The unprecedented increase in climate-related disasters has led more than 13,000 scientists from 153 countries to sign a declaration of climate emergency, according to an article published in September 2021 in a leading biological science journal. The call for such severe action as the declaration of a climate emergency is justified by the Sixth Assessment report (AR6) of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the climatology organization of United Nations (UN) which produces a climate report every seven years or so. The report has been described by British newspaper “The Guardian” as “its most blunt warning yet” of “major climate change that is inevitable and irreversible”. Antonio Guterres, the UN secretary general called the report “a code red for humanity”. The alarm bells are deaf, and the evidence is irrefutable: greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel combustion and deforestation are choking our planet and putting billions of people in immediate danger ”. The importance and urgency of addressing climate change is also reflected in 2021. Nobel Prize in Physics which has been awarded to three scientists — Syukuro Manabe from Japan, Klaus Hasselmann from Germany and Giorgio Parasi from Italy— which laid the foundation for current climate models to understand climate change and warned against climate change disasters Climate Change-related disasters include rising sea levels, increasing global warming, arctic melting, devastating floods and cyclones, record heat waves and forest fires. These disasters are believed to be caused by uncontrolled emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG)—- Carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide which, in the earth’s atmosphere, prevent heat from escaping. This is called the greenhouse effect. These gases keep the Earth warm. The increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere caused by the combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas alter the natural greenhouse effect. These changes cause the atmosphere to trap more heat than before, leading to warming of the Earth. The increase in global average Earth’s surface temperature in 2020 was 1.2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures. Climate change is real and has been unequivocally brought about by human activities, largely the release of polluting gases from the burning of fossil fuels. The Paris Agreement adopted in 2015 reaffirms the goal of limiting the increase in global temperature to well below 02, preferably 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures. To prevent warming beyond 1.5 ° C, we need to reduce emissions by 7.6% each year until 2030. According to the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)2021 published on August 09, 2021, the global warming limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius could be exceeded by 2040. This is because the countries that have been signatories to the Paris Agreement have not kept their promises . The call for a declaration of climate emergency by a large number of scientists in September 2021 is gaining importance as the 26th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP26) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is scheduled from October 31 to November 12, 2021 in Glasgow, Scotland. The COP, the supreme decision-making body of the UNFCCC, has 197 member countries. Each year, a meeting of member countries is organized, known as the Conference of the Parties (COP).

Read also: Integrated Learning / Internship Diploma Program – An Attempt to Improve the Employability of New Graduates

What challenges do developing countries face in achieving the goal of net zero emissions by 2050?

When the world does not add new emissions to the atmosphere, it is called “net emissions”. The United Nations has set a target of halving emissions by 2030 and achieving net zero emissions by 2050 to meet the Paris Agreement target of 1.5 degrees Celsius . The extreme and persistent adverse effects of global climate change have posed a serious threat to both the biosphere and to humanity. But the devastation caused by climate change is greater and more pronounced in developing countries and they are least able to bear the consequences. Multiple factors are responsible for their vulnerability to climate change which can limit their ability to prevent and respond to the devastation caused by it. In 2009, at the Conference of the Parties on Climate Change in Copenhagen, a financial commitment of $ 100 billion per year by 2020 was made by developed countries to help developing countries reduce emissions of gas. greenhouse effect, build resilience to climate impacts and achieve the goal of zero carbon in the future. This target of 100 billion dollars was to be raised before 2025. The modalities of financing from a wide variety of sources – public and private, bilateral and multilateral, and from alternative sources of financing are ill-defined. The proportions of funding from public and private sources are not specified, nor is it clear how different financial instruments such as grants and loans should be counted. They have such serious flaws that developed countries exploit them to their advantage. For example, the bulk of climate finance provided by developed countries to developing countries consists of loans, not grants. Loans must be repaid, with interest. There is no agreed system for measuring the amount of climate change finance provided by developed countries to developing countries. Regarding the commitment to mobilize US $ 100, the fact remains that it was not met. in his “Remarks to the pre-Cop26” on September 30, 2021 in Italy, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said developed countries were slow to commit to providing US $ 100 billion a year in funding climate for poor countries by 2020.

India, the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases after the United States and China, is also vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. As part of its commitment to Paris Agreement, India plans to reduce its carbon footprint by 33-35% from its 2005 level by 2030.

