Hello! The automated powers that be at Substack informed me that sometime last week I’ve passed the 100 subscriber mark! Growing this organically has been hard(er) work than anticipated. I just want to say a big thank you to each of you for your continued support and feedback - it means a lot to know that there are many of us who care about both our climate AND our security.
This months’ edition is a bit shorter because of my schedule, so I may post again in a couple of weeks. So off to the races:
One year on…
A year has now passed since the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and an outcome is nowhere in sight. Not only has it been a disaster for the Ukrainian people, it has also been devastating for the environment - oil spills, land contaminated with metal and corrosive chemicals, mines - you can read a bit more on that in my October newsletter.
Since then, it has been estimated that due to the invasion, and specifically the intensity of the fighting in the south, the Ukrainian government estimated in December that it lost 90% of its wind capacity and up to half of its solar capacity. Ongoing near-daily air strikes on Ukrainian critical infrastructure - some of it damaged almost as soon as repairs take place - is essentially placing the energy grid in constant peril until a lasting political solution is reached.
So how is Ukraine seeking to adapt? During a fundraising round in Switzerland in July, Kyiv set itself a goal of 45% renewables by 2040, an ambitious target given the war saw no end in sight and the massive costs of overall reconstruction. A recent local poll suggested sustained high enthusiasm for renewable energy across the country, especially where renewable energy was already deployed before the invasion. While Ukrainian leaders are likely more focused on the war and immediate needs, civil society is already considering what the country would look like post-war. Some of their ideas call for a decentralisation of energy infrastructure, which would be a “two-fer” of speeding up deployment of new power capacity while substantially improving the country’s resilience to future attacks - of both kinetic (missiles etc) and cyber kinds. Each city or region would be more capable of self-sufficiency for essential needs for a period of time under crisis. Should Ukraine pull through this, perhaps we could see them become one of the first countries to “leap” into decentralised energy generation, distribution and storage.
Mid-February saw the annual Munich Security Conference (a Player’s Ball of sorts for defence, security, diplomats alike) take place in, well, Munich. Many of you would have seen the headlines about the Leopard tanks being dispatched and debate over China-Russia relations. Away from the shiny objects, there were few more mentions of climate x security, with NATO being increasingly vocal about the nexus of these two themes and their impact on militaries and the national security of its members. Side events saw further conversations which aimed to deepen the institutional acknowledgement of climate security with greater focus on identifying sustainable solutions to tackle food insecurity issues. It is not wholly surprising that food insecurity has risen in the agenda given the cost of living crisis and the compounding effect the Ukraine war has had on the supply and prices of several essential grains, which in turn has influenced how many countries outside of the “West” has viewed the war and their level of rhetorical support for Ukraine. It can be argued that such projects would presumably have identified some tangible current or future peace dividend in addition to their primary energy transition / decarbonisation / UN SDG objectives - would be interesting to hear what kinds of projects, and where, are showcased in future discussions.
💥 Sensing danger
I’ve been thinking more about how security / crisis management professionals can leverage the burgeoning “climate solutions” space to be a business enabler via protecting their organisations, and contribute to a the energy transition. Finding their place in the climate space, in other words. I come back to remote sensing and early warning systems, which I touched on last time.
In the US alone last year there were 18 extreme weather events which caused over US$1 billion in damages, and over 340 since 1980 for a total adjusted cost of over $2.4 trillion (while costs vary by year, data collected by NOAA clearly shows a rising trend decade by decade).
Governments at all levels, non-profits, companies, investors and property owners need better data and applications (or at least be beneficiaries of them) to better plan, anticipate, respond and recover from those hazards. Compared to a decade ago, when the big satellite-owning firms dominated, access to imagery and software being way cheaper, if not free. As a result, a beehive’s worth of software / sensor-first firms have sprouted, so I will only point to a few. Whether they are in the earth observation, remote sensing or advisory / consulting sub-segments - they all claim to provide intelligence (raw data + analytics). Many of them are geared towards (or in some cases funded) by the insurance and farming industries - which are particularly sensitive to weather events and near-instant, actionable intelligence is of significant commercial value.
🔥 Fire: companies like Dryad (using low-powered gas sensors to detect signatures indicate the early stages of a fire) and Pano (high-powered cameras on vantage points which use deep learning and other existing sensor infrastructure in an area to detect and classify fires). Gridware (solar-powered sensors with edge computing capabilities to detect faults in power grids which could trigger fires).
🌊 Water: Companies like Floodbase (leverages a constellation of satellites to power its proprietary mapping model) and Waterplan (an end-to-end monitoring, analytics, consulting and compliance reporting platform).
🌵 Drought: The US NOAA provides a really useful US and global drought monitoring and forecasting service, which can help inform high level considerations and start more in-depth assessments on drought risk and impacts on local people and operations (. Mantle Labs leverages remote sensing data on soil moisture.
🏚️ Earthquakes: firms like Temblor (seismic modeling and building-level risk assessments) and services provided by Google and USGS’ ShakeAlert on the US West Coast (which detects faster-traveling p-waves to send automated alerts ahead of secondary s-waves which often cause much more surface-level damage).
