Who should pay for global warming?

The Pioneer , Friday, December 18, 2009
Correspondent : JL Agrawal
Glaciers are melting, sea level is rising, cloud forests are drying, and wildlife is struggling for survival. This has been caused partly by anthropogenic global warming.

The fight against climate change starts with our understanding of factors causing the same. The main causes of global warming, in order of the magnitude of their impact, are: Carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, methane from cattle and nitrogen oxides from rice paddies.

Unfortunately, the industrialised urban world is destroying some of the best known mechanisms, forests, for storing carbon. The ocean is a huge carbon sink, holding about 50 times more than that in the atmosphere. But now scientists have realised that the increased thermal stratification of the ocean layers has caused substantial reductions in levels of phytoplankton which stores CO2.

Increased atmospheric carbon is also causing an acidification of the ocean. The tiny plants of the ocean are suffering from the effects of global warming, resulting in reduction of ocean's ability to store carbon.

Nearly 80 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions come from industrial activities, including power generation, waste management, transport, and building operations, while 20 per cent come from deforestation, according to the UNFCC.

Methane's huge impact

Methane is created when bacteria break down organic matter under oxygen-starved conditions. Methane is 100 times as powerful as carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. Carbon levels in the atmosphere are about 385 parts per million (ppm) currently, whereas methane is only about 1.8 ppm. But because methane is so powerful, it has the potential to have significant impacts on the future of global warming.

A growing problem

The "green revolution" of the twentieth century have allowed the farmers of the world to use chemical fertilizers and machines to produce far more food than they ever did before. One of the primary components of the green revolution has been the development of nitrogen fertilizers that dramatically accelerate the growth and productivity of plants in the field. Plants "fix," or capture, nitrogen on their own as well, but green revolution technologies have become so popular that humans are now adding more nitrogen to the earth than all of the plants in the world combined!

Nitrogen oxides have 300 times more heat-trapping capacity per unit of volume than carbon dioxide, and we release them every time we sprinkle fertiliser to soil.

CFCs and HCFCs used in refrigeration are also powerful greenhouse gases. These gases occur in lower concentrations in the atmosphere, but because they are so much more potent than carbon dioxide.

Pragmatic solution

A commonly cited goal is to stabilise GHG concentrations around 450-550 parts per million (ppm), or about twice pre-industrial levels. This is the point at which many believe the most damaging impacts of climate change can be avoided. Current concentrations are about 380 ppm, which means there isn't much time to lose. According to the IPCC, we'd have to reduce GHG emissions by 50% to 80% of what they're on track to be in the next century to reach this level.

Many people and governments are already working hard to cut greenhouse gases, and everyone can help. Motor fuel accounts for 60% of carbon emissions over the past 20 years. In 1999 the transportation sector overtook Industry as the biggest producer of carbon emissions in the United States, according to the Energy Information Administration. Food shipment has a serious cost, both ecologically and financially; the average meal on your plate in the US has traveled 2000 miles to get to them. This helps to explain why every calorie of food they consume costs an average of ten calories of energy to produce. That imbalance is a major contributor to global warming, pouring carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at a far greater rate than the oceans and vegetation can store or reprocess them. Hence we should, "buy local, eat local.

Carbon credits are a key component of national and international attempts to mitigate the growth in concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs). One Carbon Credit is equal to one ton of Carbon Dioxide or in some markets Carbon Dioxide equivalent gases. Carbon trading is an application of an emissions trading approach. Greenhouse gas emissions are capped and then markets are used to allocate the emissions among the group of regulated sources. Since GHG mitigation projects generate credits, this approach can be used to finance carbon reduction schemes between trading partners and around the world.

There are also many companies that sell carbon credits to commercial and individual customers who are interested in lowering their carbon footprint on a voluntary basis. These carbon off setters purchase the credits from an investment fund or a carbon development company that has aggregated the credits from individual projects. Overall the carbon market has "great potential" for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, but countries need to develop policies that would allow the market to thrive past 2012, when Kyoto ends, the UNFCC said.

There are two distinct types of Carbon Credits: Carbon Offset Credits (COC's) and Carbon Reduction Credits (CRC's). Carbon Offset Credits consist of clean forms of energy production, wind, solar, hydro and biofuels. Carbon Reduction Credits consists of the collection and storage of Carbon from our atmosphere through bio sequestration (reforestation, forestation), ocean and soil collection and storage efforts. Both approaches are recognized as effective ways to reduce the Global Carbon Emissions "crises".

The Kyoto Protocol is a legally binding emissions-reduction treaty created in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan. The Kyoto agreement aims to reduce global industrial greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5 per cent against 1990 levels over a five-year period - from 2008 to 2012.

The Kyoto climate treaty, which was ratified by 185 nations in 2005, could not influence the United States. Now the 12-day long Copenhagen Summit, which started on December 7, has been considered by many as last effort to save the earth from global warming.

The summit aims to reach at a consensus for clear cut on emission level by developed and developing countries. By 2050, the UNFCC hopes to cut atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations by half from the 2000 level.

The Copenhagen climate conference has four achievable goals, according to the UNFCC:

1. Make clear how much developed countries, such as the US, Australia, and Japan will limit their greenhouse gas emissions.

2. Determine how, and to what degree, developing countries, such as China, India, and Brazil, can limit their emissions without limiting economic growth.

3. Explore options for "stable and predictable financing" from developed countries that can help the developing world reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change.

4. Identify ways to ensure developing countries are treated as equal partners in decision-making, particularly when it comes to technology and finance.

Many developing countries worry that they will be pressured to sign a deal at the Copenhagen climate conference that would hamper their economic development and poverty-alleviation efforts.

Leaders in several developing countries have asked that developed countries accept their "historical responsibility" for climate change and the production of greenhouse gases.

What's the role of the US?

Many world leaders had hoped the U.S.-the second biggest emitter of carbon dioxide per person in the world, after Australia-would arrive in Copenhagen with a climate legislation at home.

But, the US President said the global climate deal in Copenhagen should still lead to immediate action. The goal of the talks, according to Obama, "is not a partial accord or a political declaration, but rather an accord that covers all of the issues in the negotiations, and one that has immediate operational effect."

The need of the hour is that the developed and developing countries reach a consensus and ink a deal to save the earth from global warming. But the larger question is: will the industrialised economies take responsibility to help the poor countries change to greener technology without hampering their interests.

 
SOURCE : http://www.dailypioneer.com/223501/Who-should-pay-for-global-warming.html
 


Back to pevious page



The NetworkAbout Us  |  Our Partners  |  Concepts   
Resources :  Databases  |  Publications  |  Media Guide  |  Suggested Links
Happenings :  News  |  Events  |  Opinion Polls  |  Case Studies
Contact :  Guest Book  |  FAQs |  Email Us