Climate change affects us all. In this series of articles, NewsWire reporters examine some of the issues and provide background context to the debate:

OPINION: PM Key needs to remember his Pacific Islands responsibilities

By Blair Stewart

NEW Zealand is very much a small percentage of the global problem of climate change, but that’s no excuse to dismiss the issue.

Some Kiwis have already laid out the figurative sand bags out and put the dog inside.

For example, a movement called Transition Towns (which originated in England and Ireland) has emerged. These communities work together in the face of climate change, and rather than having a view of “we’re all doomed”, they remain positive.

There is also a course named “skilling up for the power down” that has taken off during its first year. Plans to take this nationwide are firmly in the mix.

It’s a start, but as far as major changes are concerned, it’s the government that must be at the forefront.

National has a climate change policy in place, with plans to achieve a reduction in carbon emissions by 2020. It seems doable, but “experts” believe the government should not be putting all of its eggs in one basket. They say the policy focuses too much on carbon emissions and not enough on areas like agriculture, transport and energy.

The government needs to raise the heat. Cracking down could make New Zealand a fully fledged leader on the world stage in negotiations on climate, although this is not what Prime Minister John Key desires.

He was adamant on skipping the giant climate change meeting in Copenhagen. Why? What else did he have planned? Kissing babies on the forehead in an attempt to gain more popularity?

But with US president Barack Obama due to at least show his face in Denmark, he changed his mind.

A lot has been made of this meeting of the minds. The burning question is whether representatives from 192 countries – 90 of whom are leaders – can nut something out over a plate of Danish pastries.

That Key didn’t originally think it was worth going was a surprise, considering one of the major topics to be discussed is the huge affect climate change is having on the Pacific.

Water has expanded as temperatures increase, resulting in low-lying Pacific countries such as Tuvalu and Kiribati finding themselves on the brink of disappearing. Standing at just 4.5 metres at its highest point, Tuvalu could be uninhabitable by 2050.

This begs the question – what will happen to those who can no longer live on their own countries.

A term for these people is “climate refugees”, one that doesn’t sit well with some people. As they don’t fit under the definition of a refugee, they are not legally recognised under international law. Therefore they don’t qualify for food, shelter, or other resources and neighbours such as New Zealand won’t be required to open their borders.

With this the case, it seems very necessary for Key to attend COP15. He is the leader of a nation which is a father figure in the Pacific, and it is quite possible that “climate refugees”, if allowed, will flock to our shores.

The importance of this is not limited to the Pacific, as these countries blame wealthier nations for their high carbon emissions. Guilt-tripping the world’s elite is a stretch, but then again the larger countries do have to take a long, hard look at themselves.

As good as it sounds for New Zealand to have less frost in winter and hotter days in summer; it’s not a track that people should be looking forward to going down.

The National Government has the task of waking up the public: let’s just hope they put it in terms which are easy to understand.

NOTE: The following stories elaborate on some of the points made in this editorial.

Adaptation or displacement? Reality of rising seas

By Tasha Black

IMAGINE if sea water was swamping Lambton Quay and fresh water was becoming scarce.

Would you go knocking on Australia’s door for asylum?

This doomsday scenario is not out of a futuristic film: it’s the question hanging over low-lying nations across the world.

The small Pacific island nation of Tuvalu, with a population of just 11,000, has become the poster child for rising sea levels.

Made up of nine low-lying coral atolls in the South Pacific Ocean, at its highest point, Tuvalu is only 4.5 metres above sea level.

With water lapping at their feet, Tuvaluans are at risk of seeing their nation disappear under the sea, by mid-2050 some scientists estimate.

They are often labelled the world’s first “climate change refugees”, but this term doesn’t sit well with everyone.

Language used in media reports about “climate change refugees” is often dramatic and sensational.

Karen Elizabeth McNamara from James Cook University and Chris Gibson University of Wollongong reported in Elsevier about a Time Magazine article declaring: “no nation is more convinced that it faces imminent catastrophe than Tuvalu”.

They say other articles suggest Pacific countries face “extinction”. A 2005 NZ Herald article “insensitively (yet dramatically) propositioned Tuvaluans to ‘sink or swim’.”

This apocalypse-type language, the authors argue, helped contribute to a new category of displaced persons – the so-called “climate refugee”.

A refugee is a person with a genuine fear of persecution on account of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group, who is outside their country of origin and whose government is unable or unwilling to protect them.

There is no mention of climate, no mention of the environment.

