Center for a New American Security

This morning you read what drew Will's initial reaction on the DOE-DOD MOU (pdf). I'm starting to worry about his nuclear fetish, but he may be right that that could be one of the more interesting aspects of cooperation given the natural overlap between these departments on nuclear issues.

Right out of the gate, first parapraph: The MOU is to "enhance energy security," yet it specifically covers "water efficiency." No argument here on the overlap, but it's interesting. Bases like Ft. Bliss and many in California and around the Southwest of CONUS are making waves on water efficiency, by necessity. In this case, we've spoken with many of the great Americans working on water conservation tech, and here DOD may be able to disseminate lessons learned from its own experiences.

One other wording choice that I'll flag for you all is in item B: that the departments will maximize collaboration on "emerging energy technologies." This is a big step folks. There are too many federal dollars spent on off-the-shelf energy tech right now, and not enough spent on pulling development along. (See our 2009 report on using DOD installations as testbeds for energy tech, based on a conference full of VCs, energy innovators and security types; and also the brand new CNA report that came online yesterday.)

For those intimate with the DOD energy world (I'm looking at you, aptly named DOD Energy Blog), it's nothing new that the Labs and DOE will continue to collaborate with DOD on many of the specific activities named in this MOU. It's been pretty heartening to watch that cooperation increase over the past few years, especially in California, Hawaii and Colorado, and I'm glad that this long-in-coming MOU finally enshrines this good work.

So then, what do you all think of the MOU?

The UN General Assembly officially declared access to clean water and sanitation a human right, reports UN News Centre.

The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released its 2009 State of the Climate report, finding that Earth has been warming for the past 50 years, according to a NOAA press release.

The New York Times reports that an oil spill in the Kalamazoo River in Michigan may be the largest ever in the Midwest.

Also from The New York Times (via Christine's Twitter feed), solar energy now costs less than new nuclear power would.

According to BBC News, the EU and six member states reached an agreement on the financing and timetable for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (Iter), an experiment to harness the power of nuclear fusion.

Yesterday, I attended a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on “Climate Change Finance: Providing Assistance for Vulnerable Countries.”  The committee witnessed testimony from eight individuals on two panels: the first panel included The Honorable Lael Brainard, Under Secretary for International Affairs at the Treasury Department, Dr. Jonathan Pershing, Deputy Special Envoy for Climate Change with the State Department, Rear Admiral David. W. Titley, Oceanographer and Navigator of the Navy and Dr. Maura O’Neill, Senior Counselor to the Administration and Chief Innovation Office at USAID; the second panel included The Honorable Nancy E. Soderberg, President of the Connect U.S. Fund, Elliot Diringer, Vice President of International Strategies with the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, The Honorable Reed E. Hunt, CEO of the Coalition for Green Capital and Dr. Redmond Clark, Chairman and CEO of CBL Industrial Services.

The hearing itself tended to range far and wide, with representatives using their Q/A time to opine on whether climate change is real, or not; anthropogenic, or not. But there were several parts of the testimony that stood out as particularly interesting for someone who is interested in Natural Security issues.

First, Rear Admiral Titley had two particularly interesting points which resonated with several of our recent blog posts on the Arctic and a DOD energy event that we hosted last Tuesday.  Titley testified that the Navy is watching changes in the Arctic environment with interest, particularly shrinking levels of ice extent and volume.  He stated that “the changing Arctic has national security implications for the Navy,” and that the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review directs DOD to address gaps in the United States’ Arctic capabilities.  The Navy’s Maritime Strategy, for example, recognizes that the potential opening of new shipping routes could generate potential sources of competition for access to the High North, as well as to natural resources beneath the ice.  He mentioned the Bering Strait as one area among many that has the potential to become strategically significant over the next few decades.  He also mentioned that this summer, the Navy “will participate in Canada’s largest annual Arctic exercise, Operation NANOOK.”   While the United States has been increasingly active in the Arctic, with the Navy, Coast Guard and the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force (which just recently released its final recommendations) being a visible presence, the United States hasn’t given the Arctic perhaps as much attention as it deserves as it grows in strategic importance, even allowing the only two Coastguard heavy icebreaking ships to fall into disrepair.

