More on climate change

I have a hard time accepting an East Coast ECA, while excluding the Arctic, because the Arctic is the most vulnerable environment with the least buffering. It is the region most affected by climate change already, as average temperature changes there are outpacing all other regions on the globe.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is concerned about the fate of low lying coastal areas and low lying Pacific Islands, which are already seriously affected by rising sea levels. In their document titled "Health and Environment: Managing the Linkages for Sustainable Development", WHO provides “A Tool Kit for Decision Makers”. WHO discuss major environmental risk factors with quantifiable disease impacts, attributing 150,000 excess deaths annually to climate change.

James E. Hansen has written many articles on the subject of air pollution. In his 2003 piece "As pure as snow" he explains the effect dirt on snow. When I saw the ECA submission I asked him whether we should be concerned about PM emissions from more ships sailing into Churchill. Two of his colleagues came back and concurred that we should be concerned. One of them, Mark Flanner in his e-mail reply said "I am currently working with some folks here at NCAR [National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado] and NOAA [National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration] to quantify impacts on sea-ice of future Arctic shipping. Also, shipping emission scenarios (including Arctic sources) are currently being drawn-up for inclusion in studies for the next IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] report." – These are people who know; maybe Canada should listen to science and consider the WHO concerns about climate change. Maybe we should look for an ECA solution that doesn't divert traffic into the Arctic?