W7i7

Mr. Deb, I recently read two of your articles on LiveMint (sources below),  and forgive me for being blunt, but please stop spreading lies . I am not concerned with your opinion of Greta or your faux concern over the child. While you write catchy headlines supposably fixated on Greta Thunberg, your actual attacks are on climate scientists and the IPCC. I'm not the first person to point out your ignorance and prejudice in this matter. I laud Bibek Bhattacharya and Krishna AchutaRao for taking the initiative with their pieces. This is my contribution to cleaning the mess you're making by being a reckless and irresponsible voice in the climate conversation. Here are my replies to 5 of your most vitriolic statements: (1) "IPCC has just released another doomsday scenario. Since bad news sells, it's made headlines." The IPCC does not release doomsday scenarios. IPCC predictions provide estimates of what could happen under specific future scena

This letter is primarily intended for students of the BS-MS program at the Department of Earth Sciences, IIT Kanpur but I am putting it up on a public platform in case it may help others too, and in case others may chip in and contribute to the discussion. I am writing this, not because I think I am the best person to advise you, but only to start this discussion. I hope you will discuss anything I say further with other, more experienced people. ----- Hi all, Some of you are making choices towards your futures right now. Some of you will choose to exit Earth Sciences after your undergraduate degree. And some of you may already have plans of how to do so. Indeed, there are numerous options available - since you are at an IIT, you are in a reasonably good position to land a job in other sectors such as banking or data analytics or coding. You may also consider preparing for a UPSC exam or getting an MBA after this. This post is not intended to criticise any of those

Mr. Aiyar, I recently happened to read a post on your blog, Swaminomics.  Source In your post, you call out the developed nations for having caused the climate crisis. You mention how the Indian annual per capita carbon emission (1.7 metric tonnes) is much lower than that of Sweden (4.5 metric tonnes). You also point out how more than 90% of the historical emissions have come from western countries and Japan. You quote Kirit Parikh that India will never emit more carbon per capita than the West. You are absolutely correct about all of these data. The rest of the post discusses coal production in India (and I have no comments on that). With all due respect, Sir, you are apologising to the wrong person . There are several metrics that any climate conversation can focus on. There may be 5 different ways to assess who puts the most CO 2  in the air, but I ask you this - do we have a problem with more CO 2  in our air or do we have a problem with the effects it h

← Climate Change: The Fundamentals The Greenhouse Gases Note: This article is meant for anyone with a high school background in science. The Greenhouse Effect The Greenhouse Effect describes the ability of some materials to trap heat. One simple example - have you noticed that the inside of a parked car (windows rolled up) gets hotter if you leave it out in the sun? The outside temperature may be warm in the first place, but after an hour or two, the inside of the car often feels like a veritable furnace. Why? The glass windows trap heat inside the car. Another example is the concept of greenhouses (well..!). Greenhouses utilise this concept to keep the insides warm enough for more comfortable plant growth even in cold climates. The Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) For both the car and the greenhouse, the glass in the windows and doors acts as the greenhouse material that traps the heat. For the Earth, it is the presence of certain gases in the atmosphere. The idea may see

The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 6, 2012 In having a conversation about climate change, one often encounters several tangential themes -- domination of the developed countries over the developing ones; economic agenda; political propaganda; religious oppression; corporate greed -- in short, the use of the climate crisis by a particular group of people for furthering their own agenda, irrespective of ground reality . Some of these themes are perfectly valid, some only partially so, and some are outrightly ridiculous. However, the one thing I notice every single time is that the "theme" of the conversation soon steers far away from the science. This could be because of several reasons: The person does not understand science, and hence wants to skip that The person partially understands the science, but prioritises other perspective