India and the Global Warming Debate

The Technology & Economic Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to Technological and Economic developments in India. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
joshvajohn
BRFite
Posts: 1516
Joined: 09 Nov 2006 03:27

Living under 50 to 60 C

Postby joshvajohn » 12 Jun 2007 07:39

Indian Government has to develop a strategy for preparing people live with 50 to 60 C in many parts. This will have implication to diseases, heatwave deaths and inability to have water (they start evapourating soon).

It is essential to provide information to the public how to live under 50 to 60 C . It is also essential to develop the public transport to cope with such situation. Just like in the West where during snow one cannot walk outside and live indoor or travel in a heated car or bus, in India too one may have to develop A/C buses and trains for the public serves at low prices.

It is also essential to find out ways of developing houses and apartments that would can be supplied with cool air similar to central heating and so on.

I do not know why the Indian Government is not able to develop a particular policy to develop green land and botanical gardens near cities. They should not allow any more new building within the cities rather have as many trees as possible wihtin the cities.

Raju

Postby Raju » 15 Jun 2007 22:32

Freedom, not climate, is at risk

By Vaclav Klaus

Published: June 13 2007 17:44 | Last updated: June 13 2007 17:44

We are living in strange times. One exceptionally warm winter is enough – irrespective of the fact that in the course of the 20th century the global temperature increased only by 0.6 per cent – for the environmentalists and their followers to suggest radical measures to do something about the weather, and to do it right now.

In the past year, Al Gore’s so-called “documentaryâ€

rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3339
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Postby rsingh » 16 Jun 2007 04:32

Good somebody said this.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Postby svinayak » 22 Jun 2007 03:37

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/128

About this Talk

"I don't think we're going to make it," John Doerr proclaims, in an emotional talk about climate change and investment. Spurred on by his daughter, who demanded he fix the mess the world is heading for, he and his partners at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers embarked on a greentech world tour -- surveying the state of the art, from the ethanol revolution in Brazil to Wal-mart's (!) eco-concept store in Bentonville, Arkansas. KPCB is investing $200 million in green technologies to save the planet and make a profit to boot. But, Doerr fears, it may not be enough.
About John Doerr

John Doerr, Silicon Valley's legendary moneyman, is afraid of eco-apocalypse. After building his... Read full bio »

gashish
BRFite
Posts: 263
Joined: 23 May 2004 11:31
Location: BRF's tailgate party, aka, Nukkad thread

Postby gashish » 27 Jun 2007 02:38

[url=http://www.commodityonline.com/newnews.php?id=1745]Futures trading in carbon credits soon in India
[/url]

India’s commodity bourses--Multi-Commodity Exchange (MCX) and National Commodity and Derivatives Exchange (NCDEX)--are gearing up to launch futures trading in carbon credits.



The current global price for one tonne of carbon dioxide at the exchange hovers around $3.35


simple math assignment from rutgers univ shows:

1) You want to buy carbon offsets to make your driving carbon-neutral. The offsets cost $4 per ton of carbon dioxide.
(a) (2 pts) How much would buying offsets add to the price of a gallon of gasoline? Assume that producing and burning a
gallon of gasoline emits 25.3 lbs of CO2. Recall 1 ton = 2000 lbs.

Answer: 25.3 lbs/gal x 1 ton/2000 lbs x $4/ton = $0.051/gallon

(b) (2 pts) If you drive 12,000 miles per year and your car averages 30 miles per gallon, how much do
you have to pay in offsets per year?

Answer: 12,000 miles/year x 1 gallon/30 miles x $0.051/gallon = $20


The whole idea of carbon trading is to attach some $$ value to CO2 emissions so that companies start investing in cleaner technologies....but is this "cost" high enough to make that happen for all?

lets continue with the assignment which compares the classic case of buying hybrid vs regular car

2) A hybrid Honda Civic, which gets an average of 50 mpg, costs $3000 more than a nonhybrid and otherwise identical, Honda Civic, which gets an average of 35 mpg. Assume that producing and burning a gallon of gasoline emits 25.3 lbs of CO2. Assume the price of gasoline is $3/gallon. Recall 1 ton = 2000 lbs.
(4 pts) If you drive 12,000 miles/year, by how many tons of carbon dioxide do you reduce your annual personal emission by choosing the hybrid? What percentage is this of the US annual per capita average of 20 tons?

