The discussion around climate change has always intrigued me. Have been part of some basic discussions around this subject thanks to the job I have at Unilever. It evokes an eclectic combination of responses from people around you. The responses vary from a strong desire to be part of the solution to a sense of disbelief. Then there are those of us in between who do not know what to do but do believe that Climate change is indeed happening. So what's the truth? Should we worry about this at all? Well to start with, I am no expert and I have not even made a honest effort to read the latest happening in this space. But I want to put down my thoughts on this topic as I have a nagging feeling that this would indeed define our future.
Climate change is a continuous phenomena and has been taking place and would continue to take place irrespective of human activity. The essential debate which we must get right is increase in rate of climate change as a consequence of green house gas emissions which lead to increase in average temperatures on planet earth. Again, It must be noticed that temperatures have been increasing after the recovery from ice ages for thousands of years now which is a natural phenomena. Green house gases which get emitted as a consequence of man made activity have accelerated this temperature increase. Temperature increase at the natural rate (as allowed by Mother Nature) lets us and all species of Flora/Fauna adjust to the same. But now the increased rate puts all of us under grave risk of survival. We also should note that fact that even when temperature increases at natural rate many species do not survive leading to Darwinian evolution. The essential challenge is that of faster rate of climate change and not climate change which we all need to grapple with. Its a highly non linear science and I am sure a mathematicians delight from that perspective.
Above is a simplistic explanation of Climate Change and there are many important technical nuances which need to be understood.
So what do we do? We have a population of ~7 Billion ( I am told the 7 Billionth child will be born in UP India, not sure how they made this calculation). There is no way we can cut it back to ~1 Billion assuming that this would solve the problem. There are many assumptions over here, couple of them being cutting consumption levels for example of fossil fuels we can stop an already started process of temperature increase or reduction in consumption by 7 times is good enough with per capita consumption at today's levels. These are complex questions and we shall leave them for the best minds in American Universities to solve.
Do we cut our consumption levels by 7 times? Even If we were to assume that this would work how do we do this? Do we trust science to bring solutions for the same? If we were to replace all Desktops by IPads will we reduce enough polymer consumption? Do we replace all the SUVs with Maruti Alto Cars across the globe? Do we do away with lifts in all the buildings for 5 floors? Some of us would use the lift to sixth floor and walk a floor down. Do we wait for next generation bricks or cement which have lower carbon footprint i.e. emit lesser green house gases? There are no simple answers and these are questions which would occupy the minds of scientists for at least next 20 years.
I actually believe that technology does not have all the answers for once. We need to overhaul the whole system of which we are a part. We need to start by identifying the cost of increased rate of climate change. Should be easy If we were to assume that climate change would lead to our extinction right. Then we need to allocate this cost to our consumption patterns and then we perhaps would have the right problem to solve. Once we do that we use science and of course maths to help us identify the right solutions. Sounds logical right, after all this is how we deal with any other decision making process right. Establishing present value of assets/liabilities etc is a common step undertaken in almost anything we do. But in the case of climate change this does not work and I wonder why? Sometime back in Cancun all the major countries came together and debated on how much increase they will allow themselves for green house gas emissions. Forget about reducing the same, they could not come to an agreement on how much increase should be fine. It was amusing to say the least for me as the discussion took place in the absence of perhaps the most important stakeholder. All participants would do well to invite her to the discussion next time. Not sure If this stakeholder has time though as Mother Nature is too busy solving the most complex problems around us which we are yet to formulate. Perhaps a reflection of bloated opinion of self which man kind has (a scaled up version of what I have for myself), I noticed this excerpt in a famous book.
On the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was the most intelligent species occupying the planet, instead of the third most intelligent. The second most intelligent creatures were, of course, Dolphins, who, curiously enough, had long known of the impending destruction of Earth. You see, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much - the wheel, New York, wars and so on - whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man - for precisely the same reasons. They'd made many attempts to alert mankind to the danger, but their communications were misinterpreted as amusing attempts to punch footballs or whistle for tidbits." -Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
I hope we start listening to the Dolphins and get our act right........
Climate change is a continuous phenomena and has been taking place and would continue to take place irrespective of human activity. The essential debate which we must get right is increase in rate of climate change as a consequence of green house gas emissions which lead to increase in average temperatures on planet earth. Again, It must be noticed that temperatures have been increasing after the recovery from ice ages for thousands of years now which is a natural phenomena. Green house gases which get emitted as a consequence of man made activity have accelerated this temperature increase. Temperature increase at the natural rate (as allowed by Mother Nature) lets us and all species of Flora/Fauna adjust to the same. But now the increased rate puts all of us under grave risk of survival. We also should note that fact that even when temperature increases at natural rate many species do not survive leading to Darwinian evolution. The essential challenge is that of faster rate of climate change and not climate change which we all need to grapple with. Its a highly non linear science and I am sure a mathematicians delight from that perspective.
Above is a simplistic explanation of Climate Change and there are many important technical nuances which need to be understood.
So what do we do? We have a population of ~7 Billion ( I am told the 7 Billionth child will be born in UP India, not sure how they made this calculation). There is no way we can cut it back to ~1 Billion assuming that this would solve the problem. There are many assumptions over here, couple of them being cutting consumption levels for example of fossil fuels we can stop an already started process of temperature increase or reduction in consumption by 7 times is good enough with per capita consumption at today's levels. These are complex questions and we shall leave them for the best minds in American Universities to solve.
Do we cut our consumption levels by 7 times? Even If we were to assume that this would work how do we do this? Do we trust science to bring solutions for the same? If we were to replace all Desktops by IPads will we reduce enough polymer consumption? Do we replace all the SUVs with Maruti Alto Cars across the globe? Do we do away with lifts in all the buildings for 5 floors? Some of us would use the lift to sixth floor and walk a floor down. Do we wait for next generation bricks or cement which have lower carbon footprint i.e. emit lesser green house gases? There are no simple answers and these are questions which would occupy the minds of scientists for at least next 20 years.
I actually believe that technology does not have all the answers for once. We need to overhaul the whole system of which we are a part. We need to start by identifying the cost of increased rate of climate change. Should be easy If we were to assume that climate change would lead to our extinction right. Then we need to allocate this cost to our consumption patterns and then we perhaps would have the right problem to solve. Once we do that we use science and of course maths to help us identify the right solutions. Sounds logical right, after all this is how we deal with any other decision making process right. Establishing present value of assets/liabilities etc is a common step undertaken in almost anything we do. But in the case of climate change this does not work and I wonder why? Sometime back in Cancun all the major countries came together and debated on how much increase they will allow themselves for green house gas emissions. Forget about reducing the same, they could not come to an agreement on how much increase should be fine. It was amusing to say the least for me as the discussion took place in the absence of perhaps the most important stakeholder. All participants would do well to invite her to the discussion next time. Not sure If this stakeholder has time though as Mother Nature is too busy solving the most complex problems around us which we are yet to formulate. Perhaps a reflection of bloated opinion of self which man kind has (a scaled up version of what I have for myself), I noticed this excerpt in a famous book.
On the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was the most intelligent species occupying the planet, instead of the third most intelligent. The second most intelligent creatures were, of course, Dolphins, who, curiously enough, had long known of the impending destruction of Earth. You see, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much - the wheel, New York, wars and so on - whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man - for precisely the same reasons. They'd made many attempts to alert mankind to the danger, but their communications were misinterpreted as amusing attempts to punch footballs or whistle for tidbits." -Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
I hope we start listening to the Dolphins and get our act right........
