Managing Impact of Climate Change - Nations are Ignoring the Real Urgency by Inaction & Procrastination

Index of Blogs and courses 


"It is your actions, not your beliefs, that prove your commitment to change"

As a long-term goal, in 2015 nations of the world signed up to keep the global warming to well below 2C above pre-industrial levels, and to limit the increase to 1.5C rise.

This was to be achieved by controlling the amount of CO2 that humans emit into the atmosphere.  Fast-forward four years and the progress has been disappointing.  USA and China continue to be the biggest contributors to the rise of CO2 that has now reached 415 ppm, and shows no signs of slowing down.  Most climate scientists now believe that limiting warming to 2C rise (relative to pre-industrial levels) by the end of the century is improbable --- 3 , 4 or even 5C rise is not unthinkable.  

It is widely accepted that a 2C warming will create big problems in terms of sea-level rise, extreme weather events, changes of rain-fall patterns causing flooding and droughts.  Many area of the world will become unfit to live. Large scale climate change migration over coming decades is a reality that cannot be ignored.

Perversely, the areas of the world that will suffer most are also the poorest with large populations.  Developed countries (OECD) are mostly in the northern hemisphere where some warming might even be welcomed; they also have technological and financial resources and will mostly be able to insulate themselves from the worst damages of global warming.  Most of the increase currently found in the atmospheric CO2 was caused by the rich countries.  With recent upsurge in nationalistic sentiments - embodied by 'my country first', it is to be expected that OECD countries will look inwards and only act to manage the living standards of their individual populations.  Even within these countries, the rising inequality will dictate that the super rich are looked after; let the general population fend for themselves as well as it is possible under the circumstances.  

We recently learnt about the UK Climate Committee proposing a road map to cut UK emissions to zero by 2050 - this is more than most other countries have planned for. As a public relations exercise, it sounds good but only to the extent that it is a policy document - a theoretical exercise.  What is gravely disappointing is that there is no serious proposals/plans to mitigate the negative effects of global warming which are already showing in terms of extreme weather events, and things are only going to get worse.  It seems that even in a rich country like the UK, there is no concerted effect to identify the areas and populations that will be badly affected by a 3C temperature rise and not many ideas are floated as to what actions may be taken to help those affected. Does one hear anything from government planning departments about encouraging people to move away from consuming large quantities of red meat? - with its scientifically established deleterious health issues and the large contribution its production makes to CO2 emissions. This most inefficient way to provide calories must not to be talked about too much as this might affect re-election chances of the incumbents.  

On a global level, the situation is dire - the world population is projected to pass 9 billion in 2050.  How to feed the rising populations with higher calorie demands per person (also increased demands for red meat) is a major worry.  As the Earth warms, rain-fall patterns may change suddenly causing harvest failure with resulting food shortages.  Imagine a monsoon free year in India - wide spread food shortages with accompanying misery will not be far off the mark.  
Mountain glaciers supply water to the rivers in many regions of the world - this supports vast areas of irrigated agricultural activity.  Most of these glaciers are melting rapidly and at some stage in coming decades, the rivers will dry with loss of food production. Populations there will have no choice but to migrate - but where will they go? - rich countries would have already closed borders.

A fundamental flaw of the Paris Protocol is the limited view that was taken of causes and extent of global warming.  As the planet warms, new feedback loops come in play that will cause further more serious warming.  Permafrost that covers about 25% of the land area in the northern hemisphere is beginning to release trapped carbon and methane into the atmosphere.  Permafrost thawing will accelerate as the northern latitutdes warm much more rapidly than other areas; but this is not accounted for in warming projections. Permafrost holds twice as much carbon as is present in the atmosphere.  

As the earth warms, the land evaporates water more quickly, becomes drier and the vegetation is more prone to combustion.  The frequency and range of wild fires is already staggering - and the temperature has only risen 1C so far.  This will get much much worse under any scenario.  Wild fires also put in a large amount of CO2 in the atmosphere - causing more warming.

I could go on.  Phytoplankton (base of the food chain for ocean life) are moving to higher latitudes creating ocean deserts - we might not have fish on the plate for long.  Disease carrying insects will move to what are currently colder area where people have no immunity for the new virus/bacteria/parasites that will be introduced ...etc.

The nations of the world have heads buried in sand - ignore the problem and hope it goes away.  
I do not think this will work for global warming.

PS:  See also a recent news article. and also this.

Thanks for reading.