Open Magazine: redeemed?

Open's climate change denial story looks even sillier one year out, but their willingness to run the Radia Tapes was no small thing

Just about a year ago, Open Magazine ran an extraordinarily bad cover story. In the 'Climate Change Fraud,' Open basically recycled a pile of press releases from right wing think tanks and threw in some quotes from a small group of well-known climate change deniers and skeptics, most of whom give quotes for a living.  No effort was made to examine the issue from multiple perspectives, and to make matters worse, the article was poorly written. The story made me doubt the integrity of people willing to run a controversial cover simply to stir the pot and sell magazines. I gave up reading Open for a long time.  

Then Open broke that Radia Tapes story, something most news outlets were afraid to do. The beauty of a free press is not that it gets things right all the time, but that it gets things right at least some of the time. And some of the time can make a big difference. Albert Camus put it this way: 'A free press can, of course, be good or bad, but, most certainly without freedom, the press will never be anything but bad.'  So hats off to Open and Outlook for being good, at least this time around.  And let's not forget The Hindu, which ran two very good pieces last week explaining why Kapil Sibal's recent attack on the  CAG report cannot really be take seriously, except as a political ploy. Read: Sorry people, we're hanging up on you, and Head in the sand.

Back to climate change, things have not been going well in the year since Open ran 'Climate Change Fraud.'  In fact, last year tied for the hottest year on record.  I know one year doesn't prove anything--it's the long term trends that matter. But if we remain silent, then we leave the field to skeptics, who like to cry foul every time snow falls anywhere.  But for the record, anyone still talking about 'global cooling' may benefit from a review of some basic maths and science. My son is almost finished with his fifth standard text books; that might be a good place to start.  Here's a reality check from a piece that originally ran in the New York Times:

Two agencies, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), reported on January 12 that the global average surface temperature for 2010 had tied the record set in 2005...[2010] was the 34th year running that global temperatures have been above the 20th-century average; the last below-average year was 1976. The new figures show that nine of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since the beginning of 2001.

Not good news, for those of us who consider things like the future of our planet. Full story here. 

So, what are we doing about it? Not as much as we should be.  The climate talks in Cancun last month were not the complete disaster many of us expected, but they fell far short of any real solution. Here are three different takes on those talks for those wanting to dig a bit deeper:

Cancún agreement rescues UN credibility but falls short of saving planet: The Guardian (full coverage here)

Cancun clinches deal--for polluters  from CSE's Down to Earth.

Green Lantern Mira Kamdar's more positive take on the Cancun summit. 

For more on climate, go see the Green Light climate page. For more on the 2G, check out our 2G-CWG page.

Climate, water and the need for serious humour

Toxic Link on Traditional Delhi Water Systems
Bhagwad on the Arrogance of Skepticism
Bill Maher on what baby-making theories have to do with theories of climate change

I've written two funny posts in a row, and this one ends in a very funny video.  So it only seems fair that you put up with a few short paragraphs of serious business about climate change, weather and water.

Climate change is one of those issues that we keep coming back to, not because we want to, but because it's just so important.  As the climate changes, the earth will change in unpredictable ways.  For a place like India, where millions and millions of people are happy if they get two--to say nothing of three--meals a day, unpredictable is obviously a terrifying word, especially when it comes to things (like rain) that affect food crops. We all like to predict when our next meal is coming.

It's not surprising that climate change will lead to change in weather patterns in many parts of the world. Yes, the sun will still shine; it will just feel warmer in most places. And the rain will still fall, just not in the same way or in the same places that it used to.  (There's a lot of research on this, and I'm not up to hyperlinking it all right now.  The posts up at our climate page are full of links.) 

Nobody is really sure what all this will look like, but it seems clear that rain fed farms will be the hardest hit.  If you don't have access to irrigation, you are stuck when it doesn't rain or when it floods; it's not easy to pack up your farm and move it to a wetter--or dryer--location.  This will likely be a huge and growing problem in decades to come: nearly 80 million hectares out of India's net sown area of around 143 million hectares rely on rain water, as they have no access irrigation.  And there is clear evidence that the water table throughout north India is falling, so even irrigated farms are in danger.

Of course, water is not just a problem in rural areas.  We in Delhi suffer our own water woes.  If you want to learn more about this issue, Toxic Link is holding a program on September 15 at IIC in Delhi that looks interesting.  It's called, "Traditional Water Systems of Delhi." You can read more about it over at the Delhi Greens site.  Here's something from Toxic Link's description of the event:

"A little water is a sea to an ant.” An eco system is made up of many small parts, which could be erroneously thought of as insignificant. Within the intersection of mega scale urban planning and the impacts of climate the almost lost traditional water systems of Delhi need to be revisited urgently.

Of course, a lot of people want to believe that climate change really isn't a problem.  I'd like to rant here, but will contain myself.  Instead, I'll send you to Bhagwad's Expressions.  He looks at the tendency of some people to believe they know more than scientists about climate change just because they've read a lot of stuff on the internet or seen a lot of YouTube videos. Actually, he says it much more clearly than that--you should read it and the discussion it's generated.

Finally, let's look at two videos. The first is sent to us by Bhagwad.  If you haven't seen Bill Maher talk about climate change, you should watch this. In it, he explains what theories of baby making teach us about climate change.  Sometimes, funny people can say serious things best.

And here's a totally different way of looking at climate: Red Card.  (Thanks Minal).

What Climate Refugees Look Like

Before the main post, two action alerts. First, Greenpeace is asking us to send a letter to Sonia Gandhi about the BRAI Bill; apparently, she's our best hope on this issue, at this moment. It's just like signing a petition; it won't take long, so why not do this today?