Answer: 12,000 miles / year x 1 gallon/50 miles = 240 gal
compared to 12,000 miles /year x 1 gallon/35 miles =343 gal for the regular Civic.
103 gal x 25.3 lbs/gal x 1 ton/2000 lbs = 1.3 tons/year
1.3/20 x 100 = 6.5%. This would be a significant reduction in CO2 emissions (comparable to Kyoto target!)

(2 pts) After 5 years, how much have you saved in fuel costs for the hybrid Civic relative to the regular Civic? By how many dollars are you out-of-pocket for the hybrid, including the initial higher cost?

Answer:
103 gal/year x 5 years x $3/gal = $1545
out of pocket by $3000-$1545 = $1455

(2 pt) If you think of this extra expense as paying to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, after 5 years of driving how much have you ended up paying per ton?

Answer:
$1455 / 6.5 tons = $223 per ton (this is a lot, compared to the price of offsets). Of course, if you drive longer, then eventually the out-of-pocket goes to zero (at 120,000 miles) and you are no longer paying to reduce carbon dioxide. Also, if the price of gas had gone significantly in the first five year, this will also reduce the effective price per ton of carbon even after 5 years


assume that this simple hybrid vs regular car math can be extrapolated to industry/companies..."driving longer" brings economy of scale...meaning large enterprises who can "drive longer" have higher incentive to invest in cleaner technology and improve their margins. For others, the incentive is lower and so would prefer to buy carbon offsets. But this adds as extra cost burden eating into their margins,especially, SMEs....small guys always get screwed, even in "noble" campaigns....:) :(

Lkawamoto
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 49
Joined: 26 Oct 2006 09:56
Location: zz_ota-ku

Postby Lkawamoto » 27 Jun 2007 03:03

capitalism is not the answer to everything cetainly not global warming

i think prolonged education campaign for the people on earth can stop a disaster that is in the making

USA for example needs to stop all the wars its engaged in
China needs to learn clean coal combustion technology

India needs to start from scratch and teach environmental science in every school to every kid (that is fortunate enough to go to school)

I think japan is the only country that is most educated in environmental awareness (and couple more scandivanian countries)

Kartman
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 15 May 2007 20:53

Postby Kartman » 27 Jun 2007 17:34

Lkawamoto wrote:capitalism is not the answer to everything cetainly not global warming

i think prolonged education campaign for the people on earth can stop a disaster that is in the making


Education, while necessary, also needs to be reinforced by attributing costs to polluters. Else, good intentions (from education) don't get reinforced into actual enviro-friendly behaviour.

E.g. consider household garbage
- some cities/towns in the EU levy garbage-disposal charges based on volume. This directly incentivizes reducing a household's garbage.
- fines/penalties for violating recycling laws

I think japan is the only country that is most educated in environmental awareness (and couple more scandivanian countries)

Add Switzerland to that... apart from education/awareness, they have a very strong enforcement and incentive system which ensures that all the noble thoughts, actually translate into action.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7805
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 01 Jul 2007 01:19


vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 17 Jul 2007 08:46

Alarm bells as Himalayan glaciers melt (IHT)

A vast and ancient sheet of ice, a glacier is in effect the planet's most sensitive organ, like an aging knee that feels the onset of winter. Its upper reaches accumulate snow and ice when it is cold; its lower reaches melt when it is warm. Its long-term survival depends on the balance between the buildup and the melting. Glaciers worldwide serve as a barometer for global warming, which has, according to a report this year by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, been spurred in recent decades by rising levels of greenhouse gas emissions.

