World on the brink

Last month’s cover story in National Geographic is pretty emotive. Although it covers a much beat-up topic of global warning, the editors are right in suggesting that not enough has been done to better the state of planet. I find it admirable that the people at Nat Geo are willing to risk cancelled subscriptions rather than dodge an important issue. But I don’t suppose cancellations would be coming their way anytime soon because the demographics that subscribe to the premier environment magazine are vocal protestors against global warming.

Global warming is such a no-brainer. Why do scientists have to keep offering more and more proof when plenty of evidences are visible all around us? The latest procession of hurricanes in Florida is merely the tip of the rapidly melting iceberg. Instead of honestly admitting that we are doing more bad than good to the environment, politicians are stalling the inevitable by demanding irrefutable evidences for global warming. Isn’t the fact that ambient temperature of the planet has risen drastically in the past century than ever before enough proof? Isn’t the rapidly depleting ozone layer and rising cases of skin cancer in Australia convincing enough? Isn’t the bizarre alteration in world’s climate and fluctuating seasonal cycles strong enough warning to get our act straight? Isn’t the spike in natural disasters that seem to occur with alarming and increasing frequency any indicator of things to come? Change in global climate might not be as swift as depicted in recent disaster flick, “Day After Tomorrow” but should we wait for things to go beyond repair?

The US led the way in dismissing genuine fears by shying away from Kyoto protocol citing cost constraints. I am not sure if there is a greater cost than willingly sacrificing our only home in the universe. I don’t want to embark on another US-bashing mission but I think it is important for the world’s most powerful nation to take the lead, as it does against the threat of terror. As Calvin puts it succinctly, the evidence of intelligent life elsewhere is that they haven’t yet tried to establish contact with us. Who would want to inhabit a diseased world anyways?

We can send a man to the moon or plan a mission to Mars with robotically operational vehicles millions of miles away but can’t find a suitable alternative to fossil fuels; the irony is completely lost on me. Governments all around the world haven’t been really helpful apart from the occasional liberal greens that are instantly classified as Luddites. The economic argument of costs and short-term gains has been beaten to death by special interests that keep the oil fires burning.

The photo essay in the magazine is powerful and strikes right at the heart of the issue, demanding attention. I hope the people powerful enough to make changes are paying attention.

“World on the brink” [Short URL: http://www.ipatrix.com/?p=321] was published Tuesday, September 28th, 2004 at 11:05 pm by Patrix, filed under Weblogs, and tagged as climate change, Environment, global warming, Science. Both comments and linkbacks are closed.

« Google Adsense makes sense

Aamcha Oscar »

Aurora
“As Calvin puts it succinctly, the evidence of intelligent life elsewhere is that they havenâ€™t yet tied to establish contact with us. ”
Honestly IF I was truly wise I would stay away from US Humans! Look at what we have done?!
U know fundamentally the people who have tasted power insecure – more about losing it! Imagine the repercussions of having cheaper alternative fuel? All the oil rich countries (Al Queda_ I dare say? ) are PFFFFt!
I am sure ‘these people’ are paying attention – be Exxon or MacDonalds or KFC or Enron, sure they know; end of the day they want their $$$$$$.$$$ to keep pouring in…
http://patrix.typepad.com Patrix
Aurora – Its all about the money, as they like to say it. According to me, capitalistic society fails largely in the environmental arena. It is a public good and needs societal responsibility to take care of the environmental. No wonder we need the Greens more than ever before. Nat Geo is doing an admirable in keeping the fires burning.
http://broodingdude.rediffblogs.com Kiran
Patrix, to just answer your question on why more proof is being sought, while no one disputes that the earth is getting hotter, there is a school of thought that believes that there is very little that we can do about it. The earth is getting hot as a natural process, and even meeting the targets of the Kyoto Protocol will delay the onset of the higher temperature by just 5 years at the most – and the costs in terms of money are stupendous, which are justifiable only if it can be proved that the money is well spent.
http://patrix.typepad.com Patrix
Kiran – But I don’t believe that Earth would get naturally hot in the last century to such a great extent that it completely outstripped the rate of heat growth for the past thousand years combined. There is surely something different about the last hundred years..oh yeah, man’s overindulgent activities for stroking more oil fires and driving gas-guzzling vehicles amongst other things.
http://arthashastra.blogspot.com kautilya
The oil price rise might force people to look for altenative fuels. Economics will finally force people to shift from fossil fuel to other natural sources.
http://patrix.typepad.com Patrix
Kautilya – Hopefully economics will do the trick that moral reprimanding hasn’t been able to. But we don’t see enough encouragement for alternative fuels…the shift can be hastened.
Aaar
‘Change in global climate might not be as swift as depicted in recent disaster flick, â€œDay After Tomorrowâ€ but should we wait for things to go beyond repair?’
There was a program in BBC that stressed on this complacency factor. Studies seem to suggest that it can change rapidly, even as short as 10 years.
Sabra
I think Kautilya is right, Patrix. Research into alternative fuel sources that can be made widely available will cost an exorbitant amout of money. The return on investment has to be high enough for the private corporations to embark on it. Whatever small federally-funded research is out there can not make the environmental impact the scientists want. It has to be done on the grand scale that only money-mongering private industry can provide.
http://patrix.typepad.com Patrix
Aaar – I like to know the source of that program, video or print…if you can, please.
Sabra – I understand the failings of alternative fuels to sustain itself and it would need widespread support…on similar but tangential line, we do harp on need for corporate responsibility even when business needs doesn’t require it, right?
http://www.parablog.com Parag
More and more proof about global warming is needed because the people who hold the decision-making power believe that the Earth was made a few thousand years ago over a period of 7 days by a perfect being. It is made to be perfect so we can’t do anything to mess it up. Power of prayer will cool down the Earth if it warms up and the same prayers will create more oil from water if need be. So, we don’t need to worry about oil comsumption and alternate sources of energy. Just keep pumping.
http://patrix.typepad.com Patrix
Parag – LOL! I am sure the Bush men have succeeded there too.
Ash
The issue goes beyond science and technology and economics; ultimately the question is one of ethics. It poses a question to all of us about what kind of world we want to live in. The issue is one that concerns all the people of the world, it concerns the human species as a whole, it concerns everything that we hold precious – our lives, our lands, the very world that we have built for ourselves.
This is a problem that cannot be resolved if we think in terms of national interests – boundaries must be ignored, economic considerations must be forgotten. We need to think only in terms of what is in the best interests of the Earth. Unfortunately, I dont see this happening until something absolutely catastrophic happens which forces the powers-that-be to see the issue in its dire reality. And that too, only if the calamity happens to occur in one of the more powerful countries … Bangladesh disappearing off the map may not do.
http://patrix.typepad.com Patrix
Ash – That is exactly what I am trying to get at. There are umpteen tell-tale signs that the world is not headed in the right direction and our own legacy for the future generations is a diseased planet that may soon reverse the mortality rate. Hopefully, the recent procession of hurricanes in Florida might bring this issue to light.
Yogustus
The cave men lived in complete harmony with nature but thats why they were still cavemen. Man has grown to his current potential by dominating nature, not by giving in to it. The minute the caveman built a crude shelter in the jungle, he defied nature and thus evolved. My point? Population Explosion…thats the real issue here. If there was a caveman in every square foot of this earth and he decided to build a shelter…mother earth would still be stripped bare and would suffer a similar fate as it is suffering now. Alternative fuels and other such patchworks are not long term solutions.
Till we tame another planet to inhabit(or exploit for resources), the only way we are going to reduce the burden on our planet is by reducing our needs and wants…and realistically that can only happen if fewer people are around than the present number.
PS: I predict another World War in the next 30 years or so. World Wars bring innovations and drastically reduce populations. I think its a subtle divine way of taming us.
Ash
Hi Yogustus, you have a good point there.
Reminds me of what my Dad says. Whenever my Dad and I debated any issue regarding India and its hazaar problems, we kept coming back to the population issue and his take on it was – drop an atomic bomb on Bombay, Delhi , Madras and Calcutta and India will be better off !
http://patrix.typepad.com Patrix
Yogustus – Trust you to bring about a unique perspective to common issues. But funny how everything boils down to population explosion. Every problem in India can be traced to the ever-growing population and unequal distribution of resources. But I don’t think that avoiding the issues of abusing the natural resources is a solution.
Ash – LOL! Your dad seems “gung-ho” about being the next Krantiveer Nana Patekar…although must admit it is a quicker solution…but will India be really better off without the four metros?
Aaar
The program called ‘explorations’ was on BBC world last week. Sorry, couldn’t find the video online.
Studied were conducted on layers of ice excavated from the artics. They contain patterns providing information on the climatic changes that happened through the years.
http://patrix.typepad.com Patrix
Aaar – Thanks…will try to catch a rerun or something.
Ash
News update :
Russia’s cabinet has backed the Kyoto treaty that will probably finally allow the UN’s global warming treaty to enter into force despite its categorical rejection by the United States.
The 1997 treaty needed the signature of countries producing 55% of the world’s greenhouse gases to come into effect. The U.S., which represents 36% of global emissions according to the treaty, refuses to sign the accord because of concerns it would slow economic growth and would not really have any effect in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The participation of Russia which was responsible for 17% of global emissions, was needed to push the treaty. With Russia’s approval, the Kyoto Protocol now has enough signers to become a United Nations treaty, subject to international law.
The Kyoto treaty may well be flawed, but it has been accepted by 118 countries and is our best chance for slowing global climate change.

Nerve Endings Firing Away

World on the brink

Related Posts

Subscribe