And this just in via the Indian Youth Climate Network:

The Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA), a new network of individuals and organizations across the country has announced that a “Kisan Swaraj Yatra” would set off from Sabarmati Ashram on October 2nd 2010, to remind all Indians of our hard-won independence and the insidious ways in which agri-business corporations, supported by the State are taking this independence and sovereignty away, especially with regard to our food and farming. This Yatra is a call for joining forces to save Indian farming and farmers mired in deep distress and to forge a sustainable path forward for Indian farming.

Please go here for more information. 

****

I don't watch TV much at all.  In fact our TV is not even currently hooked up to cable and reception is so bad on the ground floor of our block of flats that there's almost no point of turning it on. Don't get me wrong; I do watch an occasional film on DVD, and I get more "screen time" than I need through the computer.  I'm no purist. Still I do think that less TV means more reading and that's generally good.

But last weekend, I took an internet holiday and got out of the house.  Somehow I found myself sitting with a friend...watching TV. My friend is a rather serious fellow, so we ended up watching coverage of the flooding in Pakistan.  Of course I've read a lot about that flooding. I know the destruction is massive and Pakistan's infrastructure has been set back years, even decades.  I can even hyper link to an article that explains how many billions of dollars in damage has been done, how many thousands of miles of roads destroyed.

But in spite of an annoying team of American reporters, the TV footage I saw last weekend gave me insight I think I'd missed in the print coverage I'd seen.  There were thousands of people streaming out of villages and cities, fleeing the rising water; there were people fighting over drinking water and flour; terrified little children wandering, knee deep in water.

Here is the problem honest environmentalists have.  We know you can never say with certainty that this flood was a direct result of climate change. But we also know that most scientists believe that climate change is leading to an increase in certain kinds of extreme weather events--like severe flooding and cyclones.  And that means that in years to come, we are going to see more and more disasters like we've been seeing in Pakistan, Leh and China.  

So we're stuck: if we claim a connection, the climate deniers will question our credibility, even though many of them jump at the chance to cry "global cooling" every time it snows.  If we don't claim a connection, we lose a powerful opportunity to educate about the kind of future we are looking at if we allow climate change to go unchecked.

Politicians are trying to figure out how to talk about this issue.  Hillary Clinton recently spoke of "linkage" between the recent floods and climate change. I guess it's a start, but I'm sure we can do better than "linkage".  Scientists are also grappling with how to explain uncertain events clearly: many are looking at the connection between climate change an severe weather much more seriously than they did a decade ago, even.  My sense is that we need to get comfortable with the word "probably."  (Read this article if you want more on that.)

And then we must say clearly, and with a high level of confidence, that much of the recent flooding we've seen in Asia was probably a result of climate change, but it most certainly offers us a glimpse of what we expect to happen more and more often in the future if we don't do something soon.  And it's not a pretty picture.  

We must tell our friends and neighbors: Hey, if you are wondering what to worry about when it comes to climate change, the destruction wrought by extreme weather events and the resulting climate refugees is a good place to start.  After that, you can start considering the hunger caused when too many monsoons fail.  Or think about what suddenly happens when you reach the bottom of your bottle of Limca and then consider tube wells and falling water tables.  And if you really want a scary scenario, imagine the political destabilisation that tends to accompany these kinds of events.

That should be enough to worry about for now.

What Climate Refugees Look Like:

What They Carried Away (Time-CNN photo essay)

Pakistan Flood in Pictures (The New Statesman)

Photos from the Huffington Post

Loading the Dice: What Games of Chance Can Teach Us About Asian Floods and Russian Wildfires

My son has been interested in probability lately, so we've been tossing a lot of coins and dice.  You can learn a lot about how the world works from watching the way dice fall.  If you throw a pair of dice repeatedly, you will notice patterns: fewer 2's and 12's, for example; more 6's and 7's.  And it's not that difficult to see why this happens.  There are many ways you can come up with a 7 (1+6; 2+5; 3+4; 4+3; 5+2; 6+1); but there is only one way you can come up with 2 (1+1). 

But sometimes you do roll a pair of 1's.  A doctor once told a friend of mine that he shouldn't worry too, much, but according to a screening test, there was a 1 in 6 chance he'd be getting some very bad news shortly.   A week later, the doctor said there had been a mistake: the chances of bad news were only 1 in 36.  In the end, a more thorough battery of tests showed no problem whatsoever, but for a couple of weeks, my friend said he couldn't stop thinking about dice.

There has been a lot of extreme weather in the news lately. Flooding in India, Pakistan, and China has affected millions of people. Now we see a record heat wave and a severe drought in Russia leading to fires that bring to mind words like apocalyptic.  Of course, droughts and floods have always been a fact of life and the causes of any individual weather event are too complex to pin down completely. But we do know this: according to the best science we have, climate change will lead--is already leading--to an increase in extreme weather events. 

If you think I'm jumping to conclusions too hastily, consider that the UN estimates that over 150,000 people already die each year due to climate change--mostly because extreme weather events are rising.  Or go see what the good people at the Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology in Pune have to say about the flooding in Leh.  

We will have more floods, more droughts, more severe cyclones, etc.  Not every day.  Not everywhere, but most every year, and in more and more places.  Climate is not the same as weather.  But climate change will change the weather, just as surely as loading your dice will change the way they fall.

****

Update: After drafting this yesterday afternoon, I returned to find these two articles in The Hindu, both of which are worth reading:

Is Weather Chaos Linked to Warming? Probably.  (Here you will find more detailed analysis than I've gone into in this post. )

Russian nuclear centre still under threat  (Why climate change should keep you up at night worrying.)

We'll look at the power of rivers--and nature generally-- through a different lens entirely on Thursday: poetry.  Do check your feed!

The Power of Denial: Lessons from the CWG Corruption Scandal and the Climate Change Debate

Last week, Suresh Kalmadi, chair of the Commonwealth Games Organising Committee, tried to distract the country from the Commonwealth Games corruption scandal by playing the "anti-national" card. When that didn't work, he tried the next trick many politicians like to use when faced with bad news: denial.  Kalmadi repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, saying things like "We have nothing to hide...there is total transparency in OC and our conscience is clear" and "Every pie is accounted for." Claims like that sound a little like his now-famous promise that "the games won't cost the country a penny."

But even I was surprised to read that he based a large part of his defense on faked emails! Fake emails, my friends, is not a very smart strategy.  Simple, straightforward denial is almost always more effective, unless you are really desperate.  Is it any surprise that even his own party is no longer willing to defend him?

Kalmadi may be on the way out, but one has to admit the power of denial.  It doesn't usually solve problems, but it can be remarkably good at covering up the truth!  

If the press continues to do the job it has been doing, I am cautiously optimistic that the worst of the Commonwealth Games corruption will be addressed in time, though I suspect the really big fish will slip through the net as usual--in that way, politics does not resemble fishing!

In a strange way, the Commonwealth Games corruption scandal reminds me of the climate change debate, although there, I am not so optimistic. Let's look at the weather for a moment.  Things have been hot, not just in Delhi, but worldwide.  In fact, four of the first six months of 2010 were the hottest on record according to American scientists; this puts 2010 on track to be the warmest year since 1880. Along with that, Arctic sea ice is at record lows and new photos of Everest remind us that Himalayan ice is also rapidly disappearing.

One warm year is no proof of climate change--it's the long term trends that show that.  But climate deniers, like the ones who wrote the hack job that Open Magazine ran back in February, have never figured this out.  US economist Paul Krugman, writing in the New York Times, put it this way:

Of course, you can’t infer trends in global temperatures from one year’s experience. But ignoring that fact has long been one of the favorite tricks of climate-change deniers: they point to an unusually warm year in the past, and say “See, the planet has been cooling, not warming, since 1998!” Actually, 2005, not 1998, was the warmest year to date — but the point is that the record-breaking temperatures we’re currently experiencing have made a nonsense argument even more nonsensical; at this point it doesn’t work even on its own terms.

Unfortunately, the US senate didn't listen to Krugman, or any other rational voices for that matter, and it appears that serious action on climate change is dead in the US for the foreseeable future.  (And to think that officials were lecturing India and China on their need to do more during Copenhagen.) 

It's easy to get angry about all this, and I don't blame you if you do.  But it's probably better to do something.  If you are concerned about how the Commonwealth Games are taking money and resources from people who need it and transferring them to people who don't, go check out out ACORN International's Commonwealth Games Campaign.  If you are a student, why not work to fight the evictions at Delhi University?  And whoever you are, why not write a letter to the editor of your newspaper or your local government official?
 

If climate is your main concern now, the Indian Youth Climate Network has some good resources on their web page, and of course you can check out the sidebar of the Dhaba for more links.  For something quick and easy to do, you can sign this petition against BP that someone sent me this morning--but this is a long term issue that will require a lot more than on-line petitions!

*****

To read more about the CWG, go see our special CWG page.

To read more about Climate, go see our special Climate page.

World Environment Day 2010: Celebrate, Mourn...Organize!

If you are in or near Delhi, there are plenty of things you can to to celebrate World Environment Day, which is happening today itself.  The Times of India tells us how to "Go Green: Shop Eat Watch Gift".  Their list of weekend events is here. Or try this list of events from around India.

However, if you are like me, you might not feel like shopping or celebrating.  You may feel tempted to stay home and mourn instead.  After all, staying home would help you avoid inhaling (or contributing to) the unusually hight levels of air pollution that we are experiencing this year in Delhi. And there is plenty to mourn.  In spite of what “climate skeptics” would have us believe, the latest data from scientists at NASA suggests the world is continuing to warm at an alarming rate.  And it’s not just the heat wave in North India; the data points to other things that are hard to deny—like melting ice caps and warmer oceans.  Closer to home, scientists see a clear correlation between strengthening cyclones and warmer ocean water. (For more on how this works, see this article in The Hindu.)

Those who profess undying faith in the power of technology to save us from our follies might want to ignore how utterly helpless BP and the US government have been to plug just one underwater leak.  Problem is, that leak is getting harder to ignore, because it’s spreading oil over such a large and sensitive area.  Sensitive environmentally, sensitive economically and, most of all, sensitive politically.  To see just how large the spill is, take a look at this graphic. (Thanks Amruta). Or this interactive map from the NY Times.

But as bad as that looks, there’s another story that we aren’t getting.  You see, in the eyes of large corporations, powerful countries and the mainstream media, not all the wold’s regions are as …sensitive as the US coast.   Last week, the Guardian's John Vidal reminded us that in many less “important” places, such as the Niger delta, oil spills are a regular occurrence.  (In this article, he looks at the issue in more depth. You won't find an interactive map there, but it's worth reading.)

These spills are ignored, because they affect only poor countries and/or poor people.  Of course this is part of what makes oil as cheap as it is; if we enforced the same safety standards world wide that are enforced in the richer countries, oil prices would rise dramatically and alternative sources of energy would become more attractive.  A lot of people don’t want that to happen, for a lot of reasons.

