Will the Climate change at The city of lights ?!
By Sanjay Menon*
How many of you will agree with me if I state that the
changes in climatic patterns had made the Syrian drought(2002) two or three
times more likely, leading to the migration crisis ? The statement can be more
convincing if you could recollect the Russian heat wave in 2010, that destroyed
the country's wheat crop. It lead to the ban on grain exports, shooting up
world food prices, pushing 44 million people below the poverty line across 28
countries. Scientists have proved that Climate change has indeed displaced
people from their land, relinquishing stability.
The loss of mesic trees in the Sudan-Sahel zone,
switching off of Northern seas from polar to more temperate species, the "water war" in Bolivia have
all been similarly authenticated. The most recent being the finding of 2014 as
the 'hottest year' since modern records began, around 1850. However, future climatic
changes can be described only within a range of uncertainty.
To be precise, as the definition goes, Climate change
is the statistical distribution of weather patterns when that change lasts for
an extended period of time. Rising global temperature,extreme heat waves,frequent
droughts,heavy rainfalls are the end results. Enough and more evidences of
catastrophes have added thrust to the definition over the years across the
globe. It is an undeniable theory that the effects of climate change are more
inclined towards anthropogenic activities- Greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions.
The greenhouse effect is not a new phenomenon. But it
has turned into a growing problem over the years. Carbon dioxide (CO2), the main
greenhouse gas has boosted economies of richer countries, since the advent of industrialisation.With
the rising emissions since then, our annual CO2 emissions are now at an
all-time record level of nearly 40 billion tonnes per year.
The alarm bells started ringing by the beginning of
the 1960s. It was duly heard by the United Nations, which promptly formed the
Inter- Governmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC). The subsequent Earth Summit
held at Rio reflected the reports and views of around 400 scientists about
global warming. Since then, countries have resorted to tackling climate change
to avoid dangerous consequences in the future. An agreement, United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCC,1992) was signed incorporating all
major economies and polluters.
If Montreal Protocol (1987) urged nations to act
against the depletion of ozone layer, Kyoto Protocol(KP), the brainchild of
UNFCC, in 1997, formulated an international legal binding on emission reduction
targets on member countries. KP was weighed on the premise that global warming
exists and that man-made CO2 emissions have caused it. The protocol worked on
the principal of "Common but
differentiated responsibilities", entrusting more obligations upon
developed nations( Annex I Parties).KP's first commitment period started in
2008 and ended in 2012. However, it did not acquire enough wings as the US
relentlessly seemed to kill the Kyoto, which it never ratified.
Also, the Conference of Parties(COP) which met every
year to discuss Climate Tackling soon turned into "Climate Tourists” (as put by Richard Black, BBC Reporter,2006).
While countries are leisurely talking about climate action, GHG emissions have
been rising steadily with industries emitting about 600 billion tonnes of
CO2,thanks to fossil fuels(1992-2013). As a result, the level of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere have risen dramatically, by more than two- fifths. That
is, our planet is now absorbing more energy from the sun than is escaping back
into space.
The global pondering on Climate change has eventually transformed into a North-South face-off. If
the current consequences of climate changes can be attributed to the
imperialistic 'North’ countries, then the future implications will be surely on
the shoulders of the emerging 'South’ economies. As it is evident from the
fact, carbon emissions per capita in the developed world were about five times
those in developing countries.On the contrary, figures are now pointing right
in the face of the developing nations where the emissions have doubled, especially
in China where it tripled!!.The target that has been set since the KP, is to
limit the rise of global temperature by 2C. It was an achievable target until
few years back when due time was on our side. Much of the time has been wasted
deliberating the agendas of the two blocs. While the North advocates for an Environmental
Justice - ‘minimise overall cost and maximising total welfare’, South pitches
for an Compensatory Justice systems with an emphasis on historic distributive
inequities.However, the advanced nations have agreed to bear more of the burden
with a sense of charity, brushing aside historic culpability. Emission pledges
of South will be at the cost of providing decent standards of living that
contemporary technology can offer to its citizens. Rich countries have to shift
their focus from Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to internal redistribution and
changing lifestyles, which could in fact improve the quality of its citizens.
In tandem, Developing world has to reorient its growth in cleaner, efficient
and greener directions. Fortunately, the stand-off is been facilitated,
reaching a point where centrist disposition is giving way to potential new articulations
ahead of the Paris meet in November this year.
Per Capita emissions of 2.1 tonnes is a meagre figure
for India, comparatively.As the nation is striving to achieve prosperity;alleviating
poverty and furnish its people with the basic necessities,climatic aberrations
have been the evolving problem.The country has often felt the hapless effects
of global warming, not to mention the series of droughts and floods.Therefore,
it cannot rely on the actions of developed nations and it is high time the
government and the leaders ‘walk the talk’ on emission cuts. The fact about
rising CO2 emission is out in the broad daylight.It is nothing but
poorer,age-old technology and inefficient mechanisms in place.Mr.Modi, an
aspiring to-be global leader,urged nations to eradicate poverty to attain
sustainable development at the recently held United Nations Sustainable
Development Goal(UNSDG) conference at its headquarters.The speech was
culturally and organically oriented as he related earth to mother. But the PM’s
dilemma begins with growth and ends with environment. If he chooses the latter,
a generation of people will miss the bus to prosperity.He can definitely make a
breakthrough by broadening the renewable energy scheme that he implemented in
his territory when he was the CM.
As Paris is gearing up for a ‘globally warming’
mediation, nations (both north and south) have acted swiftly, rather
proactively, by pledging future emission targets and climate aids. Intended
Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) acted as the pathbreaking principle
to keep every nations on board in the run up to the Paris conference. It calls
for an amicable voluntary contributions(Bottom-Top approach) in contrast to
legal binding and strict emission targets(Top-Bottom approach). Switzerland was
the first country to formally communicate its pledging ( 50% GHG by 2030)
followed by the European Union (EU) with 40% reduction.The capitalistic and the
communistic power came to the fray when Mr.Obama and Mr.Keqiang declared
unconditional ‘War on Coal and War on Pollution ‘ respectively. The US, refuter
of KP, pledged a reduction cut of 26-28% by 2025 while China, World’s largest
greenhouse gas emitter promised a reduction rate of 60-62%/GDP.India, too has
pledged a reduction averaging 35-40%, which is a prospective approach.
May the city of lights showers its hope on all of us
and sustain our Mother Earth !.
References:
* Author is Research Intern at CPPR. Views are personal.
Comments