The earth's atmosphere's composition is:
Nitrogen: 78%
Oxygen: 21%
Greenhouse Gases: 1%
The Greenhouse Gases are: Carbon Dioxide, Methane, Nitrous Oxide, Ozone, Water Vapour and Halocarbons
Tags:
Showing posts with label Mother Earth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mother Earth. Show all posts
Friday, April 25, 2008
Global Warming: Greenhouse Effect
Effectively, the earth and its atmosphere are warmed as a result of the actions of the greenhouse gases.The solar rays as well as the heat generated by the earth are not dissipated entirely and instantaneously into space vacuum because of the gasses which trap them into the earth's atmosphere.This is needed because if there were no heat being trapped,the earth would overall be about 30 Celsius cooler and life would not be as we know it. After millions of years the delicate balance has been fractured, perhaps irreparably in the last 100 years.In the last century humanity's technological advances and the resulting lifestyle choices have increased the production of greenhouse gasses. As more greenhouse gasses are trapped in the atmosphere, more heat is generated. And too much heat causes climate change.
The earth's atmosphere's composition is:
Nitrogen: 78%
Oxygen: 21%
Greenhouse Gases: 1%
The Greenhouse Gases are: Carbon Dioxide, Methane, Nitrous Oxide, Ozone, Water Vapour and Halocarbons
The earth's atmosphere's composition is:
Nitrogen: 78%
Oxygen: 21%
Greenhouse Gases: 1%
The Greenhouse Gases are: Carbon Dioxide, Methane, Nitrous Oxide, Ozone, Water Vapour and Halocarbons
Gaia—Science of a Goddess
Gaia in classical Greek mythology is the source.In the beginning was chaos and from this chaos arose Gaia.And she produced of her own body and self Uranus.And from her union with Uranus arose creation.While the meaning of myths remains ambiguous,the deities become a part of the collective folklore and customs.So thousands of years later,Gaia is still associated with the earth and depending upon the etymological version followed,is the grandmother earth or earth goddess of the very earth itself.Nearly all cultures have some version or the other of a goddess who is the personification of earth.From the Celtic - Iris Danu to the Sumerian Tiamat and the Hindu Adya Shakti, with the sole exception of the Egyptian mythology,earth is always a feminine power.In the 1960s,while working for NASA Dr.James Lovelock formulated and put forward the Gaia Hypothesis.According to this the whole planet and all its organisms were a part of the self regulating mechanism of Gaia.From phytoplanktons on the surface of the sea to the colour of the daisy,the Gaia Hypothesis sees all earth systems- biological,chemical, human- as interlocked and interdependent.Till recently, the balance was being maintained,whereby Gaia could self regulate.Thus excessive carbon dioxide emission was balanced by greater algae bloom,which absorbed excess carbon dioxide and locked it onto the ocean floor.
But finally,human activities now threaten to strain Gaia's self regulation capacity to a critical threshold,triggering an abrupt change,which will make the earth far less hospitable for wide spread human habitation.
But finally,human activities now threaten to strain Gaia's self regulation capacity to a critical threshold,triggering an abrupt change,which will make the earth far less hospitable for wide spread human habitation.
Tags:
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Climate Change: Preserve or Perish
By 2009, 180 countries will meet in Copenhagen, under the aegis of UN, to strike a global deal that would help settle the matter of climate change. Hopefully, it would provide the breakthrough for all countries to solve the problem collectively.
Climate change has the potential of shaking the ground beneath our feet and has already shocked the powers that govern us into serious concern. It has got more than 180 countries grappling for a solution and the solution has to be found by 2009 when all these countries meet in Copenhagen under the aegis of UN.
Literally thousands of scientists have collaborated for years. All of them have worked in an unprecedented fashion to comprehend and inform the world how real and calamitous are the risks from increasing emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat trapping gasses. They are unequivocal. The threat is as real.
Accumulating greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere can wreak unprecedented havoc with nature. India, with its 8000 kilometres of coastline and 60 per cent of population still dependent on rain-fed agriculture, becomes especially vulnerable to such changes. The world is required to act now. This much we have more or less learnt since the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change - the body with these thousands of acclaimed scientists on board - over the past year submitted its four reports. But what is to be done to solve this overwhelming crisis? With the world going through the decade's worst food crisis and oil prices spiraling towards the $150 a barrel mark fast, the signs are clear. T h e w o r l d has to act decisively. But an i n c o r r e c t and badly judged answer can only deepen the hole humanity has continued to dig for itself since the industrialization era.