Among all the bad news last week, I did see one heartening story.  Writing in the Economic Times, M.   Rajshekhar reports on a government health care initiative that seems to be making a real difference in Chhattisgarh, of all places.  It seems that the program, which depends on an army of 60,000 volunteer healthcare workers who also function as advocates and activists, has resulted in more responsive doctors and more functioning health centers.  Infant mortality in the state is down from 95 per 1000 in 2000 to 44 per 1000 in 2009. Rajshekhar reminds us that health care programs alone will not make people healthy; for that, you need to do things like reduce poverty and improve nutrition.  But this story does remind us that government can make a difference in the lives of people and that progress is not impossible, even in these difficult times.  It takes leadership and some honest officials, of course, but most of all it takes the involvement of everyday people. 

So maybe the message this World Environment Day should be something like this: whether you celebrate or mourn is up to you.  But whatever you do, don’t forget to organize. With as big a mess as the world is in these days, it's going to take a lot of us to clean it up!

More Water: The Story of Bottled Water and a Photo Essay from National Geographic

I was just beginning a really interesting post on the Commonwealth Games--how much it's costing, what it's good for, that kind of thing, when I came down with a stomach bug! Nothing serious, but Yuck--and it's left my mind incapable of much original thought.  But never fear, I've got a solution:  since Monday was World Water Day, let me show you two things about water that you'll want to see.

First, take a look at National Geographic's amazing photo essay on water.

Next, check out Annie Leonard's latest contribution to the Story of Stuff Project: The Story of Bottled Water.

Like The Story of Stuff and The Story of Cap and Trade, The Story of Bottled Water lays things out simply.  It is aimed at an American audience, and I'd like to see Leonard give India's plastic recycling industry a more thoughtful and sympathetic look than she does here, but if you're trying to produce something that runs just over 8 minutes, then I guess you have to make some hard calls.  All in all, it's worth watching.

Oh and speaking of water, I was recently reminded of the hack job that Open Magazine ran a couple months back.  They recycled press releases and sound bites from right wing American think tanks and well known climate skeptics and made a lot of outrageous claims.  I documented some of that here and some over on their site, here.  Anyway, one of the many bits of good news Open delivered was this: "Another total lie has been that the Sunderbans in Bangladesh are sinking on account of the rise in sea level."  The only problem is, that the sea level is rising--in fact, it just swallowed a small island in the Bay of Bengal. 

None of us want to think our children's future is in peril; climate deniers are selling a story we all want to believe in: don't worry, it will all be fine.   Even I want to believe that story--even I want to be able to say that to my children.  But the overwhelming amount of scientific evidence suggests we have a great deal to worry about--and that everything will not be fine, not for a very long time, even if we take strong action now.  And if we don't take strong action? Let's save that story for another day.

Horns and Helmets: Photos Prove We Need Legally Binding, Enforceable Climate Agreements

Don't forget to sign the on-line petitions against the BRAI Bill and the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill.  Find out more here.

The Hindu ran a front page exclusive a week or so back, headlined: India stops U.S. attempt to sneak “scrutiny” into climate talks.   It sounded pretty good.  Unfortunately, the truth was not so impressive. But it was instructive. Let me explain.    

The Copenhagen fiasco basically set up a system where countries may voluntarily make commitments to do whatever they feel they can do.  These commitments are non-binding, and the extent to which countries choose to honor them is not even open to international "scrutiny." They are, however, open to the more ambiguous-sounding "consultations and analysis." Recently, the US had tried to substitute the "s" word for the term "consultations and analysis".The US backed off when India's Environment Minister Ramesh shot off an email to American negotiator Todd Stern.  

Now let me be clear: I love to see Todd Stern back off!  We took him to task way back in December, on the day we correctly predicted the outcome of Copenhagan talks. Here's what we said then:

US spokesperson Todd Stern is always saying obnoxious things about the developing world, suggesting WE are not doing enough.  For example, he says we won't get a "pass" this time, that "you've just got to do the math"...Americans like to "get tough" on abstract nouns.  They are always getting  tough on things like crime, "terror", immigration and drugs.   Stern's talk is part of his effort to prove America is ready to get tough on China and India...  

But the real problem here is that this is all an act.  The Americans want to look like they are getting tough on us.  We want to look like we are getting tough on them.  But nobody is likely to do very much because nobody has to!


That's why I'm going to say something that a lot of people won't like: at the end of the day, if we want to get anything done, we'll all need to accept words even stronger than "scrutiny"-- words like "legally binding" and "enforceable."  Of course, when it comes to carbon pollution, the US will have to cut much, much more, because they use much, much more--and they should pay for the share of historic pollution they've created. But at the very least, India will have to agree to reasonable cuts in emissions intensity  (explained here). 


Here is my simple, two-part part argument for why only legally binding, enforceable agreemets will work if we want to cut pollution.  You can sum it up with two words: horns and helmets.


Exhibit A: Horns 
In Delhi, some people love horns, some people hate them.  But we all hear a lot of them!  So an clever NGO has put together a great campaign of signs with slogans like these:  "Shut Up Honking...Even dogs don't bark without a reason...Horn blowing is a sickness..." These signs are smart and funny and kids like them.  There's only one problem.  They don't seem to stop anyone from blowing their horn! Conclusion: clever things that are not legally binding are not likely to work--at least not very quickly.

 

Exhibit B: Helmets

In Delhi, a very high percentage of motor cycle drivers wear helmets.  I would like to tell you they wear them because they believe in the safety benefits of the helmets.  But in most cases, this is not true.  How do I know? Well, because I've talk to a lot of people.  They say they wear a helmet to avoid being fined.  As additional proof, I submit to you these photos which demonstrate that people who are not required to wear helmets, such as women and children riding as passengers, typically do not wear them!  Now if the fathers and husbands riding these bikes believed in the life-saving properties of helmets, many of them would undoubtedly convince their wives and children to wear them.  But they don't. Conclusion: people are more likely to change their behavior when they are required to by legally binding, enforceable laws.

 

Summing up: legally binding, enforceable laws work, my friends!  Cool signs do not!

Hack Job at Open Magazine

On Saturday, I coincidentally saw two important pieces on the recent criticism being leveled at climate science. One was Open Magazine's current cover story; the other was a statement on the Himalayan glacier controversy from the citizen activists at Delhi Platform.  These seemed important to look at sooner, rather than later, so I'm running this issue of the dhaba on Monday instead of our usual Tuesday.   I'll examine each piece in turn.

This week, Open Magazine's cover story is boldly titled, "The Climate Change Fraud."  The article, which pretends to be an investigative expose of science gone wrong, claims climate change is a "hoax" and a "fraud" and that "never have so few fooled so many for so long, ever."  If you are wondering how it is that little old Open managed to beat every mainstream paper and reputable science journal in the world to this story, I'll explain it to you: Open's scoop does not actually involve journalism; it is a sloppy rehash of arguments from climate skeptics' web sites, press releases and films.  Open's reporter, Ninad Sheth, makes no effort get a variety of perspectives; the quotes he provides come exclusively from a small group of well-known climate change deniers and skeptics, most of whom give quotes for a living.

Compare Open's incompetence with Tehelka this week.  When Tehelka wanted to do a story about the fighting in Chhattisgarh, they did what good magazines are supposed to do: they sent a reporter and a photographer into the field where they spent seven days, at considerable risk to themselves, in territory where both the Maoists and the Salwa Judum are active. They interviewed a wide variety of villagers about the problems they face living in a war zone.   Also this week, in their cover story on Bihar, Tehelka managed to interview both Nitish Kumar and Lalu Prasad.  Tehelka is not perfect; I've been critical of them before.  But unlike Open, Tehelka generally expects their journalists to practice... journalism.

I'd love to spend all day going through the Open story and picking out the ridiculous bits.  But I'm going to resist.  Instead, I'll say just a few words about Open's "expert" sources--something their reporter chose not to do.   Open slams Dr. Rajendra K Pachauri, "the leader of the climate change mafia" for "having no training whatsoever in climate science." But they won't tell you that Lord Christopher Monckton, the "climate expert" who they rely on to criticize climate graphs used by Pachauri,  doesn't have any formal training in climate science either. Lord Monckton of Brenchley boasts a degree in classics and a diploma in journalism, which may explain the difficulty he's had interpreting graphs in the past.  For the record, Lord Monckton  is employed as Chief Policy Adviser for the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI), an American climate skeptics' think tank.  SPPI does not reveal the sources of it's funding, and it is not required to do so by US law.  We do know that SPPI founder Robert Ferguson has had a long term and lucrative relationship with the oil industry.

Or take Patrick Michaels who works, according to Open, for "the Cato Institute, a noted US think-tank." Just to be clear, the Cato Institute may be "noted," for it's eclectic blend of right wing and libertarian views, but a quick internet search will tell you it is neither mainstream nor neutral, endorsing as it does legalization of drugs and the privatization of the American Social Security system.  Michaels by the way, admits to have taken large amounts of money from big oil companies, a practice that many consider a conflict of interests.  So when Open quotes Michaels as saying that Dr. Pachauri should resign, because, among other things, "he has a consistent record of mixing his political views with climate science," it sounds a bit off.  After all, mixing politics with science is what Michaels gets paid to do; his own organization boasts that he "barely has time to sleep. With more than 150 media appearances since the breaking of what has come to be called "Climategate," he has quickly become the most recognized face decrying the obstructionism of global warming alarmists." 

So let's be clear; Open didn't break this story; they just uncritically bought an old package being sold by right-wing American think tanks with close ties to the oil industry.   If the editors at Open really believed this story were true,  they would have had to fact check it and evaluate opposing views; a story of this magnitude would require as much. That they didn't suggests this was  nothing more than a cynical effort to sell magazines. Shame!

 *******

By now it is clear that serious mistakes--and in some cases even misrepresentations--have been made by climate scientists, both in India and abroad.  Some of these are reprehensible; some merely regrettable.  My sense is that the reaction of most environmentalists has been healthy.  There is no use pretending that this kind of stuff doesn't hurt.   Climate scientists need to get their house in order; we cannot tolerate sloppy or dishonest science on this issue--it's much too important for that, the stakes a too high. But so far there has been nothing revealed, in hacked emails or anywhere else, that in any way undermines the lion's share of the research that supports the idea that human made climate change is a huge and growing problem.  To prove that, you'd need to find a hacked email that reads something like this.

For a more thoughtful look at this issue as it's playing out locally, let's look at a statement from Delhi Platform, an organization is made up of citizen activists who think climate change is a problem, but don't apologize for sloppy science.  These activists are not formally trained scientists, they are not reporters, they don't get paid for the work they do or the magazines they sell.  However, the members I have met are extraordinarily dedicated, well-read, and articulate.   Here's what they have to say about the Himalayan Glacier controversy; feel free to pass this statement on others who might be interested.  I think it is thoughtful, serious, and grounded in real science. I urge you to read it carefully.  You can get in touch with Delhi Platform here.

DELHI PLATFORM

Statement on the Himalayan Glaciers controversy

29 January 2010

                                    

A huge controversy has been generated in recent days over the much quoted lines in the IPCC’s 2007 report: “Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any 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” (Working Group 2, page 493). We do need to question how a statement of such magnitude, without peer review, made its way into the IPCC report. That it was discovered, externally, more than two years later raises concerns about both the mindset and the weakness of the processes of the IPCC in checking and correcting information they collate, information that is so vital in the global debate. However, to question the credibility of the science of the global warming, supported as it is by a wealth of empirical evidence, or to question IPCC’s work, as is happening in some quarters, is gross exaggeration and sometimes driven by dubious and malafide intentions.

More importantly, the ongoing debate ignores four key issues:

one, that glacial melting, happening extensively in many regions and altitudes of the Himalayas, is already impacting people’s lives in the Indian Himalayan states;

two, science ignores people’s own perceptions of their reality and their context;

three, the critics have not properly placed the issue in the overall context and fragility of glaciers globally; and

four, that the situation is going to unavoidably worsen, hence deepening an unfolding crisis of access to water.

Since the Earth’s average warming gets amplified into much higher levels of warming in the mid-level Himalayas and at higher altitudes, the impacts there are already huge and varied. At a public hearing on ‘Impacts of Climate Change on the Himalayan Region’, organized by Oxfam India in late 2009, people from different Himalayan communities presented testimonies of extensive melting, receding and disappearance of small glaciers in parts of Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand based on their lived experience over the years. One professional guide who has traversed high altitudes for many years talked of the disappearance of numerous small glaciers over the last 20 years in J&K. Small glaciers, said another speaker, have disappeared from the Sarva Valley. Sigri and Chhotadhara glacier, both in Himachal, are receding rapidly. The Dhani Nara glacier, also in Himachal Pradesh, does not exist any more. Numerous presenters talked of lessening and irregular snowfall in recent years. This has obvious impacts on glacial mass and melting in the medium term. Women spoke of how water sources have dried up, already causing distress in their daily lives, impacting drinking water access and water supply for agriculture.

People’s observations of their lived reality over time and of the impacts of global warming on their lives need to be given greater space and credence than is being done at the moment by formal science. This is particularly relevant in the area of glacial melting in the Himalayas given that many authorities, including the minister for environment and forests Jairam Ramesh, have acknowledged that Himalayan glaciers have been little studied. Why has the Himalayan glaciers issue received such inadequate attention until now? Of the thousands of glaciers in the Indian Himalayas, reliable baseline data exists for relatively few. In the absence of baseline data, it would be crucial to tap the lived experience of people who have lived in the vicinity of glaciers for decades.

Focusing on the erroneous date 2035 alone glosses over the already precarious state of glaciers worldwide, including in many parts of the Himalayas. A study by the World Glacier Monitoring Service in 2005 of 442 glaciers stated that 90% of them were receding. The much respected glaciologist Lonnie Thompson has said recently that of the 800 Himalayan glaciers being monitored, 95% are receding (Guardian, 20 January 2010). That tropical glaciers are receding worldwide are indicative of the fate of subtropical Himalayan glaciers. Ren, Jiawen, et al state: “Many glaciers on the South slope of the central Himalaya have been in retreat, and recently their retreat rate has accelerated … due to reduced precipitation and warmer temperatures” (Annals of Glaciology, vol. 43, no. 1, Sept 2006). Anil Kulkarni, et al’s oft-quoted study of 466 glaciers in the Baspa, Parbati and Chenab basins indicates greater fragmentation of glaciers, and reduction in glacial area by 21% since the mid-20^th century (Current Science, vol. 92, no. 1, 10 Jan 2007). A study of mass balance of glaciers, of “all published Himalayan-Karakoram measurements” shows that overall “they are more negative after 1995”. Though increase in mass loss rate “need not be true of every part of the region … the mass loss rate is consistent with the global average (Jeffrey Kargel, et al, ‘Satellite-era Glacier Changes in High Asia’, AGU conference, December 2009). Dobhal and Mehta’s study of the Dokriani glacier in the Bhagirathi basin says that “The present snout … is continuously retreating, like other glaciers of the Himalaya” (Himalayan Geology, n.d.).

Glaciers have also been thinning at high altitudes. Lonnie Thompson, in an interview to Nature said: “Back in 2006, we drilled three cores in the southwestern Himalayas. At 6,050 metres, where these glaciers reach their highest elevation, we found that … the glaciers are being decapitated. Not only are they retreating up the mountain slopes, but they are thinning from the top down” (Nature Reports Climate Change, 9 July 2009).

This precarious state of glaciers is going to unavoidably worsen because of further global warming in the pipeline, since there is a 25-30 year lag between emissions and warming. As it is, the drying of water sources is being exacerbated by indiscriminate damming of rivers and creation of run-of-the-river projects in the Himalayan states, in the face of considerable resistance from people across these states. All of this is going to worsen the water crisis unfolding for the poor, particularly poor women, in the Himalayas. Any debate on the Himalayan glaciers needs to keep them at its centre.

Rather than view glaciers collectively, it would be more appropriate to view them in a disaggregated way, since impacts on specific glaciers affect specific communities and people dependent on them. Not only is there a compelling need to carry out a comprehensive study of Himalayan glaciers in cooperation with other nations who are part of this rich ecosystem, the process also needs to have the people as a vital and engaged constituent. And the resultant information needs to be in the public domain.

Melting glaciers and the more irregular rainfall patterns in recent years makes the creation of appropriate small and large water harvesting structures absolutely urgent. In which both the government and local organizations have a crucial role to play. The National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) can be usefully deployed towards this end, but this requires greater political will by local elites and the administration at different levels than they have displayed thus far. There is clearly an urgent need to anticipate and prepare for acute water stress in the Himalayan region and beyond.

Dearest Asha: Will Horter of the Dogwood Inititative Shares a Letter to his Daughter

On Children's Day, we asked readers to write a letter to a child explaining what they are doing to stop climate change.  Today we are running Will Horter's letter to his daughter, Asha.  Will is the Executive Director of The Dogwood Initiaitive, an environmental NGO based in Canada.

It is an honour to publish this. If you have a letter you'd like to share, it's not too late to send it in!


Dearest Asha;

Today is your birthday. I decided to sit down and write to you because by the time you can read, and understand, this you will probably be demanding an explanation for why things are as they are, and what steps I took to protect your future.

There is no easy answer.

It has been two years since you joined this world—a lifetime in a blink of the eye.  Since your premature entry into my life, the universe has expanded. I thank you for the gifts you bring. Your joie de vivre has stimulated me. Joy has once again become a daily visitor, and your laughter invigorates my soul.

Your entry into my life, (your simple existence) has changed the way I think about both the present, and the future. In the present, you continue to remind me of what is important in life—those instants of connection where people come together and share of themselves. I look forward to those magical moments – which seem to occur more frequently when I am around you – when the world seems to disappear and you Claudia and I become the center of the universe surrounded by a powerful force field. I feel more human, more connected to something both primal, and divine. I feel better connected to the essence of both my and other’s humanity, which makes me a better person, a better parent and a better activist. Somehow being around you helps me ratchet down my excess intensity, which is the manifestation of most of my demons. Thank you.

My outlook on the future has also been transformed. Suddenly, global warming is no longer just an issue of concern. It seems like a matter of life and death. The choices humanity make today take on an urgency I haven’t felt before. And to be frank, I’m struggling to figure out how to best channel this urgency.

To be honest with you; I never thought I would be a father. It’s not that I don’t like children. I like kids (albeit until you came along I was nervous around infants). Rather, I think I was being cowardly.  I was afraid I didn’t have the patience, the wisdom, perhaps the love in me, to help shepard a child towards the life I aspire for you (and all the other children of the world). I’m still not convinced I have what it takes - only time will tell - but I’m working hard at it.  When you look back at our relationship some day after I am gone, I hope you evaluate me on my success as well as the consistency of my effort.

The second reason I thought I wouldn’t become a father was political. I wasn’t sure that bringing a baby into our increasingly unjust, inequitable and unsustainable world was the responsible thing to do.

My ambivalence about parenthood was related to what I saw as my role in the world. I am an activist. It is more than my profession. It has been my raison d'etre since I woke up 25 years ago in a hospital in Amsterdam with the doctors telling me I had a brain tumor and might not live. When I awoke I had amnesia, was disoriented, and in pain, but I remember clearly seeing a headline in the International Herald Tribune that said hundreds of thousands of black people were going to be forcibly “relocated” in South Africa. I remember pledging to myself that if I ever got out of that hospital bed I would do my best to ensure things like this didn’t happen. If I survived, I would become formidable.

Since then I have tried to live up to this pledge. I have worked on a number of “issues” over the years (anti-Apartheid, human-rights, equality, justice, aboriginal and environmental issues).  Yet as I look back I realize that since awaking in Amsterdam these seemingly unrelated strands of my life have had a common goal; I have been trying to summon up my life force to help people understand, and collectively act on, their own inherent power; To help people believe in their being that a better world is possible, and that they have what it takes to fight for it.

But is it enough? Is this my own quixotic windmill?  Now that global warming has made the choices we make today more urgent, do I have the courage to take the kinds of action I believe necessary?

I don’t know.

Until I was a father I thought that all one could do was try one’s best. But now when I see your face, when I watch you laugh, when I glimpse you exploring your expanding world with a curiosity and a joy that both inspires and terrifies me, I wonder if merely trying is sufficient.

Merely trying hard, doesn’t force me to confront my demons, my fears, my personality quirks that so often prevent my success both as activist and a parent. For me, merely trying harder too frequently means ratcheting up my intensity, spinning faster on the hamster wheel. I realize now this seldom works.

A friend of mine once told me that effective activists instinctually know when to ratchet up the energy, and when to withdraw or calm the energy in situations. Until you came along I frequently was not as good at the latter. I’m still not great, but I’m getting better at recognizing when excess intensity is counterproductive.

This challenge of moving past “trying harder” (ratcheting up the energy) suddenly seems like an imperative. The more I read about what the leading scientists predict about global warming—the more I contemplate my responsibilities as a parent—working harder, trying harder, doesn’t seem adequate.

I feel like we are entering one of those eras when epochal shifts are needed or calamity is likely. My friend Matt Price recently compared the situation to one of those movies where scientists predict Earth will be hit with a large meteorite. In the movies, governments’ mobilize immediately and recruit someone like Bruce Willis or Clint Eastwood for an urgent mission into space to blow up the meteorite. In the real world, despite equally dire scientific warnings about the future of life on earth, our politicians are doing virtually nothing. They talk a lot, but don’t walk the walk.

I fear the world you will inherit if we don’t stop polluting the atmosphere with heat-trapping gases. It is not the environmental consequences—the loss of polar bears and tropical forests, the drought and rising seawater—that terrify me; it is the economic and social dislocation that will result that fuel my nightmares.  The “haves” already impose their will on the “have nots” and I see the brutality, injustice and persecution increasing as global warming forces us to wake up from the delusion of abundance and accept forced scarcity.

It will not be a fair fight. And it is the human toll of this disparity that terrifies me. Surprisingly, the North American elites haven’t figured out that there is no way to isolate and protect their loved ones if the worst of climate forecast become a reality. If the carrying capacity of the world is shrunk to 1 billion – which the scientists predict will happen if we keep on our current fossil fuel dependant path – what can I do to guarantee that you are one of the advantaged amongst the 1 billion?  I see no such guaranteed paths forward in that dystopian nightmare. The only viable option I see is to avoid it.

I can’t help but remember what Winston Churchill—one of your grandfather Ivor’s heroes—said during World War II: “It's not enough that we do our best; sometimes we have to do what's required.”

Do I have the courage to accept Sir Winston’s challenge?

Visions of your potential dystopian future haunt me. As your dad, and as an activist, I feel I need to step out of my comfort zone, to do something drastic. But what?

The answer isn’t obvious.

Besides dramatically cutting our family’s emissions by avoiding jet planes, walking or biking, eating local and maximizing the energy efficiency of our house, the only route to a safe de-carbonized future is MASSIVE state intervention—similar to efforts in North America during World War II. But instead of focusing the power of our governments, North American leaders keep arguing about the expense of the climate equivalent of sending Bruce or Clint on a life saving mission. They say they are worried about jobs, but our current politicians really are mostly concerned about the elites that control the wealth generated by status quo. If this doesn’t change quickly, everyone, including the elites, will suffer, but it is the poor and disadvantage, especially in places like India, Bangladesh and Africa, that will suffer most and first. The forces of business-as-usual are formidable, inertia is powerful, but as they say, there are no jobs on a dead planet.

Given the failure of current leadership, the only path forward that makes sense to me is a people’s movement unlike anything the world has ever seen.

But how do we make this happen?

As an activist I have been working these last few years to stop my governments from allowing massive new fossil fuel infrastructure to be built: coal, pipelines, coalbed methane. Working with local people, and aboriginal groups, we have won most battles, but the business-as-usual machine funded by big oil and coal continue to win the war. Their tactics: impede, distort, delay and manipulate aggressive discussions about emissions reductions in the name of the almighty dollar (this, of course, can only happen with the help of their sycophant supporters in the various governments of the world).

The tar sands here in Canada are the poster child of this perversion. Imagine, the world’s largest industrial project focused on transforming a massive deposit of an asphalt-like substance into oil so the United States and China can maintain their addiction to oil. By burning almost as much energy as is produces, not to mention destroying hundreds of thousands of kilometres of boreal forests, and producing the world’s largest dams of toxic tailings, it is insanity personified.

Although my goal of keeping tar sands-related oil tankers off the British Columbian coast, and shutting down the expansion of unconventional oil and gas, are worthwhile, they somehow seem insufficient.  Given the fossil fuel addiction of Canadian and provincial governments, massive state intervention seems unlikely.

So how does one jump start a people’s movement unlike anything the world has ever seen? How do we quickly ignite Gandhi’s salt march, King’s sit-ins, the South Africa’s general strikes, Poland’s Solidarity movement, and the uprising that led to the fall of the Berlin Wall, all at once, on a global scale?

I don’t know. And I often lay awake at night pondering how.

But I have figured out a few things. There is no one-size-fits-all solution, and I doubt any one person (even a real life Clint or Bruce hero) will save us. Instead, I believe it is going to take literally millions of courageous individual actions to forestall the impending disaster.

Personally, my gut tells me there will be no way to get to the Promised Land without stepping far out of my comfort zone. That is scary… especially because there is no road map.

And pushing the envelopes that need shoving, will inevitably produce pushback.

How do I balance my role as a parent now with the risks of pushback?

I can’t be a very good father to you if I’m in jail. Is it time to step beyond the tactics I am comfortable with? I don’t know. But when you ask the inevitable question, I want you to know I thought about it.

When I get scared, frustrated, or tired by the enormity of the challenge we face I return for inspiration to a few words of wisdom author and thinker Paul Hawken shared in his commencement address at the University of Portland last spring. The challenge he offered those young people venturing into the world struck a chord with me:

You are going to have to figure out what it means to be a human being on earth at a time when every living system is declining, and the rate of decline is accelerating. Kind of a mind-boggling situation…Basically, civilization needs a new operating system, you are the programmers, and we need it within a few decades.

This planet came with a set of instructions, but we seem to have misplaced them. Important rules like don’t poison the water, soil, or air, don’t let the earth get overcrowded, and don’t touch the thermostat have been broken.

There is invisible writing on the back of the diploma you will receive, and in case you didn’t bring lemon juice to decode it, I can tell you what it says: You are Brilliant, and the Earth is Hiring. The earth couldn’t afford to send recruiters or limos to your school. It sent you rain, sunsets, ripe cherries, night blooming jasmine, and that unbelievably cute person you are dating. Take the hint.

And here’s the deal: Forget that this task of planet-saving is not possible in the time required. Don’t be put off by people who know what is not possible. Do what needs to be done, and check to see if it was impossible only after you are done.

As a father, and an activist, I’m trying to figure out my personal instructions for deciphering the invisible ink—what is my role in the coming action thriller?

I don’t’ feel brilliant, but I try to keep focused on what needs to be done, even if it seems impossible. You are proof that impossible things happen. How a baby born 14 weeks prematurely at just over 1 lb, overcame brain hemorrhages, heart murmurs, 4 months in intensive care tethered to more tubes then seems possible can blossom into the beautiful, inquisitive girl you have become confirms that the odds don’t matter and the impossible can happen.

My generation’s conspicuous consumption, our attention deficit-like death wish, and our failure to meaningful take action to avert climate change may be incomprehensible to you when you grow up.  They are to me as well.

I wrote this to try to explain to you why I made the choices I did. Some will be good, some bad. Let’s hope there are more of the former. When you evaluate my performance do not forgive me for merely trying hard, determine if I acted with courage, whether I did all I could do to step out of my comfort zone to strive for success.

As a father, as an activist, as a human being, anything less would be cowardly.