Archive for the ‘Climate change’ Category

A climate-change curse?

Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010

According to UN climate-change experts, the melting of Himalayan glaciers threatens 1.3 billion Asians. Over a billion people in Asia depend on Himalayan glaciers for water, but experts say they are rapidly melting, thereby threatening to bring drought and disease to large swathes of the continent.

The Himalayan glaciers, a 2,400-kilometre range that sweeps through Pakistan, India, China, Nepal and Bhutan, provides headwaters for Asia’s nine largest rivers, are a lifeline for the 1.3 billion people who depend on the rivers’ downstream water resources.

But rising temperatures in the last 30 years are dramatically accelerating the rate at which the glaciers are shrinking. Campaigners warn that some glaciers could disappear within a few decades. Scientists predict that most will be gone in 40 years as a result of climate change.

According to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s top authority on climate change, the deal reached at the Copenhagen Climate Summit in December 2009 “will have huge ramifications for the lives of hundreds of millions of people living in the Himalayan drainage systems who are already vulnerable due to widespread poverty.” It has warned that “Himalayan glaciers could disappear altogether by 2035.”

Experts say the effects of global warming are already being felt in the region. The Nepal-based International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), which has conducted research on Himalayan glaciers for 30 years, warns of an “urgent need for more research on the impact of climate change. Most experts accept that temperatures are changing, and this is happening more rapidly at altitudes. Current trends in glacial melt suggest flows in major Asian rivers, including the Ganges, the Indus and the Yellow River, will be substantially reduced in coming decades.

When the shortage arrives, it may happen abruptly, with water systems going from abundant to scarce in perhaps a few decades. When the glaciers get hotter, you get more water, but there comes a point when the water will run out.

It seems Pakistan’s massive glacier melt and flooding pattern fits the grim picture UN climate experts predicted for South Asia. We need to look into the scientific cause of this huge environmental disaster rather than consigning it to the will of Allah or divine retribution. Where do we go from here?

Reports from upper Swat and Chitral confirm the predictions of UN climate-change experts regarding Himalayan glaciers’ vulnerability to global warming and its cataclysmic consequences, which are already painfully evident today. This does not appear to be simple monsoon rain precipitation resulting in heavy flooding as our meteorologists and government suggest. Matters are certainly more challenging.

Mother Earth is extracting a heavy price for humans’ deliberate ignorance, extravagant lifestyle and callous policies. UN experts at the Copenhagen Conference listed Pakistan, together with Afghanistan, as most vulnerable to climate change in South Asia.

“Pakistan’s troubles pale compared with what it might face 25 years from now. When it comes to stability of the world’s most volatile regions, it is the fate of the Himalayas’ glaciers that should be keeping us awake all night!” according to Foreign Policy Magazine.

“Pakistan’s ability to tackle droughts, floods, food shortages, large ecological migrations and disease outbreaks, and still continue as a viable entity, will depend on its preparedness.”

There is no evidence that Pakistani decision-makers are taking climate-change warnings seriously enough. It is time to face the terrible reality, especially the vulnerable majority, for the wrongs of the affluent in the developed world, and Pakistan’s elitist, environmentally destructive policies.

A World Bank report estimates that since more than half of Pakistan’s land area is arid and semi-arid, expected changes in temperatures and rainfall patterns in the future could impinge upon the country’s food security, besides the livelihoods of millions of herders and pastoralists.

The impact of glacier melt would result in initial flooding and future drying of water resources and impact on water consumption. Reduced soil productivity and land use changes would shrink land resources. The impact of drought and desiccation upon ecosystems (wetlands), particularly those which are glacier-fed, would result in reduction of alpine forest cover and loss of wetlands due to exposure to water-logging. The health and social development impact will be outbreaks of heat-related and insect-transmitted diseases, malnutrition, food and water insecurity, migration and conflict.

UN climate-change experts should study the severity of the problem and propose policy recommendations, in handling climate change. The militarisation of South Asia, especially Afghanistan and Pakistan, has already destroyed the ecosystem and biodiversity of the entire region. Human greed and rapacity has a lot to do with our present predicament; the stars above are not at fault.

The Sarhad Conservation Network has proposed reputable environmental experts at IUCN and UN climate organisations to determine the cause and impact of glacier melt resulting in the flood havoc in Pakistan.

Pakistan needs to reflect on its critical ecosystem and act now. As UN secretary general Ban Ki Moon warned at the summit in the Danish capital, “failure to reach broad consensus agreement in Copenhagen would be morally inexcusable, economically short-sighted and politically unwise.”

The writer is general secretary of the Sarhad Conservation Network, an advocacy NGO for conservation of natural and cultural heritage, biodiversity and healthy lifestyles.

Source:  http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=254382

The common editorial on climate change

Monday, December 7th, 2009

Below is the text of the common editorial on climate change. Fifty-six newspapers from around the world have committed to speaking with a single voice on the eve of the Copenhagen conference by running identical editorials on December 7. The News op-ed pages have been a proud participant in the preparation of this call for politicians and states to transcend parochialism and deliver a meaningful deal for the world.

