Who has time to discuss, to engage in pointless arguments with global warming deniars?
It's becoming more and more obvious to me that those who engage in the activity of denying the reality of human induced climate change are beyond the reach of logic. It's not about logic, or more exactly, it is all about the logic of furthering short sighted profit driven greed.
It's like talking to a creationist. The facts can be bent and distorted and ignored to create an alternate reality that supports their religious views. Climate change denial works the same way. To these agenda driven deniars of climate change and evolution, it is all about making the biggest noise possible to drown out facts.
So why waste time arguing with them? The only gratification from this activity is the attention they crave in this endless loop of wordplay.
This week we learned that the new Copebnhagen Diagnosis on climate change authored by 26 scientists from 8 countries states that we have even less time than we thought to effect change, to do something concrete and meaningful.
"Many indicators are currently tracking near or above the worst case projections." made three years ago by this group of scientists.
This reports includes sea level rise, ocean acidification and the rapid melting of massive ice sheets and assesses the impact of the emissions of heat trapping gasses that are causing the change.
Some headlines have suggested that warming has slowed or paused recently, but the report differs and the scientific group calculate that the emission of gasses must peak in less than 10 years and then dive quickly back to zero, if warming of another 2 degrees above the current annual global temperatures is to be prevented after 2050.
Any warming above the 2 degrees beyond current temperatures is considered dangerous, though exactly what is meant by dangerous is still being debated by governments around the world. The good news is that most governments around the world are beginning to take the threat very seriously and China, which is the worlds current leading producer of greenhouse gasses is beginning to take the lead in emission reduction.
The theories are turning into reality incrementally, day by day. That's why we don't have time to play nice with climate change deniars. It's time for action and to support those who are engaged in positive action.
One man who is doing something is a man known as Glacier Man in Ladakh, India. 74 year old Chewal Norphel is a retired government civil engineer who is designing and building high-altitude water conservation systems, or artificial glaciers to combat the lack of water from the rapidly disappearing Himalyan Glaciers.
Over 70% of the water in Ladakh, which is the northernmost part of India, the States of Jammu and Kashmir is sourced in spring from the melting snows of the glaciers and is the sole source for irrigation in the remote mountain communities.
In recent years, the rising temperatures have resulted in decreasing snowfall in the high altitude glacial zones has led to a reduction of water in the spring.
The changing temperatures have already begun impacting the region’s biodiversity and its communities, says the international organisation, Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF).
"The breeding of the bar-headed goose and the black-necked crane is not on schedule in recent years," says Nisa Khatoon, project officer of WWF at Leh. "And migration routes of communities on the Tsokar lake [who weave the famous Pashmina shawls] have become more frequented as these pastoral communities migrate due to degrading pastures."
"I am the scientific data," quips Norphel. "I have seen, for instance, the size of the Khardung La glacier—a high mountain pass in the Ladakh region, with an elevation of 5,359 metres above sea level—since I was a child: it was solid ice then," he explains.
The Khardung La glacier is one example of Ladakh’s melting glaciers, barely recognisable now as a glacier.
"Four to five decades ago, there were so many glaciers you could see from Leh," Norphel tells IPS, responding to the ministry’s refutation of receding glaciers. "Now you can’t even see small ones anymore."
Norphel, a retired rural development engineer for Kashmir state, says the water problems faced by Ladakh’s impoverished villages bothered him as much as the "wasting" of water in winter, from taps that are left running to avoid pipes freezing and bursting.
"I noticed from my garden tap that the water would freeze where it flowed, so that’s where I got the idea of designing artificial glaciers that would freeze extra water in winter, melting just in time for sowing crops in April and May," says this unassuming, quiet man.
In November, trickling glacial streams are diverted and made to flow down nearby slopes through channels and outlets with 1.5-inch diametre pipes installed every five feet.
Stone embankments built at regular intervals impede the flow of this water, making shallow pools down the mountain slope, which fill up gradually and freeze almost instantly in winter, forming a thick glacier-like sheet of ice over the slope that Norphel calls "artificial glacier."
So far, Norphel has helped build 10 artificial glaciers, all near villages whose communities have helped construct and maintain them. In Stakna village, some 35 kilometres from Leh, 60-year-old Tashi Tundup is happy with the ‘Stakna glacier’.
Meetings are arranged in the village to discuss village history of water, its availability in their nearby stream during peak winter time and the location of shade along the stream’s course, where pools can be constructed to help freeze the water faster in the absence of direct winter sunlight.
Since the water is equally distributed to all in the village, sustainability of water-harvesting structures is ensured, says Norphel.
Norphel also dispels scientists’ criticism of his ‘artificial glaciers’ as not being glaciers. "What matters is that these artificial glaciers serve similar water conservation and harvesting techniques as glaciers," says Norphel.
Norphel hopes to build two more such glaciers at Stakna village, holding two million cubic feet of iced water for its 700 residents.
"We get water as early as April itself (instead of melting glacier water in June), and this has helped the wheat crop. Wheat production has gone up over the last five years because of the water from the artificial glacier, and I can now also grow potatoes and peas," says Tundup of Stakna.
Norphel lists several other benefits: groundwater and spring recharge, significant increase in cash-crop farming, fuel, livestock fodder and livelihood incomes, mitigation of climate change for humans and livestock and ecological benefits to soil conservation.
He says the benefits of simulated glaciers have been confirmed by village folk and responses gathered over the last ten years.
The artificial glacier system can be replicated, says Norphel, in similar geo- climatic zones in central Asian countries such as Kyrgyztan and Kazakhstan.
"The problem is, it is difficult to find labour for maintenance work in the severe winter," says Norphel. "And the remoteness of these high-altitude systems makes transportation of materials very expensive."
In 1987, the first artificial glacier built by Norphel cost 1,580 euros (2,347 U.S. dollars) in Phuktse Phu village in Ladakh district. The latest plan by Norphel and the Leh Nutrition Project, a Britain-based non-governmental organisation, to construct five more comes at a total cost of 47,216.50 U.S. dollars, which is still just a fourth of the cost of concrete cement constructions for water conservation reservoirs, despite Norphel’s claims of high costs.
"We use mostly locally available stones and material," says Norphel. The Indian Army—which has a heavy presence in Ladakh district due to its close proximity to China and Pakistan—and India’s scientific and technology department financed constructions of artificial glaciers in 2008 up to this year, but Norphel says he needs help from other sources too.
"I can do so much better if I have some more funds," he says.
3 comments:
I'm a staunch Green/Socialist from Chicago, but I vote Democrat because of the flawed system.
There simply must be a way to persuade climate change deniers other than the effects of climate change.
It's a language issue. Due to the two-party system and its political divide, I think we're speaking different languages. Facts mean little. We need to find common ground. This is less for a scientist than a social worker. We need a therapist president, or Speaker of the House, or Director of Health and Human Services.
We need to ask for help.
JMH, look for significant gains made by the Gree parties here in Europe in the next few years.
In France, the Greens have gone from being a marginal alliance fraught with infighting and territotial pissing matches to being a real alternative to the increasing irrelevant Socialists. The left in France is so fractured, but the pressing reality of environmentla concerns and the lip service the government has paid to these concerns while covering up the massive problems with nuclear here are beginning to give the Greens the moral high ground and the audience.
Europe is poised to go Green!
One more thing...
You are right, you can't speak to someone whose mind is a locked box.
They might hear your words, but it gets mixed up and deconstructed in their agenda driven craniums...
You speek CO2 levels and they hear socialist conspiracy...
The only valid discussion is strategy...we must concentrate on how to cripple the agencies and foundations that are pouring money into the denial propaganda machine.
The consumer grassroots movement to persuade members of the US Camber of Commerce to withdraw their membership over this issue is one that seems to be having effect...
If only we could convince Toyota that their membership is not going to sell any more Prius cars.
Post a Comment