Rising aluminium recycling and climate change

Bauxite makes up 8% of the earth’s crust, it is the third most abundant element in nature. The ore from which aluminum is produced is bauxite. More than 130 million tons of bauxite are mined each year. It has been estimated that we have enough aluminum to last us 400 years.

Bauxite has to be processed into pure aluminum oxide (alumina) before it can be converted to aluminum by electrolysis. Four tons of bauxite are required to produce two tons of alumina which in turn produces one ton of aluminum at the primary smelter.

Smelting is one of the most destructive processes to our climate. Fabrication encompasses several industrial processes: rolling, casting and extrusion.

Aluminum is then formed into products. The major outlets for aluminum products are in transport, building and construction, packaging and engineering. The real impact on the environment, its carbon footprint or greenhouse gas emissions, can only be judged from the life cycle perspective. What we're interested in here is the lifecycle of one aluminum can.

Once our can is used, we certainly hope it is recycled. Recycling is a major consideration in continued aluminum use, representing one of its key attributes. More than half of all the aluminum currently produced originates from recycled raw materials, a trend that is on the rise. In view of energy constraints, we have a huge stake in the collection of available aluminum and developing the most efficient scrap treatments and melting processes.

Aluminum can be recycled over and over again without loss of properties. Aluminum recycling benefits present and future generations by conserving energy and other natural resources.

Recycling just one soda can saves enough electricity to run a laptop computer for over 10 hours.

Recycling saves up to 95% of the energy required for primary aluminum production which avoids greenhouse gas emissions used in the process. Increasing demand for aluminum and the long lifetime of many products mean that, for the foreseeable future, the overall amount of primary metal produced from bauxite will continue to be greater than the volume of available recycled metal.

The life cycle of an aluminum can from mining to recycling is 60 days. Think of how many beverage and food cans you use during the next 60 days.

Global aluminum recycling rates are high, approximately 90% for transport and construction applications and about 60% for cans. In 2004, the United States only recycled 45% of cans.

I think we can do better than 45%, after all, it's something we all can do. (Courtesy: PRLog)

Climate change,developing nations most vulnerable

Climate change could cost nations upto 19% of their GDP by 2030 with developing countries most vulnerable.

A report from the Economics of Climate Adaptation Working Group said that cost effective adaptation measures already exist that can prevent between 40 and 68 percent of the expected economic loss with even higher levels of prevention possible in highly target geographies.

The report, titled "Shaping Climate-Resilient Development", offers a comprehensive and replicable methodology to determine the risks that climate change imposes on economies. It provides a set of tools for decision makers to adopt a tailored approach for estimating these costs based on local climate conditions, and for building more resilient economies. These tools do not include estimates or measures for emissions reduction, which would need to be examined separately.

By determining a location's total climate risk - calculated by combining existing climate risks, climate change and the value of future economic development - and using a cost-benefit analysis to create a list of location specific measures to adapt to the identified risk, the Working Group was able to evaluate current and potential costs of climate change and how to prevent them. The methodology was tested in localities within eight different countries (China, United States, Guyana, Mali, United Kingdom, Samoa, India, and Tanzania), which together represent a wide range of climate hazards, economic impacts, and development stages.

The working group estimated expected economic loss for the eight different case study regions leveraging natural catastrophe risk modeling techniques assuming current GDP growth estimates, under three different climate change scenarios - today's climate (assuming that there is no additional impact from climate change); moderate climate change (based on the average forecast of climate change for the particular hazard in the location studied); and high climate change (based on the outer range of the climate change considered possible by 2030). The methodology is applicable in any setting where society must consider risk. For example, in Florida the report estimates an annual expected loss of $33 billion from hurricanes - more than 10 percent of GDP - under a high climate change scenario.

Overall findings from the eight case studies showed that easily identifiable and cost effective measures - such as improved drainage, sea barriers, and improved building regulations, among many others - could reduce potential economic losses from climate change for all regions. In fact, most could deliver economic benefits that far outweigh their costs - with adaptation measures that on average cost less than 50 percent of the economic loss avoided.

In Maharashtra in India, researchers evaluated the loss associated with drought, which amounts to 30 percent of the state's food and grain production - even without climate change. This loss would severely impact the 15 million small and marginal farmers. By 2030, a significant drought could lead to a countrywide agricultural loss of more than $7 billion, and impact the income of ten percent of the population. With droughts historically occurring every 25 years, extreme climate change could change that to once every eight years.

The case study determined a number of measures that could protect crop production and farmers' incomes in Maharashtra including expanded drip and sprinkler irrigation, drainage construction, improved soil techniques, and crop engineering. In fact, Maharashtra can eliminate much of its expected drought loss by 2030 through low-cost measures with benefits that often exceed their cost.

The ECA Working Group was formed in September 2008 under the initiating sponsorship of the Global Environment Facility in coordination with UNEP to develop a framework to assist in the design of climate-resilient economic development strategies. Swiss Re, a leading global reinsurer, was a lead contributor to the research. McKinsey & Company, a global management consulting firm, drove the analytical execution and contributed to the fact base of the report. Sponsorship and key guidance was provided by ClimateWorks, an international network of foundations focused on achieving low-carbon development; the European Commission, which focused on developing a practical methodology to assist adaptation in the most climate vulnerable countries; the Rockefeller Foundation, which brought its deep experience of building climate resilience in developing countries; and Standard Chartered Bank, a global bank with a strong emerging market footprint.

(Courtesy: PRNewswire)

Climate Changes Could Cause Worldwide Crisis, says Report

Citing their report that climate change "…will aggravate existing problems such as poverty, social tensions, environmental degradation, ineffectual leadership and weak political institutions" in some countries, members of the National Intelligence Council say that a possible worldwide crisis looms in our near future.

Thomas Fingar, chairman of the National Intelligence, testified this week before the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. Though the 58-page report itself is classified, Fingar released some of the report’s dire predictions, including the fact that global disease may spread as refugees from low-lying coastal countries try to flee disaster conditions.

Fingar added that potential host countries may not be equipped to handle the possibility of millions of desperate refugees, and the fragile political systems in place may give way under the pressures caused by a global humanitarian crisis.

The report, called "National Intelligence Assessment on the National Security Implications of Global Climate Change to 2030" consisted of input from retired military personnel, from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and all 16 United States’ intelligence agencies.

The report emphasized that while climate change by itself will not cause a worldwide destabilization, the effects of global warming will cause a series of worsening situations that all contribute to political collapse and human crisis.

"Climate change alone is unlikely to trigger state failure," said Fingar. "But the impacts will worsen existing problems - such as poverty, social tensions, environmental degradation, ineffectual leadership and weak political institutions."

Fingar stated that the most affected countries will be in the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa, and central and southeast Asia.

Of Africa, Fingar says, "Without food aid, the region will likely face higher levels of instability, particularly violent ethnic clashes over land ownership."

Some areas of Africa may see their agricultural output decrease as much as 50% by 2020.

In addition, the report states that as many as 50 million more people than today could suffer from hunger by the year 2020, and 1.2 billion might face "water stress."

Fingar emphasized that while the United States may not feel the initial effects of global warming as keenly as some other nations, a worldwide crisis would eventually make itself felt even in comparatively prosperous nations like America. "The United States depends on a smooth-functioning international system ensuring the flow of trade and market access to critical raw materials, such as oil and gas, and security for its allies and partners," said Fingar. "Climate change and climate change policies could affect all of these with significant geopolitical consequences."

Reaction to the report ran predictably along party lines. Republican House committee member Darrell Issa (R-Ca) called the report "a dangerous diversion of intelligence resources."

But Democrat Committee Chairman Ed Markey told reporters, "Human beings all over the planet face death or damage or injury if we do not act."


By Buzzle Staff and Agencies
Published: 6/27/2008

Climate change to impact India severely

India’s vulnerability to climate change is far more serious than that of US, Europe or even China says a report by the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People in a critique of the India’s National Action Plan on Climate change (NAPCC).

Titled, “There is little Hope here”, it says the poor within India, whose contribution to the climate change is the least, are the most vulnerable, considering their dependence on natural resources.

The report, which includes recommendations of several civil society consultations, concludes that the NAPCC has been formulated through a most non transparent process; it will help neither the poor, nor the climate.

The report criticizes NAPCC saying the directly affected sectors have been completely left out of the process, planning and indeed the vision of the NAPCC and the missions like the National Water Mission of NAPCC.

The National Plan, it further says is designed to work only to the advantage of the privileged elite, with all the adverse impacts impacting the disadvantaged sections.

It points to Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects the benefits of which is seen by central and state governments as free gifts and are not bothered to ascertain if these projects are indeed helping reduce greenhouse gas emissions, are sustainable, do not have significant social and environmental footprints or the local communities are benefiting from the credits or even participant in the project planning and decision making.