5 ms·

this is great but at the same time terrifying. India thus far has committed to power its growth using coal-fired plants. We in the west have definitely committe

by bryanwb 11y ago

this is great but at the same time terrifying. India thus far has committed to power its growth using coal-fired plants. We in the west have definitely committed our sins in this regard, however India is particularly vulnerable to the changes caused by global warming

melling 11y ago
We've had almost 5 decades to make renewable energy cheaper than coal. We've been trying since the energy crisis of the 1970s. Nuclear, solar, wind, etc. It seems unfair that a billion people remain uneducated and in poverty because a small percentage of the world's population refused to make the necessary changes. Before there was Al Gore, there was Carl Sagan: http://youtu.be/G_3pZXhKVWY http://youtu.be/G_3pZXhKVWY
- bryanwb 11y ago
  totally! however US and Canada are big w/ relatively small populations. People can move around, they can adjust. India doesn't have the same luxury
  - eloff 11y ago
    I think it could be argued that some global warming could be a net benefit for Canada. As long as it stays below the level that would cause global catastrophe. Sea level rise will cause some issues, but Canada really has very few large cities on the coast and there are (expensive) ways of dealing with that, just like all other coastal cities will need to do in the coming century. But on the other side of the equation it would extend growing seasons and increase the amount of arable and forested land in the vast interior of the country. Changes in rainfall will be a mixed bag, bringing adjustment, but likely not ruin. Maybe this is a very simplistic way of looking at it, but as a Canadian I've always selfishly looked at global warming and said "bring it on". Of course global warming could reach a point where it causes serious catastrophe on a global scale, e.g. releasing methane deposits on the sea floor and going into a feedback loop. That's a losing scenario for the entire planet, and there's no guarantees yet that we will avoid that fate.
    - devdas 11y ago
      Global warming just means there's more energy in the atmosphere. Hotter summers, colder winters, more powerful storms, ...
      - eloff 11y ago
        Where do you get colder winters from? I don't see that as a likely outcome. Yeah the Earth's climate is a complex system, and global warming produces complex and sometimes unexpected effects. But you can't say colder winters just "because complexity". The likely effect, unsurprisingly, is warmer, shorter winters.
        mjevans 11y ago
        I am not educated in this field, but anecdotally, I believe it comes from the more energetic movement of the atmosphere drawing coldfronts down from the polar regions more frequently. I also prefer to use the phrase 'Global Weather Chaos' rather than 'Global Warming'. Much like I also prefer the term 'Waste Reducing Reactor' to 'Breeder'.
        eloff 11y ago
        I don't think weather chaos is that bad. Us humans are adverse to change, but that change will be both good and bad. Between that and the sea level rising it will cause a lot of resettlement and moving around, but hardly the end of the world in itself.
  - melling 11y ago
    Almost 40% of the US population lives near a coast. http://stateofthecoast.noaa.gov/population/welcome.html http://stateofthecoast.noaa.gov/population/welcome.html What's your guess to what part of the economy that represents? I don't think you thought this through. Katrina cost over $100 billion. The damage to the economy will be in the trillions. Put your million dollar CT home, put it on a truck to Montana, where it's worth 75% less?
    - adventured 11y ago
      How much of Katrina's cost was due to their wildly incompetent government failing to allocate even a modest amount of infrastructure spending to upkeep the walls that should have held back that flooding (which caused most of the damage)? Obvious answer: the majority of it. The US hasn't been hit by a major hurricane in a decade at this point.
      - melling 11y ago
        Sandy. $75 billion in 2012. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Sandy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Sandy Are you an American? I've gotta know how you could possibly be that wrong. I guess by the time it hit the north east it was only a big storm? $75 billion is the second costliest "hurricane".
sremani 11y ago
India's CO2 emissions are pittance compared to US, China and especially if you take the population into account. India has such a coal shortage they are making a pivot faster than many people think to Solar and Nuclear. The last regime messed up the Nuclear part because Fukushima happened and there was this leftist surge of pinning the blame on suppliers etc. If they fix the liability laws in Nuclear, in next couple of decades, India will move the NG, Solar and Nuclear at a satisfactory pace.
- chimeracoder 11y ago
  > India's CO2 emissions are pittance compared to US, China and especially if you take the population into account. Exactly. India's carbon emissions per capita are the lowest of all the countries listed here[0]; the US emits almost ten times as much per capita. That's literally 2.3 times as much by volume, even though India has 1.2 billion people. (And the US isn't even the top of the list - Australia is!) For comparison, the EU emits four times as much carbon per-capita as India, which amounts to 1.5 times as much by volume (despite the EU's small population of only 500,000,000). China is often used as a bogeyman when it comes to the environment, but honestly, even China's emits half as much carbon per-capita as the US does, and only a hair more than the EU does. They just have four times as many people as the US. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di...
  - danans 11y ago
    Even when India achieves a level of development comparable to the US, Europe, and increasingly China, it will likely still have a lower household CO2 footprint, just because it is a much warmer place, with higher population density. The farther north you are and as long as the primary fuel is carbon-based (NG, Electricity from NG or Coal), you'll need more of it to survive. Transportation CO2 in India will likely grow, as it is a function of travel frequency and distances for people/goods, and it takes basically the same amount of energy per mile everywhere. What's really striking to me is that the US per capita CO2 emission probably isn't twice as high as China because of our high industrial output, but rather because of our widespread use of carbon-intensive heating and propulsion tech coupled with huge houses and vehicles, and low density cities. All of these CO2 emissions can be turned around by really disruptive low/zero CO2 energy generation, both variable renewables and stable baseline to replace coal. For that we either need mass cheap energy storage, or invest seriously in safe (non-fissile?) nuclear energy, preferably both.
kamaal 11y ago
>>We in the west have definitely committed our sins in this regard And reaped great rewards for it. You've eradicated hunger, poverty, built great infrastructure, and turned yourselves into first world economies. Now asking others to keep starving while you enjoy fried chicken is a little hypocritical.
titomc 11y ago
I do not know about India as a whole making strides in economic growth. It has to do something with the overall education level. I am taking the example of Kerala , a small coastal state in the southern part of India. This small state in India has made great strides in economy as well as high living standards. I think this has to do with the high literacy rate in the state due to various socioeconomic & political reasons. This model of development is called Kerala model. An excerpt from the Wikipedia article , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_model " Kerala, a state in India, is a bizarre anomaly among developing nations, a place that offers real hope for the future of the Third World. Though not much larger than Maryland, Kerala has a population as big as California's and a per capita annual income of less than $300. But its infant mortality rate is very low, its literacy rate among the highest on Earth, and its birthrate below America's and falling faster. Kerala's residents live nearly as long as Americans or Europeans. Though mostly a land of paddy-covered plains, statistically Kerala stands out as the Mount Everest of social development; there's truly no place like it. " Some of the recent news in which Kerala stands out from all other states in India. 1. The Cochin International Airport in Kerala is the world's first fully solar powered airport. http://time.com/4002630/solar-power-india-airport-flight-green-technology-renewable-energy-environment/ http://time.com/4002630/solar-power-india-airport-flight-gre... 2. Did I mention that Kerala too has 1Gbps connectivity, currently given for startup incubators in IT parks, soon the entire state will have it. http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/kochi/Kerala-All-Set-to-Have-Fastest-Net-Access-in-Country/2014/11/04/article2507076.ece http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/kochi/Kerala-All-Set-... 3."As Kerala gets ready to be declared India’s first ‘Digital State’ on August 15, a host of vital data shows that the state is well ahead of other states in e-matters." http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/Data-Shows-Kerala-is-Well-Ahead-of-Other-States-in-e-matters/2015/08/08/article2963156.ece http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/Data-Shows-Ker... Wikipedia article about Kerala State https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala PS: I am from Kerala state & I enjoy almost the same living standards in Kerala as that of US where I am currently working.
- kamaal 11y ago
  >> I am from Kerala state & I enjoy almost the same living standards in Kerala as that of US where I am currently working. You've got to be kidding me. The definition of first world country isn't a fast internet connection. Heck US has 2G speeds all over the country. Having world class road/transportation infrastructure, dependable energy security, national security, economic infrastructure, public schools which provide same quality of education throughout country etc. These are some of the things that count as metrics for development. Kerala or any state in India is atleast 5 decades away from the standard of living I've seen in the US.

by bryanwb 11y ago

melling 11y ago

We've had almost 5 decades to make renewable energy cheaper than coal. We've been trying since the energy crisis of the 1970s. Nuclear, solar, wind, etc. It seems unfair that a billion people remain uneducated and in poverty because a small percentage of the world's population refused to make the necessary changes. Before there was Al Gore, there was Carl Sagan: http://youtu.be/G_3pZXhKVWY http://youtu.be/G_3pZXhKVWY

bryanwb 11y ago
totally! however US and Canada are big w/ relatively small populations. People can move around, they can adjust. India doesn't have the same luxury
- eloff 11y ago
  I think it could be argued that some global warming could be a net benefit for Canada. As long as it stays below the level that would cause global catastrophe. Sea level rise will cause some issues, but Canada really has very few large cities on the coast and there are (expensive) ways of dealing with that, just like all other coastal cities will need to do in the coming century. But on the other side of the equation it would extend growing seasons and increase the amount of arable and forested land in the vast interior of the country. Changes in rainfall will be a mixed bag, bringing adjustment, but likely not ruin. Maybe this is a very simplistic way of looking at it, but as a Canadian I've always selfishly looked at global warming and said "bring it on". Of course global warming could reach a point where it causes serious catastrophe on a global scale, e.g. releasing methane deposits on the sea floor and going into a feedback loop. That's a losing scenario for the entire planet, and there's no guarantees yet that we will avoid that fate.
  - devdas 11y ago
    Global warming just means there's more energy in the atmosphere. Hotter summers, colder winters, more powerful storms, ...
    - eloff 11y ago
      Where do you get colder winters from? I don't see that as a likely outcome. Yeah the Earth's climate is a complex system, and global warming produces complex and sometimes unexpected effects. But you can't say colder winters just "because complexity". The likely effect, unsurprisingly, is warmer, shorter winters.
      - mjevans 11y ago
        I am not educated in this field, but anecdotally, I believe it comes from the more energetic movement of the atmosphere drawing coldfronts down from the polar regions more frequently. I also prefer to use the phrase 'Global Weather Chaos' rather than 'Global Warming'. Much like I also prefer the term 'Waste Reducing Reactor' to 'Breeder'.
        eloff 11y ago
        I don't think weather chaos is that bad. Us humans are adverse to change, but that change will be both good and bad. Between that and the sea level rising it will cause a lot of resettlement and moving around, but hardly the end of the world in itself.
- melling 11y ago
  Almost 40% of the US population lives near a coast. http://stateofthecoast.noaa.gov/population/welcome.html http://stateofthecoast.noaa.gov/population/welcome.html What's your guess to what part of the economy that represents? I don't think you thought this through. Katrina cost over $100 billion. The damage to the economy will be in the trillions. Put your million dollar CT home, put it on a truck to Montana, where it's worth 75% less?
  - adventured 11y ago
    How much of Katrina's cost was due to their wildly incompetent government failing to allocate even a modest amount of infrastructure spending to upkeep the walls that should have held back that flooding (which caused most of the damage)? Obvious answer: the majority of it. The US hasn't been hit by a major hurricane in a decade at this point.
    - melling 11y ago
      Sandy. $75 billion in 2012. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Sandy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Sandy Are you an American? I've gotta know how you could possibly be that wrong. I guess by the time it hit the north east it was only a big storm? $75 billion is the second costliest "hurricane".

sremani 11y ago

India's CO2 emissions are pittance compared to US, China and especially if you take the population into account. India has such a coal shortage they are making a pivot faster than many people think to Solar and Nuclear. The last regime messed up the Nuclear part because Fukushima happened and there was this leftist surge of pinning the blame on suppliers etc. If they fix the liability laws in Nuclear, in next couple of decades, India will move the NG, Solar and Nuclear at a satisfactory pace.

chimeracoder 11y ago
> India's CO2 emissions are pittance compared to US, China and especially if you take the population into account. Exactly. India's carbon emissions per capita are the lowest of all the countries listed here[0]; the US emits almost ten times as much per capita. That's literally 2.3 times as much by volume, even though India has 1.2 billion people. (And the US isn't even the top of the list - Australia is!) For comparison, the EU emits four times as much carbon per-capita as India, which amounts to 1.5 times as much by volume (despite the EU's small population of only 500,000,000). China is often used as a bogeyman when it comes to the environment, but honestly, even China's emits half as much carbon per-capita as the US does, and only a hair more than the EU does. They just have four times as many people as the US. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di...
- danans 11y ago
  Even when India achieves a level of development comparable to the US, Europe, and increasingly China, it will likely still have a lower household CO2 footprint, just because it is a much warmer place, with higher population density. The farther north you are and as long as the primary fuel is carbon-based (NG, Electricity from NG or Coal), you'll need more of it to survive. Transportation CO2 in India will likely grow, as it is a function of travel frequency and distances for people/goods, and it takes basically the same amount of energy per mile everywhere. What's really striking to me is that the US per capita CO2 emission probably isn't twice as high as China because of our high industrial output, but rather because of our widespread use of carbon-intensive heating and propulsion tech coupled with huge houses and vehicles, and low density cities. All of these CO2 emissions can be turned around by really disruptive low/zero CO2 energy generation, both variable renewables and stable baseline to replace coal. For that we either need mass cheap energy storage, or invest seriously in safe (non-fissile?) nuclear energy, preferably both.

kamaal 11y ago

>>We in the west have definitely committed our sins in this regard And reaped great rewards for it. You've eradicated hunger, poverty, built great infrastructure, and turned yourselves into first world economies. Now asking others to keep starving while you enjoy fried chicken is a little hypocritical.

titomc 11y ago

I do not know about India as a whole making strides in economic growth. It has to do something with the overall education level. I am taking the example of Kerala , a small coastal state in the southern part of India. This small state in India has made great strides in economy as well as high living standards. I think this has to do with the high literacy rate in the state due to various socioeconomic & political reasons. This model of development is called Kerala model. An excerpt from the Wikipedia article , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_model " Kerala, a state in India, is a bizarre anomaly among developing nations, a place that offers real hope for the future of the Third World. Though not much larger than Maryland, Kerala has a population as big as California's and a per capita annual income of less than $300. But its infant mortality rate is very low, its literacy rate among the highest on Earth, and its birthrate below America's and falling faster. Kerala's residents live nearly as long as Americans or Europeans. Though mostly a land of paddy-covered plains, statistically Kerala stands out as the Mount Everest of social development; there's truly no place like it. " Some of the recent news in which Kerala stands out from all other states in India. 1. The Cochin International Airport in Kerala is the world's first fully solar powered airport. http://time.com/4002630/solar-power-india-airport-flight-green-technology-renewable-energy-environment/ http://time.com/4002630/solar-power-india-airport-flight-gre... 2. Did I mention that Kerala too has 1Gbps connectivity, currently given for startup incubators in IT parks, soon the entire state will have it. http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/kochi/Kerala-All-Set-to-Have-Fastest-Net-Access-in-Country/2014/11/04/article2507076.ece http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/kochi/Kerala-All-Set-... 3."As Kerala gets ready to be declared India’s first ‘Digital State’ on August 15, a host of vital data shows that the state is well ahead of other states in e-matters." http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/Data-Shows-Kerala-is-Well-Ahead-of-Other-States-in-e-matters/2015/08/08/article2963156.ece http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/Data-Shows-Ker... Wikipedia article about Kerala State https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala PS: I am from Kerala state & I enjoy almost the same living standards in Kerala as that of US where I am currently working.

kamaal 11y ago
>> I am from Kerala state & I enjoy almost the same living standards in Kerala as that of US where I am currently working. You've got to be kidding me. The definition of first world country isn't a fast internet connection. Heck US has 2G speeds all over the country. Having world class road/transportation infrastructure, dependable energy security, national security, economic infrastructure, public schools which provide same quality of education throughout country etc. These are some of the things that count as metrics for development. Kerala or any state in India is atleast 5 decades away from the standard of living I've seen in the US.