🕸️ More all-in-one shops like Tomorrow, Jupiter Intelligence and Cervest. Most of the major (re)insurance firms like Aon, AXA, SwissRe, Marsh and Zurich etc have some form of climate analytics, advisory functions in addition to, well, selling insurance.
🧩 It’s not all satellite/infrared imagery and AI/ML driven solutions though. They’re tools to help people make decisions. Education is critical to enable more people to be in those positions to make sustainable choices when presented with data. After all, extreme weather events become disasters only through human choices. There are a lot of non-profit groups which do this like Science Moms and the Climate Communication Project. One interesting project highlighted by Yale University is the Center for Planning Excellence’s free board game designed to teach students and planning officials on how to manage water risk - particularly flooding and storms. Different choices present trade-offs which may improve resilience in some areas but introduce vulnerabilities in others.
Questions that come to mind:
If a key objective of these solutions is to identify and verify, is the allure (and money) behind them risking an over-reliance on these tools in place of lower-tech solutions? Are we potentially overplaying what they should and should not do.
Are solutions also meant to automate decisions? This could make sense in some parameters - e.g. if it’s obvious your farm is underwater then certain payouts could be activated, but there are many potential edge or bad cases. In other words, are we still “trusting but verifying”? For security and crisis managers, these tools can be massive enablers, but - as with any other data source - should be integrated into assessment formation and decision-making which maintains human accountability.
The role of local teams, communities, and stakeholders. Would their roles diminish, or eliminated, from decision-making processes? I can envision more than one manager this light-bulb moment: “this is like the Zoom for site visits - why send someone out every month to take notes and photos when I can just pay a subscription?” What live case studies are out there of these new solutions complementing well with on-the-ground human observations?
Decision risk and climate litigation: Companies engaged in nature-based solutions are a big customer set for these firms. The issue around the fidelity of data garnered and processed by remote sensing firms was most recently flagged in the Guardian piece on the projects accredited by the Verra platform. What happens when an end user / client is negatively impacted by decisions made in part by data or insights from these tools - particularly when life safety decisions are in play (firefighters went here v there in part because of data from the platform). This type of risk is not new, but should be acknowledged in this space too.
These are very powerful data and intelligence platforms - but they are not very impactful if not in the service of clear tactical or strategic business questions. When the latter are clear (e.g. reduce financial losses from operations by x%, improve medium-to-high level incident detection within 24 hours in my facilities by y%), these solutions can shine.
We’re in a “let a thousand flowers bloom” moment in this space. It feels like there are many companies doing essentially the same underlying tech and business model - use AI/ML to process commercially available satellite imagery and remote sensing data, presented in a data analytics platform. There’ll be consolidation as many of these startups are bought up, pivot or fail. Which kinds of firms will win out? Those targeting a clear market segment or sector? A region? Those favored by an accreditation or VCM platform?
🏫 Learning the space
When I was home last month I reflected on my journey so far - I humbly admitted that, hey, I needed a good grounding in the science of climate change and how all that ties back into the impacts and efforts that we’re talking about. So I’m now a few weeks into the Learning for Action course with a cohort at Terra.do. I’m really enjoying the enthusiasm of both the instructors, the networking and how everyone on the course are really motivated to learn because they want to take real action now. Fantastic speakers - including leading climate scientists - too. The pace of learning is quick, and the volume of info covered is no joke. If you’ve been thinking about “how do I start learning” about climate change, they’re worth checking out!
What else caught my eye
🇺🇦 In another installment of the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide, Russia appears to be draining the Kakhovka dam along the Dnipro river in southern Ukraine. This may threaten the cooling abilities of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, its safety already threatened multiple times in the war with shelling, gunfights on the compound, and repeated cutoffs from the broader grid. It also introduces risks to water availability to downstream agriculture as the spring approaches. While Russian intents aren’t clear, it begs the question if these actions, regardless of intent, is another instance of the weaponising of water. In regions under greater climate stress now and coming years, may we see more of this occurring?
💧 The next big UN Water Conference is coming up in New York on 22-24 March, the first day of which is World Water Day. These are the centerpieces for the broader Water Week happening in the city. Some key themes worth watching are “water for climate, resilience and the environment” - which the focus on biodiversity and disaster risk reduction has crossovers with COP27 and COP15 themes; “water for sustainable development,” including valuing water; and “water for cooperation.”
🐝 I posted this interesting piece on Yemeni beekeepers from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on my LinkedIn earlier this week and it’s worth re-sharing because it highlights so much about the complex interplay between climate change impacts, personal resilience, war and economic fragility. The nine-minute video is worth your time.
Britney v Christina. Liverpool v Man United. In the chicken sandwich debate, Popeye’s > Chick-Fil-A, hands down. Water is wet. But hell, watch for yourself.
And this month’s meme; remember that ship that distracted us for a week during the pandemic?
See you next time!