Environment & urbanization

--
with regards
Parveen Gulia
Assistant Manager
Voyants Solution Pvt. Ltd.,
Gurgaon
Cont. No. 

Gurgaon  09468318058

Satna      09425388967

dear,Good day! shznpta!

dear friend
how are you doing recently ?
i found a very good site : www.yang-fangfang2.com
I bought an Apple laptop a week ago from this site. Now, I have been
received. This product quality is very good.
and price also very cheap. They also sell mobile phones, television
sets, motorcycles and so on.
it is the best place for us to buy , or send gift to friends .
If you feel interested , just do it .don't miss this chance.
good luck

xrnfhc
26/11/2010 12:43:23

HIMALAYAN GLACIERS SHRANK 16% IN 50 YRS

HIMALAYAN GLACIERS SHRANK 16% IN 50 YRS: ISRO

Himalayan glaciers retreated by 16% in the last nearly five decades due to climate change, investigations by India's scientists in selected basins in four states has revealed. The retreat of Himalayan glaciers and loss in a real extent were monitored in selected basins in J&K, Himachal Pradesh, Uttaranchal and Sikkim, under a programme on space-based global climate change observation by Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).
"Investigations on glacial retreat were estimated for 1,317 glaciers in 10 sub-basins from 1962. This has shown an overall reduction in glacial area from 5,866 sqkm to 4,921 sqkm since 1962, showing an overall de-glaciation of 16%", says the latest annual report of ISRO. Snow cover monitoring of all basin has been completed, it said.
Atlases for three years are ready and one for the fourth year is being prepared. Modeling response of Himalayan cryosphere to climate change has been initiated, ISRO added. Meanwhile, a study on the impact of temperature and carbon dioxide (CO²) rise on the productivity of the four major cereal food crops — wheat, rice, maize and pearl millet — revealed that yield of all of them showed reduction with increasing temperature.
Assessment after taking field data showed that wheat was the most sensitive crop and maize the least sensitive to temperature rise among the four, ISRO pointed out. Another study for climate change impact on hydrology was carried out using "Curve Number" approach to study the change in run off pattern in India at basin level. "Analysis shows there will be significant increase of run off in the month of June in most of the major river basins", the 2009-10 report of the ISRO said. ISRO has also observed a strong correlation between agriculture vegetation (mainly rice areas) and methane concentration.

--
Parveen Gulia
Cont. No. 09256015406

Climate Change and Propaganda of IPCC

R.K. PACHAURI
How this man is destroying the credibility of science
A TSI exclusive by Sutanu Guru

"The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate."

Paul Ehrlich, world renowned scientist (alarmist), in his book, Population Bomb, in 1968.

This 'great scientist, economist and futurologist''- who actually had a degree in ecology - has won numerous awards despite the brazenly false claims that he has made. Oh yes, Ehrlich predicted in the late 1960s that hundreds of millions of Indians will die of starvation by 1980.

An economist called Julian Simon was so outraged by Ehrlich's alarmist predictions that he provoked the 'great scientist' to make a bet in 1980. Simon gambled that the real prices of five commodities (primarily metals) would fall by 1990 - commodities which Ehrlich was saying will probably disappear from the Earth by then. By 1990, Ehrlich had lost the bet. And after that came the series of honours and awards for Ehrlich; and none for Simon. Most 'establishment' figures dismissed Simon as a nut case. Can you explain this travesty of truth, science, fair play and alleged dedication to 'facts'?

"Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate."

R.K Pachauri, as the leader of the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in the official report released on global warming.

This great 'scientist' - who is actually a mechanical engineer - accepted the Nobel Prize on behalf of IPCC despite persistent allegations by real scientists that the IPCC under Pachauri was 'manufacturing facts' to fan climate change fundamentalism.

The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley (see column in this issue) has been repeatedly raising objections to the manner in which Pachauri and his team have been playing around with facts to bolster their climate change and global warming case. Most of the establishment has dismissed the Viscount as a nut case while Pachauri and his team won the Nobel Prize! Can you please explain this travesty?

 

I can't, and I bet you can't too, if you pause for a while and think about this whole brouhaha. I mean, here is a man who led a team of alleged scientists mandated by the United Nations to find 'facts' on global warming. Instead of facts, the man selectively picks 'speculation' and gobbledygook as science and tries his best to frighten the world. And you and I swallow it just as the 'faithful' swallow evangelist fire and brimstone that Apocalypse is Imminent and We Have to Pay for Our Sins.