Even the Himalayas have grown measurably warmer. A recent study found that mean air temperature in the northwestern Himalayan range had risen by 2.2 degrees Celsius (4 degrees Fahrenheit) in the last two decades, a rate considerably higher than the rate of increase over the last 100 years.

It its report, the international panel predicted that as these glaciers melt, they would increase the likelihood of flooding over the next three decades and then, as they recede, dry up the rivers that they feed.

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Postby samuel » 04 Oct 2007 23:19

Folks,

If anyone lives in and around the Boston area, the amazing upswing in energy/environment/ecology conversation at MIT might be useful to attend. I can't say I am not jazzed by the increased tempo as a longtime sustainability advocate, but I have no direct connection to any of the programs coming out and they are not one-sided...

Come to the tech!

S

Vriksh
BRFite
Posts: 406
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 11:31

Postby Vriksh » 05 Oct 2007 00:23

Here are some steps to a sustainablity is by mandating the following 2 things

1. Anything that gets built must be recycled.

2. Increasing entropy of the environment must be avoided. Any activity that increases the entropy of the environment must be offset by an equivalent or more decrease in entropy by other activities.

Both these ideas are in part interchangeable. Let me explain with historical facts that I cannot give proper references for since they have not been studied very well and include my own ideas over the years.

A lot of energy and resources are expended in creating everyday products from raw materials, however the problem with this is that once these products reach the end of their useful life cycle they are discarded into the environment causing pollution/more entropy. However if we can start thinking of processes whereby anything that is made can be easily recycled into new objects that emerging society needs. For example in the present context all construction will have to use the following
1. Iron/Steel
2. Glass
3. Thermoplastic Plastic (or derivative thereof)
4. Wood/Paper
Since all the above materials can be easily sorted and converted/reused to make new products by simply heating (except wood of course) and recasting them to new shapes. This means once a society has a certain cache of these recyclables it can start using them more and more efficiently as time/technology progresses. Wood on the other hand can be returned as mulch and reconverted to wood fairly simply or pulped again and again to make new stuff

As regarding the 2nd lemma as mentioned above
All thermodynamic processes on a macro scale increase the entropy of the universe/environment. However living processes tend to utilize a source of energy (the sun) and reduce entropy (this I believe is the every essence of a living system). Any human activity that goes against this grain is inherently destructive to life. The "earth" spent billions of years converting all the high entropy CO2 into forests, oil and other living beings working against the thermodynamic entropy gradient. However in the last 100 years humans without realizing the inherent design of life have bucked this trend and converted all that stored entropy to heat (by combustion etc).

That said there should be no restriction on the use of these stored energy/entropy reservoirs of oil etc if these are converted to even less entropic states such as long chain polymers (thermoplastic polymers from lemma 1) and reused from then on.

Regardless it is impossible to completely avoid creation of entropy. Even natural processes such as breathing/respiration of humans and animals etc. However these processes can be viewed as the maintenance cost necessary for the living system to maintain its current state of less entropy. As the system converts more and more energy into objects that decrease entropy, the possibility of a catastrophic thermodynamic event upsetting the balance returning the system to high entropy states increases with time. Living processes manage this by creating kinetic blockades to this natural Thermodynamic TSPA patented "downhill skiing".

Indic religions may have realized this intuitively... but this is a digression that could needless color the discussion.

samuel
BRFite
Posts: 818
Joined: 03 Apr 2007 08:52

Postby samuel » 05 Oct 2007 00:45

Hi Cshankar,

Have a look at the Natural Step (TNS) framework that came out a while ago.
It articulated this thought many years ago, and has been one of the paradigms out there.

I fully echo your thoughts, which I see as articulated in TNS. The natural evolution from a the second-law of thermodynamics is from order to disorder (more entropy), with restorative force in nature coming from the transformation of Sun's energy by plants. The existence of nature and natural interactions in cycles as opposed to linear (take-make-waste) is intricately tied to the ability to control entropy!