People displaced by climate change are not legally refugees, nor recognised under international law.

They don’t qualify for food, shelter, or aid handouts and wealthier next door neighbours – in this case New Zealand and Australia – are not required to open their doors to them.

By the very definition, refugees are fleeing their own government, but the people of Tuvalu and Kiribati have no desire to escape from their countries.

Tuvalu and Kiribati are amongst the world’s lowest carbon emitters and argue their displacement is a direct result of carbon emissions from wealthy nations.

Australian academics Jane McAdam and Maryanne Loughry say in Inside Story that people from Tuvalu and Kiribati don’t want to be labelled as “refugees” as it implies a sense of helplessness, victimhood and the need to rely on handouts.

Some island men told Ms McAdam and Ms Loughry that being in this position would mean they had failed in their role to provide for and protect their families.

Oxfam New Zealand spokesperson Jason Garman says to be called a “climate change refugee” is an insult.

“People in the Pacific in particular are tied to their land – without their land, they feel they do not have an identity or a culture,” he says.

The term “refugee” implies crossing an international border, which is often not the case with climate change, he says.

Residents of the Carteret Islands, seven coral atolls that make up part of Papua New Guinea, are already relocating within their country to Bougainville because of rising sea levels.

Oxfam prefers the term “forced climate migrants” or “climate change-induced migration”.

Project officer Fanny Héros from Alofa Tuvalu, a French organisation helping to protect Tuvalu from climate change, says it does not matter what term is used.

“Whatever we call them, ‘climate refugees’ or ‘displaced’, the fact is that many people on our planet will have to leave their territory. Unless we can find a way to create an artificial island in Tuvalu, Tuvaluans will be the first nation to enter this category.”

However, low-lying nations do not want wealthy nations to think they can fix problems like rising sea levels by simply transferring people to another location rather than reducing carbon emissions.

Offering refugee status would suggest all mitigation measures have been thrown out the window, something Pacific ambassadors say is defeatist and globally irresponsible.

An unnamed Pacific ambassador said: “I think that maybe there is a need not for Australia for example to relax its immigration laws, but maybe the need for all industrialised countries including Australia to relax their emissions instead.

“The key point here is that carbon dioxide emissions have to decrease,” as reported in Elsevier.

However, Inside Story says the Kiribati government has acknowledged migration may be necessary and it’s keen to secure international agreements that recognise the impact climate has had on the nation and assist with relocation.

Both Kiribati and Tuvalu have considered relocation options in other countries, including New Zealand.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade website says stories circulated in the media stating that New Zealand has an agreement with Tuvalu to accept people displaced by rising sea levels due to climate change are incorrect.

In 2002, the New Zealand government established the Pacific Access Category that allows a limited number of people from Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, Kiribati and Tuvalu come to New Zealand.

Other low-lying countries are getting proactive.

The president of the Maldives islands – the lowest lying nation on earth where the highest land is only 2.4 metres above water – has talked about buying land in India or Sri Lanka to relocate the entire population.

Tom Picken, head of international climate change for Friends of the Earth, calls it an unprecedented wake-up call: “The Maldives is left to fend for itself. It is a victim of climate change caused by rich countries,” he said in an article in the Guardian.

Last June, Indonesia considered renting out land to “sinking islands”.

This opens up some issues: What happens to the people who move? What citizenship rights do they have? Small islands lacking funds will not have the money to relocate. So who pays?

Oxfam says the money should not be taken from existing aid commitments and the issue of who will pay to protect and adapt developing countries to climate change needs to be nutted out in Copenhagen.

Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies director Professor Atiq Rahman wants wealthy countries to accept people displaced from climate change: “In future, international agreements, carbon credits should be traded for climate refugees,” he said in an article in Climate Change Corp.

Some Pacific Islanders are already adapting to the warming climate.

Nic Maclellan, author of the Oxfam report The Future is Here: climate change in the Pacific,  says Fijians are trialling salt-resistant varieties of staple foods in a step to “climate-proof” their lives.

Some Pacific islands are moving homes and community buildings away from vulnerable coastlines, planting mangroves and native vegetation to halt coastal erosion.

Ten years ago, community meetings in Tuvalu about climate change would draw a large crowd, but interest has died down in recent years. Ms McAdam and Ms Loughry say it might be because doomsday scenarios advanced a decade ago have not eventuated.

They say although people recognise the changes climate has had on their environment, they also felt that they could adapt to them over time.

