World is in Danger- 2

Introduction. Latest Headlines on effects of climate change has warned that much of Mumbai would be under water due to sea-level rise by 2050. (But Indian Scientists have refuted such claims.). Further, more than 11,000 scientists, (in the journal Bio-Science,) have warned of "untold suffering" due to global warming and that “Earth is facing a climate emergency".  It said if the Paris treaty's goal is to be achieved emission of (warm causing) gases must be reduced by 50 % by 2030 and to net zero by 2050. However, another team said Paris carbon-cutting pledges itself are "too little, too late". Yet another report says, sea water warming and level rising is long term phenomenon and even if, emission is stopped, sea level will continue to rise for another hundred years. Contradicting all, one study declared, Earth’s cycles consist of both, cold glacial periods (ice ages) and warmer interglacial periods (present period) when the ice thaws and sea levels rise and the same (sea level rise) will continue in spite what human beings do.  Meanwhile US President has walked out of Paris treaty saying, treaty is unjust towards USA and puts heavy burden on it. Hearing/ Reading all these contradictory things, one gets confused and is unable to decide what / who is right. Whether, phenomenon is cyclic or structural, manmade or natural, reversible or irreversible, what about development v/s nature, developed country v/s developing country and so on. So let us understand different point of view one by one.

Inadequacy of science. The Physics explains that gases CO2 (and fossil-fuel burning is increasing CO2) in the atmosphere trap heat received from the sun and so the climate system has changed. Is it so simple? No.  Reason, we are having atmosphere, oceans, icecaps, seasons, and flora and fauna to get in the way of simple radiative (absorption, reflection and re-radiation of sun ray) physics based on which above calculations are based. Modeling the Earth's climate is one of the most complicated tasks and creates the largest uncertainties. Even supposing models have been very effective in predicting climate change, they have not been as effective in predicting its impact on ecosystem[s] and human society, which is not a pure science. So, major effort should be made to monitor climate change as well as its impact on ecosystem[s].

Changed and failed Theories. Further, for a common man question is if a tiny (It is measured in parts per million and is in range of 200 to 400 ppm in earth atmosphere) concentrations of carbon dioxide can cause enough heat to create a global warming impact on Earth, why is Mars with 95% carbon dioxide cold?  Can this theory be wrong? Earlier also science has discarded many old theories. Galileo changed Earth centric universe. Einstein changed Newton’s Classical Physics. And now CERN researchers have found neutrinos travelling faster than light that have proved Einstein theory wrong. Darwin’s life theory is also under clout when scientist found life could have originated in deep-sea hydrothermal vents and not in warm shallow pools of water (as Darwin stated). In socio political theories too Malthus predicted (mathematically) population explosion to be followed by calamities, but proved wrong due to new scientific invention like Birth Control devices etc. Further, what could be side effects (ageing population, slowing of economy etc.) of controlling population was not understood and within 50 years China had to reverse one child policy adopted in 1970s

In view of above, argument is that even if, predictor is sincere and correct about impending danger like,  Antarctic ice melting etc, that doesn’t mean rising CO2 is the CAUSE of it (nor is “human activity” the “cause” of rising CO2 levels, since nobody is taking actual MEASUREMENTS of all of the CO2 sources and sinks). Correlation does not equal causation – one of the most basic foundations of ACTUAL “science.” Computer modeling of the climate is at best a speculative hypothesis of what might happen. It is not science in itself. Science is about observation and experiment. If observation bears out the hypothesis then and only then it is science. Further, now quantum physics ( i.e. science) tells that absolute objectivity is not possible in describing observed phenomenon( ie for a single event two, observer can have two different conclusion) So, What will happen if tomorrow it is proved that carbon emission is/was not cause of global warming or for that matter warming has improved certain things on our planet (about Ozone hole written down below).

Effect of Human Intervention. Thus, Science itself has not uttered last word about nature and seems does not understand nature’s cycle fully. Further side effects of human intervention have not been properly evaluated. Thus, though science has improved our life, but many of today’s problems are due to shortsightedness in achieving so called progress. Thus industrial revolution is cause of today’s CO2 emission. Chemical fertilizer has destroyed the natural soil. Invention of plastic is cause of much solid waste and sea pollution. Similarly, it is highly probable that, today’s heavy dependence on Electromagnetic Waves (for communication etc) may give rise to some future physical or mental disease in mankind. Near home, consecutive actions in Punjab  starting from 1970s - encouragement for paddy crop, mechanization (leading to stubble in field after harvesting) and stubble burning, and a ban on early sowing ( before monsoon, to conserve water) led to late harvesting when wind direction is towards Delhi-  is cause of smoke problem in Delhi. But even in this season with (temporary) change of wind direction and daily rainfall , the share of stubble burning in air pollution in Delhi is only 2%, (in PM2.5 Air quality Index) on some day. This shows how one by one well intended human intervention leads to new unintended problems. This also indicates, nature is still more powerful (ultimately wind direction is deciding level of pollution) than human in control of pollution and climate. Further it points that media and public outcry over any problem can be biased  ( calling it problem of Delhi though problem is of North India)and tends to highlight external cause then internal one.

Failed predictions. Now we analyze earlier predictions about climate change and find that none of prediction on climate and environmental disaster since the 1970s has come true.  Illustrative brief list is. 1970: Ice age by 2000( Boston Globe, April 16, 1970). 1970: ‘America subject to water rationing by 1974 and food rationing by 1980.’ (Redlands Daily Facts, October 6, 1970) 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life’. But no such ‘great peril to life’ has been observed as the so-called ‘ozone hole’ remains: 1988: Maldives completely under water in 30 years. (Agence France Press, September 26, 1988). 2002: Famine in 10 years. ( The Guardian, December 23, 2002). 2004: Britain to have Siberian climate by 2020. (The Guardian, February 21, 2004). 2008: Arctic will be ice-free by 2018. (Associated Press, June 24, 2008). 2009: Prince Charles says only 8 years to save the planet. (The Independent, July 9, 2009). 2009: UK prime minister says 50 days to ‘save the planet from catastrophe’. (The Independent: October 20, 2009.) Further, after Oil crisis, in 1973, the ‘experts’ predicted there was less than 20 years oil left in the world and that in the year 2000 all computers would stop working and so on.

In 1970 scientist warned of global cooling but now they warn of warming. We must remember there’s environmental science, and then there’s environmentalism. Environmentalism has more in common with scientology than science. General preface to any prediction is “if present trends continue”. The issue, however, is that present trends do not continue. They change dramatically for a number of reasons within 10 -15years. Innovation happens, leading to change in Consumer behavior (due to price signals) toward quantum and type of energy consumed as well as on side effects generation (pollution etc).

Changes brought by science. Every year brings new inventions. If we were to try to name the greatest invention in human history, it would be hard to beat the stone chopping tool and the hand ax. They marked the crucial turning point when human being realized the ability to produce things and began to see the world as malleable to their needs. I am sure from that age onward nature v/s development debate must be eternally going on. Beginning of Agriculture practices led to destruction of large area under forest. In last two centuries invention of electricity and the internal combustion engine greatly changed our lives and now Computers (more efficient quantum computer is on the horizon), Digital Camera, TV, Smartphone, TCP/IP, WWW all are changing our lives, energy needs and material consumption un-imagined 50 years back. Particularly Photovoltaic Solar Energy and LED lights are redefining pattern and need of our energy. Further there has been invention of a battery that can run for 320 kilometers on a single charge for about 10 minutes only giving boost to e-vehicles. In medicine, Birth-control devices, vaccinations, Non-invasive laser surgery, Coronary Bypass Surgery, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), etc has changed birth and death rates beyond imagination.

 It is well known that CO2 is pollutant but less known fact is CO2 is also useful feedstock, an input into variety of industrial processes from plastics to concrete. So a team of researchers has devised a method where in, Carbon of CO2 (due to fossil fuel burning) is captured and oxygen returned back to the atmosphere. Other researchers have come up with a system to remove carbon-dioxide (even at low 400 ppm concentration) efficiently from the air. Now idea is- use more, emit less -and it is giving rise to whole new field in science and technology- carbon capture and utilization (CCU) processes- CO2u( utilization), CO2p (reduction in CO2 emission/production), CO2r (removal of CO2 from atmosphere), CO2s (storage of CO2)

This is how science and technology progresses and change- human organization, energy needs, opens up new sources of energy and so on. Under the circumstances it is hard to predict what will happen 30-50 year hence, and more foolish to believe such predictions.

Adaption by System and self healing by nature. As said earlier, adaptation by the system does also happen simultaneously. The diversity that we find today in flora and fauna all over the world is because of adaption done by system over millions of year and this will continue in future also. Take example of adaption of life in most poisonous gas for life, Hydrogen sulfide (H₂S). It is a potent toxicant interfering with oxidative phosphorylation ( a process) in mitochondria (part of a cell) and creating extreme adverse conditions in aquatic ecosystems. The mechanistic basis of adaptation to perpetual exposure to H₂S remains poorly understood, but it is seen to be working. Scientist investigated evolutionarily independent lineages of live bearing fishes that have colonized and adapted to springs rich in H₂S and compared their genome-wide gene expression patterns with closely related lineages from adjacent, non-sulfide streams. Overall, results suggest that modification of processes associated with H₂S detoxification and toxicity complement each other to mediate elevated H₂S tolerance in sulfide spring fishes.  Further, according to new research, Sea levels rose 10 meters, (melting ice was main reason) above present levels during Earth’s last warm period 125,000 years ago in the last interglacial period  and we survived that period. Another example of how nature works/ interacts, (at some point in the next few days), the hole in the ozone layer above the Antarctic will close (good sign and without human effort) completely as a result of warmer temperatures in the stratosphere (effect of CO2 emission).

While global energy, poverty and food insecurity remain a pressing challenge, due to innovation, legislation and adaption, the problems are getting much better, not worse all over the world.  For example in 1999 more than 15,000 people were killed in Orissa due to Super cyclone, but when similar intensity cyclone Fani hit this year death toll were less than 10. In fact we should be thankful for economic liberties that provide people with the means to protect the environment. As a country grows economically, it increases the financial ability of its citizens and businesses to care for the environment and reduce pollutants emitted from industrial growth. Countries with greater economic freedoms have cleaner environments and greater environmental sustainability. So development should be seen as complement to fight against climate change  and not otherwise.

Resist Changes. Unfortunately, above facts has been used by many to belittle environmentalist and overlook dangers of climate change. They label, environmentalist leftists and opponent of their own political thinking (implying there is some conspiracy in it, to halt progress), or lobbyist to boost business of industries engaged in clean environment (To some extent it is true, by invoking and playing with fear emotion about pollution,   industry of clean water has been created and same is going to happen with air also.). Selectively picking statements (and out of context) on scientific uncertainty to contend that “no one bothers to check that predictions are wrong all the time". They say, over the last 5 million years the world has cooled, warmed up, cooled and warmed when humans were not burning coal. Further, they claim humans have polluted the world but not to the degree the ‘experts’ want us to believe. Lastly, they tell people, even if problem is real; the solutions are so drastic that they could send us back to the Stone Age.   

Effect on Society. But reality is, rising temperatures, spread of crop disease and extreme weather events is leading to degradation of local ecosystem and has made harvests at many places unviable and people are migrating from there. In this scenario millions of people are forced to choose between insecure livelihoods and the unauthorized migration.  In the absence of coordinated action by global community there is fear of “climate apartheid.” Further, warming has enhanced economic growth in cooler, wealthier countries while dampening economic growth in hotter, poorer countries, resulting in increase in economic inequality.  . Climate change has also adversely impacted food security and emissions are “a clear and present danger to health security”. (The health benefits of addressing climate change “far outweigh the costs of meeting climate change goals). Warming oceans, melting ice, and rising sea levels are affecting everything from coral reefs to the nearly 10 percent of the global population living in low-lying coastal areas. Within those groups (living in warm and coastal area etc), damage to subgroup of vulnerable populations is disproportionately high Animal and plant species on Earth are threatened with extinction. This threat is more (due to the intensive use of fertilizers and chemicals in food production) for Bees, Butterfly etc. (like small creature for whom conservation program are not in place but) which help in pollination, making possible flowers, trees, and agriculture on earth. Further, a new global assessment shows that human impacts have greatly reduced plant-fungus symbioses (known as mycorrhiza), which play a key role in sequestering (storing) carbon in soils. To close the paragraph remembering that uncertainty, about change, can work both ways and we could be underestimating future changes.

Main Polluters and who should coordinate? We have discussed models, changes by science etc, and (uneven) effects on society and so on. Now who contributes to problem and how to improve. Just over half of greenhouse gas emissions come from four nations. At 29 percent of the global total, China has said it will lower carbon intensity and peak emissions by about 2030. The US, accounting for 13.1 percent of the total, has turned its back on the Paris deal. India, which is ramping up both renewable energy and carbon-intensive coal-fired power, accounts for seven percent, and Russia -- which has made no pledge at all -- added 4.6 percent. The emissions of the world's poorest nations have been and continue to be negligible, but steps must be taken today to shape their energy consumption pattern so that they should not become dependent on cheap fossil fuel energy (Halting development is no choice). The most complicated political questions is who should step up to deal with the harms of climate change, considering that wealthier countries pollute more but are often shielded from the worst effects. How can responsibility be assigned, and more importantly, what is to be done? Under the Paris treaty, developing nations are to receive $100 billion annually from next year to help curb climate change and cope with its impacts. But whether they will receive it? Ultimately, it is debate between development and nature. We all are supposed to commit national resources on a problem which do not recognize national boundary for which there are no clear answers. It is not a philosophical question about earth and humanity (they will adapt and survive) it is political and economic question of each once place there in.

India. Coming to specific question about India, the policy has to shift decisively from whether to do, to how to do so, but as part of development challenge. We need to do five things. First, to recognize the interplay between climate and development (sector wise), Second, identify clear areas where there are synergies, and where trade-offs exist, between two. Third, look beyond short term to longer term strategic visions of India’s development pathway. Fourth, build strong institution, Climate Change Advisory Board etc.(like Security Advisory Board) to direct and coordinate efforts. Lastly, but most important (as climate change is not bound by national boundary) is climate diplomacy, as a deeply vulnerable country, India has to push vigorously for more and more effective, global  coordinated action on reducing emissions.

Conclusion. While the exact contours of the future are hard to predict, there is little doubt that climate change carries huge, negative implications for India and World. So far we have focused on our immediate development concerns — poverty, jobs and livelihoods, access to energy services etc —but it is increasingly clear that climate is crucial to development. There is no longer a pathway to development neglecting climate challenge.

In the past, climate science reports had an implicit future tense, as in, “It’s a problem for your grandchildren”. Now, we are left with a sense of urgency, about immediate and forthcoming climate dangers. The first step in this is to accept the warnings and create conditions for innovative solutions to be found. By pushing the myth that we can continue to act as usual and innovations will magically happen in the future to bail us out, a great disservice is being done, especially to today’s children. They are being burdened with the responsibility of not only dealing with the changing climate, but also innovating and fixing it. We are taking a loan and expecting our children to pay it off. That is an inter-generational Ponzi scheme. Children themselves are aware of it and so Greta Thunberg, a teenager from Sweden, became one of the youngest crusaders against practices adversely affecting climate change.  

That is hope for us and shame on us.