It is a known fact that climate change is largely due to the historic emissions of rich developed countries over a long period of a century and a half. Many developing and underdeveloped countries were colonies of rich, developed countries. The colonies contributed significantly to their wealth which enabled them to design and develop technologies which in turn helped them achieve the industrial revolution. The industries mainly obtained the raw material from the colonized countries and sold them the finished products. This has added disproportionately to the wealth of developed countries. After gaining independence, the settlers continued to derive energy from fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas to support their economy. But unfortunately, burning fossil fuels has turned out to contribute to climate change. The UN continues to urge them to reduce the use of fossil fuels and switch to renewable energies. But it is simply not possible for them to quickly switch from fossil fuels to renewables due to financial constraints and lack of technology. At the same time, it is not possible for developed countries to tackle climate change and make the transition to a cleaner, greener future without 152 developing countries representing some 6.5 billion people.

The bottom line is that developed countries have a moral responsibility to review the US $ 100 billion a year commitment to climate finance and increase finance to a sizable level. Given the gravity of the problem of climate change, it is inevitable to help developing countries reduce greenhouse gases. emissions, building resilience to climate impacts so that they meet the goal of net zero carbon and ensure human security in the future. All the loopholes, ambiguities and pitfalls of engagement mentioned above must be eliminated. Recently, India stressed that the goal of achieving zero net emissions by 2050 should be based on the principle of equity.

Hopefully, the COP26 at the UNFCCC scheduled for October-November 2021 in Glosgow would witness significant new commitments to the global climate change agenda.

---

Through,
Dr Aqueel Khan,

Former teacher and director,
Postgraduate University Education Department of Biochemistry,
RTM Nagpur University,
Nagpur,
Maharashtra
E-mail: [email protected]
Mobile: 9890352898

---

A DOCTOR from Henley says people’s health will suffer and there will be more disease unless stronger action is taken to tackle climate change.

York Road Hart Surgery partner Philip Unwin said it would put increased pressure on the local health system, at which point the situation would be irreversible.

He said: “It takes a big change in government policy to make a difference.”

Dr Unwin is the latest city figure to speak out in favor of the Climate and Environmental Emergencies Bill, due for second reading in the House of Commons later this month .

He said: “You hope it doesn’t affect your life, but I think we’re almost getting to the point where we need to do something to make a difference.

“It’s very difficult for some people, but if everyone did something it would be a lot easier.

“Obviously this affects countries where there is extreme weather conditions. These are people who are struggling because of crop failure and famine. Global warming affects the poorest people.

“If we look at Henley, we see more flooding and extreme weather conditions, but nothing that particularly affects our health. We are relatively well protected.

“By the time we, in our very privileged and protected situation, begin to feel the effects of climate change on health, it will have gone too far and will be irreversible.

“We had a crisis with covid and the whole country came to a standstill, but climate change is a much bigger problem. It is not yet high enough on the political and social agenda.

Zero Hour Oxfordshire, formerly CEE Bill Alliance Oxfordshire, is promoting the private member’s bill, but Henley MP John Howell declined to support it.

He believes the proposed legislation is flawed and says the government has already put in place targets to achieve net zero carbon and reverse the impact on nature.

Supporters say the bill “provides a framework for the decarbonization of the UK economy” and makes it a legal obligation for the government to commit to measures that limit the temperature rise to 1.5 degree above pre-industrial levels.

Last month, the editors of 200 health journals around the world issued an emergency call for action.

Dr Unwin, who has worked at Hart Surgery for over 30 years, says the link between climate change and health should not be underestimated.

He said: “There is no doubt that if the current climate trend continues, we will see an increase in disease patterns and health conditions directly related to the climate and ecological emergency with resulting pressures on our healthcare system. here in Oxfordshire.

“I am not an expert on climate change, but I am convinced that we should do whatever we can. It takes a big change in government policy to make a difference and achieving the goals they set is going to be really tough.

“Henley trying hard could be a good role model for other cities to follow and I think we should do as much as possible.

“I stopped a lot of the waste we had at home. I drive an electric car and make every effort not to use fuel unnecessarily.

Other local supporters of the bill include Brakspear CEO Tom Davies, Bremont co-founder Nick English, Ella’s Kitchen founder Paul Lindley, naturalist Professor Richard Fortey and broadcaster Ben Fogle, who lives to Fawley.

• What do you think? Write to: Letters, Henley Standard, Caxton House, 1 Station Road, Henley or by email
@ henleystandard.co.uk

It cannot be denied that climate change has emerged as one of the most pressing issues of the day, with experts worrying about the future of the world as we move forward at this rate. In its publication of the Fifth Assessment Report in 2013, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change of 1,300 independent scientists from around the world concluded that there is a greater than a 95% chance that human activity at over the past 50 years has warmed the planet. They attribute the main causes of warming to greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the combustion of fossil fuels such as petroleum (petroleum), natural gas and coal.

Other sources of greenhouse gases come from deforestation, changes in land use, soil erosion, agriculture and livestock (IPCC, 2013). When greenhouse gases are released, they heat the atmosphere. Well, the impact of global warming has been shared around the world, and therefore, must be action against it. According to data published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), “changes in temperature and precipitation, rising ocean temperatures, sea levels and acidity, melting glaciers and sea ​​ice, changes in the frequency, intensity and duration of extreme weather conditions. events, changes in ecosystem characteristics, such as the length of the growing season, the timing of flower blooming and bird migration, and increasing negative effects on human health and well-being. (EPA, 2017).

The majority of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions come from energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) emissions. The International Energy Agency (IEA) cites that 80% of global energy consumption is based on fossil fuels. In 2016, 56% of US carbon emissions came from transportation and electricity.

Likewise, in 2015, 58% of California’s carbon emissions came from transportation and electricity. In the United States, the main source of carbon emissions in the energy sector is coal. According to a 2015 report from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), total CO2 emissions from US coal-fired electric power were 1,364 million metric tons. In contrast, CO2 emissions from natural gas and petroleum were 530 million metric tonnes and 24 million metric tonnes, respectively.

As can be seen from the archives of the past, global market agencies prefer energy produced by fossil fuels. In the electricity sector, global fossil fuel subsidies are around $ 100 billion per year, while global subsidies for renewable forms of electricity are around $ 30 billion per year (Kitson , Wooders and Moerenhout, 2011). Shifting to a low-carbon future will require reducing these massive fossil fuel subsidies. Although this subject has been raised repeatedly in various fora for a long time, its implementation has been more difficult to achieve.

According to the 2016 World Health Organization report, Delhi is one of the most polluted cities in the world and has maintained its position in the list for a very long time. Among the 11 mega-cities in the world with more than 14 million inhabitants, Delhi has the highest levels of suspended particles (PM 10). This makes Delhi’s air virtually unbreathable, resulting in the death of around 10,000 residents annually due to rising pollution levels. (Talking tree, 2015).

According to a report published by Dr Pradhan in India Today in 2015, an inhabitant of Delhi is exposed to an average of 153 micrograms per cubic meter of PM 2.5. To put this statistic into perspective, consider that it is fifteen times the limit recommended by the WHO. Also note that PM 2.5 is considered the most harmful of all measurable particles.

However, none of these figures are new or unprecedented, as the pollution problem in Delhi has been understood and analyzed by policy makers and experts for some time now. What is new, however, is the political response to this problem.

The main causes of particulate matter, PM 2.5 and PM 10, in India are vehicle emissions and industrial processes. Other pollutants emitted by these two elements include CO, NOx, SO2, etc. Following the Delhi High Court’s remark that living in Delhi is equivalent to living in a gas chamber, the Delhi government imposed the odd-even policy in 2016. This policy was introduced in an attempt to mitigate pollution caused by congestion. Delhi roads.

Even if the impact of this policy is rather questionable, the purpose of its discussion is to highlight the fact that it is the only explicit political action aimed at directly combating pollutants. According to the 2019 Delhi State Action Plan report, some policy actions in the transport and vehicle sector have been proposed to control the pollution emitted by vehicles. However, any tangible impact has yet to be assessed. Most policies of the Delhi Pollution Control Committee include tackling polluted areas and sources of pollution, but not directly tackling pollutants.

The purpose of discussing these key strategies for improving the city’s air quality is to show what precisely these policies lack in action at the industrial level. Industrial exhaust fumes add major pollutants to Delhi’s air and easily count as a major source of pollution in the state.

Therefore, the idea behind the proposed document revolves around this: to directly control pollutants emitted by industries. Most of the existing actions in this regard include only the establishment of certain standards.

Areas like Okhla, Wazirpur, Jahangirpuri, Narela, Badarpur, Mundka and Mayapuri are called the toxic hubs of Delhi. Another thing common to all of these places, however, is that they are all industrial hotspots in the state. The correlation is obvious, and that’s exactly what we can use to our advantage.

The idea of ​​the proposed political action includes the establishment of a cap-and-trade market in these industrial regions.

Cap-and-trade model

Climate change and its impacts threaten the very existence of life on earth, as scientists and experts have repeatedly explained. Regardless of the challenges that lie ahead in terms of the required change and implementation, it is imperative that we continue to do our best to mitigate the effects of climate change and put our world on a more sustainable path.

The cap-and-trade system is a market-based tool that tackles climate pollution and creates income to invest in a clean energy future. The United States has a history of inaction at the federal level on climate change issues, but the world cannot afford to wait for federal legislation. The problem of climate change has grown considerably in the past and will continue to worsen if each authority is not aware of its responsibility. Therefore, sitting down for the Center to take action would get us nowhere, it is important that States take action and take responsibility for the next step.

A cap is a restriction on the amount of pollution that can be emitted by all businesses in a particular region. This level is then broken down into allocations, according to different industries and scale of operations. This allowance is then purchased or obtained in the form of a license from the state government (or regulatory body).

The trade then occurs by a company to pollute beyond a certain limit, of another company which is ready to give up part of its said limit, for a price. This price is set according to a microeconomic analysis of the will (based on investment and operating expenses) and an econometric analysis of the economic relationship at the industry level between production and pollution.

Why cap and trade?

Two main reasons make this market-based tool an impressive strategy:

First, it tackles climate pollution through direct control of pollutants, and its implementation is state-based. Second, it generates income to invest more in political actions aimed at improving the state’s pollution conditions.

The global precedents of Cap-And-Trade-

The cap and trade program was originally introduced in California’s Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) 2006. The program was extended until 2030 in 2017, due to its success during its first decade. It has since been adopted in various countries such as Australia, New Zealand, the European Union, South Korea and Quebec.

Action plan for adoption in Delhi

If you look at the list of countries above, you will only see developed countries, mainly due to the nature of the political action required to implement the model. For Delhi, however, the advantage is that most industries are concentrated in specific regions and are mostly homogeneous in raw materials. This may allow for a more defined adoption of the model, depending on regional requirements.

The studies carried out by the Delhi Pollution Control Board specify the pollution emitted by different regions, which means that the establishment of an exogenous ceiling can be specific to the industry since the industrial concentration by zone is mainly homogeneous in Delhi.

Note also that the success of such a program depends on the way in which the exchanges take place between the companies. A key determinant in this regard, according to examples from different studies, depends on differences in operating scale, availability of capital and operating costs. Although more definitive information on this subject would require further analysis, a report published by O Saigal explicitly explains this difference.

Of course, a number of endogenous considerations would be necessary to inculcate during the modeling, the available data and the aforementioned parameters explain that this can be done. Appropriate planning and policy formation can do just that.

Related

Google has decided not to run any advertising alongside content that “contradicts the well-established scientific consensus on the existence and causes of climate change”.

The decision impacts YouTube, advertisers and publishers. It appears to be primarily a matter of commerce rather than conscience: the adtech strangler has touted the move as a change in its advertising and monetization policy.

“In recent years, we’ve heard directly from a growing number of our advertising partners and publishers who have expressed concerns about ads running alongside or promoting inaccurate claims about climate change,” the Google missive read. “Advertisers just don’t want their ads to appear alongside this content. And publishers and creators don’t want ads promoting these claims to appear on their pages or videos.”

Hence the new policy, which will ban ads appearing on content that suggests climate change is a hoax, scam or denies that human activity contributes to it. Ads suggesting any of the above will also be prohibited.

Google says it “will carefully consider the context in which the claims are made, distinguishing between content that states a false claim as a fact, versus content that reports or discusses that claim.

“We will also continue to allow advertising and monetization on other climate-related topics, including public debates on climate policy, the varying impacts of climate change, new research and more.”

Google said it had “consulted authoritative sources on the subject of climate science, including experts who contributed to the assessment reports of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” for the help define its policies.

Their recommendations will be implemented using “a combination of automated tools and human review” to assess content and ads.

But Google hasn’t explained how the review process will work.

The register expects it to need it, and quickly, as the reaction to the change we’ve seen on social media has already criticized Google’s position as another example of Big Tech effectively becoming the arbiter of a acceptable public discourse.

Here is another point of view.

The best thing Google can do to fight climate change is to shut down its data centers.

– PhotonTurtle (@ThePhotonTurtle) October 7, 2021

Others have pointed out that Google has been enjoying this content for years.

It is also easy to find a favorable sentiment for change.

One thing is certain: this change will trigger weeks of culture warfare arguments that will bring a lot of heat but very little light and hardly change their minds. ®

MakerDAO founder Rune Christensen published an essay outlining steps that could be taken to make the protocol a vehicle for tackling climate change.

In a lengthy article published Oct. 5 on the MakerDAO Governance Forum, Christensen asserts that MakerDAO should strive to ensure that all of its guarantees include “sustainable, climate-aligned assets that take into account the long-term impacts of financial activity on the environment ”.

Christensen says the protocol collateral should be invested in real-world sustainable assets (RWAs) through senior credit positions in projects that build “solar farms, wind turbines, batteries, recharging stations and ‘other cost-effective renewable energy solutions, along with their supply chains, sustainable resource extraction and recycling. He further stated:

“Today we already have everything we need to start expanding our RWA exposure to hundreds of billions of US dollars and beyond, safely and in full compliance with financial regulations, using the model. of real-world assets based on the fiduciary that the community has developed over many years. “

Related: MakerDAO To Dissolve Foundation And Become Truly Decentralized Again

Christensen also expresses the need for MakerDAO to restore its commitment to a decentralized guarantee, advocating that the protocol again relies on the Ethereum network and the Ether token.

MakerDAO users deposit crypto assets into the protocol to secure the minting of the Dai stablecoin (DAI). While Ether was initially exclusively supported by the protocol, it has since expanded to support other assets, including USD Coin, Wrapped Bitcoin, and Basic Attention Token.

The Maker founder highlighted the improvement in environmental efficiency expected to be achieved through Ethereum’s transition to a proof-of-stake consensus with Eth2, saying:

“Once the upgrade from proof of work to proof of stake is completed, Ethereum will become a high energy efficiency blockchain. ETH will become a lasting competitor to Bitcoin’s current role as the leading cryptocurrency. “

In addition to new features for Maps, Nest thermostats and flights, Google will be posting more information on how to make sustainable choices in research, shopping and finance. This includes a Google search results page dedicated to “climate change” and research into ineffective traffic lights.

Google will add a dedicated ‘climate change’ results page later this month. The “Overview” (with 10 blue links) and “News” tabs work the same, but “Causes”, “Effects” and “Take Action” are taken directly from United Nations data.

The search also makes it easier to find electric vehicles and other green vehicles. Google notes that interest in electric vehicles, as well as charging stations, has “never been higher”. The company will showcase climate-conscious models and allow users to compare models while helping users understand the benefits of electric vehicles.

There will be green tags for “Electric” and “Hybrid plug-in”, with results having a “Loading” tab. This notes the time it will take to refuel and the stations near you, as well as an “Annual Energy Cost Estimate” tool which allows you to “modify the parameters” and compare them to a vehicle. gasoline.

Meanwhile, Google Shopping will offer more cost-effective and sustainable alternatives when searching for power-hungry devices in the United States. This includes furnaces, dishwashers, water heaters, ranges and dryers.

Google Finance extends its sustainability score (from the Climate Disclosure Project) to your entire tracked portfolio. This will assess the sustainability of your investments and is currently “soon”.

Finally, Google today shared research on improving the efficiency of traffic lights to reduce idling time. This means less wasted fuel and less air pollution at street level. Optimizing, Israel’s early observations showed a 10-20% reduction in fuel delays and intersections. The company is currently piloting this effort in Rio de Janeiro and hopes to expand it to other cities.

So instead of manually measuring and calculating times, one of our AI research groups found a way to accurately calculate the traffic conditions and times at most intersections in cities around the world. , then they train a model on that data to optimize these inefficient intersections.

---

Check out 9to5Google on YouTube for more information: