newly-developed scientific strategy may finally end the woes of farmers by averting the possibility of lower crop production or even crop failure and higher food prices in the event of delay in monsoon rains.
The four-pronged strategy developed by the International Crops Research for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) will also help vulnerable farming communities cope better with drought, global warming and other associated effects of climate change, according to a research paper of the institute.
"Climate change is real and its implications are going to be borne by the poorest of the poor," says William Dar, ICRISAT's director general.
"Delayed monsoons as well as below normal rainfall are not something new as these situations occur in rainfed areas very often," he says and recommends adoption of the strategy developed for improved crop production under rainfed conditions.
The strategy calls for growing of drought tolerant and climate change ready crops to match the available length of the growing season and low soil moisture, a contingency plan for replacement of crops affected by drought, efficient management of natural resources and empowering stakeholders through capacity building.
This science-based strategy has been showcased by an ICRISAT-led consortium at Kothapally in Andhra Pradesh. This model is being sealed out in 240 micro-watersheds in India, northeast Thailand, northern Vietnam and China benefiting 250,000 people, officials said.
The ICRISAT-led consortium observed that vast rainfed areas in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu are critically deficient in micro and secondary nutrients and hence, soil health needs to be improved urgently. ICRISAT uses new science tools like crop-growth simulation models, water balance techniques and geographic information systems for assessing the length of the crop growing period and drought characterisation.
Analysts describe India's agriculture as a gamble with the monsoons. However, ICRISAT believes that by implementing the above steps, farmers won't have to gamble and India will be better prepared against the effects of climate change, enjoying sustainable food security over the long term.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Farmers need not worry when rains are tardy
India needn't gamble or fret about the timing of the monsoon any more, but only if it plays smart. An international science and research body for the tropics has suggested some useful strategies for farmers when the rains are tardy.'The possibility of lower crop production or even crop failure and higher food prices when monsoon rains get delayed can be averted,' said ICRISAT, the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, which is headquartered in Patancheru - 25 km from Hyderabad.ICRISAT is advocating a 'four-pronged science-based strategy', which, it says, helps vulnerable farming communities cope better with drought, global warming and other associated effects of climate change.The monsoon rains which lash India with varying intensity at this time of the year are critical to the country's agriculture, and account for a sixth of the country's economic output. About 70 percent of Indians depend on agriculture for their livelihood, and 60 percent of India's farms depend on rains, available figures suggest.ICRISAT Director General William Dar said 'below normal rainfall' occurs in rain-fed areas 'very often', and emphasised that 'climate change is real and its implications are going to be borne by the poorest of the poor.'ICRISAT's formula revolves around:* First, growing drought tolerant and climate change ready crops to match the available length of the growing season and low soil moisture.ICRISAT says they have developed and released several varieties of sorghum, pearl millet, chickpea, pigeon pea and groundnut - all of which are more drought tolerant than varieties grown now.* Second is contingency planning for the replacement of crops affected by drought. With delayed rains, farmers may not be able to grow their traditional crops. Instead, they should grow other shorter-duration crops.For instance, in sorghum-growing areas, farmers can plant pearl millet instead.* Third is the efficient management of natural resources, arresting land degradation, conserving soil moisture, harvesting excess water in the rainy season and utilising it to supplement irrigation.* The fourth strategy involves empowering stakeholders through capacity building, enabling rural institutions and formulating policies that support dryland agriculture. Capacity building and knowledge sharing are key.ICRISAT said its 'science-based strategy' was showcased in Kothapally, Andhra Pradesh. This model is being scaled up in 240 micro-watersheds in India, northeast Thailand, northern Vietnam and China, benefiting around 250,000 people.An ICRISAT-led consortium observed that vast rainfed areas in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu are critically deficient in micro and secondary soil nutrients.Hence, soil health needs to be improved urgently. Amendments with deficient micro-nutrients increased crop yields by 30 to 70 percent while balanced fertiliser application of deficient major and micro-nutrients doubled crop productivity.ICRISAT says it uses new science tools like crop-growth simulation models, water balance techniques and geographic information systems (GIS) for assessing the length of the crop growing period and drought characterisation.'Right and timely information is the backbone of drought-preparedness,' says ICRISAT.Analysts have describe India's agriculture as a gamble with the monsoon. ICRISAT says that by implementing the above steps, farmers won't have to gamble and India could be better prepared against the effects of climate change, enjoying sustainable food security over the long term.
An insurance plan for climate change victims
AS WESTERN governments dither at the negotiating table over how to help the world's poorest people cope with climate change, some unlikely saviours have stepped up to the plate: the giants of the global insurance industry.
As well as providing protection from the increasingly unpredictable weather, the premiums could also be a powerful way to get poor people to adapt to climate change by encouraging them to invest in measures like drought-resistant crops. Is this profit-driven endeavour too good to be true?
Each year, people in the small Ethiopian village of Adi Ha depend on the precise timing of the rain to grow teff, a sour-tasting grain they turn into the traditional injera flatbread. If the rains fail, so do their livelihoods.
Climate models forecast that droughts, floods, heatwaves and severe storms are destined to become more frequent, so what can poor farmers do? US and European farmers buy crop insurance to cope with extreme weather. But the cost of checking claims from smallholder farmers in developing countries is prohibitive, and so insurance companies have tended to steer clear of them.
Now a different type of insurance scheme is being rolled out in Adi Ha and many other places in Africa, Latin America and Asia, backed by corporate giants such as Swiss Re and Munich Re. Instead of insuring against lost crops, "index insurance" protects farmers against the vagaries of the weather. For example, if rain gauges at local weather stations drop below a certain level, insurance companies can automatically transfer a payout to farmers without having to visit them.
Cover is tailored to each region. In Adi Ha, where farmers need the rains to start before a certain date, those who are insured will receive a payment if rains fail to come before an agreed cut-off date. In the hurricane-prone Caribbean, hotel owners can buy insurance that pays out if winds exceed a certain speed. The premiums can cost as little as a few dollars a year.
The scheme in Ethiopia is backed by Swiss Re, but like others of its kind, it only got off the ground because of the firm's collaborators, in this case Oxfam and the International Research Institute for Climate and Society (IRI) at Columbia University, New York.
Alliances between NGOs, charities and insurance firms may seem an unlikely match. "Oxfam went through a big soul-searching process before climbing on board microinsurance projects, and ultimately decided it made sense," says Marjorie Victor of Oxfam America. "Insurance companies have surprisingly aligned interests with NGOs when it comes to reducing risk." According to Molly Hellmuth of IRI, "the trick is to balance the needs of companies to make a profit with the needs of farmers".
Oxfam went through a big soul-searching process before climbing on board microinsurance projects
At a session on insurance and climate change held in March in Copenhagen, Pablo Suarez, a researcher who has consulted on insurance projects for Oxfam and the UN Development Programme, confessed that he initially approached the idea with a degree of scepticism, but now calls himself a "convert".
Heavyweight humanitarians are also backing the idea. Kofi Annan, former secretary-general of the UN and head of the Global Humanitarian Forum, has said that "index insurance may hold answers for some of the more obstinate problems faced by the poor and the vulnerable". Insurance is being considered as part of the successor to the Kyoto protocol, to be hammered out at UN negotiations in December.
As in the west, insurance can also act as a powerful incentive for people to adapt their behaviour to climate change (see "When it pays to cut emissions"). "If I am a farmer and the insurance company tells me my premium will be cheaper if I plant sorghum which is drought-resistant, then that gives me an incentive," says Suarez.
Some schemes are being bundled up with bank loans, allowing farmers to invest in drought-resistant seed or irrigation systems. Farmers in India who bought insurance with loans for better quality seed saw their yields increase up to four-fold in one growing season, and some of them use their profit to buy health insurance.
Despite the promise of projects so far, it would be a mistake to interpret insurance as a "silver bullet", say Koko Warner of the UN University, Tokyo, Japan, and colleagues. They point out there is no evidence yet that the schemes leave poor people less vulnerable, nor help them cope with the long-term effects of climate change such as sea-level rise and desertification. Premiums are renewed annually, so can only protect farmers from events in a coming year. As climate change renders some regions increasingly inhospitable, insurance may become unaffordable.
"Some people are going to be excluded," says Suarez. He points out that this is already true, for instance, in shanty towns in Dhaka, Bangladesh, which are flooded every year. "In those cases promoting insurance is not the right move," he says. "Insurers will not deliberately lose money."
When it pays to cut emissions
Insurance companies are putting increasing pressure on governments to cut emissions, and are giving their customers incentives to do the same.
The industry has a vested interest, because climate change worsens weather-related disasters, leading to mounting risk and payouts. In 2008, a high number of tropical cyclones helped drive overall natural disaster losses to the third highest on record, according to Munich Re figures.
Examples include:
UK insurer Fortis offers preferential mortgage rates for energy-efficient home upgrades
Several companies offer premium discounts to hybrid car drivers
Hurricane-resistant homes built in Florida are automatically eligible for insurance discounts
UK insurers pressed their government to manage the growing flood risk; in exchange they agreed to continue to provide flood insurance to households and small businesses
However, some policies have made people take more risks. Under the US National Flood Insurance Program, the government subsidises private homeowner policies, so the price that homeowners pay doesn't reflect the full scale of flood risk.
Many have criticised the scheme for encouraging people to build on high-risk flood plains and there is evidence that the number of repeat claims from frequently flooded properties is growing.
As well as providing protection from the increasingly unpredictable weather, the premiums could also be a powerful way to get poor people to adapt to climate change by encouraging them to invest in measures like drought-resistant crops. Is this profit-driven endeavour too good to be true?
Each year, people in the small Ethiopian village of Adi Ha depend on the precise timing of the rain to grow teff, a sour-tasting grain they turn into the traditional injera flatbread. If the rains fail, so do their livelihoods.
Climate models forecast that droughts, floods, heatwaves and severe storms are destined to become more frequent, so what can poor farmers do? US and European farmers buy crop insurance to cope with extreme weather. But the cost of checking claims from smallholder farmers in developing countries is prohibitive, and so insurance companies have tended to steer clear of them.
Now a different type of insurance scheme is being rolled out in Adi Ha and many other places in Africa, Latin America and Asia, backed by corporate giants such as Swiss Re and Munich Re. Instead of insuring against lost crops, "index insurance" protects farmers against the vagaries of the weather. For example, if rain gauges at local weather stations drop below a certain level, insurance companies can automatically transfer a payout to farmers without having to visit them.
Cover is tailored to each region. In Adi Ha, where farmers need the rains to start before a certain date, those who are insured will receive a payment if rains fail to come before an agreed cut-off date. In the hurricane-prone Caribbean, hotel owners can buy insurance that pays out if winds exceed a certain speed. The premiums can cost as little as a few dollars a year.
The scheme in Ethiopia is backed by Swiss Re, but like others of its kind, it only got off the ground because of the firm's collaborators, in this case Oxfam and the International Research Institute for Climate and Society (IRI) at Columbia University, New York.
Alliances between NGOs, charities and insurance firms may seem an unlikely match. "Oxfam went through a big soul-searching process before climbing on board microinsurance projects, and ultimately decided it made sense," says Marjorie Victor of Oxfam America. "Insurance companies have surprisingly aligned interests with NGOs when it comes to reducing risk." According to Molly Hellmuth of IRI, "the trick is to balance the needs of companies to make a profit with the needs of farmers".
Oxfam went through a big soul-searching process before climbing on board microinsurance projects
At a session on insurance and climate change held in March in Copenhagen, Pablo Suarez, a researcher who has consulted on insurance projects for Oxfam and the UN Development Programme, confessed that he initially approached the idea with a degree of scepticism, but now calls himself a "convert".
Heavyweight humanitarians are also backing the idea. Kofi Annan, former secretary-general of the UN and head of the Global Humanitarian Forum, has said that "index insurance may hold answers for some of the more obstinate problems faced by the poor and the vulnerable". Insurance is being considered as part of the successor to the Kyoto protocol, to be hammered out at UN negotiations in December.
As in the west, insurance can also act as a powerful incentive for people to adapt their behaviour to climate change (see "When it pays to cut emissions"). "If I am a farmer and the insurance company tells me my premium will be cheaper if I plant sorghum which is drought-resistant, then that gives me an incentive," says Suarez.
Some schemes are being bundled up with bank loans, allowing farmers to invest in drought-resistant seed or irrigation systems. Farmers in India who bought insurance with loans for better quality seed saw their yields increase up to four-fold in one growing season, and some of them use their profit to buy health insurance.
Despite the promise of projects so far, it would be a mistake to interpret insurance as a "silver bullet", say Koko Warner of the UN University, Tokyo, Japan, and colleagues. They point out there is no evidence yet that the schemes leave poor people less vulnerable, nor help them cope with the long-term effects of climate change such as sea-level rise and desertification. Premiums are renewed annually, so can only protect farmers from events in a coming year. As climate change renders some regions increasingly inhospitable, insurance may become unaffordable.
"Some people are going to be excluded," says Suarez. He points out that this is already true, for instance, in shanty towns in Dhaka, Bangladesh, which are flooded every year. "In those cases promoting insurance is not the right move," he says. "Insurers will not deliberately lose money."
When it pays to cut emissions
Insurance companies are putting increasing pressure on governments to cut emissions, and are giving their customers incentives to do the same.
The industry has a vested interest, because climate change worsens weather-related disasters, leading to mounting risk and payouts. In 2008, a high number of tropical cyclones helped drive overall natural disaster losses to the third highest on record, according to Munich Re figures.
Examples include:
UK insurer Fortis offers preferential mortgage rates for energy-efficient home upgrades
Several companies offer premium discounts to hybrid car drivers
Hurricane-resistant homes built in Florida are automatically eligible for insurance discounts
UK insurers pressed their government to manage the growing flood risk; in exchange they agreed to continue to provide flood insurance to households and small businesses
However, some policies have made people take more risks. Under the US National Flood Insurance Program, the government subsidises private homeowner policies, so the price that homeowners pay doesn't reflect the full scale of flood risk.
Many have criticised the scheme for encouraging people to build on high-risk flood plains and there is evidence that the number of repeat claims from frequently flooded properties is growing.
India seeks more money to reduce deforestation
Deforestation accounts for about 20 percent of global warming that leads to climate change and India has suggested that developing countries be paid more to reduce deforestation.
Seventy million acres of rainforests are going to be burnt down while over 10,000 delegates from 187 countries attend the UN Conference on Climate Change here Dec 3-14.
In a paper submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), India has proposed the concept of "compensated conservation" to compensate countries that reduce deforestation, stabilise forest cover and even conserve and increase it.
Since trees hold carbon dioxide, conserving and increasing the forest cover is a direct way to combat climate change which is caused mainly by the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Though most of the carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere is by industrialised countries, they have been harping on the deforestation issue in an attempt to deflect attention. India has responded by saying developing countries will fight deforestation, but need monetary help to do so.
The paper prepared by India is now being considered at the climate change summit.
India says: "Nations with continued deforestation and now committing to reduce deforestation rates, and those having already taken up strong conservation measures and thereby stabilising and increasing forest cover against a pre-determined baseline, present a fit case to be rewarded under REDD (reducing emission from deforestation and degradation), as these efforts reduce the emission of carbon into the atmosphere and capture atmospheric carbon in the process."
Developed countries have agreed that developing countries have to be paid to reduce deforestation and to increase forest cover, but have suggested that this money come out of the clean development mechanism (CDM) prepared under the Kyoto Protocol to address climate change.
Aware that the CDM is meant mainly for technology projects and the money available under it is very small, India has proposed that REDD financing be kept out of the CDM fund.
"Developed country parties must deploy additional financial resources for the purpose," the paper from India says. "UNFCCC may create different financial instruments or apportion funds under the same instrument for different range of actions to be implemented by the countries according to their national circumstances such as reducing deforestation fund, stabilisation fund and forest carbon conservation fund."
India has said the creation of an "enabling fund to support capacity building and conducting pilot activities related to REDD activities for developing and least developed countries can also be considered."
Seventy million acres of rainforests are going to be burnt down while over 10,000 delegates from 187 countries attend the UN Conference on Climate Change here Dec 3-14.
In a paper submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), India has proposed the concept of "compensated conservation" to compensate countries that reduce deforestation, stabilise forest cover and even conserve and increase it.
Since trees hold carbon dioxide, conserving and increasing the forest cover is a direct way to combat climate change which is caused mainly by the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Though most of the carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere is by industrialised countries, they have been harping on the deforestation issue in an attempt to deflect attention. India has responded by saying developing countries will fight deforestation, but need monetary help to do so.
The paper prepared by India is now being considered at the climate change summit.
India says: "Nations with continued deforestation and now committing to reduce deforestation rates, and those having already taken up strong conservation measures and thereby stabilising and increasing forest cover against a pre-determined baseline, present a fit case to be rewarded under REDD (reducing emission from deforestation and degradation), as these efforts reduce the emission of carbon into the atmosphere and capture atmospheric carbon in the process."
Developed countries have agreed that developing countries have to be paid to reduce deforestation and to increase forest cover, but have suggested that this money come out of the clean development mechanism (CDM) prepared under the Kyoto Protocol to address climate change.
Aware that the CDM is meant mainly for technology projects and the money available under it is very small, India has proposed that REDD financing be kept out of the CDM fund.
"Developed country parties must deploy additional financial resources for the purpose," the paper from India says. "UNFCCC may create different financial instruments or apportion funds under the same instrument for different range of actions to be implemented by the countries according to their national circumstances such as reducing deforestation fund, stabilisation fund and forest carbon conservation fund."
India has said the creation of an "enabling fund to support capacity building and conducting pilot activities related to REDD activities for developing and least developed countries can also be considered."
Deforestation In India And Its Overwhelming Progress
India’s rising population expansion has positioned the country in great environmental strains. The swiftly developing populace, along with the move in the direction of urbanization and industrialization, has sited a considerable demand on India’s infrastructure and its biological reserves.
Deforestation in India, together with all its other environmental effects, continues to go downhill and is encumbering trade and industry development in all of India. However, its booming and exploding metropolises are the ones causing their presently detrimental problems.
It is a good thing to know that a single country can be able to stop deforestation even in a gradual progress. However, the other tribulations that India is now facing should also be dealt with in a similar manner. They may have erased their deforestation problems, but other troubles concerning the environment came to take its place. With due hope, all the world is watching over India and its capabilities to fully eliminate their problems that cause disturbance of the balance in nature.
A Quick Look Into The History Of Indian Forest Depletion
The turn of the 19th century marked the start of deforestation in India. In the year 1823, the elect governor of India named Thomas Munro believed that the industrialization process could take heights in the world economy. Having assumed in such matter, he opened forestry programs which then truly created a world of promising economy. However, this was also the start of nature’s fall in India. The long logging problems of over 4 years covered the entire nation; and its forests, like other jungles in the world, was buffeted by a sudden impact of stress.
It was only through the Act of 1878 that the Indian forests began to be protected by the government. For 50 years, the Indian forested lands truly suffered and at the same time prospered from an economy that is not theirs.
Today, vast environmental projects have been and are being practiced in India. The systems include tree planting, preservation of the non-damaged part of their nature, and penalties for the ones going above the prohibitions set. Incentives were also given to the minorities who learned how to adhere to the government’s policies regarding nature safeguarding. Truly, India has one of the most remarkable ways of saving the world from extermination.
Why Deforestation In India Took Place
Unknown to many, the Indian nation accounts for the biggest number of the underprivileged in the entire world, many of whom rely completely or implicitly on green areas for a living. Poverty, as well as the huge and escalating human population, places indefatigable pressure on the forested parts of India. The end result is serious dilapidation of the country’s woodland resources.
The administration has made an effort to slow down losses to its jungles and enlarge tree shelter through a sequence of plans with backing from the World Bank. It has the largest participating funds that direct to the solutions of their deforestation problems.
The effective implementation of India’s rules and regulations for the forests brought about a good change in their previously dilapidated jungles. Through the help of the Worldwide Bank and the sectors of environmentalists protecting the Earth, the Indian nation gave way to the possibilities that deforestation problems could really be fixed.
The deforestation in India shows the rest of the world that a switch to ecological friendly decisions can help alleviate the world’s present condition. If only the rest of the countries allow such kind of help from the experts, then our deforestation problems could possibly be offset in no time.
Determination and eagerness to participate are two of the most crucial values the world must possess in order to preserve the remaining capabilities of our nature.
Deforestation in India, together with all its other environmental effects, continues to go downhill and is encumbering trade and industry development in all of India. However, its booming and exploding metropolises are the ones causing their presently detrimental problems.
It is a good thing to know that a single country can be able to stop deforestation even in a gradual progress. However, the other tribulations that India is now facing should also be dealt with in a similar manner. They may have erased their deforestation problems, but other troubles concerning the environment came to take its place. With due hope, all the world is watching over India and its capabilities to fully eliminate their problems that cause disturbance of the balance in nature.
A Quick Look Into The History Of Indian Forest Depletion
The turn of the 19th century marked the start of deforestation in India. In the year 1823, the elect governor of India named Thomas Munro believed that the industrialization process could take heights in the world economy. Having assumed in such matter, he opened forestry programs which then truly created a world of promising economy. However, this was also the start of nature’s fall in India. The long logging problems of over 4 years covered the entire nation; and its forests, like other jungles in the world, was buffeted by a sudden impact of stress.
It was only through the Act of 1878 that the Indian forests began to be protected by the government. For 50 years, the Indian forested lands truly suffered and at the same time prospered from an economy that is not theirs.
Today, vast environmental projects have been and are being practiced in India. The systems include tree planting, preservation of the non-damaged part of their nature, and penalties for the ones going above the prohibitions set. Incentives were also given to the minorities who learned how to adhere to the government’s policies regarding nature safeguarding. Truly, India has one of the most remarkable ways of saving the world from extermination.