People also put their trust in God, who had given his word to Noah that there would be no more floods and God could be trusted to keep his promise.

Is the doomsday vision of sinking islands an oversimplification of the reality?

Ms McAdam and Ms Loughry think so: “The process itself is likely to be far less dramatic than the Atlantis-style predictions. People are not fleeing, but they are reluctantly recognising that at some point in the future their home may no longer be able to sustain them”.

Turning wheels for better climate future

A citizens’ movement is under way – communities are reducing their carbon footprints to ease global warming. CHRIS ARMSTRONG talks to some Wellington change makers.

NEWTOWN’s Felicity Donaldson is a recent convert to low climate impact cycle culture.

She has found a way to fuse her passions of fashion, friends, and the environment together under the all-encompassing love of cycling.

“Cycling isn’t a sport; it’s more of a lifestyle,” she says.

Having recently cancelled her gym membership – she plans to keep fit using her bike – Felicity gives several reasons for making the shift.

“Outside fresh air in nature, summer time, and it’s free! And it gives you amazing buns and thighs. I’ve been cycling up around Vogeltown. It’s pretty up there.”

In addition to being a keen cyclist, Felicity (at right) has started spreading her beloved cycling to the masses selling highly fashionable Electra bikes.

The Los Angeles built bikes and their distinctive cruiser style are known around the world and Felicity is slowly introducing them here.

She admits they are expensive but people are realising the price reflects the quality and the bikes give “instant street cred.”

She also keeps a blog which tracks her cycling adventures here and overseas. She has just returned from a trip to the United States where cycle culture is “worlds ahead”.

“In Santa Monica, or New York, all over you just see bikes everywhere,” she says.

Felicity is also a keen participant in the Frocks On Bikes movement, which won the New Zealand Land Transport Authority award for best cycling promotion.

The Wellington chapter of Frocks on Bikes began spontaneously in the two weeks leading up to the International Day of Action on Climate Change on October 24, where 350 ‘Frockers’ were mobilised to, as their website says, “make a beautiful point” about climate change.

Frocks On Bikes is about “fabulous women gathering with their bikes and their style – from winter to summer, on-road and off-road, with meticulous planning and utter spontaneity!”

And they encourage fewer cars on the roads with regular “frocknics” where cyclists gather to ride and enjoy a picnic along the way.

Felicity describes Frocks On Bikes as “a great way to meet people and raise the profile of cycling. I encourage all cyclists to join”.

It’s not only for women – everyone is welcome: from the prettiest frocks and highest powered suits to gumboots and board shorts.

Wanting to raise awareness of climate issues in the wider community, social action group 350 Aotearoa masterminded the International Day of Action on Climate Change.

The group’s name refers to 350 parts per million, the concentration level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere scientists say is the upper limit for safe human habitation.

The current levels are around 389 parts per million, and rising by about 2 parts per million each year.

350 Aoteoroa spokesperson Sophie Jerram says: “It’s not a greenie movement. It’s a citizen’s movement. Anyone can be part of it.”

She says the groups attracts a new type of environmental ”activist”, far from the stereotype of tofu munching, granola wearers. 350 Aotearoa attracts smart savvy generation X and Y’s who are socially and politically aware and want to get involved.

350 Aotearoa believes small lifestyle changes now will minimize large disastrous changes in the environment later.

This year Sophie has given up meat and started a vegetable garden. She has also taken to walking the kids to school in good weather rather than driving them.

Sophie is excited to be part of a global movement encouraging people to do their own thing to bring about change.

“People are doing it because they want to show that they care. Literally demonstrating to the community they are concerned about changing behaviour and demonstrating to political leaders that they want to see change.”

She says the actions undertaken are not just about saving the planet, but about a realignment of values, and making holistic changes based on empathy.

“Whoever’s got the energy; we can help make it happen,” Sophie says.

A strong supporter of the International Action on Climate Change is the Transition Towns movement.

Originating in the UK in 2005, the Transition Towns initiative explores how communities can work together in the face of economic, environmental and social challenges to lessen the communities’ impact on the environment.

They focus on climate change, resource depletion and an economy based on growth.

Natalie Hormann, a founding member of Transition Towns Lower Hutt and Wellington region, is a director of Refine Ltd, a company offering Skilling Up for the Power Down courses.

Today there are nine Transition Town collectives in the Wellington region, all focused on bringing communities together to minimse their carbon footprint.

“It’s not much use going around telling people the whole time how bad everything is, we’re coming up with a positive vision to get people motivated to change,” says Natalie.

It’s a very practical approach, investigating the combination of people and climate change, recognising that the findings will likely impact on every area of modern life.

“Statistics don’t do much good usually; we’ve had enough of that,” she says.

Based on the successful UK model the Refine Ltd Skilling Up for the Power Down course has been modified for the New Zealand way of life and is being taught for the first time in Wellington.

The first course is already full – there are a maximum sixteen places – but more courses are already planned for Rotorua, Lower Hutt and Upper Hutt next year.

The programme, taught over nine weeks, is divided into sessions each focusing on a different aspect of living in a world with limited resources.

The Refine Ltd website says it is designed to provide “a holistic approach that takes into account economic, environmental, social and spiritual needs”

Speaking about the pilot run, Natalie says the idea is to roll the course out across the country with a number of facilitators at different locations. “I’m putting together a teacher’s guide that can be passed around to teach other facilitators,” she says.

In addition to Skilling Up for the Power Down, Refine Ltd also offer a range of other services designed to help people live more sustainably.

Refine Ltd assesses businesses and households, and suggests sustainable alternatives such as creating vegetable gardens to help with food production, landscaping to support beneficial planting, or transport alternatives.

All of these people are taking matters into their own hands, not content to sit and allow themselves to be paralysed by the fear and loathing conflicting media reports try to induce.

Climate change is a big topic, and a big problem that we all face, but rather than trying to solve the entire problem at once, people are finding ways that they can implement their own solutions to their little part of the problem.

Experts demand National changes policy

By Kara Lok

NATIONAL urgently needs to re-think its climate change policy if New Zealand is to reduce its carbon emissions by 2020, say climate change experts.

They say global emissions need to be cut in the next 20 years to prevent a two to four degree temperature increase.

If the earth’s temperature increases, the consequences will be catastrophic.

A period of economic and social upheaval will follow and conflicts will break out as sea levels rise and low-lying nations disappear.

The National government’s current climate change policy focuses primarily on reducing New Zealand’s carbon emissions, mainly in the industrial sector.

A group of people involved in the climate change initiative say the policy is fundamentally flawed.

They believe it focuses too much on carbon emissions and does not concentrate enough on reducing the risks of climate change in other areas, namely agriculture, transport and electricity.

Professor Ralph Shapman, director of Environmental Studies at Victoria University, says the policy is out of line with scientists understanding of the urgency of the global warming problem.

“I think at the moment it’s reprehensible,” he says.

“It is going backwards and it needs a lot of work on a number of fronts to become a responsible climate change policy.

“The fundamental problem is that the government doesn’t seem to be aware of the need to cut down emissions,” says Professor Shapman.

He believes that the government is not making any attempt to convey the problem’s urgency to the New Zealand public.

Oxfam New Zealand spokesman Jason Garman agrees.

“New Zealand could be a leader, but when it comes to the international climate change negotiations, our government is behaving like a laggard.”

The leader of the World Wild Life Global Climate Initiative, Kim Carstensen, also feels the government’s climate change target is inadequate.

“The government has ignored the science and is pursuing an irresponsible policy that is against the interests of New Zealand’s people and natural environment,” she says on www.stuff.co.nz.

According to National, the climate change policy balances economic opportunities with environmental responsibilities.

The policy has divided the highest emitting sectors, agriculture, forestry, transport and energy, into work programs in an attempt to reduce New Zealand’s gross emissions.

The agricultural work programme involves enhanced research methods for improving the use of land and improved management practices to reduce emissions.

Agricultural emissions currently account for forty percent of New Zealand’s gross emissions.

While the forestry programme addresses the short and long term challenges of aforestation, deforestation and the expansion and diversification of New Zealand forests.

The transport and energy work programmes hope to improve fuel efficiency and import standards for vehicles.

A long-term goal for non-transport energy has been set for the levels of renewable carbon neutral energy.

The climate change policy was initially based on New Zealand Kyoto Protocol commitments.

However, in light of COP15 in Copenhagen this month, it has been broadened to include more long-term objectives.

Climate Change Minister Nick Smith says National intends to reduce New Zealand’s gross emissions by at least 10% below 1990 levels by 2020.

“The target is going to be a big ask for New Zealand because our gross emissions are already 24% above 1990 levels,” he says.

“On top of this, half our emissions come from agriculture, which is unique amongst developed countries, and we already have one of the highest proportions of renewable electricity.

“While forestry planted in the 1990s is currently offsetting the increases in our gross emissions, the age of our trees means this will not be the case in 2020,” says Smith.

National hopes to meet this target through domestic emission reductions, the storage of carbon in forests, and by purchasing carbon credits from other countries.

A revised Emissions Trading Scheme was passed into law earlier this month, with the support of the Maori Party.

The original scheme drafted by the Labour government was designed to establish a carbon trading market.

Large emitters will have to purchase carbon credits from other organisations and companies who reduce carbon, creating credits.

The new emissions trading deal will mean that the cost of petrol and power will rise, as tax payers are made to share the cost of pollution.

A number of iwi, including Ngai Tahu, have been granted planting deals under the scheme that will enable them to plant Crown land to obtain carbon credits.

The agreement comes as the solution to Ngai Tahu and other iwi claims that the Crown did not alert them that they would have to make up for lost carbon if they chopped down trees planted after 1990.

The scheme also offers subsidised insulation to 8000 low-income homes.

The deal has drawn heavy criticism from a number of people who feel the scheme is a government sell- out.

Professor Shapman says the deal with Ngai Tahu and the other iwi just does not add up.

“I have an objection to them being offered a deal essentially whereby they were given a special arrangement.

“Their excuse or their line was that they could claim compensation for the fact that the government had changed its policy since crown settlements to Ngai Tahu and other tribes,” he says.

In an article on Stuff, Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Jan Wright says the policy will not achieve its carbon emissions reduction target

“I cannot support the bill being passed as it is currently,” she says.

Nick Smith and Associate Climate Change minister Tim Groser will present the Emissions Trading Scheme at COP15 in Copenhagen this month.

New Zealand, along with 191 other nations, will set new emissions targets for 2050.

A decision will be made on the scope of developing countries engagement in climate change prevention and the short and long term basis by which they can prepare for and adapt to it.

Guidelines will be established for richer nations to provide financial support to poorer countries to achieve their emissions reductions objectives.

Nick Smith says reaching a global emissions reduction agreement for the post 2012 period in Copenhagen will be a huge challenge.

“This target, alongside other important initiatives like those on agricultural emissions research, is about New Zealand playing a constructive role in securing an international agreement,” he says.

Tim Groser said on Radio New Zealand that world congress is no longer debating whether climate change will occur.

He said it has become a matter of urgency for both developed and un-developed nations to take action.

All nations must take part in this “burden sharing process, this is essential for scientific reasons,” said Mr Groser.

Green MP Kennedy Graham says he is optimistic that something will come out of the Copenhagen conference.

“The last few weeks have shown there is a new emerging accommodation between the developing countries, the large ones India, China and Brazil with what I call the overdeveloped countries,” he says.

Not everyone is optimistic about the climate change negotiations in Copenhagen and the role New Zealand will take in the agreement.

Greenpeace Senior Climate Campaigner, Simon Boxer, says New Zealand has a long way to go before it can play a constructive role in the COP15 climate change negotiations later this month.

If an agreement is not reached in Copenhagen later this month and global emissions continue to rise, the world will face an uncertain and grim future.

Making sense of a warming climate

By Sarah Hardie

CLIMATE change, greenhouse gases, carbon footprint, ozone, emissions.

As climate change increasingly takes centre stage in the international arena, we’re left with baffling terms being bantered around in the media.

Here are a few to get your head around:

•    Carbon footprint is the direct effect our personal actions and lifestyle have on the environment. It is called a carbon footprint because it relates to the amount of carbon dioxide we each emit.

•    Greenhouse gases have been creating a hole in the ozone layer since the industrial revolution, leading to an increase in the earth’s climate. The gasses are made up of water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and ozone.

•    Ozone (a greenhouse gas) is technically a gas which is both in the Earth’s upper atmosphere and at ground level. The ozone on ground level is often confused with the shield in the upper atmosphere that protects us from the sun’s harmful UV rays. It is the ozone on ground level that contributes to climate change and is actually causing the hole in the ozone layer along with the other greenhouse gases.

Storms, droughts, bushfires, rising sea levels and water shortages are just some of the predictions for an increased climate.

What’s in store for New Zealand?

Scientists say we are likely to face a temperature increase of point nine degrees by 2040, resulting in far fewer cold snaps if the world’s total carbon emissions do not decrease by 2020.

More hot days may sound nice, but will result in more cases of heat-related stress and sub-tropical diseases.

