advanced fuel economy manufacturing centers: Marion, Dayton, and Toledo.

I smiled as I drove past the Toledo Assembly Plant that will produce the new Jeep, and was relieved that these new SUV’s are going to be immensely cleaner for our air and environment than the 1991 Jeep I used to own.

What’s Next

As the event drew to a close, someone asked, “What’s next?” Congressman Dingell summarized his answer this way: “Well, something my grandpa used to say, sometimes you’ve got to just shoot the first snake you see.”

In other words, while there are still many broader problems for our transportation industry to address—from a lack of rail infrastructure to building dangerous pipelines to transport dirty tar sands for oil—the time was right for the stronger set of fuel economy standards that reduce carbon pollution from cars to pave the way for the future.

As NWF’s new report Ruined Summer: Carbon Pollution’s Extreme Toll on Summer highlights, there can be another serious aspect to these attacks: West Nile virus. Transmitted by mosquitoes to humans, the Center for Disease Control says West Nile virus can cause severe symptoms, including permanent neurological effects, in 1 out of every 150 persons infected. And about 20 percent of those infected have significant symptoms like fever, headache and nausea for days. (Click here for an excellent info graphic on how West Nile virus is transmitted).

The Climate Change Link

The first time the virus was detected in the Western Hemisphere was a New York City outbreak in 1999. More recent climate change science indicates that this was just the start of a problem that will increasingly plague our backyards. As climate scientists stated in 2007:

The strain of West Nile virus (WNV) that emerged for the first time in North America during the record hot July 1999 requires warmer temperatures than other strains. The greatest WNV transmissions during the epidemic summers of 2002 to 2004 in the U.S. were linked to above-average temperatures. Laboratory studies of virus replication in WNV’s main Culex mosquito vector show high levels of virus at warmer temperatures.

Worst West Nile Outbreak Ever

Map of 2012 West Nile Virus Incidents
Image form cdc.gov

The fact that the worst US West Nile epidemic in history happens to be occurring during what will likely prove to be the hottest summer on record doesn’t surprise epidemiologists. They have been predicting the effects of climate change on West Nile for over a decade. If they’re right, the US is only headed for worse epidemics.

The Cost of West Nile Virus and Who Pays

On the individual level you can protect yourself from West Nile virus by using an insecticide—like DEET (doesn’t sound appealing)—and trying to deal with mosquitoes in your yard (read the CDC’s prevention Q& A here). But there are broader attempts to deal with this public health issue and they highlight the building costs of climate change.

One attempt to deal with the outbreak is aerial spraying to control mosquitoes (maybe even more unappealing). On a recent CDC press call, the Texas State Health Commissioner discussed Dallas County efforts on such a plan. He stated that the aerial spraying is costing close to $3 million and is paid for from federal and state public health and emergency preparedness funds—i.e. you and me the taxpayers.

Even broader prevention efforts to address the growing West Nile virus threat are underway and focus on vaccination. If successful, it won’t be cheap. One study has estimated that the average cost per case prevented with a vaccine would be around $34,200, and it would cost of $8.7 billion over ten years to vaccinate 100 million people. While there would be a significant benefit in reducing overall healthcare costs by reducing the number of cases of West Nile, I’m pretty sure if we go down this road much of the vaccination cost will be picked up through various federal and state health insurance and public health programs funded by our tax dollars.

Guess who won’t be picking up the tab? The polluters - big oil and coal companies whose products fuel climate change and play a leading role in the West Nile Virus equation end up not paying a cent.  According to a recent Center for American Progress analysis Exxon and Shell turn a $160,000 of profit every minute. This means that in less than twenty minutes these two oil companies make enough in profits to pay for the Dallas aerial spray program costs being that are being footed by the nation’s taxpayers. 

Take Action

In dealing with public health threats the best and most cost-effective policy is prevention, and the broadest West Nile virus preventative step we can take is limiting the carbon pollution that is causing climate change. And without a putting price on carbon pollution we end up with the current situation where the individual slathers on the DEET, lives under the aerial spray cloud, and the polluters contributing to the problem pay nothing.

UPDATE: Washington Post reports: As of September 4th, a total of 1,993 cases nationwide, including 87 deaths, had been reported to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a 25 percent increase in the number of cases and a 32 percent increase in deaths from the previous week.

 Tell your elected officials to stop big polluters’ free ride now.