The ‘Us’ Bus of Climate Change: From Bonn to Copenhagen
As we evolve towards a new global climate change policy regime at Copenhagen later this year via the negotiations currently going on in Bonn, a willingness to step in each other’s shoes gets more and more critical and primary.
On one hand are the developing countries like India, where emphasis has been on highlighting how its measures conform to the needs of the hour and of the globe. Its adaptation initiative on Himalayas and other, mitigation initiatives (solar, water, sustainability, energy efficiency, etc.) all aim at moving India and the world one step closer to a better environmental situation. It is a more practical way of doing things to plan on both environment and development together – rather than on viewing them in traditional typecast of development versus environment. So, the rural employment scheme under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) that generates bulk of (70%) employment in environment-improving schemes is particularly heartening. NREGA’s green jobs in afforestation, sustainable agriculture, water harvesting, etc. will not only provide employment to one person in a family but will also do so in areas that will alleviate emission-problems.
- » See also: Climate Change Sets Rural Livelihoods Off Course in Zimbabwe
- » Get EcoLocalizer by RSS or sign up by email.
On other hand developed nations like U.S. are imposing stricter standards to help curb domestic (individual and vehicular, primarily) pollution. Such measures are the need of the hour, not only for domestic environmental improvement but also in terms of the signal it will send to the rest of the world. What part of the 40% of 1990 levels by 2020 is agreed to by the U.S. is interpreted by other nations as its commitment level. So, moving from a no-cuts to a 4% cut is taken as some commitment towards a better world – albeit a very low level of commitment. Consolidated efforts by developed world and that too in a timely manner – since time lost not only worsens our global situation but has also tended to push the base levels of polluters higher – is what will deliver.
Quite expectedly, money flows (be it from financial aid or carbon trading) continue to be contentious and stepping in the other’s shoes is bound to help arrive at uniformly acceptable solutions. Whether developing countries get the aid from developed countries (- which they insist is critical to be able to cut emissions - needs careful and open minded evaluation; certainly keeping in mind that though different places will derive different shares of benefits – it is a global gain. I think the key lies in the realization that it is not a tug of war with the different nations pulling against each other. But it is a tug of war between the nations on one side and global warming (or climate change) on the other. A similar attitude on part of other countries (notably China and India) and similarly conforming approach on part of developed countries will help arrive at the ‘us’ solutions.
Any action that is taken to reduce human produced carbon dioxide to reduce global warming or influence climate is a mistake that puts freedom and prosperity at risk.
The Solar Grand Maximum that went on for about 70 years appears to have ended. The 30 year or so Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) uptrend that combined with the Solar Grand Maximum to produce the late-20th-century temperature run up has started its 30 year downtrend. The PDO downtrend combined with the quiet sun is resulting in continued planet cooling. (The cooling will be slow because of the huge thermal capacitance of the oceans) The sun has not been this quiet this long since 1913. Sunspot changes appear to be a catalyst for cloud changes and therefore have much greater influence than total solar irradiance (TSI).
Since 2000, atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased 18.4% of the increase from 1800 to 2000. According to the average of the five reporting agencies, the trend of average global temperatures since 1998 shows no increase and from 2002 through 2008 the trend shows a DECREASE of 1.8°C/century. This separation (there have been many others) corroborates the lack of connection between atmospheric carbon dioxide increase and average global temperature.
Many Climate Scientists are completely unaware of some relevant science and understand other relevant science poorly (it’s not in their curriculum). The missing science proves that added atmospheric carbon dioxide has no significant influence on average global temperature. See the pdfs linked from http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true for the proof, to identify the missing science and to see the cause of the temperature run-up in the late 20th century. It is significant that Climate Scientists use the word ‘feedback’ but apply it completely differently than had been successfully applied for decades by engineers.
As the atmospheric carbon dioxide level continues to increase and the average global temperature doesn’t it is becoming more and more apparent that many climate scientists have made an egregious mistake and a whole lot of people have been misled.
But people are already being effected by climate change. Newsy’s recent article on global warming makes that fairly evident whether or not you think humans have anything to do with it. My question is whether anyone thinks there’s something we can do to reverse what has already happened. I’m not a scientist, but to me that sounds like terraforming: a massive effort even for an entire planet’s worth of scientists working together.
[...] Jun 7th, 2009 Originally Posted by Dr Vandana Prakash This post contains additional media. Click here to view the full post. [...]