Tasman, West Coast, Otago, Southland and the Chathams will experience more rain and flooding, while Northland, Auckland, Gisborne and Hawke’s Bay’s will have less rain.

Agriculture will suffer more droughts, pests and disease. Although agriculture productivity in some regions is expected to increase, there may also be a high price tag for changing land-use activities to adapt a warmer climate.

Forests and vegetation may grow faster, but exotic species may invade native bush.

People living in coastal areas such as central Wellington, Miramar, Lyall Bay, Kilbirnie, Seatoun and Island Bay may have to move inland, as sea levels rise.

Swimming may no longer be such a pleasant experience, as New Zealand’s oceans become more acidic as the concentration of carbon emissions increases.

Erosion and salt water intrusion may mean New Zealand has to increase its protection of the coastlines.

Our glaciers are also melting, which is bad news for our water resources. A survey of 50 of New Zealand’s glaciers, done by the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), showed that our glaciers have lost half of their snow and ice over the last 30 years.

Last year’s survey showed the glaciers had shrunk to their smallest size since records began in 1977. It is likely that more than a third of our glaciers will disappear over the next 20 years, which may change water flows in major South Island rivers.

How did the world get to be in such a predicament?

Since the mid-1970s, the global average surface temperature of the Earth has risen by about 0.7 degrees Celsius.

Everything we do has a direct or indirect impact on the environment, right down to our diet and the clothes we wear.

Transport, deforestation and other industrial processes all contribute.

So, because we have steadily been creating more greenhouse gases over the last century, more radiation is being captured from the Earth’s surface, which leads to a “warming” climate.

The eight warmest years on record since 1980 have all occurred since 2001, with 2005 being the warmest. Just in the last week, scientists have reported the last decade was the warmest on record.

The melting of glaciers and masses of ice around the world is one of the major effects climate change is having on the Earth.

Glaciers cover about 10% of the world’s land area, and exist on every continent except Australia. They are the world’s largest reservoir of fresh water, holding approximately 75%.

During the 20th century, sea levels rose about 15cm-20cm, which is, on average, 1.5mm-2.0mm a year.

However, over the past decade, satellite measurements have shown that the increase has jumped to about 3.1mm a year.

It is predicted that over the next century sea levels could rise by one metre.

Overall, the melting of glaciers and ice caps during the second half of the 20th century has contributed to a rise of about 2.5cm in sea levels.

The melting of ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica has added 1cm to the sea level. If all the ice on Greenland and the West Antarctic ice sheets was to melt completely (which could take from centuries to millennia) sea levels would rise about seven metres.

As well as contributing to the rising sea level, melting ice caps and glaciers will also affect communities who rely on runoff from glaciers.

Less runoff will mean that there will be a reduced capability to irrigate crops and serve people’s needs, as fresh water reserves and reservoirs go dry, particularly in parts of South America and Central Asia, where they rely on runoff from the Andes and the Himalayas.

North America and Europe will also be affected, as glacial runoff is used to power hydro-electric plants, sustain fish runs, irrigate crops, and supply the needs of large metropolitan areas.

Another contributor to rising sea levels is simple science.

Like air and other fluids, water expands as its temperature increases. As the climate warms the temperature of the ocean, the water expands and the sea level rises. This is likely to have contributed to about 2.5cm of sea level rise during the second half of the 20th century.

Although the sea level is only rising by centimetres right now, over the next few centuries that is going to have a huge impact.

More than 600 million people live in coastal areas that are less than 10 metres above sea level, and two thirds of those cities have populations of above five million.

Residents of coastal towns and cities around the world will be forced to evacuate their homes once sea levels get beyond their control.

Many of the cities most vulnerable to sea level rise are not prepared for it.

Developing countries such as Bangladesh, Vietnam, India and China have large populations living in at-risk coastal areas.

Both large island nations such as the Philippines and Indonesia, and small ones such as Tuvalu and Vanuatu are at risk, because they do not have enough elevated land far enough above sea level where people can move.

Because of the rising sea and eroding of beaches, Papua New Guinea has already started relocating residents to its larger towns.

Two of the islands that make up Pacific Island nation Kiribati have gone under the waves.

As most of the major towns and cities in New Zealand are located in coastal areas, we may well be in as much danger as the rest of the Pacific.

Fortunately, we have better resources to handle it and more elevated land than most of the Pacific Islands to relocate people to when the sea levels become a real problem.

Although we still have at least a decade before climate change shows us its full force, it is happening now – slowly but surely.