At one such sustainability meeting, I had to raise my hand up and say, we Indians know cycles and entropy! I just know it in my bones, but I can't explain how. Insights?

S
cshankar wrote:Here are some steps to a sustainablity is by mandating the following 2 things

1. Anything that gets built must be recycled.

2. Increasing entropy of the environment must be avoided. Any activity that increases the entropy of the environment must be offset by an equivalent or more decrease in entropy by other activities.

Both these ideas are in part interchangeable. Let me explain with historical facts that I cannot give proper references for since they have not been studied very well and include my own ideas over the years.

A lot of energy and resources are expended in creating everyday products from raw materials, however the problem with this is that once these products reach the end of their useful life cycle they are discarded into the environment causing pollution/more entropy. However if we can start thinking of processes whereby anything that is made can be easily recycled into new objects that emerging society needs. For example in the present context all construction will have to use the following
1. Iron/Steel
2. Glass
3. Thermoplastic Plastic (or derivative thereof)
4. Wood/Paper
Since all the above materials can be easily sorted and converted/reused to make new products by simply heating (except wood of course) and recasting them to new shapes. This means once a society has a certain cache of these recyclables it can start using them more and more efficiently as time/technology progresses. Wood on the other hand can be returned as mulch and reconverted to wood fairly simply or pulped again and again to make new stuff

As regarding the 2nd lemma as mentioned above
All thermodynamic processes on a macro scale increase the entropy of the universe/environment. However living processes tend to utilize a source of energy (the sun) and reduce entropy (this I believe is the every essence of a living system). Any human activity that goes against this grain is inherently destructive to life. The "earth" spent billions of years converting all the high entropy CO2 into forests, oil and other living beings working against the thermodynamic entropy gradient. However in the last 100 years humans without realizing the inherent design of life have bucked this trend and converted all that stored entropy to heat (by combustion etc).

That said there should be no restriction on the use of these stored energy/entropy reservoirs of oil etc if these are converted to even less entropic states such as long chain polymers (thermoplastic polymers from lemma 1) and reused from then on.

Regardless it is impossible to completely avoid creation of entropy. Even natural processes such as breathing/respiration of humans and animals etc. However these processes can be viewed as the maintenance cost necessary for the living system to maintain its current state of less entropy. As the system converts more and more energy into objects that decrease entropy, the possibility of a catastrophic thermodynamic event upsetting the balance returning the system to high entropy states increases with time. Living processes manage this by creating kinetic blockades to this natural Thermodynamic TSPA patented "downhill skiing".

Indic religions may have realized this intuitively... but this is a digression that could needless color the discussion.

Vriksh
BRFite
Posts: 406
Joined: 27 Apr 2003 11:31

Postby Vriksh » 12 Oct 2007 22:52

shaardula wrote:Regarding water, it will be helpful if any gurus here can give inputs regarding the best practices in waste water treatment hopefully leading to recycling.

many small and medium towns in india with populations around 10 lakhs, have no extensive UGD and sewage systems. Sumps are a norm. Wastewater treatment plants are very rare. At the same time irrigation with sewage water is quite pervalent. The quantum of wastewater generated is quite high. (about 60-100 mld/town.)

wastage of a potential resource.
direct threat to water tables, water quality and health.

treatment plants are expensive. are they sustainable?
to maximize gains basic infrastructure needs massive upgradation.


I did not see this question for a while but to answer this... it is posted on the 1st page of the topic

The problem of wastewater specially sewage can be almost completely solved (in a sustainable and energy efficient way). A new technology called Soil Bio Technology (SBT) for treating human/animal waste streams is under development by a research group in IITB. A few commercial sewage treatment plants have been commissioned by them the last 3-4 years and were running successfully. Last I recall they were in the process of starting a company using this technology. You can probably find out more using google and typing SBT.

The biggest problem in India is the fact that even though money exists for such projects but the corruption in the procurement process has so far meant that the projects that were commissioned were unsuitable for our needs.

Municipal corporations in India/World over struggle mightily to handle waste and treatment invariably means dumping streams in Rivers and seas with disastrous consequences for sanitation and ecology.

As of now the Municipal corporations own the water supplied and interestingly I think also the waste streams that come out. Legally you are not allowed to draw water from a nullah for treatment and use without paying the Corporations (it should the opposite in my opinion)

If there was a law that made treatment of waste streams mandatory on the users there would be an immediate improvement on sanitation (due to increases in efficiency and decrease in water use). The market will immediately adopt superior technology to solve the problem and the only thing that Municipalities need to ensure is quality control (this may involve more corruption but that is for another day)

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7805
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 12 Dec 2007 15:27

Skeptical Scientists Urge World To ‘Have the Courage to Do Nothing' At UN Conference
Lord Christopher Monckton, a UK climate researcher, had a blunt message for UN climate conference participants on Monday.

"Climate change is a non-problem. The right answer to a non problem is to have the courage to do nothing," Monckton told participants.


joshvajohn
BRFite
Posts: 1516
Joined: 09 Nov 2006 03:27

Bali and aftermath

Postby joshvajohn » 17 Dec 2007 05:47

Business versus development?
My comment - India should take a lead asking the governments to agree to minimum starting point of reducing the emission.
It should be clear that the emission problem is not due to population rather it is due to over use and waste of over production.
Is there any serious research in India to develop technology to reduce the emission or convert the emission into some soild waste?....

It would be interesting if Indian government can invest in some research projects where carbon emissions can be converted into something else and thus reduce the emission itself.




Bali 'only first step': Rudd

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st ... 49,00.html

Matthew Warren, Environment writer | December 17, 2007

KEVIN Rudd has shifted further away from the US position on climate change, strongly backing the new Bali agreement as the White House expressed "serious concerns" about the weak commitments placed on major developing economies such as China and India.

White House press secretary Dana Perino said in a statement yesterday the new climate deal to be negotiated over the next two years needed to do more to cut greenhouse gas emissions from these major developing countries.

The Prime Minister said the historic framework for negotiations on a new global climate deal after 2012 - hammered out at the weekend in a tense and emotional finale to the UN's Bali conference - was a compromise agreement but it represented a "step forward" in imposing commitments on emerging economies.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7805
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 03 Jan 2008 21:48

A cold spell soon to replace global warming[quote] Stock up on fur coats and felt boots! This is my paradoxical advice to the warm world.

Earth is now at the peak of one of its passing warm spells. It started in the 17th century when there was no industrial influence on the climate to speak of and no such thing as the hothouse effect. The current warming is evidently a natural process and utterly independent of hothouse gases.

The real reasons for climate changes are uneven solar radiation, terrestrial precession (that is, axis gyration), instability of oceanic currents, regular salinity fluctuations of the Arctic Ocean surface waters, etc. There is another, principal reason—solar activity and luminosity. The greater they are the warmer is our climate.

Astrophysics knows two solar activity cycles, of 11 and 200 years. Both are caused by changes in the radius and area of the irradiating solar surface. The latest data, obtained by Habibullah Abdusamatov, head of the Pulkovo Observatory space research laboratory, say that Earth has passed the peak of its warmer period, and a fairly cold spell will set in quite soon, by 2012. Real cold will come when solar activity reaches its minimum, by 2041, and will last for 50-60 years or even longer.

This is my point, which environmentalists hotly dispute as they cling to the hothouse theory. As we know, hothouse gases, in particular, nitrogen peroxide, warm up the atmosphere by keeping heat close to the ground. Advanced in the late 19th century by Svante A. Arrhenius, a Swedish physical chemist and Nobel Prize winner, this theory is taken for granted to this day and has not undergone any serious check.

It determines decisions and instruments of major international organizations—in particular, the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Signed by 150 countries, it exemplifies the impact of scientific delusion on big politics and economics. The authors and enthusiasts of the Kyoto Protocol based their assumptions on an erroneous idea. As a result, developed countries waste huge amounts of money to fight industrial pollution of the atmosphere. What if it is a Don Quixote’s duel with the windmill?

Hothouse gases may not be to blame for global warming. At any rate, there is no scientific evidence to their guilt. The classic hothouse effect scenario is too simple to be true. As things really are, much more sophisticated processes are on in the atmosphere, especially in its dense layer. For instance, heat is not so much radiated in space as carried by air currents—an entirely different mechanism, which cannot cause global warming.

The temperature of the troposphere, the lowest and densest portion of the atmosphere, does not depend on the concentration of greenhouse gas emissions—a point proved theoretically and empirically. True, probes of Antarctic ice shield, taken with bore specimens in the vicinity of the Russian research station Vostok, show that there are close links between atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide and temperature changes. Here, however, we cannot be quite sure which is the cause and which the effect.

Temperature fluctuations always run somewhat ahead of carbon dioxide concentration changes. This means that warming is primary. The ocean is the greatest carbon dioxide depository, with concentrations 60-90 times larger than in the atmosphere. When the ocean’s surface warms up, it produces the “champagne effect.â€

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Postby svinayak » 15 Feb 2008 05:27


upendora
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 01 Feb 2006 12:15
Contact:

Postby upendora » 15 Feb 2008 09:00

Gerard wrote:[url=http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080103/94768732.html]

For instance, heat is not so much radiated in space as carried by air currents—an entirely different mechanism, which cannot cause global warming.


I don't understand what this Russian scientist says about heat not being radiated into space? It is the heated air which causes air currents.
Higher temparatures cause bigger storms and severe droughts.

Likewise, warm ocean water exudes greater amounts of carbonic acid, which evaporates to add to industrial pollution—a factor we cannot deny.


It is not all guess work. CO2 is measured to be increasingly in the
atmosphere. This causes more carbonic acid to be formed in oceans, as Ph-levels change (acidic) more plankton will die. (reduced green cover)
This is the sort of snow-ball effect scientists are warning about.

Human caused pollution even if negligible, definetely not helping reduce the natural phenomenon.

Meanwhile, Europeans can rest assured. The Gulf Stream will change its course only if some evil magic robs it of power to reach the north—but Mother Nature is unlikely to do that.


Note he starts at first saying climate cannot be predicted. At the end he says Gulf stream will predictably stay same. Who knows, all the extra clouds may cause a long cold spell and also shutting down Gulf stream.

upendora
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 01 Feb 2006 12:15
Contact:

Postby upendora » 15 Feb 2008 09:14

Acharya wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbGSSLxtcZY


He is indirectly lobbying for subsidies for hydrogen-fuel cells. Just like ethanol industry enjoyed. There are no subsidies for oil industry as he claims. US has less taxes thats all.
Whats wrong with charging an electric car in the night.

Rudranathh
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 20:06

Postby Rudranathh » 16 Feb 2008 18:36

National action plan on climate change soon: Sibal

Feb 16, 2008

The government will soon come up with an action plan for dealing with the issue of climate change. A National Council set up by the Prime Minister on the issue is already working out the details.

This was stated by the Minister for Science and Technology, Mr Kapil Sibal while addressing a meeting of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, in New Delhi today.

He said India will not buckle under any pressure from advanced nations on the issue and will go ahead with its national commitments.

He said India should be able to stabilise its emission norms by 2015.

The Minister expressed the opinion that incentives and appropriate policy framework will go a long way in helping the Indian industry to adopt green technologies. This will enable them to become globally more competitive.

Mr. Sibal pointed out that to sustain 9 per cent economic growth, the energy demands have to be met.

Nuclear energy entails clean technologies and India must exploit its potential to fill the demand and supply gap.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4846
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 17 Feb 2008 02:45

Climate change is perhaps less of a problem than the amount of air pollution & dust and garbage in cities in hot & humid India. That alone kills more in one year than climate change ever will.

Rudranathh
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 20:06

Postby Rudranathh » 17 Feb 2008 09:23

Neshant wrote:Climate change is perhaps less of a problem than the amount of air pollution & dust and garbage in cities in hot & humid India. That alone kills more in one year than climate change ever will.


Any scientific data to support your claims?

upendora
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 01 Feb 2006 12:15
Contact:

Postby upendora » 18 Feb 2008 06:26

Neshant wrote:Climate change is perhaps less of a problem than the amount of air pollution & dust and garbage in cities in hot & humid India. That alone kills more in one year than climate change ever will.


I would say diabetes kills more people than pollution.
You need to understand that
there is something called "tipping point" in climate change.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Postby Sanjay M » 18 Feb 2008 20:55

New crystal developed which can absorb CO2

perhaps some sort of zeolite

Rudranathh
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 20:06

Postby Rudranathh » 19 Feb 2008 12:16

Tougher air pollution rules coming
18 Feb, 2008

UN's International Maritime Organisation's sub-committee on bulk liquids and gases (BLG) has ratified air pollution rules in MARPOL (short for marine pollution).

Once approved by designated agencies of the world body like Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC), the tougher rules will come into effect from March 2010.

The working group which was given the task of reviewing the provisions has developed a three-tier structure for new engines, which would set tighter nitrogen oxide (NOx) emission standards.

IMO’s sub-committee on bulk liquids and gases (BLG) was tasked with reviewing the six options, which the committee narrowed to three.

Option 1: Global: 1 per cent (10,000 ppm maximum sulphur content) fuel standard applied in 2012. Global: 0.50 per cent (5,000 ppm maximum sulphur content) fuel standard applied in 2015.

Option 2: Global/Regional: Global cap remains unchanged at 4.50 per cent (45,000 ppm maximum sulphur content). Emission Control Areas require 0.10 per cent (1,000 ppm) standard in 2012.

Option 3: Global/Regional with Micro-Areas: Global cap is lowered to 3 per cent (30,000 ppm maximum sulphur content) in 2012. Emission Control Area standard lowered to 1 per cent (10,000 ppm) in 2010.

The Emission Control Area standard to be lowered to 0.50 per cent (5,000 ppm maximum sulphur content) in 2015.
Micro-Emission Control Areas may be established at a distance no more than 24 nautical miles from the baseline with a 0.10 per cent (1,000 ppm maximum sulphur content) standard.

The committee developed a three-tier structure for new engines, which would set tighter nitrogen oxide (NOx) emission standards. Tier I represents the 17 g/kW standard. Tier II, would see NOx levels for new engines installed from January 1, 2011 reduced 15.5 - 21.8 per cent.

Geographically based Tier III would require major reductions in designated Emission Control Areas (ECAs) - a reduction of 80 per cent from Tier I levels for new builds by 2016.

The working group also reviewed the issue of whether it was right to establish a standard for pre-2000 marine diesel engines and agreed to further study.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7805
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 28 Feb 2008 03:39


Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7805
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 23 Mar 2008 07:38


Raju

Postby Raju » 28 Apr 2008 10:02

Image

Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: India and the Global Warming Debate

Postby Bade » 30 Apr 2009 22:40

DEHRA DUN: Dehra Dun on Thursday broke the 39-year-old record when it registered 40.8 degrees Celsius in the month of April.


The previous highest temperature that was recorded in the month of April was 40.6 degrees in 1970, Met director Anand Sharma said.

The hot conditions are mainly due to the strong winds coming from Rajasthan, he added.

Rapid urbanization and uncontrolled felling of trees are also responsible for rising temperature in the city, Sharma said.


Dehra Dun at 40.8 degrees breaks 39-year-old record

shyam
BRFite
Posts: 1453
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31

Re: India and the Global Warming Debate

Postby shyam » 25 May 2009 04:36

Does anybody know what happened to "Alternate Energy" thread in this forum?
I couldn't locate that in trashcan either.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7805
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India and the Global Warming Debate

Postby Gerard » 01 Jun 2009 06:27


Jamal K. Malik
BRFite
Posts: 638
Joined: 27 Mar 2009 23:03

Re: India and the Global Warming Debate

Postby Jamal K. Malik » 02 Jul 2009 20:24

SUV ban may light up lives
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Earth/articleshow/4714141.cms
If the current fleet of 25-40 million gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles (SUVs) in the United States were to shift to more fuel
efficient cars such as those available in Europe, more than 1.6 billion people in the world currently living in the dark can be provided electrification without any increase in the levels of greenhouse gases that lead to climate change.



Jamal K. Malik
BRFite
Posts: 638
Joined: 27 Mar 2009 23:03

Re: India and the Global Warming Debate

Postby Jamal K. Malik » 03 Jul 2009 21:11

India’s position on Climate Change issues
India’s Expectation with Regard to the Copenhagen Outcome
http://www.pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=49717

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7805
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India and the Global Warming Debate

Postby Gerard » 16 Jul 2009 06:41

Negotiators slam India's climate flip at Italy forum
In his letter to the government, the negotiator, a senior government official, said "India's poor will pay the price for this political declaration".

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India and the Global Warming Debate

Postby Vipul » 17 Jul 2009 01:02

Sikkim plants 6 lakh saplings in 10 minutes.

Sikkim has inked a new chapter in the environmental record books of the world by planting more than six lakh saplings throughout the hill State in ten minutes during a special campaign ‘Ten minutes to Greenery’ as the clock ticked 10:30 am.

The Governor, Mr Balmiki Prasad Singh, and the Chief Minister, Mr Pawan Chamling, led the campaign from the forefront as thousands of Sikkimese people, army personnel and paramilitary forces came forward and planted more than 6 lakhs saplings in any place of their choice on Wednesday. The whole campaign was facilitated by the State forest department.

Speaking to media after completion of the campaign, the State Forest Minister, Mr Bhim Dhungel, said that an international and national record has been created by the Sikkim people by planting the six lakhs saplings in ten minutes in the State.

“This initiative also supported the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) worldwide tree planting campaign. This was also a record that within ten minutes, the plants numbering population of the State were planted all over the State”, said Mr Lachungpa.

He pointed out that the ‘Ten minutes of Greenery’ programme would able to sequester about 1,400 tonnes of carbon di-oxide annually, he said.

The Forest Secretary said that the Chief Minister has further given emphasis on important native species such as quercus (oak), rhododendron, magnolia and native wild fruits to have a well balanced forest ecosystem and preserve local biodiversity unique programme and was celebrated on a mass scale.

“There are myriad of economic activities going on in Sikkim ranging from ecotourism, horticulture to clean power generation through carefully chosen hydroelectric projects. Sikkim’s green governance showcases a unique example of harmony between people, profit and planet”, said Mr. Lachungpa.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7805
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India and the Global Warming Debate

Postby Gerard » 25 Jul 2009 01:36


Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 12976
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: India and the Global Warming Debate

Postby Suraj » 25 Jul 2009 02:58

Jairam Ramesh has impressed me so far with his performance as Minister of State in the Environment Ministry. Looking up his background, he's an IITB Mech graduate, with graduate studies in public and technology policy at Carnegie Mellon and MIT.

We need someone like him to articulate our development agenda clearly during these climate talk initiatives. The carbon tax issue has significant economic implications, and is wholly discriminatory to a country like India, that is just on the growth trajectory now. We will increase our carbon emissions in the coming years and decades - there's no way around that despite what technological means we use to curtail them based on good intentions. Agreeing to emissions caps and carbon trading regimes controlled by the west would be ruinous at this point.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4846
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India and the Global Warming Debate

Postby Neshant » 27 Jul 2009 12:11

Indian governments climate change website
http://envfor.nic.in/cc/index.htm
Last edited by Neshant on 27 Jul 2009 12:19, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Technology & Economic Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests