The myths about global warming- you think you know aal about it, right?

Go Green

Myths: (what you probably don't know)

We all Think we know the importance of the issues that we are facing. But are we able to understand the threat that is imposed on us? Read out and probably you will find out a lot more than what is generally spread out. Situation is far more complicated as it seems with far more complex solutions.

Collapse all | Expand all

What is being done at a bigger scale

Everyone seems to talking about carbon tax. It’s probably the most glamorous and certainly the most unlikely – use of the tax code since Al Capone got hooked for the tax evasion. The idea is that polluters should pay for the environmental damage they cause. Slap a tax on carbon, the theory goes and you will get fewer carbon emissions, more revenue for government and energy independence all at the same time. No wonder people from same sides of the political divide have some out in support of it.
The one country in which carbon taxes have led to a large decrease in emissions is Denmark, whose per capita CO2 emissions were nearly 15% percent lower in 2005 than in 1990. And Denmark accomplished this while posting a remarkably strong economic record and without relying on nuclear power. What did Denmark do right? There are many elements to its success, but taken together the insight they provide is that if reducing emissions is the goal, then a carbon tax is a tax you want to impose but never collect.
The carbon tax worked in Denmark because it was easy for Danish firms to switch to cleaner fuels. Danish policymakers made huge investment in renewable energy and subsidized environmental innovation. Denmark back then was more reliant on coal than other countries, so when the tax gave companies a reason to leave coal and investments in renewable energy gave them an easy way to do so, they switched. The key was providing easy substitutes.
Carbon taxes have been promoted almost as panacea - just pop in the economic incentives and watch them work their magic. But unless the steps are taken to lock the tax revenue rather than to less pollution. If we want to reduce carbon emissions, then we should follow Denmark's example: tax the industrial emission of carbon and return the revenue to industry through subsidies for research and investment in alternative energy resources, cleaner-burning fuel, carbon-capture technologies and other environmental innovations.

The Horrifying Indian scenario:

Leading meteorological and social scientist have warned a human tragedy 10 times bigger than what the sub-continent witnessed during the Partition.
They say climate change will force a whopping 125 million people -75 million Bangladeshi’s and 50 million Indians, to migrate into various parts of India by the turn of the century.
While migration will affect West Bengal the worst, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu will each face displacement of 10-12 million people with Kolkata, Mumbai, Chennai, Kochi and Panjim facing inundation.
India has no choice but to adopt an economic growth path that moves towards de-carbonization. If policy interventions contain global warming to below 2 degrees Celsius, the displacement figure in India will be at a manageable 5 million.
Emissions of CO2, the principal greenhouse gas, have risen 10-fold since the start of industrial revolution. While industrialized countries have been the primary emitters of the gas, fast-growing countries like China and India are beginning to become significant emitters.
India, with close to 700 million people living in rural areas who depend directly on climate-sensitive sectors like agriculture, forests and fisheries, will face the brunt of the consequences of the climate change.

But are we actually doing something?

Installing a solar-powered hot-water heater or a windmill at your place in the country is not going to erase the carbon footprint of marinating and traveling to a second home.
Recycling glass bottles and avoiding plastic bags at the grocery store will not offset your car’s emissions. Switching to a pirus will not undo the effects of frequent air travel.
A couple of international trips can be worse for your carbon footprint than driving a hummer for a year.
Besides putting the enthusiasm of greens to practical use, this fashion statement might also inject some realism into the debate about global warming.
Once you start keeping track of all the energy you use, you begin to see the difficulties of making drastic reductions – and the difference between effective actions and ritual displays.

Give a second thought on these right approaches

We need the right nudge, to borrow the title of the new book applying the lessons of social psychology and behavioral economics to everything from health care to climate maintenance.
The authors of Nudge, Cass Sunstein and Richard Thaler of university of Chicago, agree with economists who’d like to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by imposing carbon taxes or a cap-and trade system. But they think people need extra guidance. “Greeting the prices right will not create the right behavior if people do not associate their behavior associate their behavior with the relevant costs,” says Thaler, a professor of behavioral science and economics. “When I turn thermostat down my Ac, I only vaguely know how much that costs me. If the thermostat were programmed to tell you immediately how much you are spending, the effect would be much more powerful.”
It would be still more powerful, he and Sunstein suggest, if you knew how your energy consumption compared with the social norm. A study in California showed that when the monthly electric bill listed the average consumption in the neighborhood, the people in above average households significantly decreased their consumption.
Meanwhile, the people with the below average bills reacted by significantly increasing their consumption- not exactly the goal of the project.
The reaction was avoided when the bill featured a little drawing along with the numbers: a smiling face on a below – average bill or a frowning face on an above-average bill.
After that simple nudge, the heavy users even bigger cuts in consumption, while the light users reminded frugal.

What can be done, Ideas that may work

A glowing ball called the Ambient Orb, programmed to change colors as the price of electricity increases at peak periods, has been given to some utility customers in California, who promptly reduced their usage by 40% when ball glowed red in peak periods.
Another gadget, the Wattson, which changes colors depending upon how much electricity a house is using, collects data that can be displayed on a website. Clive Thompson, a columnist for wired, has suggested that people start displaying the Wattson data on their Facebook pages, an excellent idea that everyone will like to take further.
New green fad for electronic jewellery with real-time displays of carbon footprints. These could be mood rings, bracelets, lapel pins or anything else that could change color depending on how much electricity you use, how much gasoline your car burns, how much you travel. The displays might change color from red to yellow to green as a carbon footprint diminishes. The green might be a dim shade for those who have bought carbon credits to offset their energy use, but a much brighter shade for those who’ve reduced emissions to below-average without having to buy the credits.
It would be a chore to set up monitors for energy use, but plenty of greens are willing to give lots of time to the cause. Some are accused of being religious zealots global warmists. But one of the advantages of religion is that it inspires people to acts of selflessness for the common good. Why not reward devout conservations by letting them display their virtue?

Respond to the call. Do give feedback and suggestions.
Tell us what you wish to do to contribute to the situation
EARTH POSTERS