Why Deforestation In India Took Place
Unknown to many, the Indian nation accounts for the biggest number of the underprivileged in the entire world, many of whom rely completely or implicitly on green areas for a living. Poverty, as well as the huge and escalating human population, places indefatigable pressure on the forested parts of India. The end result is serious dilapidation of the country’s woodland resources.
The administration has made an effort to slow down losses to its jungles and enlarge tree shelter through a sequence of plans with backing from the World Bank. It has the largest participating funds that direct to the solutions of their deforestation problems.
The effective implementation of India’s rules and regulations for the forests brought about a good change in their previously dilapidated jungles. Through the help of the Worldwide Bank and the sectors of environmentalists protecting the Earth, the Indian nation gave way to the possibilities that deforestation problems could really be fixed.
The deforestation in India shows the rest of the world that a switch to ecological friendly decisions can help alleviate the world’s present condition. If only the rest of the countries allow such kind of help from the experts, then our deforestation problems could possibly be offset in no time.
Determination and eagerness to participate are two of the most crucial values the world must possess in order to preserve the remaining capabilities of our nature.
BIRDS IN INDIA SUFFERING FROM HEAT, DEFORESTATION
A recuperating Kite is fed multi-vitamins at the Bai Sakarbai Dinshaw Petit Hospital in Mumbai.
According to the Bombay Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (BSPCA), this year there has been a 25 to 30 percent rise in the incidence of birds suffering from heat-related exhaustion as temperatures across several Indian cities soared in excess of 40 degrees celcius (104 degrees farhenheit). BSPCA officials say birds are forced to fly longer distances before resting due to dwindling tree cover in urban areas, as increased tree felling makes way for Mumbai's rapidly developing infrastructure.
According to the Bombay Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (BSPCA), this year there has been a 25 to 30 percent rise in the incidence of birds suffering from heat-related exhaustion as temperatures across several Indian cities soared in excess of 40 degrees celcius (104 degrees farhenheit). BSPCA officials say birds are forced to fly longer distances before resting due to dwindling tree cover in urban areas, as increased tree felling makes way for Mumbai's rapidly developing infrastructure.
Govt negotiating emission targets and not UN’s Framework Convention: Jairam Ramesh
Clearing the misconception about (GHG) emissions, Ramesh said that India is the third largest country in GHG emission volume after the US and China but the climate change is a result of the cumulative impact of GHG in the planetary atmosphere.
India is not negotiating or re-negotiating United Nation’s Framework of Convention, but is negotiating emission targets. Briefing the media about India’s approach to Climate Change, Minister of State for Environment and Forests, Jairam Ramesh said India has no role in building Green House Gases (GHGs). Clearing the misconception about (GHG) emissions, Ramesh said that India is the third largest country in GHG emission volume after the US and China but the climate change is a result of the cumulative impact of GHG in the planetary atmosphere.
This accumulated GHG is mainly the result of carbon-based industrial activity in developed countries over the past two centuries. UNFCCC does not require developing countries to take on any commitments on reducing their GHG emissions, despite this India will not allow its per capita GHG emission to exceed the average per capita emissions of the developed countries.
The Minister explained, this effectively puts a cap on our emission, which will be lower if our developed country partners choose to be more ambitious in reducing their own emissions.
Making this more clear the Minister said India can not be described as a so called “major emitter”. India’s per capital CO2 emission are currently only 1.1 tons, when compared to over 20 tons for the US and in excess of 10 tons for most OECD countries. The Minister added that the US and China account for over 16% each of the total global emissions, while India trails with just 4%, despite its very large population and rapid growing economy. Thus, India is way down in international ranking.
Talking about major climatic variability which India faces today, Ramesh pointed out that we have already observed warming of 0.40 C from 1901-2000 and receding glaciers in Himalayas at accelerating pace. This also can be due to natural processes, he added. Other expected changes are increase in rainfall by 15-40 %,more warming over land, maximum in North India, relatively greater warming in winter and post monsoon seasons and increase in mean temperature by 30C to 60C.
Ramesh emphatically said that we must stop looking at climate change issue as an international issue, we must look at it as a domestic and local issue .It is related to land productivity, food security and energy conservation. He said we might have political differences with our neighbors including Pakistan but on climate change we, all SAARC countries, are together and speak with the same concern.
Highlighting India’s position on Climate Change, the Minister affirmed quoting Prime Minister’s statement that India’s per capita emission levels will never exceed that of the per capita emission level of developed countries. India cannot and will not take emission reduction targets because poverty eradication and social and economic development are first and over-riding priorities. He further said that each human being has equal right to global atmospheric resources. Common but differentiated responsibility is the basis for all climate change actions, he added. Throwing light on India’s primary focus, Environment Minister said that India’s primary focus is on “adaptation” and not “mitigation”. He made it clear that mitigation can be accepted in few areas. Only those nationally Appropriate Mitigation actions (NAMs) can be subject to international monitoring, reporting and verification that are enabled and supported by international finance and technology transfer. He also explained that India wants a comprehensive approach to Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) and advocates REDD that includes conservation, afforestation and sustainable management of forests. Ramesh announced with pride that 227 scientists and 98 institutions, Univercities, IITs, CSIRs etc are involved in National Programme on Climate Change. He informed that India advocates collaborative research in future low-carbon technology and access to intellectual property rights (IPRs) as global public goods.
Referring to some issues of concern, Ramesh said differentiation amongst developing countries sought to be introduced by alternative multilateral forums and parallel bilateral negotiations. Ambiguity in responsibility for finance and technology transfer, sectoral approaches to mitigation actions outside Bali, move to limit scope of Clean development Mechanism (CDM),impose trade penalties on countries that do not accept limits on global warming pollution are other issues of concern. Referring to this trade penalty Bill passed by US House of Representatives before the US Senate proposes to impose trade penalties , Jairam said India will not accept any legally binding emission Reduction target as it will jeopardize our energy conservation, agricultural and food security, transport etc.
Giving India’s contribution to Climate Change negotiations, Ramesh said we are actively involved with G77 and China to evolve common position on negotiations. We have made 9 submissions to UNFCCC on finance, technology, forestry and other areas. We have worked with China, Brazil, South Africa and 33 other countries to present a joint proposal for emission reduction targets by Annex1 countries in second commitment period.
Talking about efforts of 8 National Missions, the Minister said that they are in different phases of operation. Besides this, other 24 critical initiatives are in the anvil for which detailed plans and an institutional framework is being prepared
India is not negotiating or re-negotiating United Nation’s Framework of Convention, but is negotiating emission targets. Briefing the media about India’s approach to Climate Change, Minister of State for Environment and Forests, Jairam Ramesh said India has no role in building Green House Gases (GHGs). Clearing the misconception about (GHG) emissions, Ramesh said that India is the third largest country in GHG emission volume after the US and China but the climate change is a result of the cumulative impact of GHG in the planetary atmosphere.
This accumulated GHG is mainly the result of carbon-based industrial activity in developed countries over the past two centuries. UNFCCC does not require developing countries to take on any commitments on reducing their GHG emissions, despite this India will not allow its per capita GHG emission to exceed the average per capita emissions of the developed countries.
The Minister explained, this effectively puts a cap on our emission, which will be lower if our developed country partners choose to be more ambitious in reducing their own emissions.
Making this more clear the Minister said India can not be described as a so called “major emitter”. India’s per capital CO2 emission are currently only 1.1 tons, when compared to over 20 tons for the US and in excess of 10 tons for most OECD countries. The Minister added that the US and China account for over 16% each of the total global emissions, while India trails with just 4%, despite its very large population and rapid growing economy. Thus, India is way down in international ranking.
Talking about major climatic variability which India faces today, Ramesh pointed out that we have already observed warming of 0.40 C from 1901-2000 and receding glaciers in Himalayas at accelerating pace. This also can be due to natural processes, he added. Other expected changes are increase in rainfall by 15-40 %,more warming over land, maximum in North India, relatively greater warming in winter and post monsoon seasons and increase in mean temperature by 30C to 60C.
Ramesh emphatically said that we must stop looking at climate change issue as an international issue, we must look at it as a domestic and local issue .It is related to land productivity, food security and energy conservation. He said we might have political differences with our neighbors including Pakistan but on climate change we, all SAARC countries, are together and speak with the same concern.
Highlighting India’s position on Climate Change, the Minister affirmed quoting Prime Minister’s statement that India’s per capita emission levels will never exceed that of the per capita emission level of developed countries. India cannot and will not take emission reduction targets because poverty eradication and social and economic development are first and over-riding priorities. He further said that each human being has equal right to global atmospheric resources. Common but differentiated responsibility is the basis for all climate change actions, he added. Throwing light on India’s primary focus, Environment Minister said that India’s primary focus is on “adaptation” and not “mitigation”. He made it clear that mitigation can be accepted in few areas. Only those nationally Appropriate Mitigation actions (NAMs) can be subject to international monitoring, reporting and verification that are enabled and supported by international finance and technology transfer. He also explained that India wants a comprehensive approach to Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) and advocates REDD that includes conservation, afforestation and sustainable management of forests. Ramesh announced with pride that 227 scientists and 98 institutions, Univercities, IITs, CSIRs etc are involved in National Programme on Climate Change. He informed that India advocates collaborative research in future low-carbon technology and access to intellectual property rights (IPRs) as global public goods.
Referring to some issues of concern, Ramesh said differentiation amongst developing countries sought to be introduced by alternative multilateral forums and parallel bilateral negotiations. Ambiguity in responsibility for finance and technology transfer, sectoral approaches to mitigation actions outside Bali, move to limit scope of Clean development Mechanism (CDM),impose trade penalties on countries that do not accept limits on global warming pollution are other issues of concern. Referring to this trade penalty Bill passed by US House of Representatives before the US Senate proposes to impose trade penalties , Jairam said India will not accept any legally binding emission Reduction target as it will jeopardize our energy conservation, agricultural and food security, transport etc.
Giving India’s contribution to Climate Change negotiations, Ramesh said we are actively involved with G77 and China to evolve common position on negotiations. We have made 9 submissions to UNFCCC on finance, technology, forestry and other areas. We have worked with China, Brazil, South Africa and 33 other countries to present a joint proposal for emission reduction targets by Annex1 countries in second commitment period.
Talking about efforts of 8 National Missions, the Minister said that they are in different phases of operation. Besides this, other 24 critical initiatives are in the anvil for which detailed plans and an institutional framework is being prepared
Environment ministers to meet in Greenland
Around 30 environment ministers and delegates from the world's biggest polluters are set to meet in the Danish territory of Greenland on Tuesday ahead of the larger UN climate summit in Copenhagen at the end of 2009.
The informal meeting is taking place in Ilulissat on Greenland's west coast and Danish Climate Minster Connie Hedegaard said it will aim to "change points of view and go further in its conclusions than those in other forums."
The United States, Germany, Britain, France, Russia, Japan, India and Brasil, are all attending the four-day "Greenland dialogue", an annual meeting on a climate change first held by Denmark four years ago in the same town.
Only China has not confirmed if it will send a delegation so far and Danish media have speculated that Beijing is still upset about a visit by the Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, to Copenhagen last May.
A spokeswoman for the Chinese Embassy in Denmark told AFP they were still deciding whether to attend.
A number of African countries will also be at the meeting including Sudan, Tanzania and Mali.
The previous meeting was held in Argentina last year, with Sweden hosting the talks in 2007.
According to an American study published last summer, the Ilulissat glacier, a UNESCO-listed site, lost 94 square kilometres (60 square miles) of surface area between 2001 and 2005 due to global warming.
The informal meeting is taking place in Ilulissat on Greenland's west coast and Danish Climate Minster Connie Hedegaard said it will aim to "change points of view and go further in its conclusions than those in other forums."
The United States, Germany, Britain, France, Russia, Japan, India and Brasil, are all attending the four-day "Greenland dialogue", an annual meeting on a climate change first held by Denmark four years ago in the same town.
Only China has not confirmed if it will send a delegation so far and Danish media have speculated that Beijing is still upset about a visit by the Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, to Copenhagen last May.
A spokeswoman for the Chinese Embassy in Denmark told AFP they were still deciding whether to attend.
A number of African countries will also be at the meeting including Sudan, Tanzania and Mali.
The previous meeting was held in Argentina last year, with Sweden hosting the talks in 2007.
According to an American study published last summer, the Ilulissat glacier, a UNESCO-listed site, lost 94 square kilometres (60 square miles) of surface area between 2001 and 2005 due to global warming.
Zambia: RB Launches National Policy on Environment
PRESIDENT Rupiah Banda yesterday launched the National Policy on Environment (NPE) and called on Zambians to embrace and implement strategies of the policy, which include issues of climate change.
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetA" );
Mr Banda also said that the Government had embarked on an awareness campaign on environmental issues targeting policy makers and vulnerable communities in rural areas. In a speech read for him by Tourism Minister Catherine Namugala during the launch in Lusaka yesterday, Mr Banda said the policy sought to promote sustainable environmental protection.
The president said the policy would ensure that economic activities were conducted in a manner that did not undermine the integrity of ecosystems. He said the overall vision of the policy was to provide a framework for the management of the environment and natural resources and protect future generations.
"I would like to appeal to the public to embrace and implement strategies of the NPE which include emerging issues such as that of climate change, " he said. Mr Banda called on cooperating partners to work with the Government and participate in the translation of policy strategies into viable programmes and projects.
The president said Zambia faced daunting environmental threats and challenges, which included climate change, deforestation, land degradation and loss of biological diversity, wildlife depletion and environmental pollution.
He said recent studies in Zambia indicated that there was increasing pressure on the country's natural resources, including forests with the current rate of deforestation being estimated at 250,000 to 300,000 hectares per annum.
Mr Banda said there were more than 30 legislative instruments enacted over a decade ago and some of them had been reviewed several times to address the conservation of biodiversity and protection of the environment.
The launch was attended by Cabinet ministers and cooperating partners
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetA" );
Mr Banda also said that the Government had embarked on an awareness campaign on environmental issues targeting policy makers and vulnerable communities in rural areas. In a speech read for him by Tourism Minister Catherine Namugala during the launch in Lusaka yesterday, Mr Banda said the policy sought to promote sustainable environmental protection.
The president said the policy would ensure that economic activities were conducted in a manner that did not undermine the integrity of ecosystems. He said the overall vision of the policy was to provide a framework for the management of the environment and natural resources and protect future generations.
"I would like to appeal to the public to embrace and implement strategies of the NPE which include emerging issues such as that of climate change, " he said. Mr Banda called on cooperating partners to work with the Government and participate in the translation of policy strategies into viable programmes and projects.
The president said Zambia faced daunting environmental threats and challenges, which included climate change, deforestation, land degradation and loss of biological diversity, wildlife depletion and environmental pollution.
He said recent studies in Zambia indicated that there was increasing pressure on the country's natural resources, including forests with the current rate of deforestation being estimated at 250,000 to 300,000 hectares per annum.
Mr Banda said there were more than 30 legislative instruments enacted over a decade ago and some of them had been reviewed several times to address the conservation of biodiversity and protection of the environment.
The launch was attended by Cabinet ministers and cooperating partners
Creating a Safe School Environment
Action Steps for StudentsStudents have an important role to play in ensuring that their schools are safe and orderly. They can take steps to help make their schools places where learning can take place without disruption and without the fear of being victimized or bullied. They can:
Participate in, or help develop, student government organizations and guidelines that promote a drug- and gun-free, safe, and orderly environment for learning.
Volunteer to serve on decisionmaking or advisory committees such as the group developing the overall Safe School Plan.
Become advocates for programs such as peer mediation, conflict resolution, peer assistance leadership, teen courts, or anger management.
Reduce conflict situations rather than making them worse. Practice good citizenship, and treat peers and teachers with respect.
Report weapon possession, drug use or sale, bullying threats or intimidation, victimization, gang activity, or vandalism to school authorities and parents.
Learn the consequences of gang involvement and alcohol, drug, and gun use and the methods for resisting alcohol, drugs, and tobacco. Use this understanding to help other students avoid alcohol or drug use or seek help if they are already involved in alcohol or drugs.
Follow the school code of conduct, understand that rules are made for everyone, and recognize the consequences of violating the rules.
Whenever possible, travel with others to and from school and to special school events. Students must always be aware of their surroundings.
Work with teachers, principals, and other students in developing a community service program, where students give back to the community in a positive manner.
Encourage their parents to come to the school and be involved in activities that support the school.
Serve as a big brother/big sister, tutor, or mentor for a younger student.
Action Steps for ParentsParents play a key role in ensuring that their children are safe and drug-free. Without the active support and participation of parents, schools and communities cannot be safe. Parents have to be part of a school's effort to create an orderly, respectful environment. Some of the actions parents can take to assist schools are:
Set standards of behavior, limits, and clear expectations for children both in and out of school and develop mutually agreed-upon rules about homework, extracurricular participation, grades, curfews, chaperoned parties, and places that are off limits.
Teach standards of right and wrong and demonstrate these standards through example.
Discuss with their children the school's discipline policies, reinforcing the belief that school rules support the rights of all students to attend schools with disciplined environments safe from influences of violence and alcohol or substance abuse.
Encourage their children to talk about school, their social activities, their interests and problems, and even their walk to and from school.
Be involved in their children's school life by reviewing homework, meeting their teachers, and attending school functions such as parent-teacher conferences, PTA meetings, class programs, open houses, plays, concerts, and sporting events.
Build a network of other adults with whom they can talk about school safety issues and alcohol and drug use.
Join a community association to ensure that issues related to alcohol, drugs, and violence are made part of the organization's agenda and that community groups work together to create a safe school corridor by supervising walking routes to and from school.
Talk to their children about the consequences of drug and weapon use, gang participation, and violence and ensure that firearms that parents keep in the home or automobile are unloaded and inaccessible to children. Other dangerous weapons should also be kept out of the reach of children.
Work with the school to develop a comprehensive Safe School Plan that incorporates a clearly articulated statement to students, parents, and the community regarding what will and will not be tolerated and that also provides a strong emphasis on programs to prevent violence and the use of alcohol and drugs.
Monitor the programs their children watch, the video games they play, and the music they listen to regularly. Take time to explain to their children the actual nature and consequences of what is being said and done.
Encourage their children to participate in school-sponsored, after-class activities to help limit the amount of time their children spend watching television.
Participate in, or help develop, student government organizations and guidelines that promote a drug- and gun-free, safe, and orderly environment for learning.
Volunteer to serve on decisionmaking or advisory committees such as the group developing the overall Safe School Plan.
Become advocates for programs such as peer mediation, conflict resolution, peer assistance leadership, teen courts, or anger management.
Reduce conflict situations rather than making them worse. Practice good citizenship, and treat peers and teachers with respect.
Report weapon possession, drug use or sale, bullying threats or intimidation, victimization, gang activity, or vandalism to school authorities and parents.
Learn the consequences of gang involvement and alcohol, drug, and gun use and the methods for resisting alcohol, drugs, and tobacco. Use this understanding to help other students avoid alcohol or drug use or seek help if they are already involved in alcohol or drugs.
Follow the school code of conduct, understand that rules are made for everyone, and recognize the consequences of violating the rules.
Whenever possible, travel with others to and from school and to special school events. Students must always be aware of their surroundings.
Work with teachers, principals, and other students in developing a community service program, where students give back to the community in a positive manner.
Encourage their parents to come to the school and be involved in activities that support the school.
Serve as a big brother/big sister, tutor, or mentor for a younger student.
Action Steps for ParentsParents play a key role in ensuring that their children are safe and drug-free. Without the active support and participation of parents, schools and communities cannot be safe. Parents have to be part of a school's effort to create an orderly, respectful environment. Some of the actions parents can take to assist schools are:
Set standards of behavior, limits, and clear expectations for children both in and out of school and develop mutually agreed-upon rules about homework, extracurricular participation, grades, curfews, chaperoned parties, and places that are off limits.
Teach standards of right and wrong and demonstrate these standards through example.
Discuss with their children the school's discipline policies, reinforcing the belief that school rules support the rights of all students to attend schools with disciplined environments safe from influences of violence and alcohol or substance abuse.
Encourage their children to talk about school, their social activities, their interests and problems, and even their walk to and from school.
Be involved in their children's school life by reviewing homework, meeting their teachers, and attending school functions such as parent-teacher conferences, PTA meetings, class programs, open houses, plays, concerts, and sporting events.
Build a network of other adults with whom they can talk about school safety issues and alcohol and drug use.
Join a community association to ensure that issues related to alcohol, drugs, and violence are made part of the organization's agenda and that community groups work together to create a safe school corridor by supervising walking routes to and from school.
Talk to their children about the consequences of drug and weapon use, gang participation, and violence and ensure that firearms that parents keep in the home or automobile are unloaded and inaccessible to children. Other dangerous weapons should also be kept out of the reach of children.
Work with the school to develop a comprehensive Safe School Plan that incorporates a clearly articulated statement to students, parents, and the community regarding what will and will not be tolerated and that also provides a strong emphasis on programs to prevent violence and the use of alcohol and drugs.
Monitor the programs their children watch, the video games they play, and the music they listen to regularly. Take time to explain to their children the actual nature and consequences of what is being said and done.
Encourage their children to participate in school-sponsored, after-class activities to help limit the amount of time their children spend watching television.
How is Wildlife Affected by Global Warming?
Most researchers agree that even small changes in temperature are enough to send hundreds if not thousands of already struggling species into extinction unless we can stem the tide of global warming. And time may be of the essence: A 2003 study published in the journal Nature concluded that 80 percent of some 1,500 wildlife species sampled are already showing signs of stress from climate change.
How Global Warming Affects WildlifeThe key impact of global warming on wildlife is habitat displacement, whereby ecosystems that animals have spent millions of years adapting to shift quickly. Ice giving way to water in polar bear habitat is just one example of this.
Another, according to The Washington Post, is the possibility that warmer spring temperatures could dry up critical breeding habitat for waterfowl in the prairie pothole region, a stretch of land between northern Iowa and central Alberta.
Affected wildlife populations can sometimes move into new spaces and continue to thrive. But concurrent human population growth means that many land areas that might be suitable for such “refugee wildlife” are already taken and cluttered with residential and industrial development. A recent report by the Pew Center for Global Climate Change suggests creating “transitional habitats” or “corridors” that help migrating species by linking natural areas that are otherwise separated by human settlement.
Shifting Life Cycles and Global WarmingBeyond habitat displacement, many scientists agree that global warming is causing a shift in the timing of various natural cyclical events in the lives of animals. Many birds have altered the timing of long-held migratory and reproductive routines to better sync up with a warming climate. And some hibernating animals are ending their slumbers earlier each year, perhaps due to warmer spring temperatures.
To make matters worse, recent research contradicts the long-held hypothesis that different species coexisting in a particular ecosystem respond to global warming as a single entity. Instead, different species sharing like habitat are responding in dissimilar ways, tearing apart ecological communities millennia in the making.
Global Warming Effects on Animals Affect People TooAnd as wildlife species go their separate ways, humans can also feel the impact. A World Wildlife Fund study found that a northern exodus from the United States to Canada by some types of warblers led to a spread of mountain pine beetles that destroy economically productive balsam fir trees. Similarly, a northward migration of caterpillars in the Netherlands has eroded some forests there.
Which Animals Are Hardest Hit by Global Warming?According to Defenders of Wildlife, some of the wildlife species hardest hit so far by global warming include caribou (reindeer), arctic foxes, toads, polar bears, penguins, gray wolves, tree swallows, painted turtles and salmon. The group fears that unless we take decisive steps to reverse global warming, more and more species will join the list of wildlife populations pushed to the brink of extinction by a changing climate
How Global Warming Affects WildlifeThe key impact of global warming on wildlife is habitat displacement, whereby ecosystems that animals have spent millions of years adapting to shift quickly. Ice giving way to water in polar bear habitat is just one example of this.
Another, according to The Washington Post, is the possibility that warmer spring temperatures could dry up critical breeding habitat for waterfowl in the prairie pothole region, a stretch of land between northern Iowa and central Alberta.
Affected wildlife populations can sometimes move into new spaces and continue to thrive. But concurrent human population growth means that many land areas that might be suitable for such “refugee wildlife” are already taken and cluttered with residential and industrial development. A recent report by the Pew Center for Global Climate Change suggests creating “transitional habitats” or “corridors” that help migrating species by linking natural areas that are otherwise separated by human settlement.
Shifting Life Cycles and Global WarmingBeyond habitat displacement, many scientists agree that global warming is causing a shift in the timing of various natural cyclical events in the lives of animals. Many birds have altered the timing of long-held migratory and reproductive routines to better sync up with a warming climate. And some hibernating animals are ending their slumbers earlier each year, perhaps due to warmer spring temperatures.
To make matters worse, recent research contradicts the long-held hypothesis that different species coexisting in a particular ecosystem respond to global warming as a single entity. Instead, different species sharing like habitat are responding in dissimilar ways, tearing apart ecological communities millennia in the making.
Global Warming Effects on Animals Affect People TooAnd as wildlife species go their separate ways, humans can also feel the impact. A World Wildlife Fund study found that a northern exodus from the United States to Canada by some types of warblers led to a spread of mountain pine beetles that destroy economically productive balsam fir trees. Similarly, a northward migration of caterpillars in the Netherlands has eroded some forests there.
Which Animals Are Hardest Hit by Global Warming?According to Defenders of Wildlife, some of the wildlife species hardest hit so far by global warming include caribou (reindeer), arctic foxes, toads, polar bears, penguins, gray wolves, tree swallows, painted turtles and salmon. The group fears that unless we take decisive steps to reverse global warming, more and more species will join the list of wildlife populations pushed to the brink of extinction by a changing climate
How Do Humans Contribute to Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Global Warming?
Question: How Do Humans Contribute to Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Global Warming?
Answer: Throughout most of human history, and certainly before human beings emerged as a dominant species throughout the world, all climate changes were the direct result of natural forces.
Industrial Age Accelerates Global WarmingThat changed with the start of the Industrial Revolution, when new agricultural and industrial practices began to alter the global climate and environment. Before that time, human activity didn’t release many greenhouse gases, but population growth, deforestation, factory farming, and the widespread use of fossil fuels are creating an excess of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and contributing to global warming.
Science Links Global Warming to Human ActivityIn February 2007, a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), representing the work of 2,500 scientists from more than 130 countries, stated that human activity "very likely" has been the primary cause of global warming since 1950. (In science, nothing is ever claimed to be "certain" or absolute, which leaves open the possibility of further research and discovery, but the term “very likely” indicates more than 90 percent certainty and is considered virtual confirmation.)
The IPCC report also said that human activity has been a major contributor to climate change since the start of the Industrial in the mid-1700s.
Answer: Throughout most of human history, and certainly before human beings emerged as a dominant species throughout the world, all climate changes were the direct result of natural forces.
Industrial Age Accelerates Global WarmingThat changed with the start of the Industrial Revolution, when new agricultural and industrial practices began to alter the global climate and environment. Before that time, human activity didn’t release many greenhouse gases, but population growth, deforestation, factory farming, and the widespread use of fossil fuels are creating an excess of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and contributing to global warming.
Science Links Global Warming to Human ActivityIn February 2007, a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), representing the work of 2,500 scientists from more than 130 countries, stated that human activity "very likely" has been the primary cause of global warming since 1950. (In science, nothing is ever claimed to be "certain" or absolute, which leaves open the possibility of further research and discovery, but the term “very likely” indicates more than 90 percent certainty and is considered virtual confirmation.)
The IPCC report also said that human activity has been a major contributor to climate change since the start of the Industrial in the mid-1700s.
What Causes Global Warming?
Scientists have determined that a number of human activities are contributing to global warming by adding excessive amounts of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide accummulate in the atmosphere and trap heat that normally would exit into outer space.
Greenhouse Gases and Global WarmingWhile many greenhouse gases occur naturally and are needed to create the greenhouse effect that keeps the Earth warm enough to support life, human use of fossil fuels is the main source of excess greenhouse gases. By driving cars, using electricity from coal-fired power plants, or heating our homes with oil or natural gas, we release carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere. Deforestation is another significant source of greenhouse gases, because fewer trees means less carbon dioxide conversion to oxygen.
During the 150 years of the industrial age, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased by 31 percent. Over the same period, the level of atmospheric methane has risen by 151 percent, mostly from agricultural activities such as raising cattle and growing rice.
The Consequences of Global WarmingAs the concentration of greenhouse gases grows, more heat is trapped in the atmosphere and less escapes back into space. This increase in trapped heat changes the climate and alters weather patterns, which may hasten species extinction, influence the length of seasons, cause coastal flooding, and lead to more frequent and severe storms.
Global Warming FAQ Index:
What Causes Global Warming?
What are Greenhouse Gases?
How Do Humans Contribute to Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Global Warming?
Are Levels of Greenhouse Gases Increasing?
Is Global Warming a Hoax?
Greenhouse Gases and Global WarmingWhile many greenhouse gases occur naturally and are needed to create the greenhouse effect that keeps the Earth warm enough to support life, human use of fossil fuels is the main source of excess greenhouse gases. By driving cars, using electricity from coal-fired power plants, or heating our homes with oil or natural gas, we release carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere. Deforestation is another significant source of greenhouse gases, because fewer trees means less carbon dioxide conversion to oxygen.
During the 150 years of the industrial age, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased by 31 percent. Over the same period, the level of atmospheric methane has risen by 151 percent, mostly from agricultural activities such as raising cattle and growing rice.
The Consequences of Global WarmingAs the concentration of greenhouse gases grows, more heat is trapped in the atmosphere and less escapes back into space. This increase in trapped heat changes the climate and alters weather patterns, which may hasten species extinction, influence the length of seasons, cause coastal flooding, and lead to more frequent and severe storms.
Global Warming FAQ Index:
What Causes Global Warming?
What are Greenhouse Gases?
How Do Humans Contribute to Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Global Warming?
Are Levels of Greenhouse Gases Increasing?
Is Global Warming a Hoax?
Exelon Marks Successful First Year of Comprehensive Low-Carbon Strategy by Reaffirming 2020 Emissions Reduction Targets
One year after Exelon unveiled its strategy to eliminate the equivalent of its 2001 carbon footprint by 2020, the company continues to work toward its goal, including new efforts to help the customers and communities it serves to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. To report on its progress to date and how the economic landscape has reshaped its options for achieving its goal, Exelon has published a one-year update, which is available at exeloncorp.com.
Exelon 2020 is the company’s comprehensive strategy to reduce, offset or displace more than 15 million metric tons of GHG emissions per year by 2020 by greening its own operations, helping customers and the communities Exelon serves reduce their GHG emissions, and offering more low-carbon electricity in the marketplace. The 2009 update reports that Exelon so far has reduced more than one-third, or 6 million metric tons, of its GHG emissions.
“We have demonstrated already that we are capable of achieving meaningful carbon reductions,” said Exelon Chairman and CEO John W. Rowe. “But Exelon still has considerable work to do, and we have picked most of the low-hanging fruit.”
Exelon has relied on greening its operations to achieve the bulk of its emissions reductions to date. It also has announced plans to offer substantial new low-carbon electricity in the marketplace by raising the output of Exelon nuclear plants and investing in new renewable energy projects. Going forward, the company will increase its investment in customer initiatives to continue progress toward its 2020 goal. Exelon’s energy delivery companies — ComEd in northern Illinois and PECO in southeastern Pennsylvania — will spend more than $350 million through 2011 on energy efficiency and demand response programs that will help residential and business customers reduce their energy consumption by more than 1.6 million MWh and reduce peak load by 226 MW.
Just last month, ComEd introduced an Advanced Metering Infrastructure pilot program that will provide automated “smart” meters to as many as 141,000 customers, allowing them to use real-time electricity usage data to better manage their electricity bills and reduce energy consumption. Also, after the first year of its energy efficiency programs, ComEd has sold nearly 3 million discounted compact fluorescent light bulbs, recycled close to 12,000 appliances, and is saving customers more than $20 million in annual energy costs. Just today, PECO filed a plan with regulators to spend $342 million on customer programs to reduce overall electricity consumption by 3 percent and peak load by 4.5 percent by 2013. Another filing this summer will propose the deployment of two-way smart meters to PECO’s 1.6 million customers.
Beyond Exelon’s one-third reduction in emissions, other achievements reported at the one-year mark include:
Completing a 38 MW nuclear uprate, the first of many planned uprates that could yield 1,300 to 1,500 MW of additional, virtually GHG-free capacity — the equivalent output of a new advanced nuclear reactor — by 2017, without turning a spade of earth
Reducing energy usage across Exelon’s facilities by 16 percent from 2001 levels
Recycling or reusing more than 30 million pounds of scrap metal and other solid material and 700,000 gallons of oil in 2008 alone
Acquiring 198 MW of wind farm output, 4.8 MW of landfill gas output and 4.5 MW of solar output
Unveiling plans for the nation’s largest urban solar power plant (10 MW) in Chicago.
The one-year update also shows how the flexibility of the company’s plan will allow it to respond to two potential scenarios for the future U.S. economic recovery — one more optimistic in its assumptions, and one more pessimistic — and examines how each would affect the potential requirements for achieving Exelon’s 2020 goal.
“Since we prepared the initial Exelon 2020 analysis, economic growth has slowed and the natural gas prices that set the market price for electricity have plummeted,” said Rowe. “Technologies that once looked attractive are less so, and other technologies that once looked prohibitively expensive look more reasonable. As such, we are continually reassessing our options for reducing emissions and adjusting our strategy accordingly.”
Exelon’s 2009 update also reaffirms the company’s position that although it will not wait for Washington to act, it is encouraged by recent progress Congress has made on climate legislation.
“To fully realize our goal — and for other companies and our society to realize national greenhouse gas reduction goals — we need focused federal action,” Rowe said. “With the House’s passage of the Waxman-Markey bill last week, the nation is one step closer to enacting comprehensive climate change legislation during this Congress. Exelon will continue to work with policymakers in the Senate to encourage the adoption of a sound national energy policy that balances the need to protect consumers, business and the economy with the urgent need to reduce our nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.”
Exelon 2020 is the company’s comprehensive strategy to reduce, offset or displace more than 15 million metric tons of GHG emissions per year by 2020 by greening its own operations, helping customers and the communities Exelon serves reduce their GHG emissions, and offering more low-carbon electricity in the marketplace. The 2009 update reports that Exelon so far has reduced more than one-third, or 6 million metric tons, of its GHG emissions.
“We have demonstrated already that we are capable of achieving meaningful carbon reductions,” said Exelon Chairman and CEO John W. Rowe. “But Exelon still has considerable work to do, and we have picked most of the low-hanging fruit.”
Exelon has relied on greening its operations to achieve the bulk of its emissions reductions to date. It also has announced plans to offer substantial new low-carbon electricity in the marketplace by raising the output of Exelon nuclear plants and investing in new renewable energy projects. Going forward, the company will increase its investment in customer initiatives to continue progress toward its 2020 goal. Exelon’s energy delivery companies — ComEd in northern Illinois and PECO in southeastern Pennsylvania — will spend more than $350 million through 2011 on energy efficiency and demand response programs that will help residential and business customers reduce their energy consumption by more than 1.6 million MWh and reduce peak load by 226 MW.
Just last month, ComEd introduced an Advanced Metering Infrastructure pilot program that will provide automated “smart” meters to as many as 141,000 customers, allowing them to use real-time electricity usage data to better manage their electricity bills and reduce energy consumption. Also, after the first year of its energy efficiency programs, ComEd has sold nearly 3 million discounted compact fluorescent light bulbs, recycled close to 12,000 appliances, and is saving customers more than $20 million in annual energy costs. Just today, PECO filed a plan with regulators to spend $342 million on customer programs to reduce overall electricity consumption by 3 percent and peak load by 4.5 percent by 2013. Another filing this summer will propose the deployment of two-way smart meters to PECO’s 1.6 million customers.
Beyond Exelon’s one-third reduction in emissions, other achievements reported at the one-year mark include:
Completing a 38 MW nuclear uprate, the first of many planned uprates that could yield 1,300 to 1,500 MW of additional, virtually GHG-free capacity — the equivalent output of a new advanced nuclear reactor — by 2017, without turning a spade of earth
Reducing energy usage across Exelon’s facilities by 16 percent from 2001 levels
Recycling or reusing more than 30 million pounds of scrap metal and other solid material and 700,000 gallons of oil in 2008 alone
Acquiring 198 MW of wind farm output, 4.8 MW of landfill gas output and 4.5 MW of solar output
Unveiling plans for the nation’s largest urban solar power plant (10 MW) in Chicago.
The one-year update also shows how the flexibility of the company’s plan will allow it to respond to two potential scenarios for the future U.S. economic recovery — one more optimistic in its assumptions, and one more pessimistic — and examines how each would affect the potential requirements for achieving Exelon’s 2020 goal.
“Since we prepared the initial Exelon 2020 analysis, economic growth has slowed and the natural gas prices that set the market price for electricity have plummeted,” said Rowe. “Technologies that once looked attractive are less so, and other technologies that once looked prohibitively expensive look more reasonable. As such, we are continually reassessing our options for reducing emissions and adjusting our strategy accordingly.”
Exelon’s 2009 update also reaffirms the company’s position that although it will not wait for Washington to act, it is encouraged by recent progress Congress has made on climate legislation.
“To fully realize our goal — and for other companies and our society to realize national greenhouse gas reduction goals — we need focused federal action,” Rowe said. “With the House’s passage of the Waxman-Markey bill last week, the nation is one step closer to enacting comprehensive climate change legislation during this Congress. Exelon will continue to work with policymakers in the Senate to encourage the adoption of a sound national energy policy that balances the need to protect consumers, business and the economy with the urgent need to reduce our nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.”
What is the Greenhouse Effect?
The “greenhouse effect” often gets a bad rap because of its association with global warming, but the truth is we couldn’t live without it.
What Causes the Greenhouse Effect?Life on earth depends on energy from the sun. About 30 percent of the sunlight that beams toward Earth is deflected by the outer atmosphere and scattered back into space. The rest reaches the planet’s surface and is reflected upward again as a type of slow-moving energy called infrared radiation.
As it rises, infrared radiation is absorbed by “greenhouse gases” such as water vapor, carbon dioxide, ozone and methane, which slows its escape from the atmosphere.
Although greenhouse gases make up only about 1 percent of the Earth’s atmosphere, they regulate our climate by trapping heat and holding it in a kind of warm-air blanket that surrounds the planet.
This phenomenon is what scientists call the "greenhouse effect." Without it, scientists estimate that the average temperature on Earth would be colder by approximately 30 degrees Celsius (54 degrees Fahrenheit), far too cold to sustain our current ecosystem.
How Do Humans Contribute to the Greenhouse Effect?While the greenhouse effect is an essential environmental prerequisite for life on Earth, there really can be too much of a good thing.
The problems begin when human activities distort and accelerate the natural process by creating more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere than are necessary to warm the planet to an ideal temperature.
Burning natural gas, coal and oil —including gasoline for automobile engines—raises the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Some farming practices and land-use changes increase the levels of methane and nitrous oxide.
Many factories produce long-lasting industrial gases that do not occur naturally, yet contribute significantly to the enhanced greenhouse effect and “global warming” that is currently under way.
Deforestation also contributes to global warming. Trees use carbon dioxide and give off oxygen in its place, which helps to create the optimal balance of gases in the atmosphere. As more forests are logged for timber or cut down to make way for farming, however, there are fewer trees to perform this critical function.
Population growth is another factor in global warming, because as more people use fossil fuels for heat, transportation and manufacturing the level of greenhouse gases continues to increase. As more farming occurs to feed millions of new people, more greenhouse gases enter the atmosphere.
Ultimately, more greenhouse gases means more infrared radiation trapped and held, which gradually increases the temperature of the Earth’s surface and the air in the lower atmosphere.
The Average Global Temperature is Increasing QuicklyToday, the increase in the Earth’s temperature is increasing with unprecedented speed. To understand just how quickly global warming is accelerating, consider this:
During the entire 20th century, the average global temperature increased by about 0.6 degrees Celsius (slightly more than 1 degree Fahrenheit).
Using computer climate models, scientists estimate that by the year 2100 the average global temperature will increase by 1.4 degrees to 5.8 degrees Celsius (approximately 2.5 degrees to 10.5 degrees Fahrenheit).
Not All Scientists AgreeWhile the majority of mainstream scientists agree that global warming is a serious problem that is growing steadily worse, there are some who disagree. John Christy, a professor and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville is a respected climatologist who argues that global warming isn’t worth worrying about.
Christy reached that opinion after analyzing millions of measurements from weather satellites in an effort to find a global temperature trend. He found no sign of global warming in the satellite data, and now believes that predictions of global warming by as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the 21st century are incorrect
Scientists agree that even a small increase in the global temperature would lead to significant climate and weather changes, affecting cloud cover, precipitation, wind patterns, the frequency and severity of storms, and the duration of seasons.
Rising temperatures would raise sea levels as well, reducing supplies of fresh water as flooding occurs along coastlines worldwide and salt water reaches inland.
Many of the world’s endangered species would become extinct as rising temperatures changed their habitat.
Millions of people also would be affected, especially poor people who live in precarious locations or depend on the land for a subsistence living.
Certain vector-borne diseases carried by animals or insects, such as malaria, would become more widespread as warmer conditions expanded their range.
Carbon Dioxide Emissions are the Biggest ProblemCurrently, carbon dioxide accounts for more than 60 percent of the enhanced greenhouse effect caused by the increase of greenhouse gases, and the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing by more than 10 percent every 20 years.
If emissions of carbon dioxide continue to grow at current rates, then the level of the gas in the atmosphere will likely double, or possibly even triple, from pre-industrial levels during the 21st century.
Climate Changes are InevitableAccording to the United Nations, some climate change is already inevitable because of emissions that have occurred since the dawn of the Industrial Age.
While the Earth’s climate does not respond quickly to external changes, many scientists believe that global warming already has significant momentum due to 150 years of industrialization in many countries around the world. As a result, global warming will continue to affect life on Earth for hundreds of years, even if greenhouse gas emissions are reduced and the increase in atmospheric levels halted.
What is Being Done to Reduce Global Warming?To lessen those long-term effects, many nations, communities and individuals are taking action now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and slow global warming by reducing dependence on fossil fuels, increasing the use of renewable energy, expanding forests, and making lifestyle choices that help to sustain the environment.
Whether they will be able to recruit enough people to join them, and whether their combined efforts will be enough to head off the most serious effects of global warming, are open questions that can only be answered by future developments
What Causes the Greenhouse Effect?Life on earth depends on energy from the sun. About 30 percent of the sunlight that beams toward Earth is deflected by the outer atmosphere and scattered back into space. The rest reaches the planet’s surface and is reflected upward again as a type of slow-moving energy called infrared radiation.
As it rises, infrared radiation is absorbed by “greenhouse gases” such as water vapor, carbon dioxide, ozone and methane, which slows its escape from the atmosphere.
Although greenhouse gases make up only about 1 percent of the Earth’s atmosphere, they regulate our climate by trapping heat and holding it in a kind of warm-air blanket that surrounds the planet.
This phenomenon is what scientists call the "greenhouse effect." Without it, scientists estimate that the average temperature on Earth would be colder by approximately 30 degrees Celsius (54 degrees Fahrenheit), far too cold to sustain our current ecosystem.
How Do Humans Contribute to the Greenhouse Effect?While the greenhouse effect is an essential environmental prerequisite for life on Earth, there really can be too much of a good thing.
The problems begin when human activities distort and accelerate the natural process by creating more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere than are necessary to warm the planet to an ideal temperature.
Burning natural gas, coal and oil —including gasoline for automobile engines—raises the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Some farming practices and land-use changes increase the levels of methane and nitrous oxide.
Many factories produce long-lasting industrial gases that do not occur naturally, yet contribute significantly to the enhanced greenhouse effect and “global warming” that is currently under way.
Deforestation also contributes to global warming. Trees use carbon dioxide and give off oxygen in its place, which helps to create the optimal balance of gases in the atmosphere. As more forests are logged for timber or cut down to make way for farming, however, there are fewer trees to perform this critical function.
Population growth is another factor in global warming, because as more people use fossil fuels for heat, transportation and manufacturing the level of greenhouse gases continues to increase. As more farming occurs to feed millions of new people, more greenhouse gases enter the atmosphere.
Ultimately, more greenhouse gases means more infrared radiation trapped and held, which gradually increases the temperature of the Earth’s surface and the air in the lower atmosphere.
The Average Global Temperature is Increasing QuicklyToday, the increase in the Earth’s temperature is increasing with unprecedented speed. To understand just how quickly global warming is accelerating, consider this:
During the entire 20th century, the average global temperature increased by about 0.6 degrees Celsius (slightly more than 1 degree Fahrenheit).
Using computer climate models, scientists estimate that by the year 2100 the average global temperature will increase by 1.4 degrees to 5.8 degrees Celsius (approximately 2.5 degrees to 10.5 degrees Fahrenheit).
Not All Scientists AgreeWhile the majority of mainstream scientists agree that global warming is a serious problem that is growing steadily worse, there are some who disagree. John Christy, a professor and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville is a respected climatologist who argues that global warming isn’t worth worrying about.
Christy reached that opinion after analyzing millions of measurements from weather satellites in an effort to find a global temperature trend. He found no sign of global warming in the satellite data, and now believes that predictions of global warming by as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the 21st century are incorrect
Scientists agree that even a small increase in the global temperature would lead to significant climate and weather changes, affecting cloud cover, precipitation, wind patterns, the frequency and severity of storms, and the duration of seasons.
Rising temperatures would raise sea levels as well, reducing supplies of fresh water as flooding occurs along coastlines worldwide and salt water reaches inland.
Many of the world’s endangered species would become extinct as rising temperatures changed their habitat.
Millions of people also would be affected, especially poor people who live in precarious locations or depend on the land for a subsistence living.
Certain vector-borne diseases carried by animals or insects, such as malaria, would become more widespread as warmer conditions expanded their range.
Carbon Dioxide Emissions are the Biggest ProblemCurrently, carbon dioxide accounts for more than 60 percent of the enhanced greenhouse effect caused by the increase of greenhouse gases, and the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing by more than 10 percent every 20 years.
If emissions of carbon dioxide continue to grow at current rates, then the level of the gas in the atmosphere will likely double, or possibly even triple, from pre-industrial levels during the 21st century.
Climate Changes are InevitableAccording to the United Nations, some climate change is already inevitable because of emissions that have occurred since the dawn of the Industrial Age.
While the Earth’s climate does not respond quickly to external changes, many scientists believe that global warming already has significant momentum due to 150 years of industrialization in many countries around the world. As a result, global warming will continue to affect life on Earth for hundreds of years, even if greenhouse gas emissions are reduced and the increase in atmospheric levels halted.
What is Being Done to Reduce Global Warming?To lessen those long-term effects, many nations, communities and individuals are taking action now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and slow global warming by reducing dependence on fossil fuels, increasing the use of renewable energy, expanding forests, and making lifestyle choices that help to sustain the environment.
Whether they will be able to recruit enough people to join them, and whether their combined efforts will be enough to head off the most serious effects of global warming, are open questions that can only be answered by future developments
Environment clearance process will be made transparent: Jairam
In an attempt to clean up the environmental clearance stable, environment minister Jairam Ramesh on Friday said the chairman of Expert
Committee, P Abraham, who was also on the board of several power companies, had resigned. The committee is one of the seven that recommends environmental clearance of various development projects. The move came after NGOs raised the issue but even then it took more than a week for Abraham to resign. Ramesh said it was part of the plan to improve the clearance process and make it more transparent. As part of the move, he has made it mandatory for companies to disclose the clearance letters and periodic status of compliance. At the same time, hinting that the clearances would become tougher to secure, Ramesh said, “The ministry has an unnaturally healthy rate of accepting proposals — 98%. I would be much happier with a higher rate of rejection.” While promising to reduce the time taken for both forest and environment clearances, Ramesh said he was studying how to do away with the “business of in-principle clearance”.
Committee, P Abraham, who was also on the board of several power companies, had resigned. The committee is one of the seven that recommends environmental clearance of various development projects. The move came after NGOs raised the issue but even then it took more than a week for Abraham to resign. Ramesh said it was part of the plan to improve the clearance process and make it more transparent. As part of the move, he has made it mandatory for companies to disclose the clearance letters and periodic status of compliance. At the same time, hinting that the clearances would become tougher to secure, Ramesh said, “The ministry has an unnaturally healthy rate of accepting proposals — 98%. I would be much happier with a higher rate of rejection.” While promising to reduce the time taken for both forest and environment clearances, Ramesh said he was studying how to do away with the “business of in-principle clearance”.
SA's greenhouse emissions very high, says WWF
"South Africa's emissions are very high," said the World Wide Fund for Nature's (WWF) local climate change manager, Richard Worthington."It is well above the developing country average partly because of our strong dependence on coal."He was speaking in Johannesburg at the release of climate scorecards for G8 and G5 countries which map their carbon emission trends.The scorecards check for improvements since 1990, the current status of each country and its policies for the future.Out of the G8 countries, Germany received the best score, followed by the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United States (rated seventh out of the G8) and Canada in the last place.Worthington said the G5 countries, which are Brazil, India, China, Mexico and South Africa, had done more to commit themselves to climate change goals than some of the G8 countries.Although the G5 countries were not ranked like the G5 countries, the scorecard showed that South Africa's current carbon emissions were 11 tonnes a person a year."To be carbon neutral by 2050, emissions in South Africa need to be one tonne per person per annum," said Worthington.
Brazil was currently standing at five tonnes of carbon emissions a person a year, China and India were standing at six tonnes and Mexico at two tonnes.This while 73% of South Africa's population had access to electricity, compared to 99% in China, 95% in Brazil and Mexico and 43% in India, according to the information released by the WWF.Among the G8 countries, Germany's emissions were 12 tonnes a person a year. The UK had 11 tonnes, Italy nine, Japan 12, Russia 16 and the US 25."South Africa's emissions per capita are only slightly below the average of industrialised countries," said Worthington.However, the government's long-term climate change plans showed promise, he said."South Africa provided the most comprehensive plan [out of the G5 countries] on options to reduce emissions in the future ... We're not there yet, but we seem to be going in the right direction."Worthington said the African National Congress (ANC) acknowledged the importance of climate change goals at its conference in Polokwane in 2007.He quoted from a Polokwane resolution, which stated that the ANC would "recognise that climate change is a new threat on a global scale and poses an enormous burden upon South Africans and Africans as a whole, because we are the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change".Asked if he had any message to President Jacob Zuma, Worthington replied: "I guess the message would be [to] go back and read the Polokwane resolution again."On the new administration's attitude toward the challenges of climate change, he said: "It's too early to tell, but so far, so good ..."South Africa has acknowledged that emissions need to be reduced by 30% by 2050." Climate change refers to changes in temperature on earth that are happening too fast because of human intervention.According to the South African Weather Service website, climate change could affect South Africa by causing unreliable rainfall which could negatively affect agriculture and forestry.Climate change also causes sea levels to increase, but the consequences of that in South Africa "are not very extensive because the coastline is relatively steep", says the website.However, higher sea levels could create changes in ocean currents, which could cause "major changes in several fish resources important to the country".Small isolated plant populations may go extinct in South Africa as a result of climate change."South Africa has about 10% of all the plant species in the world, of which about half occur nowhere else on earth."Warming, and a change in the seasonal rainfall of the Cape floral kingdom, are issues of concern to conservationists," states the website.The Kyoto Protocol, which will come under discussion again at Copenhagen later this year, aims to get countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prevent the earth from getting warmer too fast for nature to cope.According to the plan of action, industrialised countries must fund climate change programmes in developing nations. -- Sapa
Brazil was currently standing at five tonnes of carbon emissions a person a year, China and India were standing at six tonnes and Mexico at two tonnes.This while 73% of South Africa's population had access to electricity, compared to 99% in China, 95% in Brazil and Mexico and 43% in India, according to the information released by the WWF.Among the G8 countries, Germany's emissions were 12 tonnes a person a year. The UK had 11 tonnes, Italy nine, Japan 12, Russia 16 and the US 25."South Africa's emissions per capita are only slightly below the average of industrialised countries," said Worthington.However, the government's long-term climate change plans showed promise, he said."South Africa provided the most comprehensive plan [out of the G5 countries] on options to reduce emissions in the future ... We're not there yet, but we seem to be going in the right direction."Worthington said the African National Congress (ANC) acknowledged the importance of climate change goals at its conference in Polokwane in 2007.He quoted from a Polokwane resolution, which stated that the ANC would "recognise that climate change is a new threat on a global scale and poses an enormous burden upon South Africans and Africans as a whole, because we are the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change".Asked if he had any message to President Jacob Zuma, Worthington replied: "I guess the message would be [to] go back and read the Polokwane resolution again."On the new administration's attitude toward the challenges of climate change, he said: "It's too early to tell, but so far, so good ..."South Africa has acknowledged that emissions need to be reduced by 30% by 2050." Climate change refers to changes in temperature on earth that are happening too fast because of human intervention.According to the South African Weather Service website, climate change could affect South Africa by causing unreliable rainfall which could negatively affect agriculture and forestry.Climate change also causes sea levels to increase, but the consequences of that in South Africa "are not very extensive because the coastline is relatively steep", says the website.However, higher sea levels could create changes in ocean currents, which could cause "major changes in several fish resources important to the country".Small isolated plant populations may go extinct in South Africa as a result of climate change."South Africa has about 10% of all the plant species in the world, of which about half occur nowhere else on earth."Warming, and a change in the seasonal rainfall of the Cape floral kingdom, are issues of concern to conservationists," states the website.The Kyoto Protocol, which will come under discussion again at Copenhagen later this year, aims to get countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prevent the earth from getting warmer too fast for nature to cope.According to the plan of action, industrialised countries must fund climate change programmes in developing nations. -- Sapa
Uganda: Cattle Corridor in Climate Scare
Going by this year's rainfall performance and outlook reports issued by the meteorology department, most areas in Uganda have received poor rainfall.
Statistics show that most parts of the country have received rainfall within the near normal to below normal range throughout the first half of this year, a proof that global warming is real.
In the last two years alone, the country has experienced shortage of food, inflation, floods and general increase in temperature, which has affected the economy.
Global warming, a gradual increase in the temperature of the atmosphere, is tending to change the earth's climate permanently. The warming is largely the result of emissions of greenhouse gasses for human activities, fossil fuel combustion and changes in land use such as deforestation and agriculture as well as industrial processing.
The greenhouse effects is a phenomenon whereby certain gases (CO2 methane and the other gases) in the earth's atmosphere, absorb heat that would otherwise escape to space.
As the country feels the impacts of climate changes, the worst scenario is reported in the cattle corridor, stretching from the northern region to the southwest region.
It is reported that the cattle corridor has a fragile ecosystem that is gravely affecting agriculture, cattle keeping, health and water.
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetB" );
Ms Rehema Kahigwa Akiki, a subsistence farmer of Wabigalo village, Wabinyonyi Sub-county in Nakasongola District (one of the districts that lies in the corridor), says the situation is worrying.
Ms Kahigwa, a single mother of eight, whose livelihood solely depends on farming, says bad weather has frustrated their efforts to overcome poverty.
The farmer, who grows matooke (bananas) and rears local poultry, reveals that chronic drought has gravely affected her banana plantations, diminishing her returns by more than half.
"In order to maintain this garden, I have to irrigate it daily with water I fetch from a water dam located about one and half kilometre from here," a distressed mother says.
"At times I am forced to buy water at Shs200 per 20litre jerrican to irrigate because I can't sit and look on when my garden, the only source of income, is drying up."
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetC" );
To Salongo Stanley Senku, a commercial farmer of Macumu-Sasira parish in Nakasongola District, this year's first season has been a gamble. He says the change in weather patterns has prompted them to plant whenever they see some rains, which was a grave move.
"We have harvested nothing in this year's first season due to poor rain," Mr Senku who has lived on farming for over 30 years, says.
All crops he planted after receiving mild rains stunted or dried up as temperatures soared.
"This season alone, I have slashed two maize plantations, one of seven acres and another on of 10 acres after they dried up," he narrates.
Salongo Senku says Uganda's two rainy seasons, the long rain starting in March and lasting through until June and the short rains running from around October/November to December are now erratic.
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetD" );
The farmers' misery, however, is echoed by the District's Production officer Sarah Nakamya, who admits that the district is in crisis.
"We have been advising farmers to diversify cattle keeping with crop farming, but what disturbs, is that people are not harvesting due to bad weather and animals have started dying," she laments. She says though they receive weather focus reports from the meteorology department, purposely to advise farmers on when to start sowing with a view of minimising losses, the practice has yielded nothing because reports are also erratic.
She says with such experiences, farmers have lost trust in them. Despite the fact that Nakasongola greatly depend on agriculture, the district has intensely destroyed its tree cover due charcoal burning.
Currently, the district is ranked among the three districts (Nakasongola, Kiboga and Apac) that lead in charcoal supply.
Meanwhile, Ms Nakamya, says the district is currently sensitising residents to abandon charcoal burning and plant more trees to restore what has been degraded. But the rate at which trees are cut doesn't match with those being planted.
Currently, deforestation in Uganda is alarming. Over 90,000 hectares of Uganda's forest cover disappear per year yet deforestation is responsible for up to 20 per cent greenhouse gases.
According to the March 1 to April 30, 2009 meteorology report, places in the Lake Basin and central, Kampala recorded 43 per cent, Namulonge 61 per cent and Kituza 67 per cent of their Long-Term Mean (LTM) rainfall, which was in the below normal range. Only Kibanda, Entebbe and Mubende recorded amounts which were within the near normal range; 102 per cent, 93 per cent and 80 per cent respectively.
Statistics show that most parts of the country have received rainfall within the near normal to below normal range throughout the first half of this year, a proof that global warming is real.
In the last two years alone, the country has experienced shortage of food, inflation, floods and general increase in temperature, which has affected the economy.
Global warming, a gradual increase in the temperature of the atmosphere, is tending to change the earth's climate permanently. The warming is largely the result of emissions of greenhouse gasses for human activities, fossil fuel combustion and changes in land use such as deforestation and agriculture as well as industrial processing.
The greenhouse effects is a phenomenon whereby certain gases (CO2 methane and the other gases) in the earth's atmosphere, absorb heat that would otherwise escape to space.
As the country feels the impacts of climate changes, the worst scenario is reported in the cattle corridor, stretching from the northern region to the southwest region.
It is reported that the cattle corridor has a fragile ecosystem that is gravely affecting agriculture, cattle keeping, health and water.
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetB" );
Ms Rehema Kahigwa Akiki, a subsistence farmer of Wabigalo village, Wabinyonyi Sub-county in Nakasongola District (one of the districts that lies in the corridor), says the situation is worrying.
Ms Kahigwa, a single mother of eight, whose livelihood solely depends on farming, says bad weather has frustrated their efforts to overcome poverty.
The farmer, who grows matooke (bananas) and rears local poultry, reveals that chronic drought has gravely affected her banana plantations, diminishing her returns by more than half.
"In order to maintain this garden, I have to irrigate it daily with water I fetch from a water dam located about one and half kilometre from here," a distressed mother says.
"At times I am forced to buy water at Shs200 per 20litre jerrican to irrigate because I can't sit and look on when my garden, the only source of income, is drying up."
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetC" );
To Salongo Stanley Senku, a commercial farmer of Macumu-Sasira parish in Nakasongola District, this year's first season has been a gamble. He says the change in weather patterns has prompted them to plant whenever they see some rains, which was a grave move.
"We have harvested nothing in this year's first season due to poor rain," Mr Senku who has lived on farming for over 30 years, says.
All crops he planted after receiving mild rains stunted or dried up as temperatures soared.
"This season alone, I have slashed two maize plantations, one of seven acres and another on of 10 acres after they dried up," he narrates.
Salongo Senku says Uganda's two rainy seasons, the long rain starting in March and lasting through until June and the short rains running from around October/November to December are now erratic.
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetD" );
The farmers' misery, however, is echoed by the District's Production officer Sarah Nakamya, who admits that the district is in crisis.
"We have been advising farmers to diversify cattle keeping with crop farming, but what disturbs, is that people are not harvesting due to bad weather and animals have started dying," she laments. She says though they receive weather focus reports from the meteorology department, purposely to advise farmers on when to start sowing with a view of minimising losses, the practice has yielded nothing because reports are also erratic.
She says with such experiences, farmers have lost trust in them. Despite the fact that Nakasongola greatly depend on agriculture, the district has intensely destroyed its tree cover due charcoal burning.
Currently, the district is ranked among the three districts (Nakasongola, Kiboga and Apac) that lead in charcoal supply.
Meanwhile, Ms Nakamya, says the district is currently sensitising residents to abandon charcoal burning and plant more trees to restore what has been degraded. But the rate at which trees are cut doesn't match with those being planted.
Currently, deforestation in Uganda is alarming. Over 90,000 hectares of Uganda's forest cover disappear per year yet deforestation is responsible for up to 20 per cent greenhouse gases.
According to the March 1 to April 30, 2009 meteorology report, places in the Lake Basin and central, Kampala recorded 43 per cent, Namulonge 61 per cent and Kituza 67 per cent of their Long-Term Mean (LTM) rainfall, which was in the below normal range. Only Kibanda, Entebbe and Mubende recorded amounts which were within the near normal range; 102 per cent, 93 per cent and 80 per cent respectively.
Traffic Noise Pollution
Vehicular traffic noise pollution may be one of those everyday pollutions that we overlook, considering it to be annoying but not really detrimental to our health or well-being. In reality, traffic noise might just be killing many of us slowly, as well as causing lots of other irritations that we just can’t get away from.
Healthy human hearing is very sensitive, so to be subjected to prolonged exposure to traffic noise estimated to be in the range 50 to 95 dB (of equivalent sound level, or the energy mean sound level, to use the right jargon) can be both annoying and damaging to your hearing. The last century is the noisiest in the history of the world due to the advent of fossil fuels.
It seems every country has their own limits for what levels are considered to be non-damaging to the human ear, some say 85dB for more than 8 hours a day (which means 88dB for 4 hours, 91dB for 2 hours and 94dB for 1 hour, in terms of acoustical energy exposure). For sleeping, the World Health Organization proposes limits of 30 dB(A) constant noise and 45 dB(A) for individual noise events.
More than just hearing damage though, there is the stress of noise pollution that can lead to sleepless nights, anxiety, higher blood pressure and even increased chances of heart failure. Missing out on sleep makes people irritable and compromises the immune system, that lack of sleep might also mean a lack of concentration at school or work, which mean lower grades, lower pay rises and maybe an increase in accidents. Sleepless nights can also make partners grumpy the next day, meaning less blissful partnerships and maybe even contributing to break-ups.
I think we should all be looking forward to the arrival of electric and/or solar powered vehicles, they will be a lot quieter than today’s gasoline and diesel powered ones, so quiet in fact that governments might have to legislate that manufactures make them more noisy. The concern is that children and visually impaired people might not hear the vehicles coming when they are crossing the road or in parking lots.
Lotus, the specialist UK car manufacturer, has demonstrated a 300W externally mounted sound system on a Toyota Prius Hybrid which made engine like sounds when the vehicle was in hybrid mode but which switched-off when the internal gasoline engine came on. Hopefully the regulations won’t turn your future electric vehicle from a whispering buzz into a roaring V8, otherwise we won’t be able to look forward to quieter, more harmonious and healthier cities.
Healthy human hearing is very sensitive, so to be subjected to prolonged exposure to traffic noise estimated to be in the range 50 to 95 dB (of equivalent sound level, or the energy mean sound level, to use the right jargon) can be both annoying and damaging to your hearing. The last century is the noisiest in the history of the world due to the advent of fossil fuels.
It seems every country has their own limits for what levels are considered to be non-damaging to the human ear, some say 85dB for more than 8 hours a day (which means 88dB for 4 hours, 91dB for 2 hours and 94dB for 1 hour, in terms of acoustical energy exposure). For sleeping, the World Health Organization proposes limits of 30 dB(A) constant noise and 45 dB(A) for individual noise events.
More than just hearing damage though, there is the stress of noise pollution that can lead to sleepless nights, anxiety, higher blood pressure and even increased chances of heart failure. Missing out on sleep makes people irritable and compromises the immune system, that lack of sleep might also mean a lack of concentration at school or work, which mean lower grades, lower pay rises and maybe an increase in accidents. Sleepless nights can also make partners grumpy the next day, meaning less blissful partnerships and maybe even contributing to break-ups.
I think we should all be looking forward to the arrival of electric and/or solar powered vehicles, they will be a lot quieter than today’s gasoline and diesel powered ones, so quiet in fact that governments might have to legislate that manufactures make them more noisy. The concern is that children and visually impaired people might not hear the vehicles coming when they are crossing the road or in parking lots.
Lotus, the specialist UK car manufacturer, has demonstrated a 300W externally mounted sound system on a Toyota Prius Hybrid which made engine like sounds when the vehicle was in hybrid mode but which switched-off when the internal gasoline engine came on. Hopefully the regulations won’t turn your future electric vehicle from a whispering buzz into a roaring V8, otherwise we won’t be able to look forward to quieter, more harmonious and healthier cities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)