Task 2 Global Warming

Global warming is certainly happening and to deny the seriousness of the problem of climate change would be ostrich-like. It is, however, important to keep things in perspective.

There is a tendency nowadays, in certain circles, to blame all of the world's woes on global warming. Natural disasters are not all due to global warming. The tsunami , for example, which devastated parts of Sri Lanka and other areas in S.E. Asia at the end of 2004 was not caused by global warming. It was caused by a volcanic eruption in Indonesia.

Probably the most devastating natural phenomenon of recent centuries, the eruption at Krakatoa, west of Java, occurred long before anyone had ever even remotely considered the concept of global warming.

Its best-known eruption culminated in a series of massive explosions on August 26–27, 1883, which was among the most violent volcanic events in modern times. With a Volcanic Explosivity Index of 6, the eruption was equivalent to 200 megatons of TNT—about 13,000 times the yield of the Little Boy bomb (13 to 16 KT) that devastated Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II and four times the yield of the Tsar Bomba (50 MT), the largest nuclear device ever detonated.The 1883 eruption ejected approximately 21 cubic kilometres (5.0 cu mi) of rock, ash, and pumice. It also generated the loudest sound reported in recorded history—the cataclysmic explosion was distinctly heard as far away as Perth in Western Australia, nearly 2,000 (over 3,000 kms) miles away, and the island of Rodrigues near Mauritius, about 3,000 miles (5,000 kms) away. (Wikipedia, 2009).

Food shortages are also often blamed on global warming but there is enough food in the world to feed all of its inhabitants. Where food shortages occur, as in present-day Zimbabwe, they are almost always the result of political mismanagement, as is clearly the case with President Mugabe.Another problem in 2009 is the global economic recession.

Many green projects are expensive and it must be doubted whether many ambitious schemes, such as Masdar City in the UAE, will remain entirely unaffected by the worldwide economic downturn.

Have I been too pessimistic here? I recently read this, about the Conservative party in the UK, by Fraser Neslon, in The Spectator, 25.02.09:

Undeterred, the Conservatives want to apply the Californian formula to the burgeoning ‘green tech’ industry in the hope of incubating a whole new economic sector. There is to be a government-run green stock exchange to direct investment into businesses which spring from universities. Mr Cameron has solemnly declared that Britain is to become a ‘world leader in battery-powered cars’ — thereby leapfrogging California itself, whence this sort of ambition is explicitly imported. Under a Tory government, he says, businesses will develop carbon-capture business in the North Sea, not the Pacific.
Whatever one may think of its chances of success, this is likely to become the key Tory message on the economy (whether expressed as Californian in inspiration or in some other form). A vision of smaller, family-friendly companies that allow flexible working. A proud refusal to abandon the green agenda in spite of the downturn, on the grounds that — like it or not — environmentalism is the future. To a surprising extent, Mr Cameron has actually revived his eco-strategy since the recession started, saying he wants ‘not green or growth, but both.’ If the election is to be about competing visions for the economy, this will be the Tory credo — and it is designed to be an optimistic one, with rays of Californian sunshine peeking through.