Climate of Change!

Hello to my favorite people! The title is not of my creation, as I have already nixed any thoughts about my creativity in an earlier post. It is plagiarized from the editorial by Paul Krugman in the New York Times today. The last few days have been an amazing experience in the Obama land, from the Climate Change and Green Energy perspective, i.e. my perspective:). The State of the Union address, and the ensuing budget brought forth by the government solidly stated that this administration believes in walking the talk. A welcome relief from the past regime, and in general of the class of politicians who mostly subscribe to all talk and no walk.

It feels great to be writing a blog during this historic week in US politics. For the uninitiated, the Obama administration has included setting up a cap and trade system in this year's budget proposal. This is such a HUGE moment in the climate change arena, such an admirable change from the last US regime that didn't even seem to recognize the concept, at the cost of irreparable harm. Anyway, as they say, good riddance!:) Not just that, the resources generated from selling the carbon credits will be channeled to further research and deployment of renewables. Did they say that double whammy was ever as good! I might say this at the cost sounding banal, but I am amazed at the amount of change I am about see in a lifetime:) Anyway, more on this later, time for the topic of today.

Again, I shall start with replying to the comment of my last post and then go onto discussing something new. And believe me, there shall be something new today:)

The one comment I got to my last post was related to ice caps in the Arctic have risen to a 17 year high and that defeats the argument of Climate Change. Its a very potent argument brought forward by a very special person, whom I have always looked upto. And this is another instance why. Thanks Anu for bringing forth this topic, for I somehow forgot to broach it. This is the distinction between the Climate and Weather. Weather is the seasonal variation of temperatures, pressure, wind speed, etc., a very temporal phenomena and I shall not even go in detail for I can hardly be aware of all the forces at work here. What we concerned about is Climate, and Climate Change. Its not the year after year temperature in a part of the world, but the environment's behavior, overall. I still doubt the data that ice levels in the Arctic were at 17 years high, but reports show that they were greater than the levels reported in 2007. However, if you compare the level of ice caps between 1979 and 2007, they have HALVED! I am not saying that the ice caps reduced each year, there could have been fluctuations in the annual level, but they have been monotonically decreasing, as a trend. Hence, the yearly levels of ice caps should be used as a point to negate the concept of climate change. As I said earlier, we have long moved beyond that phase, all its skeptics should be treated as pariahs now:) Like George W. Bush in US:)

Monotonically, aah, I love to use this word! I was introduced to this word in my high school maths, through a chapter on Functions and graphs, and have been hooked onto it ever since:) Whenever I am able to plug this word into any of my writing or conversations, the literary side of me gives a pat on the back to my mathematical side. What were the odds of my exposure to this word had I taken literature as a major:) Thanks Anu for giving me this opportunity, again!!:)

Now for the topic of the day. Since we started the post with with a political overtone, lets stick to it for the day! Consistency should be a hallmark of my blog, something that has never been of my life! So we shall discuss the policy side of Climate Change today. Precisely speaking, the development of the Kyoto Protocol and the post Kyoto scenario. Hopefully, I will be able to justice to this humongous topic.

Just to give you a little background to it, Kyoto Protocol has been modeled on the lines of the Montreal Protocol, which was signed by countries to arrest the depletion of the ozone layer. The Ozone layer protects us from the harmful ultraviolet radiations of the sun and it was getting severely depleted in the 1980s due to the emission of the CFCs into the atmosphere, the primarily refrigerants used at that time. It was a pointed problem and got a pointed policy response. The different countries ratified it without breaking a sweat, as it required a simple technological fix. The technical world had brought out a cheap and easy alternative to the CFCs and compliance was easy. The latest numbers for ozone layer confirms the fact that Montreal Protocol was a great success as countries are still sticking to the targets.

The grave error policy makers did at the very beginning was to build the Kyoto Protocol on the lines of the Montreal Protocols. But we can't blame them for basking in their glory, for seldom does a policy response meet with this level of success. The problem here is far more complex than the ozone layer depletion, and the to think of a solution would be amateurish. The second grave error that they did was to exclude the developing nations, the Non-Annex B countries, from making any commitment to reducing emissions. They were asked to jump onto the bandwagon at their own sweet will while the developed world were told to adhere to time bound targets. This was a failed strategy, right from the very beginning and confirmed only lately, when China trumped US in total Green House Gas(GHG) Emissions in 2008.

And then the poor thing hit the rock called George W. Bush, who just didn't budge an inch. US did not approve the Kyoto Protocol, and the entire treaty has been a cross between a good starting point and a meek response to a grave problem. It is too focused on the short term, with no thought given to the road ahead. In fact, the first phase of compliance started in 2008 and is until 2012 and I will not burn my hands by making any predictions here.

All is not lost yet!The world leaders reconvene in December 2009 in Copenhagen to decide the future of this treaty, post 2012, when its first compliance period ends. That should be an event worth waiting for, and it gives me great pleasure to imagine that US would be on the right side of the arguments, finally!:)