Climate Change: Initiating the Dialogue - Part II

-

← Part I

"There used to be Global Warming. Now there's Climate Change. Wait, there was something about the Ozone Hole too, right?"

Unfortunately, "right".

It may seem that scientists like scaring the rest of the world with news of "supposedly" catastrophic phenomena, but nothing seems to "really" happen. At least not to us. Such discoveries seem to make headlines, and then get washed away by cricket matches, celebrity weddings, or worse, catchier catastrophes.


So here's a quick summary of the "latest / most popular catastrophes" that scientists have been raising alarms about. The hope is that the more people understand about the issues, the more they will begin to appreciate the scientific credibility of these alarms.

1. The Ozone Hole


The atmosphere has a layer of ozone that protects us from the harmful effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation that the Earth receives from the Sun. Scientists in the 1980s discovered a "hole" (yes, a physical gap) in the ozone layer over the Antarctic which was

(a) caused due to human activity, and
(b) growing and could eventually damage the ozone layer all over the Earth

Why was this problematic? Because receiving the full dose of UV radiations causes myriad health problems -- skin cancer, eye problems, damage to the immune system. It also causes a lot of problems to ecosystems and biodiversity, but I think what really caught everyone's attention was that we, the humans, were going to suffer.

Then followed some serious research on finding solutions, a whole lot of political negotiations, and finally, the Montreal Protocol. The Montreal Protocol was an international political agreement to reduce the use of certain chemicals (chlorofluorocarbons or CFCs) which were causing the damage to the Ozone Hole.

Scientific research and political action led to steps which are helping solve the problem. As of 2018, the Ozone Hole was reported to be recovering -- the size of the Ozone Hole is declining. It doesn't mean the problem is completely solved, but it does mean that the right steps were taken and progress is under way. I hope I can see a completely recovered Ozone Hole during my lifetime, it would be a momentous occasion indeed.

2. Global Warming


Scientists have known about global warming for over a century. The research behind global warming began in the early 19th century (here's a really interesting timeline) but lay people started talking about it in the early 1910s. Global warming basically refers to the fact that the Earth's temperature is rising with time.

Spoiler alert: it's because of human activity.

3. Climate Change


 The next buzzword in this direction was "Climate Change". Climate Change and Global Warming are closely related -- in fact, global warming is a concept included in the concept of Climate Change. The difference is that the Earth isn't just suffering from rising temperatures, but a multitude of other problems such as sea level rise and changing weather patterns. Temperature is just one aspect of weather, and there are long-term changes in other aspects too.

------------------

The example of the Ozone Hole crisis shows that given sufficient scientific research and prompt political action, humans do have the ability to tackle global level problems. In the following blog posts, I will provide evidence that there is enough scientific research and clarity on the crisis (and also, that there is enough clarity on the limits of our clarity too!).

The key phrase here is political action, unfortunately.



------------------

As part of a 2019 resolution to raise awareness about climate change, I will be writing a series of blog posts explaining the phenomenon to non-scientists. It is meant for anyone with a high-school level background in Science. If I don't explain anything simply enough, I would appreciate it if you pointed it out.

If you would like to receive such posts via email, you may subscribe to the mailing list.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Darwin's Lost World - Part II

-
<< Previous page So what do we (did Darwin) know by now (then) ? That living creatures from the very very ancient past (we're talking in terms of millions of years) were often found preserved in the rock record. That we could make out some things about the past environments from these fossils. Fossils showed specific associations: you saw only certain types and groups of fossils in certain suites of rocks (belonging to different periods of geological time). There came a dead end at the base of the Cambrian. Scientists like to call this the Cambrian Explosion today, but back then, many of them were more inclined to dismiss this either as a figment of the imagination of relatively smaller body of researchers, or simply, incomplete/inaccurate science. That the Creator had made us all, was the popular view. 3 theories emerged to explain why we see the Cambrian Explosion (if it even is a real thing!): Charles Lyell Interestingly, it is said that Lyell was...
Read more

On Darwin's Lost World

-
Image
Martin Brasier was a prolific paleontologist. And from what little I know of him, he must have been a pretty cool guy. I recently read his book "Darwin's Lost World" and it was definitely one of the better decisions of my life. On Darwin Thankfully, even the most plebeian of science curricula finds it worthwhile to describe Charles Darwin's scientific accomplishments. To me, all through childhood, Darwin represented my superiority to the apes. When someone said Darwin, I would get a mental picture of an ape gradually turning human. That's an overly simplistic picture, but then again, there is so much to learn about everything  that one doesn't quite know where to start. Source The rock record is the only thing that can give us a picture of the ancient Earth. Most other branches of science can tell you what the Earth is like, and why it is the way it is. But it was Geology that first told us what the Earth was  like, and bits of why it w...
Read more

What is ENSO? Page 2 - SSTs and trade winds

-
Image
  This is Page 2 of the sub-series "What is ENSO?". If you haven't already, please read Page 1 first. For convenience, keep that page open in a different tab. = = = What is ENSO? In the previous post , we learnt to identify ENSO phases from the perspective of sea surface temperature anomalies . In this post, I'm going to answer a question that no one really asked ―  What if I wanted to identify ENSO phases from the perspective of sea surface temperatures (SSTs) instead? What if, for no good reason but because I felt like it, I wanted to do away with the "anomalies" bit? Looking at SSTs instead of SST anomalies makes matters unnecessarily complicated, but we're going to do it anyway because it also teaches us a lot. In the image below, I've plotted SSTs from the HadISST dataset. These are mean SSTs for the months of December, January and February (DJF) over all years from 1872-2009. Why did we select the months of DJF? Because ENSO events can be seen...
Read more