Search This Blog

Thursday, September 13, 2018

Countries are not meeting targets to cut carbon emissions

Countries are not meeting targets to cut carbon emissions. 

We are on track for temperatures to rise by 4-5 C by 2100. See here and here.

I went back to seeing this documentary that i feel everyone on this planet should see : 

Six degrees could change the world.

The implications are many but include these atleast : 

Sea level rise will make coastal communities retreat inland - property values in the inundated areas will plummet and lots of new infrastructure will have to be built. and for countries and places that cant immediately afford it, lower levels of service for all the things we now take for granted.. 

Increasing forest fires are another hazard : Studies have found that forest fires in the western US have been occurring nearly five times more often since the 1970s and 80s. Such fires are burning more than six times the land area as before, and lasting almost five times longer. 2015 was a record-breaking year in the US, with more than 10 million acres burned. That's about 4 million hectares, or an area of the size of the Netherlands or Switzerland. 

In fact, wildfires are burning more area around the world. The areas where wildfires are taking place are always areas that have become drier and hotter, and where spring has come earlier.

Fire is a natural and beneficial part of many forest ecosystemsOver the decades, undergrowth builds up on the forest floor - so when a fire burns through, that provides space for larger, more mature trees that are more fire-resistant. But the unnatural increase in wildfires is causing entire forests to burn down uncontrollably. 

Global warming is increasing forest fire risk in the Alps as well. Humid, forested areas are most likely to face greater threats from wildfires, as conditions there grow drier and hotter due to global warming. 

Just one degree additional warming can see new desserts emerging in the western united states, leading to shortages of grain in the world. The great plains lie across 12 states of the US. Drought and changeover of land from grassland to cropland is creating conditions reminiscent of the dust bowl years.. 

It has not been warmer than today for the last one million years. But the sorts of temperatures that climate models tell us may occur by 2100 or in the next century, peaked about 55 million years ago to 5° to 8°C more than today. The temperature rise then occured over a few thousand years, with the Arctic Ocean reaching a subtropical 23°C. Mass extinctions resulted.

The warming, which lasted 200,000 years, was caused by the release of massive amounts of methane or CO2. It was thought to have come from the thawing of methane clathrates in deep ocean sediments, but the latest theory is that it was caused by a massive volcanic eruption that heated up coal deposits. 

Wednesday, June 06, 2018

The State of India's Water Resources..

I hope you continue to find newer and newer ways to save water. For myself, I have been practicing, on a neighbour's guidance, to use a glass now stationed at our bathroom sink for brushing and washing my face rather than use water directly from the tap. The water saving is substantial. 

The news of 5th June says : Water levels in India’s major reservoirs are 10 per cent lower than normal whereas these are 50 per cent deficient in Himachal Pradesh. Extreme rainfall is becoming more common in much of the country leading to floods and loss of agriculture.

River Mithi, Mumbai / Nicholas / CC-By-SA 3.0
Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab, Odisha, Tamil Nadu and Uttarakhand all saw major reservoirs running dry in early 2018 and drought and severe water shortages in many parts of these states.

A May 7 report of this year refers to the battle over the Yamuna between Delhi and Haryana. The Yamuna’s lack of water for all the demands placed over it highlights the profound — but scarcely acknowledged — crisis now confronting India: it is slowly running dry. Signs of severe water stress are everywhere. Yet there is little action from the government or public awareness of the impending crisis. Any sense of the importance of water conservation among affluent city dwellers seems minimal.

Water conservationist Rajendra Singh said that Shimla is not alone. A water crisis is likely to hit metro cities within the next few years. “At least 12 metro cities will face severe water crisis in the next five to six years, and in the next ten years there will be a crisis in almost all parts of the country,” he said .

The water storage level across 91 major hydro reservoirs in India has plummeted to 17 per cent, lower than the 21 per cent storage recorded last year at the same time. As a result, electricity generation from hydropower was down by a quarter in March 2018.

Reports are showing how not treating our waste water properly and re-using it responsibly, is leading to overall water shortages. Sludge from a treatment plant at Malyana, which had a faulty sewage treatment system, was flowing into the Ashwani Khad -- a spring from where Shimla used to get its largest share of water. When unclean water from the sewage treatment plant contaminated streams, there was an outbreak of jaundice that affected more than 500 people in Shimla between December 2015 and March 2016. The Himachal Pradesh High Court then put a blanket ban on use of water from springs around Shimla after this. But the administration did little to compensate for the loss of reservoir water since 2016.

India is one of the most water-challenged nations in the world, with at least 54% of the country being recognised as highly or extremely water stressed, according to a 2015-World Resources Institute report.


Calculations based on some estimates of the amount of water lost to the atmosphere by evapo-transpiration suggest that water that can be put to use in India in future will be about 654 billion cubic metres (BCM), very close to the current actual water use estimate of 634 BCM. These estimates suggest there is little scope to meet any additional demand. 

So please focus every day on how you can save more and more water.

Monday, June 04, 2018

We are all making a world without water - and now we have to live in it.


A friend whatsapped me this piece about the Shimla water crisis : 

शिमला के पानी दाता : पानी की हाहाकार के बीच जब मेयर चायना भाग गई ओर सरकार के हाथ पांव फूल गए ,तब यह फरिश्ता रात के 3-3 बजे तक अधिकारियों के साथ शिमला के गली गली पानी की सप्लाई सुनिश्चित करने निकला, शहर के चप्पे चप्पे का जायजा लिया और अगले दिन प्रदेश के सबसे बड़े कोर्ट की सबसे ऊंची कुर्सी पर बैठकर डेली सुनवाई करते हुए शिमला को जल संकट से निकाला।शिमला के जगरूप वकीलों ने इसकी शुरुआत एक दिन की हड़ताल से की तो माननीय एक्टिंग चीफ जस्टिस संजय करोल साहब ने पानी सप्लाई सुचारू करवाने का जिम्मा खुद सम्भाल लिया।अधिकारी सुबह साढ़े नो बजे कोर्ट में तलब किये और तगड़ी घुट्टी पिलाई।फिर क्या था चीफ सेक्रेटरी तक को म्युनिसिपल कारपोरेशन के कार्यालय में बैठना पड़ा।शहर में जो पानी की सप्लाई 12 दिन बाद हो रही थी उसे हर तीन दिन बाद करवाया।लीकेज ओर अवैध कनेक्शन धारियों के कनेक्शन कटे।सप्लाई लाइन से सीधे कनेक्शन लेकर 24 घँटे पानी सप्लाई का लुत्फ लेने वालों की शामत आई।लाखों का पानी बिल भरने वाले पानी भरते नज़र आये।शिमला के जल संकट को सिर्फ एक दिन में हल कर के जस्टिस संजय करोल प्रदेश की जनता के हीरो बन गए।शर्म की बात है कि जिन दो लोगों, मेयर ओर पानी मंत्री को इस संकट की घड़ी में मैदान में डटने चाहिए था वो दोनों ही भाग खड़े हुए।सोचिये अगर जज साहब कानून का डंडा उठाकर रात भर लोगों की समस्याओं को समझते ओर हल निकालते तो शिमला में महामारी फेल सकती थी।जज साहब ने सभी VVIP को टैंकरों से पानी सप्लाई करने पर पूर्ण प्रतिबंध लगा कर आम जनता को राहत दी।

Houses in Shimla / Arpit Chhonker / CC-By-SA 4.0
Even now politicians are talking of more dams, more lifting schemes (which are subject to corruption and not completed for years) from far away rather than protecting and enhancing local sources and inculcating a culture of conservation / tighter management. Shimla earlier had 30-40 public water sources in the city – hillside streams and bawadis which have been constructed over or commandeered for private use. Farmers growing vegetable crops upstream have been stopped from drawing water – is it a given that rural people must pay for cities’ misuse ? 

It is rich that the Congress can blame BJP, having been in power at assembly level and Shimla corporation level for most of the time. BJP too hasn’t confronted this issue in its 15 years of rule at assembly level and a few years at the corporation level.

The previously installed waterschemes that supplied shimla have only half the water they were designed for. A long dry spell with less rainfall and snowfall appear to be factors behind the depletion of water in the city. Leaky pipes also lead to a loss of a significant amount of water. The civic body gives VIP localities preferential treatment. The illegal construction that takes place across the city is also the place where water is frequently pilfered for use, along with hotels that draw extra water. As a result, the common man is left to face the shortage of water almost every year.

Indian agriculture faces threats from irresponsible shrimp (& prawn) farming..

I am beginning to catch up with photos and videos sent me by friends in India on whatsapp while I was away.

Saw a terrible news item sent by a friend – in a large no. of villages, shrimp farms near chennai have turned barren the agriculture lands surrounding them. The untreated effluent from shrimp farms, full of toxic chemicals, is let out into lakes, rivulets and surrounding lands. It has ruined all groundwater sources and is destroying Kaliveli lake that hosts vast numbers of migratory birds and is a spawning ground for many fish varieties. Worse, the shrimp farmers, politically connected and rich, have broken the nearby dam which housed fresh water, which otherwise could have supplied fresh water to Chennai. Farmers are ruined and migrating as labourers.

Giant Tiger Prawn / CC-By-SA 3.0
I read more widely and found a large no. of news items that report on the devastation in Tamil Nadu. This is the story too in Andhra Pradesh (see here too), Orissa (also see here, here and here) and Gujarat (also see here and here). This has gone on for decades.

The shrimp farms are not registered or monitored by the authorities despite persistent protests by those surrounding them. Sometimes after largescale protests some shrimp farms are closed down, only to re-open again shortly. The shrimp farms are so toxic that they can use a particular piece of land only for a few years and then abandon it to move to new pieces of land. This degraded land cannot be turned back to farming for another 30 years as it is full of salinity and chemicals. The rich in our lawless land can monopolise environmental resources for great profits while more and more farmers and fish workers leave their generations old vocations to become labourers in cities.

The Indian governments, past and present have done nothing – even as other governments have recognized the dangers and have more effectively regulated shrimp farming. Most countries completely ban inland shrimp farming. Mexico runs the industry via highly regulated cooperatives. America has pioneered closed loop shrimp farming where the waste products are eaten by other acquatic animals. The value of protecting mangroves is being recognized even by shrimp farmers as the mangroves filter out toxic chemicals and restore water quality. But Indian governments are not bothered as they only seek to make more money to win the next election.

I can see news of only one large scale action - but we will have to see if it lasts.. in the Chilika Lake of Odisha. 

Sunday, May 13, 2018

The four ways humanity can avoid climate disaster..

The FOUR Golden Means..

There are four ways humanity can avoid climate disaster: reducing our need for energy, producing energy through more sustainable, low-carbon means, changing the DNA of capitalism to put a price on carbon emissions, and better environmental conservation.

Let’s start with the first point: reducing our energy consumption. There are three major sectors that make up the bulk of energy consumption in our society: food, transportation, and housing—how we eat, how we get around, how we live—the basics of our daily lives.

Reducing Energy Needs for Food


It is forecast that farmers will start investing in renewable algae or hydrogen-based fuels for machinery, and the installation of solar and wind generators on their land. Meanwhile, farming soil and its heavy dependence on nitrogen-based fertilizers (created from fossil fuels) is a major source of global nitrous oxide (a greenhouse gas). Using those fertilizers more efficiently (like via soil testing) is crucial. 


Overusing chemical fertilizers can increase the salinity of soil, making it difficult for plant roots to absorb water. Incorrectly applied chemical fertilizers can damage  plants or increase the acidity of the upper layers of soil, making it harder for some plants to absorb nutrients. Chemical nitrogen fertilizers work best when they are tilled into the soil and lightly irrigated shortly before planting time.


In addition to supplying nitrogen and other nutrients plants need, compost improves the structure of the soil, allowing water to permeate through it more easily and increasing its ability to retain water. Unlike chemical fertilizers, organic soil amendments release nutrients over a period of several years. Legumes form a symbiotic relationship with bacteria in the soil that allows them to draw nitrogen from the atmosphere. Legumes are commonly planted on nitrogen-deficient soils and then plowed into the ground where the nitrogen absorbed from the air is released into the soil as the plants decay.


Eventually, switching to algae based fertilizers will become a major focus in the coming years. To get serious about agriculture carbon reduction, we’ve also got to reduce the numbers of cattle. 

Reducing our need for electricity for homes, offices and factories



Electricity and heat generation produces about 26 % of global greenhouse gas emissions. Buildings, including our workplaces and our homes, make up three-fourths of the electricity used. Today, much of that energy is wasted. We need to watch out for :

·       Do we leave TVs and Computer sockets on at night – this too uses electricity.

·       Do we take the trouble to keep our houses as cool as possible through natural means – via chiks / roller blinds outside and inside our windows, by keeping all doors and windows open when the outside air is cool, such as in most summer nights.

·       Do we optimize the most efficient ways of cooling ourselves – apart from ceiling fans, wall fans placed in kitchens, bathrooms, balconies and stores can help; small mini coolers with honeycomb pads can be wheeled everywhere and use only as much power as a fan. These coolers can easily run on inverters / colony generator back up up also.

·       When using Airconditioners (ACs), do we keep them at a more optimal temperature of say 25 C with perhaps a light fan, rather than keep them at 20-22 and then use blankets for covers in summer nights.

·       The same goes for heaters – blowers and oil heaters are energy guzzlers as they have settings only for 1000 / 2000 watts.

·       Halogen heaters instead have 3-4 rods, each rod varying in wattage use from 125 – 300 Watts. So one can only switch on only as many rods as one needs. They give out light too apart from heat, eliminating the need for putting on a separate light in the evening.

·       People often don’t realize that they lose enormous amounts of heat / cool via their window / door glasses, as glass is a good conductor of heat and cooling. So keeping your glass windows as insulated as possible with chiks / roller blinds / thick curtains when using either cooling or heating devices is a good idea.

·       It is not too expensive to replace your normal single fixed glass panes with double glass panes. The trapped air between two glass window panes acts as a very good insulator. A good carpenter or iron-works person can change your single fixed glass pane to double glass ones. In our homes, the single 3 mm fixed panes were removed from all windows and 6 mm panes installed on the inside, and 8 mm panes installed on the outside, in the same frame where earlier single glass panes were fitted. There is a more than 2 inch gap between the two fixed glass panes now.

·       In my memory in 2016 we paid around 400 INR a sq foot for removal of previous panes, cleaning and painting of the frame, buying of 6 mm and 8 mm glass panes, and installation with silicone injections which seal air in.

·       Window ACs in our house were enclosed in simple, open-able wooden boxes which reduce air-flow between outside and inside when the ac is not in use. To my memory we paid about Rs. 4000 per such box in 2014.

·       Both these measures have reduced noise from outside (like sometimes from a neighbouring club) in our estimation by about 60 % but have also insulated the room/s to the same degree from loss of heat / cold.


·       Putting blankets on your beds and sofas in winter increases their insulation enormously, making you warmer when you use them.

·       Another possibility is to turn buildings into mini power plants by converting their windows into see-through solar panels (yup, that’s a thing now) or installing geothermal energy generators. Such buildings could be taken entirely off the grid, removing their carbon footprint.

·       In India, ofcourse, rooftop solar electricity generation is slowly making its presence felt.

It is estimated that in the US in the coming decades the buildings will triple or quadruple their energy efficiency, saving 1.4 trillion dollars.


Acknowledgement : Some of the above material is adapted from Quantumrun Forecasting. The ideas for energy saving at homes are my own.

Why Governments are so Slow to Respond to Climate Change..

We have all had the Q posed as the title of this post. I found very elegant and simple answers from Quantumrun Forecasting from whose website this post is excepted.

Most of the international organizations responsible for organizing the global effort on climate change agree that the limit we can allow greenhouse gas concentrations to buildup to in our atmosphere is 450 parts per million (ppm). That more or less equals a two degree Celsius temperature increase in our climate, hence its nickname: the “2-degrees-Celsius limit.” To avoid it, the world would have to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by 50% by 2050 (based on 1990 levels) and by almost 100% by 2100.

Presently, politicians and climate change don’t exactly mix. The reality of today is that even with  innovations in the pipeline, cutting emissions will still mean purposefully slowing down the economy. Politicians who do that don’t normally stay in power.

This choice between environmental stewardship and economic progress is hardest on developing countries. They've seen how first world nations have grown wealthy off the back of the environment, so asking them to avoid that same growth is a hard sell. These developing nations point out that since first world nations caused most of the atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, they should be the ones to bear most of the burden to clean it up. Meanwhile, first world nations don’t want to lower their emissions—and put themselves at an economic disadvantage—if their cuts are cancelled out by runaway emissions in countries like India and China. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg situation.


According to David Keith, Harvard Professor and President of Carbon Engineering, from an economist’s perspective, if you spend a lot of money cutting emissions in your country, you end up distributing the benefits of those cuts around the world, but all the costs of those cuts are in your country. That’s why governments prefer to invest in adaptation to climate change over cutting emissions, because the benefits and investments stay in their countries.


Nations throughout the world recognize that passing the 450 red line means pain and instability for everyone within the next 20-30 years. However, there’s also this feeling that there’s not enough pie to go around, forcing everyone to eat as much of it as they can so they can be in the best position once it runs out. That’s why Kyoto failed. That’s why Copenhagen failed. And that’s why the next meeting will fail unless we can prove the economics behind climate change reduction are positive, instead of negative.



Another factor that makes climate change so much harder than any challenge humanity has faced in its past is the timescale it operates on. The changes we make today to lower our emissions will impact future generations the most. Think about this from a politician’s perspective: she needs to convince her voters to agree to expensive investments in environmental initiatives, which will probably be paid for by increasing taxes and whose benefits will only be enjoyed by future generations. As much as people might say otherwise, most people have a tough time putting aside $20 a week into their retirement fund, let alone worrying about the lives of grandchildren they've never met.
And it will get worse. Even if we succeed in transitioning to a low-carbon economy by 2040-50 by doing everything mentioned above, the greenhouse gas emissions we’ll emit between now and then will fester in the atmosphere for decades. These emissions will lead to positive feedback loops that could accelerate climate change, making a return to “normal” 1990s weather take even longer—possibly until the 2100s. Sadly, humans don’t make decisions on those time scales. Anything longer than 10 years might as well not exist to us.
As much as Kyoto and Copenhagen may give the impression that world politicians are clueless about how to resolve climate change, the reality is quite the opposite. The top tier powers know exactly what the final solution will look like. It’s just the final solution won’t be very popular among voters in most parts of the world, so leaders are delaying said final solution until either science and the private sector innovate our way out of climate change or climate change wreaks enough havoc over the world that voters will agree to vote for unpopular solutions to this very big problem.
Here’s the final solution in a nutshell: The rich and heavily industrialized countries must accept deep and real cuts to their carbon emissions. The cuts have to be deep enough to cover the emissions from those smaller, developing countries who must continue to pollute in order to complete the short term goal of pulling their populations out of extreme poverty and hunger.
On top of that, the richer countries must band together to create a 21st century Marshall Plan whose goal will be to create a global fund to accelerate Third World development and shift to a post-carbon world. A quarter of this fund will stay in the developed world for strategic subsidies to speed up the revolutions in energy conservation and production outlined at the beginning of this article. The fund’s remaining three quarters will be used for massive scale technology transfers and financial subsidies to help Third World countries leapfrog over conventional infrastructure and power generation towards a decentralized infrastructure and power network that will be cheaper, more resilient, easier to scale, and largely carbon neutral.
The details of this plan might vary—hell, aspects of it might even be entirely private sector led—but the overall outline look much like what was just described.
At the end of the day, it’s about fairness. World leaders will have to agree to work together to stabilize the environment and gradually heal it back to 1990 levels. And in so doing, these leaders will have to agree on a new global entitlement, a new basic right for every human being on the planet, where everyone will be allowed a yearly, personal allocation of greenhouse gas emissions. If you exceed that allocation, if you pollute more than your yearly fair share, then you pay a carbon tax to put yourself back into balance.
Once that global right is agreed on, people in first world nations will immediately start paying a carbon tax for the luxurious, high carbon lifestyles they already live. That carbon tax will pay to develop poorer countries, so their people can one day enjoy the same lifestyles as those in the West.
Now I know what you’re thinking: if everyone lives an industrialized lifestyle, wouldn't that be too much for the environment to support? At present, yes. For the environment to survive given today’s economy and technology, the majority of the world’s population needs to be trapped in abject poverty. But if we accelerate the coming revolutions in food, transportation, housing, and energy, then it will be possible for the world’s population to all live First World lifestyles—without ruining the planet. And isn't that a goal we’re striving for anyway?
Finally, there’s one scientific field that humanity could (and probably will) use in the future to combat climate change in the short term: geoengineering.
The dictionary.com definition for geoengineering is “the deliberate large-scale manipulation of an environmental process that affects the earth's climate, in an attempt to counteract the effects of global warming.” Basically, its climate control. And we’ll use it to temporarily reduce global temperatures.
Two of the most promising options are : stratospheric sulfur seeding and iron fertilization of the ocean.
When especially large volcanoes erupt, they shoot huge plumes of sulfur ash into the stratosphere, naturally and temporarily reducing global temperatures by less than one percent. How? Because as that sulfur swirls around the stratosphere, it reflects enough sunlight from hitting the Earth to reduce global temperatures. Scientists like Professor Alan Robock of Rutgers University believe humans can do the same. Robock suggests that with a few billion dollars and about nine giant cargo aircraft flying about three times a day, we could unload a million tonnes of sulfur into the stratosphere each year to artificially bring global temperatures down by one to two degrees.
The oceans are made up of a giant food chain. At the very bottom of this food chain are phytoplankton (microscopic plants). These plants feed on minerals that mostly come from wind-blown dust from the continents. One of the most important minerals is iron.
Now bankrupt, California-based start-ups Climos and Planktos experimented with dumping huge amounts of powdered iron dust across large areas of the deep ocean to artificially stimulate phytoplankton blooms. Studies suggest that one kilogram of powdered iron could generate about 100,000 kilograms of phytoplankton. These phytoplankton would then absorb massive amounts of carbon as they grew. Basically, whatever amount of this plant that doesn’t get eaten by the food chain (creating a much needed population boom of marine life by the way) will fall to the bottom of the ocean, dragging down mega tonnes of carbon with it.
That sounds great, you say. But why did those two start-ups go bust?
Geoengineering is a relatively new science that’s chronically underfunded and extremely unpopular among climate scientists. Why? Because scientists believe (and rightly so) that if the world uses easy and low cost geoengineering techniques to keep the climate stable instead of the hard work involved with reducing our carbon emissions, then world governments may opt to use geoengineering permanently.
If it were true that we could use geoengineering to permanently solve our climate problems, then governments would in fact do just that. Unfortunately, using geoengineering to solve climate change is like treating a heroin addict by giving him more heroin—it sure might make him feel better in the short term, but eventually the addiction will kill him.
If we keep the temperature stable artificially while allowing carbon dioxide concentrations to grow, the increased carbon would overwhelm our oceans, making them acidic. If the oceans become too acidic, all life in the oceans will die out, a 21st century mass extinction event. That’s something we’d all like to avoid.
In the end, geoengineering should only be used as a last resort for no more than 5-10 years, enough time for the world to take emergency measures should we ever pass the 450 ppm mark.
An addiction gets harder to quit the longer you have it. The same can be said about our addiction to polluting our biosphere with carbon. The longer we put off kicking the habit, the longer and harder it will be to recover. Every decade world governments put off making real and substantial efforts to limit climate change today could mean several decades and trillions of dollars more to reverse its effects in the future. 
We shouldn’t have to resort to geoengineering to fix our world. We shouldn’t have to wait until a billion people die of starvation and violent conflict before we act. Small actions today can avoid the disasters and horrible moral choices of tomorrow.

Saturday, May 12, 2018

What I just Discovered about Climate Change..

I read a great deal on climate change.. yet some of the information by Quantumrun Forecasting on their website and excerpted below, was new to me, or perhaps it made more of an impact because of the way it was simply presented.. 

Feedback loops are already coming into play.. it really is our last chance.. 


Feedback loops, in the context of climate change, is any cycle in nature that either positively (accelerates) or negatively (decelerates) impacts the level of warming in the atmosphere.

An example of a negative feedback loop would be that the more our planet warms, the more water evaporates into our atmosphere, creating more clouds that reflect light from the sun,which lowers the earth’s average temperature.

Unfortunately, there are way more positive feedback loops than negative ones. Here’s the list of the most important ones:

As the earth warms, ice caps in the north and south poles will begin to shrink, to melt away. This loss means there will be less gleaming white, frosty ice to reflect the sun’s heat back into space. (Keep in mind that our poles reflect up to 70 per cent of the sun’s heat back to space.) As there is less and less heat deflected away, the rate of melting will grow faster year-over-year.

Related to the melting polar ice caps, is the melting permafrost, the soil that for centuries has remained trapped under freezing temperatures or buried beneath glaciers. The cold tundra found in northern Canada and in Siberia contains massive amounts of trapped carbon dioxide and methane that—once warmed—will be released back into the atmosphere. Methane especially is over 20 times worse than carbon dioxide and it can’t easily be absorbed back into the soil after it’s released.

Finally, our oceans: they are our biggest carbon sinks (like global vacuum cleaners that suck carbon dioxide from the atmosphere). As the world warms each year, our oceans’ ability to hold carbon dioxide weakens, meaning it will pull less and less carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The same goes for our other big carbon sinks, our forests and our soils, their ability to pull carbon from the atmosphere becomes limited the more our atmosphere is polluted with warming agents.


We need to urgently help farmers with drought proofing farming


We are told that chances are, the Eastern part of India will receive more rain that before because of climate change. But Quantumrun points out that a warmer climate means our most farm-able soil will also suffer from higher rates of evaporation, meaning the benefits of greater rainfall will be canceled out by a faster soil evaporation rate in many places around the world.

Modern farming tends to rely on relatively few plant varieties to grow at industrial scale. We’ve domesticated crops, either through thousands of years of manual breeding or dozens of years of genetic manipulation, that can only thrive when the temperature is just Goldilocks right.

For example, studies run by the University of Reading on two of the most widely grown varieties of rice, found that both were highly vulnerable to higher temperatures. Specifically, if temperatures exceeded 35 degrees during their flowering stage, the plants would become sterile, offering few, if any, grains. Many tropical and Asian countries where rice is the main staple food already lie on the very edge of this Goldilocks temperature zone, so any further warming could mean disaster.

Acknowledgement : The above post is adapted from Quantumrun Forecasting.