Sunday, July 22, 2007

India to develop climate change mitigation policy

Global warming is a quantifiable problem — at it's most reduced it is directly related to the amount of previously sequestered GHGs entering the atmosphere minus the amount of carbon that is being sunk — and to tackle it you need a quantifiable solution. That is, you need carbon emissions reductions targets.

While it is theoretically a strong argument that it is India's turn to grow their economy so they should not have to tax their cheap fossil fuel energy, it is a short-term view. India is also one of the first-in-line, down-the-line, to pick up the real global warming tab which, in their case, is a not-so-mighty Ganges.

clipped from

India has taken the first steps towards developing a national plan on tackling the effects of climate change.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh chaired a meeting of top government officials and environmental experts which agreed to draft a national policy by October.

India and China are among the world's largest polluters and are coming under international pressure to agree to mandatory emission cuts.
A recent report by environmental experts said India would be among the countries worst affected by climate change.
In his opening remarks at the meeting of India's National Council for Climate Change, Mr Singh acknowledged the scale of the problem.

The council will work on a strategy to offset the impact of melting Himalayan glaciers which feed many of the country's rivers and are a major source of water and power.

A tree planting programme will also be launched to replenish 15m acres of degraded forests.

But no mention was made of cutting carbon emissions.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

One problem I have with this whole ‘debate’ is the concept of ’scientific consensus’. Consensus is a political, not scientific, term.

Here’s an interesting, albeit non-scientific, exercise: You know there’s lot’s of information to find out there by doing a Google search for ‘global warming’, and a lot of it is quite scary; but try adding ‘climatologist’ to your search terms and the results - the ‘consensus’, if you will - changes dramatically. It’s quite interesting how many actual climatologists are anthropogenic global warming doubters, compared with the doomsayers who are mostly in other fields like geology, biology, journalism, politics, fashion, and entertainment.

Try it - search?hl=en&q=climatologist+global+warming

And then consider this question - What causes ice ages? They are cyclical, as you know; so doesn't it seem logical that the warming periods between ice ages are part of the same cycle? Go ahead and do another Google search. Also, I found some interesting info on the causes of ice ages in my kid's 6th grade science textbook.