The problem began when countries in the west rapidly developed their economies using fossil fuels and spewing out thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide each year and other harmful gases into the atmosphere. These gases accumulated, trapping heat, changing the world's climate. As economic activity and consumption patterns in these countries heated up so did the atmosphere.
Other countries were slow to follow on the same path. But by the time they had reached an economic level to make the people better off, reduce poverty through economic growth, the carbon pie, if one may call it that, had been eaten up. If the atmosphere is a cake that is to be cut equally between each individual on the planet, the rich countries have eaten more than their fair share. At least, this is what the developing countries, like India, China and Brazil contend. A US citizen, they often cite as example, has twenty times the footprint of an average Indian.
But the developed countries contend that the time to hark on history is past. They also argue that countries like China are fast reaching the same levels of emissions and when looked at as a sum would outpace even some rich countries. They demand that regardless of the historic burden, all large economies must act together and cut their emissions even if they are disproportionate to their per-capita emissions.
If it is a crisis as all scientists tell us it is, then the first instinct is to listen to the latter group. After all, it is not worth harking back to the past when the future is imperiled.
But, there is a hitch. Reducing future emissions and cutting down on existing ones can take a toll on the economy, believe the developing countries. Industrial processes would slow down. Some sectors like steel and power that are yet to reach the best standards would suffer a hit. Worse still, the smaller players in these sectors, unable to afford the new technologies that emit lesser carbon, would suffer the most. With the small sector being the employment generator for developing countries, country's entire economy could take a hit.
While there might be a handful in countries like India that come close to the lifestyle of the rich and famous of the west, a large part of the country still lives if not in abject poverty, then on edge. An edge where only greater economic development can provide social security.
The battle lines are today drawn at this point. The West wants India and China to commit to time bound, supervised emission reductions. India, for its part, is ready to take action at home under purely domestic regulations - it is after all going to help reduce dependence on fuel and save India on the oil import bill. But it wants the west to provide the technologies they already have. In most cases, the West would rather sell these technologies.
Countries like India also demand that the guilty nations provide funds to poorer nations to adapt to what are now the inevitable impacts of climate change. By 2009 all the countries will meet in Copenhagen to hammer out a global deal that should help settle these matters for some decades and provide the breakthrough for all countries to solve this problem collectively. And, equitably. If the world fails its poor and is unable to string together an equitable deal that allows poor countries sustainable economic development, the world might be saved from the perils of climate change but it could get caught in a poverty trap that may leave many of its poor and vulnerable worse off than before.
Climate change has the potential of shaking the ground beneath our feet and has already shocked the powers that govern us into serious concern. It has got more than 180 countries grappling for a solution and the solution has to be found by 2009 when all these countries meet in Copenhagen under the aegis of UN.
Literally thousands of scientists have collaborated for years. All of them have worked in an unprecedented fashion to comprehend and inform the world how real and calamitous are the risks from increasing emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat trapping gasses. They are unequivocal. The threat is as real.
Accumulating greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere can wreak unprecedented havoc with nature. India, with its 8000 kilometres of coastline and 60 per cent of population still dependent on rain-fed agriculture, becomes especially vulnerable to such changes. The world is required to act now. This much we have more or less learnt since the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change - the body with these thousands of acclaimed scientists on board - over the past year submitted its four reports. But what is to be done to solve this overwhelming crisis? With the world going through the decade's worst food crisis and oil prices spiraling towards the $150 a barrel mark fast, the signs are clear. T h e w o r l d has to act decisively. But an i n c o r r e c t and badly judged answer can only deepen the hole humanity has continued to dig for itself since the industrialization era.
The problem began when countries in the west rapidly developed their economies using fossil fuels and spewing out thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide each year and other harmful gases into the atmosphere. These gases accumulated, trapping heat, changing the world's climate. As economic activity and consumption patterns in these countries heated up so did the atmosphere.