There is no doubt any more that a lot of the IPCC report is a gigantic fraud - Nobel Prize or not. But that is not the problem. What you and I need to worry is how the 'Malthusian' alarmists succeed in convincing otherwise reasonable people like us into believing the worst about the future of humanity and the planet. Back in the late 18th century, Thomas Malthus - who happened to be a Reverend - predicted that the world will run out of food very soon. Almost 200 years later, Ehrlich became immortal by 'repackaging' the Malthusian scare in modern jargon. Back in the late 18th century, there was genuine concern that the forests of the world would disappear as the demand for firewood was growing exponentially. In the later half of the 20th century, you and I have been subjected to repeated warnings that fossil fuels will disappear and plunge the world into catastrophe. And now of course, you have this global warming warning that people like Pachauri claim will lead to melting of glaciers, more natural disasters like tsunamis, the death of the Amazon and what not.

Common sense should persuade you and me to dismiss these alarmist theories since they have such a disgraceful track record of patently wrong forecasts. Yet we listen to people like Pachauri. I think the reasons go back to our craving for religion. We are insecure human beings and we all fear the unknown. Back in ancient times, fire, storms, forests, lightning, water and what not became embodiment of Gods - to be blindly believed and worshipped. Today, we seem to be determined to elevate the likes of Pachauri to the same status.

Of course alarmists like Pachauri are brilliant marketing professionals above all else. They understand fear and uncertainty and know how to package them into Nostradamus-like prophecies that will both frighten the hell out of us and also tickle the voyeur in us. Unfortunately for people like Pachauri, people like you and me do have common sense and do manage to sniff out charlatans sooner or later. Half truths have virtually destroyed the credibility of genuine concerns about the dangers of pollution and carbon emissions. More than half truths, that is the bigger crime committed by Pachauri and gang of alarmists.

With due apologies "Dr" Pachauri, someone who claims to be a scientist told me recently that Neanderthals originated from a particular area in Uttarakhand in the Himalayan foothills of India. So can I call you a Neanderthal from Nainital please?

 

 

R.K. PACHAURI
How this man is destroying the credibility of science
A TSI exclusive

 

A climate for fudging

As IPCC'S alarmist chief digs a hole for himself and his tribe and puts up a weak defence for his blunders, it is time for the world to put him in his place and salvage the credibility of the cause, writes Vikas Kumar

Rajendra K. Pachauri's "Himalayan blunder" is showing no signs of melting away. If anything, it is snowballing into a major global fracas that threatens to put the credibility of the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that he heads under a cloud.

The 69-year-old chairman of the UN-mandated IPCC finds himself in the eye of a blizzard of controversies not only over the panel's claim that Himalayan glaciers will be gone forever by the year 2035, but also due to his alleged conflicts of interest that stem from his direct and indirect association with many firms and institutions that have a stake in the burgeoning carbon credit market.

Since the glacier controversy erupted and the director-general of TERI admitted to "one mistake in a 1000-page report", many more glaring errors of fact and deduction have tumbled out of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (4th AR), which had, in 2007, fetched Pachauri and his team of researchers a joint Nobel Prize alongside former US vice-president and one of the world's best-known climate change warriors, Al Gore.

The roots of the current controversy can be traced back to last November, when Pachauri aggressively debunked a study by Dr V.K. Raina, one of India's leading glaciologists. In a discussion paper, Dr Raina had questioned the IPCC's alarmist conclusion on the rate of the melting of the Himalayan glaciers due to climate change.

The study authored by Dr Raina, 'Himalayan Glaciers: A State-of-the-Art Review of Glacial Studies, Glacial Retreat and Climate Change', took the position that "it might be premature to make a statement that the glaciers in the Himalayas are retreating abnormally because of climate change." Dr Raina, a retired deputy director-general of the Geological Survey of India, asserted that there was no "scientific evidence" to link the retreating Himalayan glaciers to the phenomenon of climate change. Pachauri dismissed the report as "voodoo science".

In his broadside against Dr Raina's study, the IPCC chief said the glaciologist was out to "trivialise" science. Not only did Pachauri raise questions about the academic worth of the study, he also accused the Union minister of state for environment, Jairam Ramesh, who had supported Dr Raina's conclusions, of being arrogant. "It can't be on the basis of what two persons, the minister and one more person, think. It is going against the findings of the IPCC. It creates a sense of complacency that climate change is not for real," Pachauri had scoffed.

The tables have turned dramatically since then and Pachauri stands exposed. Critics point out that he is only an economist and industrial engineer. They allege that he is not a climate scientist as he would have the world believe. They wonder why he was in the first place made the IPCC chairman in 2002 and entrusted with the job of creating consensus on one of the most critical issues facing the planet, global warming.

 

One of the most scathing attacks on Pachauri has come from Lord Christopher Monckton, policy adviser to the former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Even if global warming has assumed unprecedented proportions, he says in his column published in TSI, "the hawkers and peddlers of the extremist notion that "global warming" is or may become a global crisis mention melting ice-caps, roaring hurricanes, rising sea levels, searing droughts and other extreme weather events as though such things had never occurred before and must, therefore, be blamed on humankind."

The doomsday prediction dates back to 1999, when a JNU-based glaciologist, Syed Husnain, published a report on the melting of Himalayan glaciers. A New Scientist magazine author Murarilal interviewed him and wrote that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035. This claim was later incorporated in IPCC's report.

Dr Husnain denies that the date emanated from his report. He explains, "I hadn't mentioned a fixed date like 2035… It was entirely Murarilal's assumption. I had just said if the present rate of the melting of glaciers continues, they might melt completely in the next 39-40 years."

Asked why, during his stint as Senior Fellow in TERI, he did not bring this fact to the attention of Dr Pachauri, he says, "Pachauri was a very busy man and we had very few personal interactions."

This is not the first time that IPCC has fudged figures. Anil Kumar Singh, eminent energy scientist, says, "IPCC exaggerated the figures of biomass pollution. It is certainly a concern, but the rate of increase in pollution estimated by IPCC was not true."

The over-reaching IPCC researchers have done great disservice to the cause of environmental conservation. Owing to the multiple goof-ups in the IPCC's 4th AR, climate change sceptics have found a handy stick to beat the climate change warriors with. Many can now be persuaded to believe that the situation isn't really as bad as it is being made out to be.

The second argument is that climate models based on software devices are simply too unreliable, as are temperature records. Leaked e-mails from the University of East Anglia appeared to show manipulation of temperature data by the IPCC, raising serious questions about the validity of the UN panel's claims.

A cornered Pachauri has been brushing aside all allegations but without much conviction. "I have made my stand very clear. TERI is a not-for-profit organisation working for the welfare of society and its revenues cover costs and provide no private benefit to any party," he told doubts persist.
What is most shocking is the astonishing network of interests that Dr Pachauri has built around the world (see info-graphic). He is on the boards of various companies, NGOs, institutions and banks. As a chairman of IPCC, this certainly creates conflicts of interest. He had been member of the Board of Directors of IOC, ONGC and power company NTPC, which are India's largest public sector companies. They contribute to the increasing carbon footprint of the country. Pachauri-led TERI also floated OTBL (an ONGC-TERI joint venture company). Pachauri said, "I have made my position very clear already. The decision was taken at the behest of ONGC itself. I wasn't even present in the board meeting in which this decision was taken."

Pachauri has interests in several companies and organisations that either benefit from the global scramble to counter climate change or are actively involved in businesses that have giant carbon footprints. He established an oil company in the US, GloriOil, which is in the business of exploiting fossil fuels for profit.

Moreover, Pachauri never divulges anything about the Tata group's role in TERI. In fact, TERI says through a press release that Tata group has no relationship with it. This disregards the fact that TERI was known as Tata Energy Research Institute till sometime back. And of course, TERI was founded by Tata chemicals – this is a fact TERI now accepts.

Former minister for petroleum and natural gas Santosh Gangwar had complained in writing about TERI getting into a joint venture with ONGC even when Pachauri was on the board of the public sector company.

TERI was the preferred bidder for Kuwaiti contracts to clean up the mess left behind by Saddam Hussein in the country's oilfields. The $3 billion contracts were awarded by the UN. Pachauri has also been appointed the head of Yale University's Climate and Energy Institute, which receives millions of dollars in US state and corporate funding. Interestingly, none of these organisations publish data related to remunerations paid to Pachauri.

In November 2008, TERI got a huge grant from the Carnegie Corporation to study the impact of the melting of Himalayan glaciers on the lives of people. Dr Raina, who has dismissed Pachauri's alarmist prediction, demands an apology from the latter for misleading people around the world. "Now he says that we have studied only 30-40 glaciers. But at least we have gone there unlike Pachauri and his scientists. He should at least say sorry to people around the world," says the veteran glaciologist.

The rapidly growing worldwide carbon credit market is today estimated to be to the tune of $126 billion. Large firms and institutions where Pachauri holds advisory positions are likely to benefit from the global panic that is bound to be caused by inflated climate change projections.

It now seems that Pachauri's IPCC manipulated data and information at will to hyper-ventilate the world's climate change worries. The latest expose by London's Daily Telegraph refers to the panel's claim that 40 percent of the Amazon rain forests would disappear for good due to the ill-effects of global warming.

The newspaper alleges that this finding did not come from IPCC's own research but was a "cut and paste" job – it was lifted from a report prepared by an advocacy group for World Wildlife Fund. Amazingly, the report was authored not by an Amazon expert nor by a climate specialist, but by a policy analyst and a freelance journalist.

From "Glaciergate" to "Amazongate", Pachauri is stirring up quite a storm. The Himalayan glaciers or the Amazon rain forests may or may not be in danger of disappearing altogether, but India's self-styled climate change expert is in dire need of a vanishing act before he digs a bigger hole for himself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JUST ONE MISTAKE

 

IPCC Chairman R. K. Pachauri's credibility is under attack for glaring mistakes in the fourth assessment report of IPCC and for charges of financial irregularities in TERI. Vikas Kumar caught up with the man in the muddle.

