The projection by all account is extremely grim. That six South Asian nations -- Bangladesh, India, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Nepal -- would suffer the most on account of the climate change was known but not in economic terms. Now the Asian Development Bank (ADB) concludes on the basis of a study it conducted under the title, "Assessing the costs of climate change and adaptation in South Asia" that the region's average economic loss is likely to be around 1.8 per cent of their collective annual gross domestic product (GDP) by the year 2050 and 8.8 per cent by 2100. Bangladesh's share will be higher than the average: 2.0 per cent by 2050 and 9.0 per cent by 2100. The study has not covered Pakistan which is not expected to suffer any less. Pakistan included, it is the heaviest concentration of people on this planet with about one-quarter of the world population living there.
What is so frustrating is that the South Asian region is at the receiving end of this man-made phenomenon called global warming not so much for its inhabitants' own actions but for actions of others mostly living in the developed world. This is to say that the people of this region cannot do enough to arrest the sharp temperature rise even if they wished it as intently as they could. Had the world gone by the recommendations of the Cancun and Copenhagen climate summits held in 2009 and 2010, which favoured cuts on fossil fuel use in order to keep the global mean temperature rise to 2 degree Celsius or below, South Asia would not lose more than 1.3 per cent of GDP by 2050 and 2.5 per cent by the end of the century.
There is no sign that the rich nations in particular have heeded to the call and limit their fossil fuel use at the recommended level. Instead, they have complained that emerging economies like India and the economic powerhouse China are becoming major environment polluters and they should as well cut their carbon dioxide emissions. Such wrangles will hardly help the cause. If fossil fuel is burnt at the current rate, the temperature is projected to rise from 0.9 to 1.9 degree Celsius by 2030, from 1.6 to 2.5 degree Celsius by 2050 and from 2.9 to 4.2 degree Celsius by 2080. What a frightening scenario!
The case of Bangladesh, the Maldives and Sri Lanka will be particularly precarious. Extreme weather will cause widespread damage to forests, wetlands and particularly the world's largest mangrove, the Sunderbans. Both the island nations and Bangladesh will lose large areas to sea and the later will have to cope with intrusion of saline water into a wide area of cultivable land in the most likely scenario of a one-metre rise in sea level. Relocation of population will be necessary. In land-starved countries like these, the full assessment of the socio-economic impacts cannot be made in just economic terms.
Now the problem with studies like the one done by the ADB is that the losses, measured in economic terms, do not quite tell the story of a process called the demise of civilisations. Once disappeared, species will never be back again. Communities will be forced to change livelihoods simply because the known world will be lost to them for ever, hastening their own disappearance. So it is important to highlight the environmental consideration first rather than the amount of money to be spent in an effort to adapt to the changing climate. Both rich and poor nations are required to agree to reduce carbon emission on a priority basis.
This they can do by promoting clean energy, the production of which is costly now. But given the enormous amount of money spent on the experiment with highly sophisticated armament and its production, the expectation that even a small proportion of that amount diverted to find cleaner energy would be able to make the miracle happen is not misplaced. The fact is the world leaders are not as concerned with preserving the planet's environment as they are with raising their defence and striking capabilities.
After all the rich nations are not going to be the immediate losers. The cost of climate change and air pollution together is estimated to rise to 3.2 per cent of the global GDP by 2030 where the least developed nations will suffer losses up to 11 per cent of their GDP. If the world's temperature rises abnormally, this apparent security may vanish at some point. Already the planet has experienced some queer weather patterns with some of the countries in Europe and America encountering floods and twisters either unusual there or with increasing intensity.
So at issue is not allowing the global temperature to rise on account of release of increasing greenhouse gas and finding newer mechanism for human adaptability but to find a solution to the energy crisis. If technologies are devised for harnessing clean energy, temperature rise can be kept within manageable limit. If rice production in Bangladesh, India, Bhutan and Sri Lanka drop by 23 per cent by 2080, when there will be more mouths to feed, food security will be seriously jeopardised. Adapting to the negative impacts of climate change for people here will not remain limited to investment of money alone in the years to come. Saline-tolerant paddy, crop and aquaculture diversification and many other ways and methods have been suggested for encountering the impact. They may prove too little too late.
Such prescriptions will one day become ineffective if the temperature rises to an intolerable level. It is therefore wise to limit or even reduce the use of fossil fuel at a level where the Earth has a chance to get cooler in order to be more hospitable than now. Environmental scientists, experts and activists should launch a movement in order to impress upon the world leaders of the need to keeping the planet cool for survival of the human race on it.
nilratanhalder2000@yahoo.com
Climate change unfolds a nightmarish scene
Nilratan Halder | Published: August 22, 2014 00:00:00 | Updated: November 30, 2024 06:01:00
Share if you like