Other countries were slow to follow on the same path. But by the time they had reached an economic level to make the people better off, reduce poverty through economic growth, the carbon pie, if one may call it that, had been eaten up. If the atmosphere is a cake that is to be cut equally between each individual on the planet, the rich countries have eaten more than their fair share. At least, this is what the developing countries, like India, China and Brazil contend. A US citizen, they often cite as example, has twenty times the footprint of an average Indian.
But the developed countries contend that the time to hark on history is past. They also argue that countries like China are fast reaching the same levels of emissions and when looked at as a sum would outpace even some rich countries. They demand that regardless of the historic burden, all large economies must act together and cut their emissions even if they are disproportionate to their per-capita emissions.
If it is a crisis as all scientists tell us it is, then the first instinct is to listen to the latter group. After all, it is not worth harking back to the past when the future is imperiled.
But, there is a hitch. Reducing future emissions and cutting down on existing ones can take a toll on the economy, believe the developing countries. Industrial processes would slow down. Some sectors like steel and power that are yet to reach the best standards would suffer a hit. Worse still, the smaller players in these sectors, unable to afford the new technologies that emit lesser carbon, would suffer the most. With the small sector being the employment generator for developing countries, country's entire economy could take a hit.
While there might be a handful in countries like India that come close to the lifestyle of the rich and famous of the west, a large part of the country still lives if not in abject poverty, then on edge. An edge where only greater economic development can provide social security.
The battle lines are today drawn at this point. The West wants India and China to commit to time bound, supervised emission reductions. India, for its part, is ready to take action at home under purely domestic regulations - it is after all going to help reduce dependence on fuel and save India on the oil import bill. But it wants the west to provide the technologies they already have. In most cases, the West would rather sell these technologies.
Countries like India also demand that the guilty nations provide funds to poorer nations to adapt to what are now the inevitable impacts of climate change. By 2009 all the countries will meet in Copenhagen to hammer out a global deal that should help settle these matters for some decades and provide the breakthrough for all countries to solve this problem collectively. And, equitably. If the world fails its poor and is unable to string together an equitable deal that allows poor countries sustainable economic development, the world might be saved from the perils of climate change but it could get caught in a poverty trap that may leave many of its poor and vulnerable worse off than before.
Tags:
Monday, April 21, 2008
Evergreen revolution merely a dream?
The current food crisis resulting from agricultural stagnation at home and escalating energy prices abroad, will lead to the birth of an ever-green revolution
Sustainable Food Security involves physical, economic and social access to a balanced diet and clean drinking water to every child, woman and man in the country. For achieving physical access, production and productivity of major crops should go up, so that there is a proper match between demand and supply. For economic access, there is need for adequate purchasing power, which in turn can be achieved through work and income security. Social access involves attention to the gender, class and caste dimensions of food security.
Climate change could result in higher temperatures and droughts that are more frequent, heavy floods in the Indo-gangetic plains, un-seasonal rainfall posing a threat to crops nearing maturity, and a rise in sea level along the coast and in the Andaman and Nicobar and Lakshadweep group of islands. Physical access to food can be endangered by such changes, while economic access will be further eroded due to damage to livelihood security caused by adverse changes in temperature and precipitation. The rise in the prices of staple foods now occurring nationally and globally will further enhance poverty related endemic hunger.
How can we face such challenges? The climate change calamity also presents opportunities for developing strategies, which can help to mitigate the adverse impact of aberrant weather. In the early 1960s, India was leading a "ship to mouth" existence and there would have been a serious famine in Bihar, like the Bengal famine of 1942-43, but for the import of as much as 10 million tonnes of wheat in 1966 from North America largely under the US PL 480 programme. This crisis led to the birth of Green Revolution in 1968, resulting from a synergy between technology and public policy. The Green Revolution gave rise to a climate of confidence in India's agricultural capability.
It is my hope that the current food crisis resulting from agricultural stagnation at home and escalating energy prices abroad will lead to the birth of an ever-green revolution movement designed to improve productivity in perpetuity without associated ecological harm. The climate change calamity can then become a blessing in terns of reorientation of our agricultural research and development strategies based on the principles of ecology, economics, equity, employment, and energy security. The pathways to an ever-green revolution are organic farming and/ or green agriculture.Organic farming precludes the use of mineral fertilizers or synthetic pesticides, and genetically modified crops. Green agriculture is based on integrated pest and nutrient management, crop-livestock integration, use of the most appropriate and productive genetic strains irrespective of the method breading, and the adoption of more crop and income per drop of water techniques. Both organic farming and Green Agriculture are environment friendly and will help prevent damage to the basic life support systems of soil, water, biodiversity, forests and the atmosphere.