Today 56 newspapers in 44 countries take the unprecedented step of speaking with one voice through a common editorial. We do so because humanity faces a profound emergency.

Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet, and with it our prosperity and security. The dangers have been becoming apparent for a generation. Now the facts have started to speak: 11 of the past 14 years have been the warmest on record, the Arctic ice-cap is melting and last year’s inflamed oil and food prices provide a foretaste of future havoc. In scientific journals the question is no longer whether humans are to blame, but how little time we have got left to limit the damage. Yet so far the world’s response has been feeble and half-hearted.

Climate change has been caused over centuries, has consequences that will endure for all time and our prospects of taming it will be determined in the next 14 days. We call on the representatives of the 192 countries gathered in Copenhagen not to hesitate, not to fall into dispute, not to blame each other but to seize opportunity from the greatest modern failure of politics. This should not be a fight between the rich world and the poor world, or between east and west. Climate change affects everyone, and must be solved by everyone.

The science is complex but the facts are clear. The world needs to take steps to limit temperature rises to 2C, an aim that will require global emissions to peak and begin falling within the next 5-10 years. A bigger rise of 3-4C — the smallest increase we can prudently expect to follow inaction — would parch continents, turning farmland into desert. Half of all species could become extinct, untold millions of people would be displaced, whole nations drowned by the sea.

Few believe that Copenhagen can any longer produce a fully polished treaty; real progress towards one could only begin with the arrival of President Obama in the White House and the reversal of years of US obstructionism. Even now the world finds itself at the mercy of American domestic politics, for the president cannot fully commit to the action required until the US Congress has done so.

But the politicians in Copenhagen can and must agree the essential elements of a fair and effective deal and, crucially, a firm timetable for turning it into a treaty. Next June’s UN climate meeting in Bonn should be their deadline. As one negotiator put it: “We can go into extra time but we can’t afford a replay.”

At the deal’s heart must be a settlement between the rich world and the developing world covering how the burden of fighting climate change will be divided — and how we will share a newly precious resource: the trillion or so tonnes of carbon that we can emit before the mercury rises to dangerous levels.

Rich nations like to point to the arithmetic truth that there can be no solution until developing giants such as China take more radical steps than they have so far. But the rich world is responsible for most of the accumulated carbon in the atmosphere – three-quarters of all carbon dioxide emitted since 1850. It must now take a lead, and every developed country must commit to deep cuts which will reduce their emissions within a decade to very substantially less than their 1990 level.

Developing countries can point out they did not cause the bulk of the problem, and also that the poorest regions of the world will be hardest hit. But they will increasingly contribute to warming, and must thus pledge meaningful and quantifiable action of their own. Though both fell short of what some had hoped for, the recent commitments to emissions targets by the world’s biggest polluters, the United States and China, were important steps in the right direction.

Social justice demands that the industrialised world digs deep into its pockets and pledges cash to help poorer countries adapt to climate change, and clean technologies to enable them to grow economically without growing their emissions. The architecture of a future treaty must also be pinned down – with rigorous multilateral monitoring, fair rewards for protecting forests, and the credible assessment of “exported emissions” so that the burden can eventually be more equitably shared between those who produce polluting products and those who consume them. And fairness requires that the burden placed on individual developed countries should take into account their ability to bear it; for instance newer EU members, often much poorer than “old Europe”, must not suffer more than their richer partners.

The transformation will be costly, but many times less than the bill for bailing out global finance — and far less costly than the consequences of doing nothing.

Many of us, particularly in the developed world, will have to change our lifestyles. The era of flights that cost less than the taxi ride to the airport is drawing to a close. We will have to shop, eat and travel more intelligently. We will have to pay more for our energy, and use less of it.

But the shift to a low-carbon society holds out the prospect of more opportunity than sacrifice. Already some countries have recognized that embracing the transformation can bring growth, jobs and better quality lives. The flow of capital tells its own story: last year for the first time more was invested in renewable forms of energy than producing electricity from fossil fuels.

Kicking our carbon habit within a few short decades will require a feat of engineering and innovation to match anything in our history. But whereas putting a man on the moon or splitting the atom were born of conflict and competition, the coming carbon race must be driven by a collaborative effort to achieve collective salvation.

Overcoming climate change will take a triumph of optimism over pessimism, of vision over short-sightedness, of what Abraham Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature”.

It is in that spirit that [56] newspapers from around the world have united behind this editorial. If we, with such different national and political perspectives, can agree on what must be done then surely our leaders can too.

The politicians in Copenhagen have the power to shape history’s judgment on this generation: one that saw a challenge and rose to it, or one so stupid that we saw calamity coming but did nothing to avert it. We implore them to make the right choice.

Source: www.thenews.com.pk, Monday, December 07, 2009