Following up on a story we highlighted here on the blog last Friday, China has issued a stern warning to the United States not to meddle in a longstanding dispute between China and its South China Sea neighbors over territorial claims to a string of strategic islands with deposits of oil and natural gas. The more assertive warning came several days after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the United States had a “national interest” in freedom of navigation and open access of the maritime commons in the South China Sea.

On Friday, China “put American officials on notice that it will not brook foreign interference in the waters off its southeastern coast, which it views as a ‘core interest’ of sovereignty.” But yesterday, The New York Times reported a more direct warning from Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi that U.S. interference “would increase regional tensions.”

In an excerpt from the Times report published this morning, reaction to Secretary Clinton’s remark seemed to vacillate from diplomatic to less than so: “‘What will be the consequences if this issue is turned into an international or multilateral one?’” the Times quoted Foreign Minister Yang as published on the Foreign Ministry’s website. “It will only make matters worse and the resolution more difficult,” the web posting stated. Meanwhile, The New York Times reported China’s state-run media as labeling Secretary Clinton’s remarks as “an attack,” with an editorial appearing in People’s Daily that cited her remarks as American aspirations to “contain a China with growing military capabilities.”

Last week I rode Amtrak back home to Ohio for the first time, inspiring me to think a bit more about this means of displacing individual vehicle transport (and commensurate petroleum consumption and greenhouse gas emissions). I normally drive or fly. Driving was not an option for me this time; as it was about 2 days’ notice, flights were $550 and up, well out of my tolerable price range. I’m no stranger to the Acela, having fallen in love with it after about a dozen many-hour delays and frequent extra-personal body and luggage inspections while taking the shuttle to and from New York in the earlier years after 9/11. I also hopped the train from Chicago to Sandusky last year, and now honestly question whether I will ever again feel motivated to drive that route with its infamous traffic.

As usual, this train ride was comfortable and had all of the normally-nice qualities of taking the train: coffee, beer and munchies for sale; people hanging out, talking, watching movies, playing cards and reading; beautiful scenery; stairwells and corridors in which to get up and walk around. When my mom was dropping me off to head home, we met a nice couple who was embarking on a full-family train-transported trip to D.C. – they were meeting with eight of their children and grandchildren in the nation’s capital, coming from Sandusky, Cleveland, and Boston. In the sight-seeing car, I also spoke to a 23-year Navy vet who was train-riding from Florida to Pittsburgh for his mom’s 89^th birthday. While catching up on my reading, I overheard the two people behind me debating whether high-speed rail would make the scenic views less of a benefit to train travelers. The only setback was the somewhat inconvenient timing. Riding from D.C. to Sandusky takes about 12 hours compared to a 7 to 7.5 hour drive. Trains only leave about once per day, so my only option involved arriving in Sandusky at 4:00 a.m. and departing back to D.C. at about 1:00 a.m.

The United States could wade into the fray over a string of islands in the South China Sea, a string of strategically sensitive islands that are rich in oil and gas reserves with disputed claims made by China and other Asian neighbors, reports The New York Times.

The New York Times also reports that efforts to pass a major climate change bill to reduce carbon emissions this summer in the U.S. Senate collapsed yesterday; the Senate will pursue a smaller bill aimed at responding to the Gulf oil spill and tightening energy efficiency standards.

From The Washington Post: efforts to clean up the Gulf oil spill where again put on hold as Tropical Storm Bonnie approached.

The U.N. plans to amend the way that Kyoto Protocol resolutions are passed in an effort to help end the current international deadlock over climate change negotiations, according to The Guardian.

UPI reports that the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sent a survey ship to the Arctic to detect navigational dangers in critical arctic waters that have not been charted for more than 50 years.

Seven hundred people have been killed and millions displaced throughout China from floods due to torrential summer rains, reports The L.A. Times.

NPR reports that a gathering storm has halted work on the Gulf oil well.

Legislation to promote the installation of ten thousand solar power systems was approved by the U.S. Senate's Energy and Natural Resources Committee yesterday, writes Energy Matters.

But new U.S. climate change legislation may be in trouble in the Senate, according to a Politico report.

Militants attacked a hydroeletric power plant in Russia's North Caucuses region, according to The New York Times.

A water dispute is increasing tensions between India and Pakistan as India constructs a hydroelectric dam project in Kashmir that could disrupt the flow of water to Pakistan, reports The New York Times.

According to UPI, the new U.S. aid package to Pakistan announced by Secretary Clinton includes several projects to provide power and assistance to develop natural gas resources.

UPI also reports that an oil spill off of the northeast coast of China caused by two pipeline explosions could reach international waters.

From The Washington Post (and Christine's twitter feed): the U.S. financial reform bill that will be signed into law today includes a provision that requires thousands of U.S. companies to disclose what steps they are taking to ensure that their products do not contain conflict minerals from the Congo.  (On this item, we tip our hats to our friends at the Enough Project, which has been working very hard on this issue for a while now.  Congratulations!)

The United States and other countries have "pledged hundreds of millions of dollars toward clean energy initiatives to help battle climate change" at a conference convened by U.S. Energy Secretary Stephen Chu, according to Reuters.

The United States and South Korea will conduct joint exercises in the Sea of Japan next week reports The New York Times; the George Washington, a Nimitz-class carrier and one of the largest warships in the world, will arrive in the South Korean port of Busan on Wednesday as part of the exercises.

Paul Collier's Op-ed in The New York Times describes the steps that the Afghan government should take to make sure that its mineral deposits are mined responsibly.

And in a third article from The New York Times, waters at the Three Gorges Dam in China are reaching record levels.

Newsweek reports that the future of jet aviation "may look surprisingly like a larger version of the hybrid automobile."

Shanghai's high speed rail station has installed the world's largest stand-alone integrated photovoltaic project, a massive solar power system that is expected to reduce coal consumption by 2,254 tons and cut carbon emissions by 6,600 tons, according to UPI.

Since July 1st, the DoD blog Armed with Science has been posting about ICESCAPE, a scientific mission undertaken by the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter HEALY, the United States’ most technologically advanced polar icebreaker (pictured above). First, let’s give them an earned shout-out for interagency collaboration. Next, a bit about the mission. According to the blog:

’Impacts of Climate on Ecosystems and Chemistry of the Arctic Pacific Environment’ is a multi-year NASA shipborne project to investigate the impacts of climate change on the ecology and biogeochemistry of the Arctic. During five weeks at sea, more than 40 scientists will sample the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the ocean and sea ice.

As our discussion with Charles Emmerson, author of The Future History of the Arctic highlighted, there’s a lot that we don’t know about the Arctic. As another of the USCG heavy icebreakers recently broke down, ICESCAPE’s ability to access and study the Arctic on the HEALY has become more important than ever. As Emmerson stated, “wanting to have more and (more capable) ships and other infrastructure up north is not just an academic exercise. It is also about how practically to deal with a range of possible future events – including an environmental disaster – and it is about demonstrating sovereignty and intent, backing up the diplomatic positions which the United States may take on Arctic issues.” We wish the HEALY and its crew luck on their journey as we officially conclude Arctic week here on the blog.

Photo: Courtesy of the U.S. Coast Guard

We’ve spent the week highlighting issues related to the Arctic by discussing a recent book on the subject. I want to end it by looking back to the recommendations geared toward improving Arctic governance that Will, Herb and I made in our April 2010 report on climate change and DOD. These things alone will not guarantee the United States can protect its interests in the Arctic, but nor can it get far without taking these three steps first.

First and foremost, we recommend ratifying UNCLOS. This is certainly nothing new, but it is important enough for anyone in support of it to add their voice. We wrote as follows:

Reductions in Arctic summer sea ice have created new opportunities for access to maritime trade routes and sea lines of communication, and potential access to vast supplies of zinc, nickel, palladium, precious stones and other various minerals, as well as oil and natural gas under the ocean with an estimated value of 1.2 trillion dollars. Many of these resources lie in the extended continental shelf up to 600 nautical miles of the Alaska coast. As access to the Arctic and industry technologies continues to improve, heightened energy needs could spur private corporations to increase exploration and exploitation of these reserves. UNCLOS establishes the process for mining firms to obtain access and exclusive rights to these resources and title to the minerals once recovered. A failure to ratify UNCLOS prevents the United States from submitting a claim for rights in the extended continental shelf and prevents firms from securing these rights. This will hinder growth in the emerging seabed mining industry and related industries in the United States – as well as the jobs supporting those industries – because corporations will wisely seek the protection and legal certainty afforded only to member nations of UNCLOS before investing in these opportunities.