Global warming will present an opportunity to enlarge the food basket by including jowar, bajra, ragi and a wide range of millets and pulses. Today, it is the poor, mostly tribal and rural women who are conserving the agro-biodiversity for public good at personal cost. They will not be able to continue these traditions, unless steps are taken to create an economic stake in conservation. The government has introduced a Genome Saviour Award to recognize and reward the contributions of tribal and rural families to genetic resources conservation and enhancement.
To illustrate that "good ecology is also good business," a bio-valley is being established in a watershed area in the Koraput district of Orissa. A bio-valley is to biotechnology, what the Silicon Valley is to information technology. It will help to link bio-resources, biotechnology (non GMO technology) and business in a mutually reinforcing manner. This could lead to an era of bio happiness arising from the conservation and sustainable and equitable uses of bio-resources.
If management of climate change becomes everybody's business, we can safeguard ecological, food and livelihood security to the maximum extent possible.
Sustainable Food Security involves physical, economic and social access to a balanced diet and clean drinking water to every child, woman and man in the country. For achieving physical access, production and productivity of major crops should go up, so that there is a proper match between demand and supply. For economic access, there is need for adequate purchasing power, which in turn can be achieved through work and income security. Social access involves attention to the gender, class and caste dimensions of food security.
Climate change could result in higher temperatures and droughts that are more frequent, heavy floods in the Indo-gangetic plains, un-seasonal rainfall posing a threat to crops nearing maturity, and a rise in sea level along the coast and in the Andaman and Nicobar and Lakshadweep group of islands. Physical access to food can be endangered by such changes, while economic access will be further eroded due to damage to livelihood security caused by adverse changes in temperature and precipitation. The rise in the prices of staple foods now occurring nationally and globally will further enhance poverty related endemic hunger.
How can we face such challenges? The climate change calamity also presents opportunities for developing strategies, which can help to mitigate the adverse impact of aberrant weather. In the early 1960s, India was leading a "ship to mouth" existence and there would have been a serious famine in Bihar, like the Bengal famine of 1942-43, but for the import of as much as 10 million tonnes of wheat in 1966 from North America largely under the US PL 480 programme. This crisis led to the birth of Green Revolution in 1968, resulting from a synergy between technology and public policy. The Green Revolution gave rise to a climate of confidence in India's agricultural capability.
It is my hope that the current food crisis resulting from agricultural stagnation at home and escalating energy prices abroad will lead to the birth of an ever-green revolution movement designed to improve productivity in perpetuity without associated ecological harm. The climate change calamity can then become a blessing in terns of reorientation of our agricultural research and development strategies based on the principles of ecology, economics, equity, employment, and energy security. The pathways to an ever-green revolution are organic farming and/ or green agriculture.Organic farming precludes the use of mineral fertilizers or synthetic pesticides, and genetically modified crops. Green agriculture is based on integrated pest and nutrient management, crop-livestock integration, use of the most appropriate and productive genetic strains irrespective of the method breading, and the adoption of more crop and income per drop of water techniques. Both organic farming and Green Agriculture are environment friendly and will help prevent damage to the basic life support systems of soil, water, biodiversity, forests and the atmosphere.
Global warming will present an opportunity to enlarge the food basket by including jowar, bajra, ragi and a wide range of millets and pulses. Today, it is the poor, mostly tribal and rural women who are conserving the agro-biodiversity for public good at personal cost. They will not be able to continue these traditions, unless steps are taken to create an economic stake in conservation. The government has introduced a Genome Saviour Award to recognize and reward the contributions of tribal and rural families to genetic resources conservation and enhancement.
To illustrate that "good ecology is also good business," a bio-valley is being established in a watershed area in the Koraput district of Orissa. A bio-valley is to biotechnology, what the Silicon Valley is to information technology. It will help to link bio-resources, biotechnology (non GMO technology) and business in a mutually reinforcing manner. This could lead to an era of bio happiness arising from the conservation and sustainable and equitable uses of bio-resources.
If management of climate change becomes everybody's business, we can safeguard ecological, food and livelihood security to the maximum extent possible.
Tags:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)