 

Don't you feel that the recent revelations have severely eroded your credibility and you should resign from the post?

First of all, I would like to make it aptly clear that I have no intention of resigning from my post. I was selected by the United Nations and I have a task of carrying out the fifth assessment report of IPCC. I have to complete it and we are trying to come up with a more robust report this time. Unfortunately, there were some mistakes in the fourth assessment report on Himalayan glaciers but that, in no way, can demean or discredit the value of the report. As far as credibility of the report is concerned, I am sure that 'rational people' all over the world will not be distracted by this one error as they see the larger picture.

Global Warming is a phenomenon not only confined to Himalayan glaciers. It affects the entire world. I do not think this one mistake will make people look away from the actual reality.

What about the allegations of financial irregularities in TERI?

I am again and again saying these allegations are false and TERI has not benefited at all in any way.

This is a big mistake. How can you escape responsibility after making such a Himalayan blunder?

First of all, you have not worked your fundamentals right. TERI was not at all involved in IPCC assessment report.

But was not Syed Husnain a senior fellow at TERI?

You should check your facts. At the time his report on Himalayan glaciers came out, he was working with Jawaharlal Nehru University and not with the The Energy Research Institute. He was working with us for the last two years only. Whatever statement he made about the glaciers was made much earlier than his association with TERI.

There are other mistakes too in the section….?

(Cuts in)…Yes, there is a whole paragraph and we have put it on the IPCC website. We are trying to adopt more robust practices while carrying out fifth assessment report. However, there is no question of taking action against any of the authors as they are not employees of the IPCC.

It is amply clear from the mistakes in the fourth assessment report that processes are not perfect. Now, the work for the preparation of fifth assessment report is going on. How will you ensure such mistakes are not repeated this time?

You cannot generalise on the basis of one mistake. Our procedures are very robust and all we need to do is to adhere to implement these procedures. We have clear-cut guidelines. That's how we include information from other publications. Unfortunately, this is a failure on the part of IPCC in the fourth assessment report and all we can do is to reassure people that such mistakes will not be repeated in future.

 

When the western media broke the story of email leak of the data, did you try to brush things under the carpet?

I am not at all trying to brush anything under the carpet. And as far these allegations are concerned, I have already made my position very clear.

How is it possible that in the last two years, neither you nor IPCC did even bother to test the veracity and credibility of the report presented by Husnain?

Because it did not come to our attention. To be honest, few weeks ago when it came to our notice, we accepted our mistake. At the same time, it is not possible for me to go through each and every word of the fourth assessment report which is 3,000 pages long.

It is very difficult to carry out research project on glaciers. So, what will be the next deadline for complete melting of some another glacier?

You are right. It is unfortunate that in our country there is a dearth of experts on glaciology and we need to enhance our capability in this regard. Understanding glacial dynamics is very important for people.

You talked about 'rational people'. But undoubtedly you have given an opportunity to climate sceptics to raise questions against global warming. What is your stand?

I do agree with you. But climate sceptics are looking at anything and everything by which they can demolish the facts of the climate change. Whenever new knowledge emerges, there is always a body of people which stands to fight it tooth and nail. Sceptics are very powerful and they have support all over the world. All I can say is that the world would ultimately realise the truth about climate change.

 

PACHAURI'S NETWORK

 

·         From 1999 to 2003 Served as a member of the board of directors of Indian Oil, the country's largest commercial enterprise

 

·         Till this year was as the director of the National Thermal Power Generating Corporation, largest electricity producer, Director of Pegasus Capital Advisors, Japan  president of Asian Energy Institute Was on the Board of GAIL, Member of Climate Change Advisory Board, Deutsche Bank

 

·         TERI-NA- Associated with lobbying firm, mobilised the support of the Indian Diaspora for developmental investments/grants in India by providing them with a reliable channel for funneling/managing such finances towards identified activities.

 

·         Continue to sensitise, through policy analysis and targeted outreach, the decision makers and global influencers in North America.

 

·         Member of the Board of Siderian Ventures Member of Chicago Climate Exchange Inc.

 

·         Member of Rockefeller Foundation

 

·         Member of Credit Suisse Group

 

·         Board member of Nordie Glitnir Bank

 

·         Advisor to Toyota Motors

 

·         Advisor to a France-based railway company

 

·         Member of China Council

 

·         Working as an advisor to Glori Oil which specialises in extracting fossil fuels for profit

 

 

REACTIONS TO IPCC'S RETRACTION ON THE 2035 STATUS OF THE HIMALAYAN GLACIERS

 

Dr R.K. Pachauri

Chairman, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

The very fact that we're not trying to brush the error done by IPCC under the carpet and have instead come out and apologised, proves that we're clean. This issue might give a handle to the climate skeptics, but I'd say that they are just on the lookout for anything that can demolish the history of scientific concept. In the last few years we have created enormous amount of awareness on climate change, which is disturbing them. In Washington D.C alone, there are 1200 lobbyists being funded by about 770 companies to stop this awareness that is being generated. And this is the figure only for United States…

 

Dr MS Swaminathan

Eminent scientist and father of the Indian Green Revolution

The retraction is acceptance of the factual position. Skepticism will not help, particularly developing countries, since they will suffer most from increase in temperature; even by 2°C, drought, floods and sea level will rise.

The lesson from the recent retraction is that the scientific body, which was at one time led by world leaders in climate science like Bert Bolin, should again regain its scientific credibility.

Tim Flannery

Leading author, explorer and conservationist

Every scientific academy in the world – from Russia to China to America, India and Britain's Royal Society – all support the science of climate change. How is it possible that so many highly respected people with such a broad diversity of interests could be a part of a fraud? Climate scientists have better things to do (than to profit from carbon trading etc.)

It is entirely untrue that (global warming) is part of any 'natural' cycle. Indeed there is a great deal of misinformation circulating – much of it traceable to the fossil fuel industries, and lobbyists who seek to protect those interests.

 

Dr John Christy

Director of the Earth System Science centre and Alabama state climatologist

The average person will now view the recent IPCC report as something written by self-serving scientists and not a report about the true state of climate knowledge.

IPCC was never supposed to have "a cause", it was supposed to be an Honest Broker, revealing scientific information fairly and openly. The IPCC has become an advocacy organisation for "a cause" of promoting disastrous climate change. To do this, they needed to squelch dissent, magnify obscure statements of alarm so that no other message could be heard. Our ignorance about the climate system is enormous, and it is that fact that policy makers need to know.

Indira Parthasarathy & Spriha Srivastava   

 

Source: The Sunday India, weekly magazine

 

 

 

with regards
Parveen Gulia
M.Tech (Infrastructure Planning)
Cont. No.- 09256015406

GROUND WATER DEPLETES IN NORTH

In Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan and Delhi, table came down by 4 cm every year between 2002-08

GROUND WATER DEPLETES IN NORTH

Kalyan Ray, New Delhi

Using images from a NASA satellite that can sense water stored in all levels including groundwater, US scientists have estimated that in Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan and Delhi, the groundwater table has come down by four cm every year between 2002 and 2008. This means, almost 18 cubic km of water is getting vanished from underground aquifers in these states, leading to a 109 cubic km of groundwater in 6 years –– more than the water stored in some of world's big surface reservoirs. Total water loss is equivalent to double the capacity of India's largest surface reservoir (Upper Wainganga in Madhya Pradesh) and triple the capacity of the US' largest man-made reservoir, Lake Mead. The deficit is much more than what the government has estimated, the team reported in the online edition of Nature on Wednesday. The unsustainable rate of groundwater depletion, they said, could lead to severe water shortages and reduced farm productivity. Researchers from NASA's Goddard Space Flight Centre and University of California warned that unless quick counter measures were adopted, 1,14,000,000 residents of the region might face a shortage not only agriculture produce but potable water too. The new findings are contrary to the estimates made by the Union Ministry of Water Resources. "Our result implies that the portion of irrigated water that replenishes aquifers and the rate of (groundwater) withdrawal is more than the government estimate," they said. While 2002 was a dry year, 2003 and 2008 were wet years and rainfall in the other years was within a few centimetres of normal. According to researchers, the reduction cannot be attributed to natural climate variability –– there was no rainfall decline in those six years –– but is probably caused by excessive irrigation and other human activities. The findings come a day after the Meteorological Department indicated towards the alarming possibility of a drought by downgrading its seasonal forecast for the country to 87 per cent of its regular monsoon quota (88 cm) from its June forecast of 93 per cent. Lower rainfall leads to more pressure on the ground water further lowering the water table.

--
with regards
Parveen Gulia
M.Tech (Infrastructure Planning)
Cont. No.- 09256015406

CLIMATIC CHANGE AND IT’S IMPACTS ON AGRICULTURE

CLIMATIC CHANGE AND IT'S IMPACTS ON AGRICULTURE

Parveen Gulia

Climate change and agriculture are interrelated processes, both of which take place on a global scale. Global warming is projected to have significant impacts on conditions affecting agriculture, including temperature, precipitation and glacial run-off. These conditions determine the carrying capacity of the biosphere to produce enough food for the human population and domesticated animals. Rising carbon dioxide levels would also have effects, both detrimental and beneficial, on crop yields. The overall effect of climate change on agriculture will depend on the balance of these effects. Assessment of the effects of global climate changes on agriculture might help to properly anticipate and adapt farming to maximize agricultural production.

At the same time, agriculture has been shown to produce significant effects on climate change, primarily through the production and release of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, but also by altering the earth's land cover, which can change its ability to absorb or reflect heat and light, thus contributing to radiative forcing. Land use change such as deforestation and desertification, together with use of fossil fuels, are the major anthropogenic sources of carbon dioxide; agriculture itself is the major contributor to increasing methane and nitrous oxide concentrations in earth's atmosphere.

Despite technological advances, such as improved varieties, genetically modified organisms, and irrigation systems, weather is still a key factor in agricultural productivity, as well as soil properties and natural communities. The effect of climate on agriculture is related to variabilities in local climates rather than in global climate patterns. The earth's average surface temperature has increased by 1 * F in just over the last century.

A study published in Science magazine suggest that, due to climate change, "southern Africa could lose more than 30% of its main crop, maize, by 2030. In South Asia losses of many regional staples, such as rice, millet and maize could top 10%".

The 2001 IPCC Third Assessment Report concluded that the poorest countries would be hardest hit, with reductions in crop yields in most tropical and sub-tropical regions due to decreased water availability, and new or changed insect pest incidence. In Africa and Latin America many rainfed crops are near their maximum temperature tolerance, so that yields are likely to fall sharply for even small climate changes; falls in agricultural productivity of up to 30% over the 21st century are projected.

Climate change induced by increasing greenhouse gases is likely to affect crops differently from region to region. For example, average crop yield is expected to drop down to 50% in Pakistan according to the UKMO scenario whereas corn production in Europe is expected to grow up to 25% in optimum hydrologic conditions.

More favourable effects on yield tend to depend to a large extent on realization of the potentially beneficial effects of carbon dioxide on crop growth and increase of efficiency in water use. Decrease in potential yields is likely to be caused by shortening of the growing period, decrease in water availability and poor vernalization.

Climatic Change and Its Impact on Grain Production

Between 1996 and 2003, grain production has stabilized slightly over 1800 millions of tons. In 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003, grain stocks have been dropping, resulting in a global grain harvest that was short of consumption by 93 millions of tons in 2003.

The earth's average temperature has been rising since the late 1970s, with nine of the 10 warmest years on record occurring since 1995. In 2002, India and the United States suffered sharp harvest reductions because of record temperatures and drought. In 2003 Europe suffered very low rainfall throughout spring and summer, and a record level of heat damaged most crops from the United Kingdom and France in the Western Europe through Ukraine in the East. Bread prices have been rising in several countries in the region.

Climate Change and Its Impact on Pests, Diseases and Weeds

A very important point to consider is that weeds would undergo the same acceleration of cycle as cultivated crops, and would also benefit from carbonaceous fertilization. Since most weeds are C3 plants, they are likely to compete even more than now against C4 crops such as tomatoes. However, on the other hand, some results make it possible to think that weed killers could gain in effectiveness with the temperature increase.

Global warming would cause an increase in rainfall in some areas, which would lead to an increase of atmospheric humidity and the duration of the wet seasons. Combined with higher temperatures, these could favour the development of fungal diseases. Similarly, because of higher temperatures and humidity, there could be an increased pressure from insects and disease vectors.

Climate Change and Irrigation

Due to climatic changes the glaciers are shrinking with very fast rate and it emerge the irrigation crisis in the agriculture. According to a UN climate report, the Himalayan glaciers that are the principal dry-season water sources of Asia's biggest rivers - Ganges, Indus, Brahmaputra, Yangtze, Mekong, Salween and Yellow - could disappear by 2035 as temperatures rise. Approximately 2.4 billion people live in the drainage basin of the Himalayan Rivers. India, China, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Myanmar could experience floods followed by severe droughts in coming decades. In India alone, the Ganges provides water for drinking and farming for more than 500 million people. The west coast of North America, which gets much of its water from glaciers in mountain ranges such as the Rocky Mountains and Sierra Nevada, also would be affected.

Effect on Scheduled Planting and Harvesting

Duration of crop growth cycles are related to temperature. An increase in temperature will speed up development. In the case of an annual crop, the duration between sowing and harvesting will shorter. The shortening of such a cycle could have an adverse effect on productivity because senescence would occur sooner.

Effect on Fertility of Soil

Soil fertility would probably be affected by climate change. However, because the ratio of carbon to nitrogen is a constant, a doubling of carbon is likely to imply a higher storage of nitrogen in soils as nitrates, thus providing higher fertilizing elements for plants, providing better yields. The average needs for nitrogen could decrease, and give the opportunity of changing often costly fertilisation strategies.

Thus there are negative impacts of climate changes on agriculture and it's necessary to reduce the climatic changes for the sake of earth.

(For more articles please visit www.infraplanner.blogspot.com

You can also send your articles, Please send your article with your name on (planner.parveen.gulia@blogger.com). Don't attach the file with mail just copy and past.)

thank you

--
with regards
Parveen Gulia
M.Tech (Infrastructure Planning)
Cont. No.- 09256015406

Are CFL safe

ARE CFLS SAFE?[1]

Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFLs) is being projected as the panacea of all lighting needs of the nation which will control if not bring down the whopping demand for energy, which in India is mostly met from greenhouse gas-producing thermal power plants. But there is a poisonous side to this harbinger of good tidings that is being swept under the proverbial carpet, durries perhaps, in the Indian context. 

Ban the century-old 'Edisonion' incandescent light bulbs to help reduce global warming is a powerful thought. Smashing the light bulb that produces more heat than light, energy inefficient as a lighting device, is perhaps the right choice. And if replacing it with CFLs that produce the same light using less energy makes you feel that you have done your bit for cooling the earth, then by all means go ahead!  CFLs , made like florescent tubes, produce four times more light than traditional bulbs. Hence a 15-19 wattage CFL produces as much light as a 60 watt bulb. Much of the western fraternity has progressed down the route already. But with the positives comes a few negatives too and cleaning the air doesn't necessarily justify poisoning the soil.

The issues

Point 1:

 Left unsaid is that each CFL contains 4 to 10 milligrams of mercury, a deadly neurotoxin. When a CFL breaks or are discarded it releases mercury into the air. Every product containing mercury should be handled with care. Exposure to mercury, can affect our brain, spinal cord, kidneys and liver, causing symptoms such as trembling hands, memory loss, and difficulty in movement. Even 1 gm of mercury is enough to contaminate a lake and make its fish unfit for eating. Compounds like methyl mercury are the deadliest poisons known to life, which travel globally and get deposited in our food chain. Mercury passes the placental and blood-brain barrier, passing on from mother to child and can cause overall reductions in IQ of exposed populations. Though exposure from a single CFL may not cause any perceptible individual harm, in numbers they can be deadly, especially to pregnant mothers and children.

Point 2:

 According to the US Environment Protection Agency replacing an incandescent bulb with a CFL will reduce the amount of mercury released into the environment (from thermal power stations) from 13.6 mg to 8.3 mg over the lifetime of the CFL. The question then arises about the lifetime of a CFL. As consumers are aware, a CFL that promises to last over six months to a year in many cases turn tail much before that. So the lifetime issue remains shrouded in ambiguity.

Point 3:

Experts declare that environmentalists should be aware that CFLs are a kind of tube light with more or less the same components including mercury vapour. The amount of mercury in a standard tube light can vary dramatically, from 3 to 46 mg. If mercury problem wasn't an issue then, it shouldn't be now also. "We need to address every mercury containing product in the country from the ubiquitous thermometer to tube lights and CFLs to stop hazardous pollutants from entering our food chain," says Tanmay Tathagat, Director, Environmental Designs Solutions, working with Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) Govt. of India, on energy efficiency related projects.  However, the inherent question that arises here is the scale of operations. CFL is tethering on the brink of replacing every bulb in the nation. As any random study will point out, bulb usage is way above the lowly tube light - thus replacement ratios will be sky rocketing. If CFLs are to be introduced en masse, it will mean that our current consumption of mercury annually in the lighting sector will multiply by more than ten times. Besides if we had just one kind of tubes to combat before, now we will have unprecedented quantities of discarded CFLs rising to the ranks of deadly pollutants.

Point 4:

 As a buyer knows, CFL outlets are the very same age old electrical stores that do provide a year's guarantee on the product, yet treat you like a leper if you happen to encounter a problem and return to seek a replacement. Almost thirty to fifty percent of times replacements are required

The other side

The US Environmental Protection Agency prepared a fact sheet to respond to concerns about mercury in energy-efficient lighting that uses CFL technology and declared that CFLs are responsible for less mercury than incandescent light bulbs.  In fact they argue that CFLs present an opportunity to prevent mercury from entering air, where it most affects our health. The highest source of mercury in our air comes from burning fossil fuels such as coal, the most common fuel used to produce electricity. A CFL uses 75 percent less energy than an incandescent light bulb and lasts at least 6 times longer. A power plant will emit 10 mg of mercury to produce the electricity to run an incandescent bulb compared to only 2.4 mg of mercury to run a CFL for the same time. They claim that CFLs do not add to the mercury released to the environment while providing significant greenhouse gas emission reductions. On the contrary CFLs over their life-time reduce the overall amount of mercury released into the environment from the production and use of electricity.

Disposing CFLs

The dangers of mercury contamination at end of life of the CFL persist. And with CFL technology still inefficient with large number of replacements, the end of life may be nearer than projected. This would mean a huge disposal problem. "Unfortunately in India tubes are dumped, smashed and left in landfills, releasing mercury into the environment. Also at present there is no norm of CFL disposal instituted in the country," states Tanmay. Thus in the absence of collection and recycling systems, CFLs will sully the air and groundwater. While the technology for safe disposal and recycling are available, the challenge of ensuring that such systems are implemented is enormous in India.

The alternative

Does CFL, then, have an alternative? Experts point towards light emitting diode (LEDs) that hold unlimited promise. They have a 10 to 100 year life as the prototypes claim, which is way longer than CFL and use 40 percent lower energy than CFLs.

"Unfortunately, LEDs are not yet being mass produced and don't produce the amount of light we usually expect from household lamps. Also the current off the shelf fixtures are not consumer friendly," informs Tanmay. India does have several showcased pilot projects where LED has been custom fabricated (like the solar powered LED lantern), but technology needs to be scaled up considerably if LEDs are to become a household name. The progress continues, but we still are years away from getting something on store shelves that will adequately replace the CFL. "Besides," points out Tanmay, "subsidies for CFL are in place, but LED's are yet to find its place in the sun."

White light LEDs that are sufficiently cheap, pleasing, and efficient is almost there, but more often than not they are used for spotlight applications. To replace the light bulb, LEDs need to have the ability to distribute light in the same manner which it does not have at present. While the lumens/watt in a LED are increasing at a dramatic rate, the lighting fixtures are not. In fact companies are selling LED bulb's but they are not nearly as bright as CFLs and cost much more. LED light bulbs have their place in decorative lighting applications but cannot at present replace CFLs. "Some ten years will have gone before we can use LED lighting in homes," adds Tanmay conclusively.

Seeking solutions

If CFLs are here to stay then we may propose a few steps that can perhaps contribute to a safe and better world that the fluorescent tubes and bulbs advocate.

Factory orientation:  Most of the CFLs used in households provide less lighting than the promised wattage. It also turns dark at the edges, malfunctions and requires replacement. Enforcement agencies such as BEE needs to star label the products of different lighting companies and put them under strict norms that would ensure a reduction in replacement ratios as well as effectively deal with complaints of low wattage and lighting inefficiency over a well defined timeline.

Consumer orientation: Enforcing authorities like BEE can act as facilitators between the hapless purchaser and the CFL dispensing shops. At best it could eliminate the intermediaries and create kiosks in all market centres which are flashpoint company outlets - with purchase, replacement within guarantee period and disposal, all integrated within the same model. "The companies can function in the same way as private telecom systems function in the country," suggests Dr. D Sharma, a CFL user.

Disposal backup: Implementing agencies can put in place systems for take back and safe disposal practices by the manufacturers (also known as Extended Producer Responsibility). All manufacturers should be required to phase out hazardous substances in their CFLs as soon as environmentally sustainable alternatives are available (mandatory substitution), establish take back schemes and ensure effective recycling of CFLs.

To ensure that the consumer does not destroy the used CFL, monetary support may be provided, that may be handed over the counter in terms of buy back scheme (where the rag picker and poorer sections will benefit and at the same time clean up landfills) or extend offers on newer purchases where the buyer avails a certain discount if he brings back a CFL for recycling.

End note

The concern cannot be trivialised, since countries now promoting CFLs have strict collection and recycling laws for discarded lamps. While climate change is very serious business, we must consider all aspects when we take action for its mitigation and not produce 'bad', when trying to do well. The point is that CFL is no magic solution and must not be presented as such. It is thus most important that everyone is aware of the choices before them before being asked to switch to another system.

Recommendations towards CFL awareness

·         With energy efficiency statistic of CFL usage, number of CFL units and the amount of mercury in circulation should also be made available.

·         There is need for an Indian spreadsheet based on US Environmental Protection Agency to relieve concerns, incase of CFL breakage. The US Environmental Protection Agency urges consumers to get rid of dead CFLs, and clean up materials from a breakage, responsibly, but we are not directed about how to dispose CFL safely in India.

·         Although CFL bulbs are categorised as household hazardous waste, our consumers cannot consult mercury details before purchasing a CFL as the price governs most preferences - besides the details are not written on the packs

·         Enforcement agencies such as BEE needs to star label the products of different lighting companies and put them under strict norms that would ensure a reduction in replacement ratios as well as effectively deal with complaints of low wattage and lighting inefficiency over a well defined timeline.

·         No well meaning interventions towards CFL usage in India include any provision for dealing with the manufacturer directly, imposing a recovery and recycling of the products they promote.

·         At least mandatory consumer awareness on the lines of 'Tobacco is injurious to health' on every pack containing a CFL, (also a manual with picture stories on do's and don'ts about CFL usage and disposal) should be placed with immediate action.

·         Local electrical shops stock broken CFL parts. Potentially hazardous the electricians are unaware of the ramifications and hoard them in the hope of creating an indigenous, free of cost CFL. Such hazards need to be highlighted and eliminated for health reasons.

---

[1] www.geographyandyou.com

--
with regards
Parveen Gulia
M.Tech (Infrastructure Planning)
Cont. No.- 09256015406