Trees Grow Faster

At least one has.
On a lark, I made some predictions on 30 Dec 2008 for 31 Dec 2009. Here is one of those:

Besides, scientists have discovered that the trees - with all the excess carbon-dioxide in the atmosphere - have actually grown taller and bigger. As a result, the excess CO2 has been neutralised by the oxygen produced by these trees. Man must therefore take care not to destroy trees. Governments all over the world have hailed this discovery and have promised to dedicate at least 30% of their country's land to maintain forests.

And guess what? Forests Are Growing Faster, Ecologists Discover; Climate Change Appears to Be Driving Accelerated Growth

Am I thrilled or am I thrilled!!!

Ok so I got lucky.
Read the rest of my predictions here and tell me what you think of these. No they did not come true, but it is fun reading anyway.

Newspapers are the Jokers in the Global Warming Debate

"Global Warming is Not a Myth: Temperature in the City [Bangalore] has changed by 2 degrees."

This is a headline in Times of India.
Unfortunately, this is exactly the kind of moronic headlines that detracts people from understanding what Global Warming is all about.
And moronic is an understatement.

The news is about a workshop on Climate Change and Sustainable Development organised in Bangalore by The Energy and Research Institute (TERI). To be fair to the workshop, the increase of the 2 degree rise in temperature is attributed to changes in land usage and poor city planning ("The cut-and-paste model used by architects who duplicate European style is an additional factor. Buildings in tropical countries like India don't need to absorb heat ...").

But screaming your lung out (half an inch high, bold headlines is screaming) that Global Warming is not a myth because the temperature of a poorly planned city that has cut trees and placed concrete slabs all over is just bad science and irresponsible press.

Local warming may or may not contribute to Global Warming. It is very important to distinguish between the two phenomenon. Here's a short, good article on the subject: Are Urban Heat Islands Linked to Global Warming?. To reiterate the article's main point: "An urban heat island is a metropolitan area that is significantly warmer than its surrounding rural areas. Unlike global warming, which entails a worldwide rise in temperatures, heat islands occur at the local level."

Global Warming is a serious issue being discussed on various fora. There seems to be consensus but no one knows for sure. The dissenters seem to make sense too. As it is it is difficult to determine who is correct, who is not. In midst of all this, irresponsible newspaper reporting is the last thing the debate needs.

Global Warming: A Story of Hard(ly) Scientific Data and Gimmicks

Shortly after Maladives holding underwater cabinet meeting (see here), we have Nepal holding cabinet meeting on the slopes of the Everest (see here).

Perhaps they are not aware of the very basis of IPCC's dooms day warning lies in shambles (see here)

We do not need gimmicks ... we need quick action based on hard scientific data.

Hard scientific data? Are you joking? Read this here.

Don't buy that jeans! Save Water!

Oh! You love that jeans.
It has the cut that you think will be a perfect fit.
So what you have two already?
This one is just perfect.

Stop!
Consider this: the amount of water it takes to produce a pair of denim jeans is about 11 cubic meters. This is equal to the capacity of a standard-size tank truck.
That much!

It is easy to lose sight of the fact that freshwater that is so essential for our living is in limited supply. Not sure where I read this: The third world war will be fought over water. Increasing demand for more water for drinking, hygiene, sanitation, food production, and industry, tends to support this.

While there are many low-tech approaches that can help prevent scarcity - the governments need to be wise enough to plan for and implement them, though - we need to do our bit. As with Global Warming, preventing Fresh Water Crisis demands, first and foremost, change in life style.

Like carbon footprint, there is something called water footprint. A person's water footprint is the volume of freshwater the individual uses directly and in production of the goods and services he or she consumes.

Find your water foot print at: www.waterfootprint.org

Do you still want to buy that new pair of jeans?

PS: I have taken the above information from an old issue (August 2008) of Scientific American India.

Make your voice heard - Seal the Deal

In another 100 days (7th December 2009) environment ministers from all over the world will meet in Copenhangen to discuss environmental issues and thrash out a new climate treaty that will succeed the Kyoto Protocol.

Governments have been playing politics as the environment continues to deteriorate. Time you make your voice heard. UNited Nations has launched a worldwide campaign on climate change. It is called SEAL THE DEAL. Go to the Seal the Deal website and sign the petition for a fair climate agreement at the Copenhagen conference.

Even if you do not believe in Global Warming - for whatever reason - it is worth trying to create a greener and cleaner earth, isn't it?

Global Warming - Fact or Fiction

In a planet far, far away there lived a carbon-based species who evolved to such great heights that they developed silicon-based intelligence that could live. The silicon-based intelligence could assemble its own kind and thus procreate. The carbon-based living things also destroyed their own environment by not understanding that they were products of the environment and dependent on it. That planet is now inhabited by silicon-based intelligence (basically, robots). Once in a while they send their UFOs to visit us. When the UFOs go back and report about Global Warming, many robots shake their heads in disbelief: Are the carbon-based intelligence destined to repeat history? Will they always grow in intelligence but not in wisdom? Some are pleased: they anyways are looking out for other planets to inhabit - they are running short of space; let the earthling destroy themselves. We will secure the place without a fight. What fun!

You think this is fiction?
Prove it!

Global Warming and God

There could be up to four responses to the perceived threat of Global Warming.

(a) The threat is real and I want to do something about it. And make some feeble attempts at it.
(b) The threat is real but there is nothing I can do about it.
(c) The threat does not exist. Global Warming is hyped.
(d) So what?

You would go wrong if you pick up any of the above options.

Because if you are concerned and perceive the threat as real, you would already be ...

(i) Cycling to work
(ii) Harvesting rain water
(iii) Teaching your kids / rooms mates / family members why the taps need to be closed while brushing
(iv) Replaced all incandescent bulbs with CFL bulbs
(v) Experimenting with new ideas to reverse the trend

You would choose option (e)The threat is real and present. And I *am* acting to change the world.

In that aspect Global Warming is like God. If God does not exist, believing or not is not going to harm you. But if s/he exists, then you better believe. It logically flows that since we do not know, it is safe to believe.

Similarly, it is better to accept that Global Warming is taking place and act accordingly.

Mom! I Changed The World!

The saddest and yet the most telling comment describing the human impact on environment ...

As Nate Lewis remarked to me one day: "You remember when you were a kid, your mom would ask you what you wanted to do when you grew up and you would say, 'I want to change the world'? Well, guess what, Mom: We did."

This is from Hot, Flat, and Crowded by Thomas L. Friedman.

Of modeling and predictions

Model of a system is not the system. It is an approximation, by definition.

When one models a system, certain assumptions are made, some aspects of the system is taken as invariable or at times independent of each other.

How then is one to determine if the approximation, the model makes sense?

The success of a model depends on its ability to predict. Models can be twisted and turned to fit the existing data and therefore can explain the known or the past in the most brilliant way possible. But if the model cannot predict the unknown or the future, then it is of no use. Einstein's model of the universe is an approximation but makes sense because it could predict certain phenomena that was till then unknown or unexplained. The success of environmental models will lie in its predictability. Unfortunately, we will get to know of the models' success only when it is too late.

I recently read (see here) that reduction in pollution will actually result in increased global warming. How? Pollution causes scattering of light which enables more leaves even those that are not at the top to carry out the process of photosynthesis at increased efficiency. Reduction in pollution will reduce the scattering and hence low photosynthesis resulting in low carbon absorption. So either you die of pollution or due to global warming! Nice!

The book I am reading now, The Logic of Life, by Tim Harford, is also about modeling. The premises are simple but effective. Human beings are capable of reacting to any situation rationally as well as irrationally. The book models the human society as rational and explores various non-economic issues. From what I have read so far, the rational model seems to be explaining the past well. There is no prediction of the future. I am hoping desperately that the book will make predictions somewhere down the line. But I won't be disappointed if there are none. Why? Well, if economic (and financial) models were that good at predicting, we wouldn't be facing the worst global financial crisis of all times, now would we?

Picture courtesy: Tory Byrne

Global Warming Index

Global Warming is the new stock exchange index.

There is not a day when we read something on Global Warming in the newspapers. And like stock exchange index it keeps swinging from one end to another. Today's Times of India carries a news article, "Is global warming slowing down?" No that is not a typo. It is 'Global Warming' not 'Global Economy'. Heh! Heh! "Is Global Economy Slowing Down?" is not a news anymore.

Ok! Here's what it says:

A new study has determined that global warming may have hit a speed bump and could slow down for decades. Earth's climate continues to confound scientists. [Now they tell us!] Following a 30-year trend of warming, temperatures have flatlined since 2001 despite rising greenhouse gas concentrations, and a heat surplus that should have cranked up the planetary thermostat.

Watch tomorrow's newspaper for a diametrically opposite news. Want to invest money in Gloabl warming Index?

Just as a side note, the people of Bangalore would like some scientific opinion on local warming. It is not yet summer but it feels like peak summer right now. This year also saw very cold winter.

Picture courtesy: miamiamia

Problem And Solution

"It is getting hotter by the day. It is all that global warming."

"The traffic condition is worsening by the day. Why doesn't someone do anything about it?"

"Nothing works without paying bribe. These guys are all corrupt."

"Politicians are all corrupt."

"Why should I pay taxes. I do not see any of my money being used properly. It only lines someones pocket."

"Things are so expensive."

"The police does not do anything to the rich."

"The finance minister only taxes the working class. The rich only get richer. And they do not pay any taxes."

"The condition of roads is so bad."

I hear this all the time ...

My response: "Are you part of the problem or part of the solution? If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. You cannot be just an observer."

Picture Courtesy: Steve Woods

Present and Immediate Danger

It took me a long time to figure this out but I have got it in the end.
I think.

Ok! Here's a question for you: Assume you know someone obese and he has a 80% chance of getting an heart attack in the next 10 years; and he is offered a medical insurance. Which insurance should he take?

a) Insurance that covers all his heart related disease.
b) Insurance that covers diabetes.
c) Insurance that covers all diseases.

If you have answered (a), then you are like the rest of us. Absolutely logical. But like most of us, wrong.
You see, (c) is a super set of (a) and (b) - (c) automatically covers (a) and (b).

What do you think the insurance man agent is going to push for?
You are right. (a). He may not even mention (c). Nor will the insuree - is that the word - ask about it.
The chances are that the premium for (a) is higher because the demand for (a) is higher.

We, humans, are wired to take into account present and immediate threat. That has saved us as a race for the last few million years. 'Present and Immediate' means we can see these threats coming. But this can also makes us vulnerable to hype. We can be made to see things that would otherwise not be apparent to us.

We can 'see' Global Warming coming, can we not?

We can see factories bellowing thick, black smoke.
We can see white, harmful smoke from the cars.
Our eyes sting when we stop at traffic lights and vehicles are idling.
We feel warmer every summer.

The obvious conclusion as repeated ad nauseum by magazines and newspapers is that the green house gas will cause global warming. And we are concerned.

We should be. Or should we be?

What about the good old concern about pollution?

In all this hype(?) about Global Warming, I rarely read any more about the impact of air pollution on our health.
What about the polluted rivers?
They don't cause Global Warming (or perhaps they do - I am sure some causal relationship can be figured out if you try hard enough) so you don't get to hear about that any more.

Tell me frankly. When was the last time you read an article in newspaper or a magazine the number of deaths due to pollution? Think hard.

Hmmm... sometimes, it is good to react to the 'present and immediate'.
I am all for systemic analysis (more on that in my blog, shortly) and take into account "in the long run" but for that we need to be alive in the long run.

Now consider the impact of taking away the present and immediate threat (pollution) and replacing this with a bigger picture (Gloal Warming).
Because pollution is no longer in our mind, we click our disapproval at all those people (always the other people) causing Global Warming when we read the newspapers, but do nothing about it.
We continue to air our disapproval but do not think twice while driving down to the nearest departmental store.

What do you think will affect us more?
a) A daily headline in the newspaper screaming number of hospitalisation and deaths due to pollution
b) A daily headline in the newspaper telling us about the possibilities of Global Warming in 20 years.


If you have answered (a), then you are like the rest of us. Absolutely logical. And correct.

Note: The picture used belongs to "jaylopez" (see gallery)

Cycling, Education and Tender Coconut

Please do me a favour. Pass this post to some you know who needs education ...

While in Bangalore, if you happen to see a person with a laptop on his back and a maroon helmet, on a Trek3700 pedaling furiously on the Old Airport Road, please

• do not show off your driving skills by brushing past him - there is enough space on the road for all of us
• do not honk as you approach him - he is not deaf and definitely not suicidal
• do not stare at him - haven't you see cyclists with helmet before? Besides, it is impolite to stare
• do not drive on the wrong side of the road, even if it is early morning and the traffic police is not around - that causes accidents and just goes to show that you are a moron
• do not look out only for bigger vehicles while crossing the road - cycles have mass too and can travel at high speeds
• and definitely do not knock him down - that will be the end of this blog.

This rant is not aimed at anyone specific. Rather a sort of open letter to some characters I have the misfortune of encountering on Bangalore roads as I commute to office (unfortunately, the commuting is not as frequent as I wish to).

And to my regular readers and occasional visitors - the more decent human beings on this planet (any one reading my blog has to be one :-)) - please find out means of reducing your carbon footprint. I am not sure about the global warming bit, but am surely concerned about the impact of pollution on health.

Here are some ways ...

• Walk to your nearest grocery store: it will only take you a few extra minutes.
• If you have to use your vehicle, plan so that the path taken is optimum (the shortest path may not always be the fastest).
• Declare at least one day per month, if not one day every weekend, a car/motorbike-free day.
• Teach your children, if you have one or whenever you have one, to enjoy cycling. Buy them good, smart looking bikes.

And, of yes, patronize your local tender coconut seller. He is a life saver for us cyclists.

Note: The picture used here belongs to Svetlana Maksimovic. To see more of her photographs visit her gallery.

The picture of the tender coconut belongs to Manu M. Go to his gallery to see more pictures.