This Global Change Research report released this week is a compendium of the expected fallout from climate change in the U.S.

It’s not something you’ll want to curl up with in place of your bedtime novel; it won’t make you hazy, happy and sleepy (picture yourself bolt upright, watching crime news to calm down).  Still, for those of us deliberately trying to keep our heads above the sand (or our real estate above the tide) it’s a must read.

I recommend skipping a lot of the governmentish intros and conclusions. Cut to the heartland synopses; these assessments of each region are a great reality check. This section of the report is stout and specific and will wrest away any fuzzy notion you have that climate change will just make things a tad warmer and we’ll all wear fewer sweaters.

For instance, the report projects that under the worst case scenario,  average temperatures in Carbondale, Ill., at the end of the 21st Century could parallel those of Houston today; blueberry cultivation, maple syrup harvests and dairy farming could go bye-bye, or nearly so, in the Northeast and on the Great Plains, the great and beneficent Ogallala Aquifer could, ummm, how to say it nicely…dry up.

I’ve synopsized some of the synopses below to give you more details from four sample regions.

NORTHEAST:
Flooding coastlines could cause the most havoc as sea levels rise, threatening real estate worth trillions up and down the coasts. Manhattan’s 100-year flood zone, for instance, could expect a flood of that magnitude every ten years by the end of this century, instead of once in a century. Warmer temperatures also will create air quality issues and increasing demand for air conditioning. The length of winter could be cut in half across New York, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine. Temperate crops like apples and blueberries will no longer be adapted to the region, under worst case scenario projections. Forests will be pushed northward. Heat will stress dairy cows, damaging milk production. Cod and lobster fisheries will be diminished.

MIDWEST:
Changing average temps could make climate in Michigan more like that of Arkansas or evenNorth Texas. Downstate Illinois could end up feeling more like Houston. Increasingly frequent severe heat waves, though, would be lethal, with blasts like the one that killed tens of thousands in Europe in 2003 occurring about every other year by the end of the century (under the “higher emissions scenario”). The Great Lakes would warm and lose water to evaporation, with lake levels falling by one to two feet, choking out fisheries, reducing hydropower and degrading water quality. Longer growing seasons will potentially increase row crop yields – but heat waves, floods and increased insect pests will make growing food more challenging.

SOUTHWEST:
Hotter temperatures are reducing snowpack and river flow, and a northward shift in storm tracks are zapping precipitation.The resulting water scarcity would (and already does) threaten croplands in California and municipal water supplies in populationcenters like Phoenix and Las Vegas. As the situation worsens, it could lead to “conflict” over competing needs. During more frequent droughts, for instance, water set aside for agriculture would have to be diverted to urban areas. Desert and forest fires would become more frequent, and invasive species could gain a stronger foothold, jeopardizing native biodiversity.

GREAT PLAINS:
Higher temperatures here could soar to more than 10 degrees higher by the end of the century under the “higher emissions” scenario, or 6 to 7 degrees under the “lower emissions” scenario. (Throughout the report, projected changes are described this way, based on how well greenhouse gas emissions are controlled.) Coupled with more frequent heat waves, drought and heavy rainfall, the region would experience changes in water availability and agricultural and ranching activities. Withdrawals from the Ogallala Aquifer system could overrun input, leading to problems irrigating crops. Rising temperatures would help more insect pests survive winter, and weeds also would flourish. Playa lakes that preserve prairie wildlife would dry up, and agricultural wastes will continue to clog them, further depleting the aquifers.

So that’s the bad news, and there’s plenty more of it in the sections on Alaska, the Coasts, the Islands, the Northwest and the Southeast.

The report contains a few nuggets of good news. The Great Plains are primed for wind power. Chicago is pioneering heat mitigation in urban areas with green roofs and vegetation areas. King County (Seattle) is repairing its levee system to prepare for sea rise. Some flood walls were redesigned after Katrina.

But these seem like flotsam on vast floodwaters. Much more will be needed, and soon.

Copyright © 2009 Green Right Now | Distributed by Noofangle Media

By Harriet Blake

Two evangelical groups are in the spotlight for their efforts to improve the environment. The most recent to join the eco-movement is a small group of Southern Baptists whose climate initiative is receiving a lot of press these days.

The Southern Baptist Environment and Climate Initiative (SBECI) got its start with a divinity student, Jonathan Merritt. As the story goes, one day in divinity class, Merritt had an epiphany.

“I was sitting in theology class at Southeastern Seminary [in Wake Forest, N.C.],” he says. “We were discussing how God reveals himself both through scripture and through nature. My professor made the statement that when we destroy God’s creation, which is a form of divine revelation, it is similar to tearing a page out of the Bible.

“That broke me,” says Merritt, “and began a shift in perspective for me.” The 26-year-old son of noted evangelist Dr. James Merritt, former president of the Southern Baptist Convention, decided that his faith needed to get on board with global warming.

“I began praying through a mobilization project which has blossomed into the coalition of over 450 Southern Baptist leaders and laypeople known as the SBECI,” says Merritt, who plans to graduate with a masters in divinity later this year. Among the prominent Baptist leaders who have signed the initiative are his father, now host of Touching Lives broadcast ministries, and current SBC president, Dr. Johnny Hunt.

Merritt, who is also the initiative’s national spokesperson, describes the SBECI as “an independent coalition of Southern Baptists who are passionate about caring for God’s creation.”

The SBECI is not the first group of evangelicals to test the global warming waters.

In 2006, a group of 86 evangelical leaders began an initiative to fight global warming, stating “millions of people could die in this century because of climate change, most of them our poorest global neighbors.” Among those who signed that statement were presidents of 39 evangelical colleges and megachurch leaders such as Rick Warren, author of The Purpose Driven Life.

At the same time another group of evangelical leaders disputed this claim with a letter to the National Association of Evangelicals, saying, “Global warming is not a consensus issue.” Among those who signed the letter were James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family and Charles Colson, founder of Prison Fellowship Ministries. They argued that the science was not clear on whether global warming was a real problem and that human beings caused it.

The 2006 initiative eventually became the Evangelical Climate Initiative (ECI), which has continued collecting signatures from the movers and shakers in the evangelical community. “The ECI is focused exclusively on climate change,” says spokesman Rusty Pritchard, “and what the church can do.” Currently, he says, the ECI’s “Call to Action” is closing in on 300 signatories, all senior evangelical leaders with a national reputation or senior pastors of evangelical churches.

(For the record, Southern Baptists are evangelists, but not all evangelists are Southern Baptists, notes Pritchard. “Evangelical,” says Merritt, “is a broad term that includes all conservative Christians.” The Southern Baptist Convention is a denomination of 16 million Americans that makes up about half of the evangelical population.)

For the SBECI, the focus is on “creation care”, which Merritt says is a synonym for environmentalism. However, the group does not issue a verdict on global warming, a topic on which Southern Baptists still disagree, with a segment deeming global warming to be a hoax.

Rather the SBECI statement suggests, somewhat delicately, that Southern Baptists can agree to disagree, but still act: