Welcome to Online Research .....

Most important, effective research paper collection in the world

The impacts of climate change are felt most by the Southern countries


1.1 Introduction:
The people over the world are facing great risk due to climate change. The impacts of climate change are felt most by the Southern countries, as a majority of its people is poor and vulnerable to and susceptible to risks. Since the past few years, countries in the North like Germany (flood), France and Scotland (heat wave) are also confronting extreme events. Such events are likely to increase all over the world and will become threatening and dangerous for the survival and even existence of many climate sensitive plant and animal species. Climate change is already happening and represents one of the greatest environmental, social and economic threats facing the planet. The European Union is committed to working constructively for a global agreement to control climate change, and is leading the way by taking ambitious action of its own. The warming of the climate system is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global mean sea level. The Earth's average surface temperature has risen by 0.76° C since 1850 (Agarwal, 2008). Most of the warming that has occurred over the last 50 years is very likely to have been caused by human activities. In its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), published in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projects that, without further action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the global average surface temperature is likely to rise by a further 1.8-4.0°C this century, and by up to 6.4°C in the worst case scenario (IPCC,2007).
Projected global warming this century is likely to trigger serious consequences for mankind and other life forms, including a rise in sea levels of between 18 and 59 cm which will endanger coastal areas and small islands, and a greater frequency and severity of extreme weather events (Wallington, 2oo5) 
Human activities that contribute to climate change include in particular the burning of fossil fuels, agriculture and land-use changes like deforestation. These cause emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main gas responsible for climate change, as well as of other 'greenhouse' gases. To bring climate change to a halt, global greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced significantly.  
This is the time to take action to mitigate the green house gas emission. Who takes this action, this question create very much controversy among different countries especially among developed and developing countries. This controversy make climate change situation very much complicated.
Today, we are at a cross-road- convinced that our current development paradigm, its production technology and philosophy, consumption patterns, and institutions cannot be sustained. On the other hand, we are still uncertain about how human society, confronted with this common but differentiated responsibility, will address and over- come the challenges through our conscious role and function. The fact which stand out and reflect our effort to do what is necessary can be understood in our expression of ideas, interest, willingness and practice.

1.2 Objectives of my study:
Climate change is the most common concern of the 21st century. Due to the rapid climate change, the world is facing various kinds of threats e.g. drought, storm, flood, global warming etc. We the people of the developing countries are already suffering due to climate change. The key objectives of my study are as follows:
ü      To review the major causes and consequences of climate change.
ü      To review the perceptual conflicts among developing and developed countries on climate change mitigation.


Concepts and Causes of Climate Change

2.1 What is climate?
Climate is defined as long-term weather patterns that describe a region. According to convention on climate change, ‘Climate change’ means a change of climate which is attributed directly to human activity that alter the composition of global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods. 
IPCC refers climate as ‘average weather in terms of the mean and its variability over a certain time-period and a certain area’. Our traditional appreciation of weather and climate is based on mean values of variables, such as, maximum and minimum temperatures, surface winds, precipitation in all its forms, humidity, mist and cloud types, solar radiation, etc. Climate is determined by atmospheric circulation and its interactions with ocean currents on a large scale, and with continental characteristics such as relief, albedo, vegetation, and land humidity, among other factors.
 The nature of climate varies from place to place, as a function of latitude, distance from the sea, vegetation, and the presence or absence of mountains or some other geographical factor. Climate also varies over time: seasonally, annually, by decades, or through even longer periods of time such as glacial eras. Statistically significant variations from the mean state of the climate or its variability, lasting for decades or longer, are considered to be ‘climate change’ (IPCC, 2001).

2.2 The Climatic System
According to the IPCC ‘to understand the climate of our planet Earth and its variations, and to understand and possibly predict the changes of the climate brought about by human activities, one cannot ignore any of these many factors and components that determine the climate’. Then it would be easier to examine different affirmations and to verify if all the factors and components that determine the climate have been effectively examined, and if any of them may have been neglected or even ignored, whether involuntarily or voluntarily
The climatic system has five major components:
The atmosphere: the most unstable and changeable component of the system. The modification of its constituents is considered to be the essential phenomenon in the greenhouse effect, thanks to the properties of its emissive gases, principally water vapour, to which must be added solid and liquid particles in suspension (aerosols), and clouds.
The hydrosphere: all liquid water, including water underground; freshwater in rivers, lakes, and aquifers; salt water in oceans and seas (which are both sinks for, and sources of, carbon dioxide); and water/vapour and/or liquid in suspension in the air.
The lithosphere: land masses and their distribution and relief (altitude and disposition), soils, volcanic and terrigenic dust in the form of aerosols.
The cryosphere: sea ice (ice fields), ice on land (the inlandsis of Greenland and Antarctica, glaciers on mountains, permafrost), snowfields, and ice crystals in high clouds.
The biosphere: on land and at sea, represented by vegetation, and particularly by extensive entities such as large areas of forest, not forgetting plankton fields.
The noosphere (noos, intelligence): - which maybe added to these major components; Representing the actions of the human race.
(Sourse: IPCC, 2001)
Figure-1: The components of the global climate system: schematic view. Processes and interactions are represented by thin arrows; aspects that may change are represented by bold arrows. ( Source: IPCC, 2001)

2.3 Climate Change
“Any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability, or as a result of human activity” (IPCC, 2001).
Climate change refers to variations in the prevailing state of the climate on all temporal and spatial scales beyond that of individual weather events. It may be due to natural internal processes within the climate system, or to variations in natural or anthropogenic (human-related) external forcing. Global climate change indicates a change in either the mean state of the climate or in its variability, persisting for several decades or longer. This includes changes in average weather conditions on Earth, such as a change in average global temperature, as well as changes in how frequently regions experience heat waves, droughts, floods, storms, and other extreme weather. It is important to note that changes in individual weather events will potentially contribute substantially to changes in climate variability.

2.4 Causes of climate change:
The climate of the earth is dynamic and always changing through a natural cycle. Climate changes occur due to externally (from extra-terrestrial factors-solar output, earth-sun geometry, and stellar dust) or internally (from ocean, atmosphere and land atmospheric chemistry, atmospheric albedo, surface albedo, ocean heat change, continental drift, mountain building, and volcanic activity) through any one of these component (Agarwal; 2008).
The causes of climate change can be divided into two categories: (i) natural causes & (ii) man-made causes.

2.4.1 Natural causes:
“if one wishes to understand, detect and eventually predict human interference on climate, one need to understand the system that determines the climate of Earth and the processes that lead to climate change”(IPCC, 2003)
A number of natural factors are responsible for climate change. Some of the more prominent ones are Variation in earth orbital, continental drift, volcanoes, ocean currents, and the earth's tilt.
Figure-2: Natural factor affecting climate change (Pidwirny, 2006) Variation in earths orbital:
Milankovitch theory suggests that normal cyclical variations in three of the Earth’s characteristics are probably responsible for some past climate change. The basic idea behind this theory assumes that over time these cyclical events vary the amount of solar radiation that is received on the earth’s surface (Agarwal, 2008).
a. The first cyclical variation, known as eccentricity, Controls the shape of the earth orbit around the sun. The orbit gradually changes from being nearly circular and then back to elliptical in a period of about 100,000 years. The greater the eccentricity of the orbit (that is the more elliptical it is), the greater the variation in solar energy received at the top of the atmosphere between the earth’s closest (perihelion) and farthest (aphelion) approach to the sun. Currently the Earth is experiencing a period of low eccentricity. The difference of earth distance from the sun between perihelion and aphelion (which is about 3%) is reasonably for approximately a 7 percent variation in the amount of solar energy received at the top of the atmosphere. When the difference in this distance is at its maximum (9%), the difference in solar energy received is about 20 percent (According to Pidwirny, 2006).
b. The second cyclical variation results from the fact that, as the earth rotates on its polar axis, it wobbles like a spinning top changing the orbit timing of the equinoxes and solstices. This effect is known as the procession of equinox. The procession of the equinox has a cycle of approximately 23000 years (Pidwirny, 2006). According to the Earth’s orbit analysis, the earth is closer to the sun in January (perihelion) and further away in July (aphelion) at the present time. Because of precession, the reverse will be true in 11,500 years and the earth will be closer to the sun in July (Wesker, 1996). This means, of course that if everything else remain constant,11500 years from snows seasonal variation in the northern Hemisphere should be greater than at present (colder winter and warmer summers) because of the closer proximity of the earth to the sun ( Agarwal,2008) . 
c. The Third cyclical variation related to the changes in the tilt of the earth‘s axis of rotation. The earth makes one full orbit around the sun each year. It is tilted at an angle of 23.5° to the perpendicular plane of its orbital path (Wesker, 1996). For one half of the year when it is summer, the northern hemisphere tilts towards the sun. In the other half when it is winter, the earth is tilted away from the sun. If there was no tilt we would not have experienced seasons (Pidwirny, 2006). Changes in the tilt of the earth can affect the severity of the seasons - more tilt means warmer summers and colder winters; less tilt means cooler summers and milder winters (Pidwirny, 2006).
At this time the tilt is small, there is less climatic variation between the summer and winter season in the middle and high latitudes. Winter tends to be milder and summer cooler. Warmer winters allow for more snows to fail in the high latitude regions.

Figure-3: Modification of the timing of Aphelion and perihelion over time (A=today; b=1150 years into the future) (agarwal, 2008)

 When the atmosphere is warmer it has a greater ability to hold water vapour and therefore more snows are produced at areas of frontal or organic uplift. Cooler summers cause snow and ice to accumulate on the Earth surface because less of this frozen water is melted. Thus, the net effect of a smaller tilt would be more extensive formation of glacier in the polar latitudes (Agarwal, 2008).
    Periods of larger tilt result in greater seasonal climatic variation in the middle and high latitudes. At these times winters tends to be colder and summer warmer. Colder winter produce less snows because of lower atmospheric temperatures. Cold winter produces less snow because of lower atmospheric temperatures. As a result, less snows and ice accumulates on the ground surface. Moreover the warmer summers produced by the larger tilt provide additional energy to melt and evaporate the snow that fell and accumulated during the winter months. Glaciers in the Polar Regions should be generally receding, with contributing factors constant, during this part of the obliquity cycle (Agarwal, 2008).

2. 4.1.2 Volcanoes:
The idea that there maybe a link between volcanism and the climate is a very ancient one (Leroux, 1998, 2001). Many authors have discussed the link between major volcanic eruptions and marked drops in temperature, using data from recent times, and also looking back through geologic time.
Volcanoes, either active or extinct, are a continuous source of gases, which mayor may not accompany lava outflows; half of this out gassing probably occurs at the mid-oceanic ridges. Volcanoes also throw into the atmosphere:
  • water vapour;
  • Sulphur compounds (mostly sulphur dioxide, SO2);
  • Carbon dioxide (35±65% of the CO2 needed to balance out the deficit of the ocean-atmosphere system,( Gerlach 1991); and
  • Chlorine (36 million tones annually in years without major eruptions, (Maduro et al 1992). 
The meteorological effects of volcanoes depend upon the density, extent, and duration of atmospheric veils of aerosols. Aerosols of non-volcanic origin (dust, and sand particles from deserts) which generally rise to only modest altitudes remain in the troposphere for relatively short periods. Scientists thought that the dust emitted into the atmosphere from large volcanic eruptions was responsible for cooling by partially blocking the transmission of solar radiation the earth surface (Wesker, 19960). They are washed out of the atmosphere by rain, or driven towards the poles, where there is evidence on the ice sheets of the large amount transports. Measurement indicates that most of the dust thrown into the atmosphere returned to the earth’s surface. (Agarwal; 2008)
  •  A large eruption, sending considerable amounts of chlorine into the stratosphere, is accompanied by a decrease in ozone levels. For example, Mount Erebus, in Antarctica, in continuous eruption since 1972, emits more than 1,000 tonnes of chlorine a day (370,000 tonnes in a year), and is a major contributor to ozone reduction above the South Pole. After the eruption of Pinatubo in 1991, measurements showed a decrease in the ozone layer of about 5±6% above northern hemisphere tropical latitudes (where the cloud first spread) (Maduro et al 1992). There were decreases of 3±4% over mid- latitudes, and of 6±9% in high latitudes (Mahfouf and Borel, 1995) as a result of the concentration of aerosols in the polar vortex.
Another striking example was in the year 1816, often referred to as "the year without a summer." Significant weather-related disruptions occurred in New England and in Western Europe with killing summer frosts in the United States and Canada. These strange phenomena were attributed to a major eruption of the Tambora volcano in Indonesia, in 1815 (Wesker, 1996).

Figure-4: Effects of volcanic eruptions on the atmosphere (simplified)( Zlang,2004). Ocean currents
The oceans are a major component of the climate system. They cover about 71% of the Earth and absorb about twice as much of the sun's radiation as the atmosphere or the land surface. Ocean currents move vast amounts of heat across the planet - roughly the same amount as the atmosphere does. But the oceans are surrounded by land masses, so heat transport through the water is through channels.
Winds push horizontally against the sea surface and drive ocean current patterns.
Certain parts of the world are influenced by ocean currents more than others. The coast of
Peru and other adjoining regions are directly influenced by the Humboldt Current that flows along the coastline of Peru.
Another region that is strongly influenced by ocean currents is the North Atlantic. If we compare places at the same latitude in Europe and North America the effect is immediately obvious. Take a closer look at this example - some parts of coastal Norway have an average temperature of -2°C in January and 14°C in July; while places at the same latitude on the Pacific coast of Alaska are far colder: -15°C in January and only 10°C in July. The warm current along the Norwegian coast keeps much of the Greenland-Norwegian Sea free of ice even in winter. The rest of the Arctic Ocean, even though it is much further south, remains frozen.
Ocean currents have been known to change direction or slow down. Much of the heat that escapes from the oceans is in the form of water vapour, the most abundant greenhouse gas on Earth. Yet, water vapor also contributes to the formation of clouds, which shade the surface and have a net cooling effect. Any or all of these phenomena can have an impact on the climate, as is believed to have happened at the end of the last Ice Age, about 14,000 years ago. Continental drift:
Continental drift is the movement of the Earth's continents relative to each other. The notion that continents have not always been at their present positions was suggested as early as 1596 by the Dutch map maker Abraham Ortelius in the third edition of his work Thesaurus Geographicus. Ortelius suggested that the Americas, Eurasia and Africa were once joined and have since drifted apart "by earthquakes and floods", creating the modern Atlantic Ocean. For evidence, he wrote: "The vestiges of the rupture reveal themselves, if someone brings forward a map of the world and considers carefully the coasts of the three continents." Francis Bacon commented on Ortelius' idea in 1620, as did Benjamin Franklin and Alexander von Humboldt in later centuries.
Evidence for continental drift is now extensive. Similar plant and animal fossils are found around different continent shores, suggesting that they were once joined. The discovery of fossils of tropical plants (in the form of coal deposits) in Antarctica has led to the conclusion that this frozen land at some time in the past, must have been situated closer to the equator, where the climate was tropical, with swamps and plenty of lush vegetation (Phillips,1994).
The continents that we are familiar with today were formed when the landmass began gradually drifting apart, millions of years back. This drift also had an impact on the climate because it changed the physical features of the landmass, their position and the position of water bodies. The separation of the landmasses changed the flow of ocean currents and winds, which affected the climate. This drift of the continents continues even today; the Himalayan range is rising by about 1 mm (millimeter) every year because the Indian land mass is moving towards the Asian land mass, slowly but steadily (According to Wesker,1996).

5. Solar output: The climate can be influenced greatly by the amount of solar energy caught by the Earth. The energy output of the sun, which is converted to heat at the Earth's surface, is an integral part of the Earth's climate (Lamb, 1995). Early in Earth‘s history,  according to one theory, the sun was too cold to support liquid water at the Earth's surface, leading to what is known as the Faint young sun paradox. Over the coming millennia, the sun will continue to brighten and produce a correspondingly higher energy output; as it continues through what is known as its “ main sequester", and the Earth's atmosphere will be affected accordingly (
Scientists have long tried to link sunspots to climate change. Sunspots are huge magnetic storms, appear dark because they are at a lower temperature (about 4,5000C) than the rest of the photosphere (at about 6,0000C) (Wesker, 1996). Observations of sunspot activity since the beginning of the 17th century have revealed that the number of spots varies between sunspot minimum and sunspot maximum, following an average cycle of 11 years, with variations around this mean value of between 9 and 13 years. Also cycle occurs in pairs, making the periodicity 22 years. The maximum before last is in cycle 22, occurred in 1991, and the last minimum in 1997, when cycle 23 began, with a maximum 2000-2001. The next minimum is expected in 2007-2008(Wesker, 1996).
Figure-5: Total solar irradiance variation between 1978 and 2002. (Foukal; 2003)

2.4.2 Human induced causes of climate change:
 There are much more human induced causes are responsible for climate change. Certain atmospheric emissions are unambiguously responsible for the crises. They include carbon dioxide- the necessary product of combustion of fossil fuel, biomass burning and deforestation, Methane from anaerobic digestion of organic matter in the water-logged paddy field etc. the problem is compounded by deforestation and burning of fossil fuel. There are brief descriptions of green house gases are given below: The production of green house gases:
Greenhouse gases are those gases in an atmosphere that absorb and discharge radiation within the thermal infrared range. This process is the fundamental cause of the greenhouse effect. In order, Earth's most abundant greenhouse gases are:
  • water vapor (H2O)
  • carbon dioxide (CO2)
  •  methane (CH4)
  • nitrous oxide (N2O)
  • ozone (O3) and
  • Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC)
The Earth’s atmosphere consists mainly of oxygen and nitrogen, but does not plays a significant role in enhancing the greenhouse effect because both are essentially transparent to terrestrial radiation.  The greenhouse effect is primarily a function of the concentration of water vapor, carbon dioxide, and other trace gases in the atmosphere that absorb the terrestrial radiation leaving the surface of the Earth (IPCC 1996). This  is a process of absorbing of short wave  and the re-emission of long wave back to the Earth's surface increase the quantity of heat energy in the Earth's climatic system (Chawdnary,1990). Without the greenhouse effect, the average global temperature of the Earth would be a cold -18° Celsius rather than the present 15° Celsius (IPCC (2001).
Figure 6: The Greenhouse Effect (Source: U.S. Department of State, 1992)

Changes in the atmospheric concentrations of these greenhouse gases can alter the balance of energy transfers between the atmosphere, space, land, and the oceans (IPCC, 1997).  A gauge of these changes is called radiative forcing, which is a simple measure of changes in the energy available to the Earth-atmosphere system (IPCC 1996). Holding everything else constant, increases in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere will produce positive radiative forcing (i.e., a net increase in the absorption of energy by the Earth). That means earth become hotter.
Figure-7: The radiation balance of the atmosphere, average of the entire Earth over 24 h. (Source: IPCC report)
 According to IPCC, when those gases are ranked by their contribution to the greenhouse effect, the most important are:
  • water vapor, which contributes 36–72%
  • carbon dioxide, which contributes 9–26%
  • methane, which contributes 4–9%
  • ozone, which contributes 3–7%

A brief description of each greenhouse gas, its sources, and its role in the atmosphere is given below. Water vapour:
Water vapour is indeed the most abundant and dominant greenhouse gas. In addition, atmospheric water can exist in several physical states including gaseous, liquid, and solid. Human activities are not believed to directly affect the average global concentration of water vapor. The radiative forcing for water is around 75 W/m2 while carbon dioxide contributes 32 W/m2 (Kiehl 1997). The radiative forcing produced by the increased concentrations of other greenhouse gases may indirectly affect the hydrologic cycle.
 “Tts radiative effects are the major factor in the atmospheric greenhouse effect' (Elliot and Gaffen, 1995). Theory suggests that the global climate is quite sensitive to the least change in humidity at every level of the atmosphere, though observations verifying these hypotheses are few and far between. However, `radiosonde observations over the past few decades suggest increases in tropospheric water vapour, globally and regionally” (Elliot and Gaffen, 1995).
Amounts of water vapour are essentially incapable of regulation, in the geo-graphical sense, the major source being above the oceans. Its distribution is also unequal at varying altitudes. `Nearly half the total water in the air is between sea level and about 1.5km above sea level. Less than 5±6% of the water is above 5km, and less than 1% is in the stratosphere, nominally above 12 km' (AGU, 1995).
Figure-8: Contribution to the `greenhouse effect' (natural and man-made causes ± including water vapor). (source:  Hieb , 2004)

Table 1: Global atmospheric concentration (ppm unless otherwise specified), rate of concentration change (ppb/year) and atmospheric lifetime (years) of selected greenhouse gases
Atmospheric Variable
CH 4
Pre-industrial atmospheric concentration
Atmospheric concentration (1998)
Rate of concentration changeb
Atmospheric Lifetime
Source: IPCC (2001)
a= Concentrations in parts per trillion (ppt) and rate of concentration change in ppt/year.
 b= Rate is calculated over the period 1990 to 1999.
 C= Rate has fluctuated between 0.9 and 2.8 ppm per year for CO 2  and between 0 and 0.013 ppm per year for CH4 over the period 1990 to 1999.
 d= No single lifetime can be defined for CO 2 because of the different rates of uptake by different removal processes.
e = This lifetime has been defined as an “adjustment time” that takes into account the indirect effect of the gas on its own residence time. Carbon Dioxide (CO2): In nature, carbon is cycled between various atmospheric, oceanic, land biotic, marine biotic and mineral reservoirs.  The largest fluxes occur between the atmosphere and terrestrial biota, and between the atmosphere and surface water of the oceans. In the atmosphere, carbon predominantly exists in its oxidized form as CO2.  Atmospheric carbon dioxide is part of this global carbon cycle, and therefore its fate is a complex function of geochemical and biological processes. An increase in CO2 is responsible to increase the radiative effect of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Studies of long term climate change have discovered a connection between the concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and mean global temperature. Carbon dioxide is one of the more important gases responsible for the greenhouse effect. Carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere increased from approximately 280 parts per million by volume (ppmv) in pre-industrial times to 367 ppmv in 1999, a 31 percent increase (IPCC 2001).   The IPCC notes that “this concentration has not been exceeded during the past 420,000 years, and likely not during the past 20 million years.  The rate of increase over the past century is unprecedented, at least during the past 20,000 years.”
Human activity is the main reasons behind the increasing amount of CO2. The IPCC definitively states that “the present atmospheric CO2 increase is caused by anthropogenic emissions of CO2” (IPCC 2001).  Although change land use pattern, deforestation, land clearing, agriculture, and other activities have all led to a rise in the emission of carbon dioxide but fossil fuel combustion are the main sources. The seven sources of CO2 from fossil fuel combustion are (with percentage contributions for 2000–2004):
1.      Solid fuels e.g. coal: 35%
2.      Liquid fuels e.g. gasoline: 36%
3.      Gaseous fuels e.g. natural gases: 20%
4.      Flaring gas industrially and at wells: <1%
5.       Cement production: 3%
6.      Non-fuel hydrocarbons: <1%
7.      The "international bunkers " of shipping and air transport not included in national inventories: 4%

Figure-9: Global atmospheric concentration of CO (source, Wikipedia)

In its second assessment, the IPCC also stated that “[t]he increased amount of carbon dioxide [in the atmosphere] is leading to climate change and will produce, on average, a global warming of the Earth’s surface because of its enhanced greenhouse effect—although the magnitude and significance of the effects are not fully resolved” (IPCC 1996), the concentration of which has increased by 33% from 1958 to 2000 (IPCC 2001).
Average global carbon emissions approximate one metric ton per year (tC/yr) per person. In 2004, United States per capita emissions neared 6 tC/yr (with Canada and Australia not far behind), and Japan and Western European countries range from 2 to 5 tC/yr per capita. Yet developing countries’ per capita emissions approximate 0.6 tC/yr, and more than 50 countries are below 0.2 tC/yr (or 30-fold less than an average American)(IPCC,2003).


Figure-10; Annual Greenhouse Gas Emission by sector (source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Methane (CH4): Methane is primarily produced through anaerobic decomposition of organic matter in biological systems.  Agricultural processes such as wetland rice cultivation, enteric fermentation in animals, and the decomposition of animal wastes emit CH4, as does the decomposition of municipal solid wastes (Agarwal,2008).  Methane is also emitted during the production and distribution of natural gas and petroleum, and is released as a by-product of coal mining and incomplete fossil fuel combustion(Agarwal,2008) .  Atmospheric concentrations of methane have increased by about 150 percent since pre-industrial times  approximately 700 to 1745 ppb by volume in 1998 (IPCC,2001).  The IPCC has estimated that slightly more than half of the current CH4 flux to the atmosphere is anthropogenic, from human activities such as agriculture, fossil fuel use and waste disposal (IPCC 2001).
Methane which has a GWP of 21, raises particular concerns about global warming because over a period of 100 years it is 21 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide (Agarwal,2008) .
1.4.. Nitrous Oxide (N2O). Anthropogenic sources of N2O emissions include agricultural soils, especially the use of synthetic and manure fertilizers; fossil fuel combustion, especially from mobile combustion; adipic (nylon) and nitric acid production; wastewater treatment and waste combustion; and biomass burning.  The atmospheric concentration of nitrous oxide (N2O) has increased by 16 percent since 1750, from a pre industrial value of about 270 ppb to 314 ppb in 1998, and has contributed to 4-6 percent to the enhancement of the greenhouse effect Agarwal, 2008). Like CO2   nitrous oxide molecules absorbed heat trying to escape to space.
Nitrous Oxide is a significant gas due to its high global warming potential, which is 280 times greater than that of carbon dioxide (IPCC, 1996) Ozone (O 3).  Ozone is present in both the upper stratosphere, where it shields the Earth from harmful levels of ultraviolet radiation, and at lower concentrations in the troposphere, where it is the main component of anthropogenic photochemical “smog” (Chawdnary, 1990)   During the last two decades, emissions of anthropogenic chlorine and bromine-containing halocarbons, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), have depleted stratospheric ozone concentrations (IPCC, 1996). This loss of ozone in the stratosphere has resulted in negative radiative forcing, representing an indirect effect of anthropogenic emissions of chlorine and bromine compounds (IPCC 1996).  The depletion of stratospheric ozone and its radiative forcing was expected to reach a maximum in about 2000 before starting to recover, with detection of such recovery not expected to occur much before 2010 (IPCC 2001). The Global Warming Potential
The Global Warming Potential (GWP) provides a simple measure of the radiative effects of emissions of various greenhouse gases, integrated over a specified time horizon, relative to an equal mass of CO2 emissions. The GWP with respect to CO2 is calculated using the formula:
GWP = integral from TR to TH of a sub i times c sub i(t)dt over integral from TR to TH of a sub CO2 times c sub CO2(t) dt
where ai is the instantaneous radiative forcing due to the release of a unit mass of trace gas, i, into the atmosphere, at time TR, Ci is the amount of that unit mass remaining in the atmosphere at time, t, after its release and TH is TR plus the time horizon over which the calculation is performed (100 years in this table).(Formula adapted from page 210 of IPCC (2007).)
Examples of the atmospheric lifetime and GWP ( global warming potential)  is include:
·        Carbon dioxide has a variable atmospheric lifetime, and cannot be specified precisely.[ Recent work indicates that recovery from a large input of atmospheric CO2 from burning fossil fuels will result in an effective lifetime of tens of thousands of years. Carbon dioxide is defined to have a GWP of 1 over all time periods.
·        Methane has an atmospheric lifetime of 12 ± 3 years and a GWP of 72 over 20 years, 25 over 100 years and 7.6 over 500 years. The decrease in GWP at longer times is because methane is degraded to water and CO2 through chemical reactions in the atmosphere.
·        Nitrous oxide has an atmospheric lifetime of 114 years and a GWP of 289 over 20 years, 298 over 100 years and 153 over 500 years.
·        CFC-12 has an atmospheric lifetime of 100 years and a GWP of 11000 over 20 years, 10900 over 100 years and 5200 over 500 years.
·        HCFC-22 has an atmospheric lifetime of 12 years and a GWP of 5160 over 20 years, 1810 over 100 years and 549 over 500 years.
·        Tetrafluoromethane has an atmospheric lifetime of 50,000 years and a GWP of 5210 over 20 years, 7390 over 100 years and 11200 over 500 years.
·        Sulphur hexafluoride has an atmospheric lifetime of 3,200 years and a GWP of 16300 over 20 years, 22800 over 100 years and 32600 over 500 years.
·        Nitrogen trifluoride has an atmospheric lifetime of 740 years and a GWP of 12300 over 20 years, 17200 over 100 years and 20700 over 500 years.
Source: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Fossil Fuel:
Anaerobic decomposition of buried dead organisms that lived up to 300 million years ago formed Fossil fuels or mineral fuels natural .These fuels contain high percentage of carbon and hydrocarbons. The burning of fossil fuels produces around 21.3 billion tons (21.3 gigatons) of carbon dioxide per year, but it is estimated that natural processes can only absorb about half of that amount, so there is a net increase of 10.65 billion tones of atmospheric carbon dioxide per year (one tonne of atmospheric carbon is equivalent to 44/12 or 3.7 tons of carbon dioxide).  (Bindoff 2007) .While 66% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions over the last 250 years have resulted from burning fossil fuels, 33% have resulted from changes in land use, primarily deforestation (Schmidt, Gavin A. 2007)
 In the United States, more than 90% of greenhouse gas emissions come from the combustion of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels Combustion also produces other air pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds and heavy metals.
According to Environment Canada, Fossil fuel-fired electric power plants emit carbon dioxide, which contribute to climate change ( Garkack, TM ;1991). Combustion of fossil fuels generates sulfuric, carbonic, and nitric acids, which fall to Earth as acid rain, impacting both natural areas and the built environment. It also contains radioactive materials, mainly uranium and thorium, which are released into the atmosphere Schmidt, (Gavin A. 2007).
Figure-11: Global energy consumption by fuel type (source: wikipedia)

Tabel-2: Relative CO2 emission from various fuels
Pounds of carbon dioxide emitted per million British thermal unit of energy for various fuels:
Fuel name    
CO2 emitted (lbs/106 Btu)    
Natural gas
Liquefied petroleum gas
Aviation gasoline
Automobile gasoline
Fuel oil
Tires/tire derived fuel
Wood and wood waste
Coal (bituminous)
Coal (subbituminous)
Coal (lignite)
Petroleum coke
Coal (anthracite)

(Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) Deforestation: Deforestation both reduces the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by deforested regions and releases greenhouse gases directly, together with aerosols.
There are many root causes of deforestation, including corruption of government institutions, the inequitable distribution of wealth and power, population growth[4] and overpopulation,[5][6[ and urbanization. Globalization is often viewed as another root cause of deforestation, though there are cases in which the impacts of globalization (new flows of labor, capital, commodities, and ideas) have promoted localized forest recovery.
According to British environmentalist Norman Myers, 5% of deforestation is due to cattle ranching, 19% due to over-heavy logging, 22% due to the growing sector of palm oil plantations, and 54% due to slash-and-burn farming.
Global deforestation sharply accelerated around 1852. It has been estimated that about half of the earth's mature tropical forests — between 7.5 million and 8 million km2 (2.9 million to 3 million sq mi) of the original 15 million to 16 million km2 (5.8 million to 6.2 million sq mi) that until 1947 covered the planet— have now been cleared. Some scientists have predicted that unless significant measures (such as seeking out and protecting old growth forests that haven't been disturbed) are taken on a worldwide basis, by 2030 there will only be ten percent remaining, with another ten percent in a degraded condition. 80 percent will have been lost, and with them hundreds of thousands of irreplaceable species.
Deforestation is directly responsible for climate change. Forest and soil are reserve  about 2200 Gt c. only Amazon rainforest locks up 11 years of carbon dioxide emissions Rainforests play the important role of locking up atmospheric carbon in their vegetation via photosynthesis. The vegetation and soils of the world's forests contain about 125 percent of the carbon found in the atmosphere. When forests are degraded, or cleared, the opposite effect occurs: large amounts of carbon are released into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide along with other greenhouse gases (nitrous oxide, methane, and other nitrogen oxides). The burning of forests releases about two billion metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year, or about 22 percent of anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide. Deforestation has a great contribution to climate change. Table -2 show the reservoirs of carbon.

Table-3: The global carbon reservoirs:
Size (Gt C)
Surface Ocean
Deep Ocean
Fossil fuels
Natural gas
Total fossil fuel

Source: global warming and climate change by ( Agarwal;2008) Aerosol Cloud:
Aerosols are extremely small particles or liquid droplets found in the atmosphere. They can be produced by natural events such as dust storms and volcanic activity, or by anthropogenic processes such as fuel combustion and biomass burning.
 They are removed from the atmosphere relatively rapidly by precipitation.  Because aerosols generally have short atmospheric lifetimes, and have concentrations and compositions that vary regionally, spatially, and temporally, their contributions to radiative forcing are difficult to quantify (IPCC 2001).
Various categories of aerosols exist, including naturally produced aerosols such as soil dust, sea salt, biogenic aerosols, sulphates, and volcanic aerosols, and anthropogenically manufactured aerosols such as industrial dust and carbonaceous aerosols (e.g., black carbon, organic carbon) from transportation, coal combustion, cement manufacturing, waste incineration, and biomass burning.
The main effects due to aerosols involve the scattering of solar radiation into space and towards the Earth. Major dust eruptions are more likely to cause such effects, but more modest eruptions may also contribute if the ejected magma is rich in sulphur.
Effects on solar radiation have been measured ever since the eruption of Krakatoa (near Sumatra, Indonesia) in 1883. The aerosols from this eruption reduced direct solar radiation by20±30% for a few months, though there was a certain compensatory effect from scattered radiation. The explosion of Gunung Agung (Bali, Indonesia) in 1963, then called `the eruption of the century' because of the quantity of ash sent up into the stratosphere, led to a 24% reduction in direct radiation, but compensatory scattering effects brought this down to only6% of total radiation; it took 13 years for the volcanic dust to disperse. After the eruption of El ChichoÂn (YucataÂn, Mexico) on 28 March 1982, the planetary albedo showed an increase of the order of 10% (Halpert et al., 1993).  There was also a decrease of 25±30% in direct solar radiation lasting several months after the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in June 1991 (Dutton and Christy, 1992).
Aerosols also have indirect radiative force effect. The indirect radiative forcing from aerosols are typically divided into two effects.  The first effect involves decreased droplet size and increased droplet concentration resulting from an increase in airborne aerosols. The second effect involves an increase in the water content and lifetime of clouds due to the effect of reduced droplet size on precipitation efficiency (IPCC 2001).  Recent research has placed a greater focus on the second indirect radiative forcing effect of aerosols.
The IPCC’s Third Assessment Report notes that “the indirect radiative effect of aerosols is now understood to also encompass effects on ice and mixed-phase clouds, but the magnitude of any such indirect effect is not known, although it is likely to be positive” (IPCC 2001).

Consequences of Climate Change

Climate change refers to a change in the state of the climate that can be identified (e.g. using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer. It refers to any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity. Climate change refers to a change of climate that is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and that is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods. Some major consequences are as follows:
3.1 Negative impacts:  climate change has emerged as the greatest challenge facing human kind.this global problem has serious local problem and poses major threats to the human  security. The most important  negative impacts are given below:
3.1.1 Temperature:
The temperature of the earth is determined by the balance between the rate at which sunlight reaches the earth‘s surface and rate at which warmed earth, send inferred radiation back in to the space (Agarwal,2008). The warm temperature which make life on the earth possible, are the direct result of the trapping of part of the earth’s radiant heat by traces of atmospheric Carbon dioxide, Methane, water vapor. Nitrous-oxide and chlorofluorocarbon. But the increasing emission of Green house gases losses the balance.
Over the last three decades, there has been growing concern that increases in atmospheric greenhouse gases will lead to substantial changes in the Earth’s climate. In addition to a general increase in temperature, it has been predicted that there will be changes in the geographical distribution, intensity and frequency of extreme events. Global warming is unequivocal, as is now evident from observation of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level and we humans are the main cause (IPCC 2001).
 Since 1905 the average temperature of the planet, then at 14oC, has increased 2.5%, an unusually rapid rate (a 0.35oC rise) (IPCC,2001). Over the last 25 years, from 1970 to 2005, it went up 4% (or 0.55oC) (Agarwal,2008) . The total increase in global average temperature represents a rise of 5.4% (or 0.74oC) since 1750.  “The warming trend over the last 50 years (1955 to 2005) is nearly twice that for the last 100 years”. The IPCC scientists say that much of it happened in the last 15 years! True, some cool years do occur. This is not a matter of the normal variability of temperature. The key point is that the overall trend since 1850, and especially since 1990, is that of a consistent, increasingly and unusually rapid, increase in global average temperatures
"The link between temperature and carbon dioxide, as well as methane concentrations in the past is surprisingly constant over time. Only through the impact of humans during the last centuries, atmospheric green house gases have been raised above their natural levels" Prof Dr Thomas Stocker of the Physics Institute at the University of Bern in Switzerland.
Fig-12: The concentrations of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and methane have heavily increased since the beginning of the 20th century,(IPCC)

Figure.13: Average Northern Hemisphere temperature over the past 1000 years.( Red = instrumental record, blue = reconstructed using proxy indicators, black = 40 year average, grey = estimated uncertainty range.) (Reproduced with permission from IPCC)

Observations of surface air temperature, averaged over the globe, indicate a warming of 0.7 80C from 1860 to 2000 (Parker et al. 2005). The temporal pattern of global mean warming is similar whether using independent data from land, sea surface or the air above the ocean. Attempts to simulate the temperature record using comprehensive three-dimensional climate models can only reproduce the rapid warming in the last three decades when the effect of anthropogenic greenhouse gases is included ( Stott et al. 2000,). That means when we combined the modeled and observed data in a graph then we get the prove that recent growing temperature is only and only due to increasing GHGs. (figure 2)
Figure-14; climate change attribution between observed an modeled
Source: wikipedia

Prediction about temperature rise:
In its Third Assessment Report, the IPCC noted that, when allowing for uncertainties in future changes in greenhouse and aerosol concentrations as well as for the range of probable climate sensitivity to such changes, expected warming of average surface temperatures will be between 1 and 2.5°C by 2050, increasing to between 1.4 and 5.8°C by 2100, relative to mean climate conditions of the past few decades. The CO2 emissions scenarios ranged from 5 to about 30 GtC/yr in 2100 (current anthropogenic emissions are about 76 GtC/yr).(IPCC,2001)

Delayed effects from changes in radiative forcings to date already commit the world to 0.5°C of that warming, even if all emissions of greenhouse gases were to stop immediately.

Figure-15: temperature increase in the next century (Source, IPCC,Working group,1)

There is considerable agreement between model results on the significance of global-scale changes in temperature; there is much less agreement with respect to regional changes. Despite these differences, there are a number of common features. For example:
·        Land areas warm more than ocean surfaces. This is primarily a consequence of the thermal inertia of oceans ( according to Agarwal,2008).
·        The Arctic polar region warms more than the tropics. The primary reason for this polar amplification is the reduction in the extent and duration of snow and ice cover on the surface, which thus reduces surface albedo, causing a positive feedback. Although such amplification is also expected to eventually occur in the Antarctic region, model experiments suggest a delayed cryospheric response to global warming in that region, relative to that in the Arctic.(Peter,2004)
·        Nighttime temperatures will, on average, warm more than daytime temperatures, thus reducing the daily temperature range ( according to Peter,2004).
·        Ocean circulation is expected to slow down. The turnover of the global oceans is largely determined by thermohaline processes that affect surface water densities. Generally, model studies agree that enhanced precipitation in the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere is likely to decrease the rate of deep-water formation in the North Atlantic and hence weaken the thermohaline circulation system. Melting of sea ice will add to this freshwater input. A weaker ocean circulation will also influence ocean heat transport mechanisms and may thus cause some surface ocean regions, like areas of the North Atlantic, to actually cool while the rest of the world warms (Vellinga,2000).
·        Natural oscillations in the climate system will be superimposed on the projected upward trends in temperatures, and hence will modulate both the temporal and spatial response of climates to enhanced radiative forcing. This adds significantly to the temporal and spatial uncertainty of the model projections, particularly at the regional scale (Verseveld,2000).
·        There is also evidence that the pattern of future warming will increasingly be like that of current El Niño years, with enhanced warming in the central and eastern tropical Pacific relative to the western Pacific. This, in turn, causes global atmospheric circulation patterns to change (Peter,2004).

3.1.2 Precipitation:
The increase in mean temperature increases the saturation vapor pressure of water, and hence potentially the water content of the atmosphere (Agarwal,2008). All other things being equal, this would, in turn, lead to increased intensity in precipitation events. If relative humidity (the fractional saturation of the atmosphere) is preserved, which appears to be true to first order in model simulations, and then the water content of the atmosphere would increase by about 6% for each degree Celsius of warming, following the Clausius Clapeyron equation. J. Gregory (Allen & Ingram 2002) found that the most extreme precipitation rates did increase by this level in a simulation with increased atmospheric carbon dioxide, but the intensity of moderate and light events decreased. The increase in atmospheric water increases the radiative warming of the surface and combined with the radiative cooling of the free atmosphere (Mitchell et al. 1987) tends to reduce the static stability of the atmosphere, supporting more intense precipitation.
According to Dr. Peter Toth, “there are a large number of human activities affect global rainfall patterns, including increased precipitation in the north of 50 degrees north latitude, in this area, including the United Kingdom.”
“The wet winter in the United Kingdom is expected that this will lead to more extreme precipitation, while summer is expected to be drier. But it may be based on climate change, there will be increased, even in extreme precipitation generally dry.”(Peter,2004). Recent events related to abnormal Weather conditions, with Tropical Ocean. The biggest problem in the UK is a great uncertainty about what will happen in the future of extreme rainfall (Peter,2004).
Figure-16; The evolution of globally averaged temperature (8C) changes relative to the years1961–1990 for the SRES A2 scenario from nine general circulation models (IPCC).

As average global temperatures have risen, average global precipitation has also increased. According to the IPCC, the following precipitation trends have been observed:
·         Precipitation has generally increased over land north of 30°N from 1900-2005, but has mostly declined over the tropics since the 1970s. Globally there has been no statistically significant overall trend in precipitation over the past century, although trends have varied widely by region and over time.
·         It has become significantly wetter in eastern parts of North and South America, northern Europe, and northern and central Asia, but drier in the Sahel, the Mediterranean, southern Africa and parts of southern Asia.
·         Changes in precipitation and evaporation over the oceans are suggested by freshening of mid- and high-latitude waters (implying more precipitation), along with increased salinity in low-latitude waters (implying less precipitation and/or more evaporation).
·         There has been an increase in the number of heavy precipitation events over many areas during the past century, as well as an increase since the 1970s in the prevalence of droughts—especially in the tropics and subtropics.
In the Northern Hemisphere's mid- and high latitudes, the precipitation trends are consistent with climate model simulations that predict an increase in precipitation due to human-induced warming.
3.1.3. Glacier and sea ice melting:
 Glacier and sea ice melting are one of the proven consequences of climate change. As the earth’s temperature has risen in recent decades, the earth’s ice cover has begun to melt. And that melting is accelerating.
Antarctic; Huge, pristine, dramatic, unforgiving; the Antarctic is where the biggest of all global changes could begin. There is so much ice here that if it all melted, sea levels globally would rise hugely - perhaps as much as 80m. Scientists divide the Antarctic into three zones: the east and west Antarctic ice sheets; and the Peninsula, the tongue of land which points up towards the southern tip of South America (Agarwl,2008). Parts of it appear to be thickening as a result of snowfall increases. But the peninsula is thinning at an alarming rate due to warming (Vellinga,et.al,2000). The West Antarctic sheet is also thinning on average by about 10cm per year, but in the worst places by 3-4m per year (IPCC, 2007). This Ice Sheet contains enough ice to raise sea level by 5-6 meters (17-20 feet) (IPCC, 2007)
Antarctica:  Most of the world's freshwater ice is contained in the great ice sheets that cover the continent of Antarctica. The most dramatic example of glacier retreat on the continent is the loss of large sections of the Larsen Ice Shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula. Ice shelves are not stable when surface melting occurs, and the collapse of Larsen Ice Shelf has been caused by warmer melt season temperatures that have led to surface melting and the formation of shallow ponds of water on the ice shelf (Agarwl,2008). The Larsen Ice Shelf lost 2,500 km2 (970 sq mi) of its area from 1995 to 2001 (IPCC,2003). In a 35-day period beginning on January 31, 2002, about 3,250 km2 (1,250 sq mi) of shelf area disintegrated (Huggel,2008). The ice shelf is now 40% the size of its previous minimum stable extent(Huggel,2008) .
Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS) :  The Greenland ice sheet contains enough ice to raise sea level about 7 meters (23 feet) (ipcc,2007). The net loss in volume and hence sea level contribution of the Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS) has doubled in recent years from 90 km3 (22 cu mi) to 220 km3 (53 cu mi) per year (ipcc,2007). The period since 2000 has brought retreat to several very large glaciers that had long been stable. Satellite images and aerial photographs from the 1950s and 1970s show that the front of the glacier had remained in the same place for decades (Agarwal,2008). In 2001 the glacier began retreating rapidly, and by 2005 the glacier had retreated a total of 7.2 km (4.5 mi), accelerating from 20 m (66 ft) per day to 35 m (110 ft) per day during that period Huggel,2008). Were Greenland s entire ice sheet to melt, global sea level could rise by a starting 7 meters inundating most of the world’s coastal cities.
The Himalayas: The Himalayas and other mountain chains of central Asia support large regions that are glaciated. The loss of these glaciers would have a tremendous impact on the ecosystem of the region. A March 2005 WWF report concluded that 67% of all Himalayan glaciers are retreating. In examining 612 glaciers in China between 1950 and 1970, 53% of the glaciers studied were retreating (IPCC,2001). After 1990, 95% of these glaciers were measured to be retreating, indicating that retreat of these glaciers was becoming more widespread (IPCC,2001) . In India the Gangotri Glacier, which is a significant source of water for the Ganges River, retreated 34 m (110 ft) per year between 1970 and 1996, and has averaged a loss of 30 m (98 ft) per year since 2000. However, the glacier is still over 30 km (19 mi) long (Huggel,2008). The continued retreat of glaciers will have a number of different quantitative impacts. Sea level rise, reduction of fresh water and irrigation water, specious loss etc.
Figure 17 :  Satellite images of the Gangotri Glacier retreat (Source; Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

3.1.4 Sea level rise:
·        Current sea level rise has occurred at a mean rate of 1.8 mm per year for the past century, and more recently at rates estimated near 2.8 ± 0.4 to 3.1 ± 0.7 mm per year (1993-2003) (IPCC,2003). Current sea level rise is due to human-induced global warming, the ocean sea surface temperature which will increase sea level over the coming century and longer periods (Vellinga,2000). Increasing temperatures result in sea level rise by the thermal expansion of water and through the addition of water to the oceans from the melting of continental ice sheets. Thermal expansion, which is well-quantified, is currently the primary contributor to sea level rise and is expected to be the primary contributor over the course of the next century (Agarwal,2008). Thermal expansion, The volume of the ocean surface water layer expands per 0.1oC  warming of the surface layer of the oceans, such that the sea level rises about 1 centimeter.  Thus, the measured 0.6oC-sea surface temperature increase explains a 6 centimeters sea level rise ( Wigley  1999)
Glacier melting is another cause of sea level rise. Average global sea-level rise over the second half of the 20th century was 1.8±0.3 mm/yr, and sea-level rise of the order of 2to3 mm/yr is considered likely during the early 21st century as a consequence of global warming (Woodroffeetal, 2006).
Figure 18.  Global mean sea level changes according to different SRES scenarios. The minimum and maximum values are the result of using different sensitivities of 1.5 o C and 4.5 o C and low and high ice-melt model parameter values ( source: Wigley  1999).

Values for predicted sea level rise over the course of the next century typically range from 90 to 880 mm, with a central value of 480 mm (Vellinga, 2008). Based on an analog to the deglaciation of North America at 9,000 years before present, some scientists predict sea level rise of 1.3 meters in the next century( Wigley  1999).
Figure-19: Past and projected global average sea level. The gray shaded area shows the estimates of sea level change from 1800 to 1870 when measurements are not available. The red line is a reconstruction of sea level change measured by tide gauges with the surrounding shaded area depicting the uncertainty. The green line shows sea level change as measured by satellite. The purple shaded area represents the range of model projections for a medium growth emissions scenario (IPCC SRES A1B). For reference 100mm is about 4 inches. Source: IPCC (2007)

In 2001, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Third Assessment Report predicted that by 2100, global warming will lead to a sea level rise of 9 to 88 cm. At that time no significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century had been detected. Subsequently, Church and White(2005) found acceleration of 0.013 ± 0.006 mm/yr2.
Future sea level rise, like the recent rise, is not expected to be globally uniform (details below). Some regions show a sea-level rise substantially more than the global average (in many cases of more than twice the average), and others a sea level fall (Church and White,2005).  However, models disagree as to the likely pattern of sea level change.
Over time, more substantial changes in sea level are possible due to the vulnerability of the West Antarctic and Greenland Ice sheets. However, there are significant uncertainties about the magnitude and speed of future changes (IPCC, 2007):

3.1.5 Sea level rise and coastal or low-lying areas
Coasts are dynamic systems, undergoing adjustments of form and process (termed morphodynamics) at different time and space scales in response to geo-morphological and ocean graphical factors (Cowelletal, 2003).
Coastal land forms, affected by short-term perturbations such as storms, generally return to their pre-disturbance morphology, implying a simple, morpho-dynamic equilibrium. Many coasts undergo continual adjustment towards a dynamic equilibrium, often adopting different ‘states’ in response to varying wave energy and sediment supply(Woodroffe,2003). Coasts respond to altered condition s external to the system, such as storm events, or changes triggered by internal thresholds that cannot be predicted on the basis of external stimuli.
Trenberth et al.(2007)and Bindoff et al.(2007) observed a number of important climate change-related effects relevant to coastal zones. Rising CO 2 concentrations have lowered ocean surface pH by 0.1 units since 1750 (Mortsch, 2006).  Recent trend analyses indicate that tropical cyclones have increased in intensity.
In Asia, erosion is the main process that will occur to land as sea level continues to rise. In some coastal are as of Asia, a 30 cm rise in sea level can result in 45m of landward erosion (ACIA, 2005). Climate change and sea-level rise will tend to worsen the currently eroding coasts (HuangandXie, 2000). In Boreal Asia, coastal erosion will be enhanced as rising sea level and declining sea ice allow higher wave and storm surge to hit the shore (ACIA, 2005).
Projected sea-level rise could flood the residence of millions of people living in the low-lying area s of South, South-East and East Asia such as in Vietnam, Bangladesh, India and China (Wassmann et al.,2004; Stern,2007).Even under the most  conservative scenario, sea level will be about 40cm higher than today by the end of 21st century and this is projected to increase the annual number of people flooded in coastal populations from 13 million to 94million. Almost 60% of this increase will occur in South Asia (along coasts from Pakistan, through India, Sri-Lanka and Bangladesh to Burma), while about 20% will occur in South-East Asia, specifically from Thailand to Vietnam including Indonesia and the Philippines (W al.,2004). The potential impacts of one meter sea-level rise include inundation of 5,763km2 and 2,339km2 in India and in some big cities of Japan, respectively ( Mimura and Yokoki, 2004). For one metre sea-level rise with high tide and storm surge,the maximum inundation area is estimated to be 2,643 km2 or about 1.2% of total area of the Korean Peninsula (Matsen and Jakobsen,2004).
Figure-20; Potential impact of sea-level rise on Bangladesh (Source: BCAS)

 Forty percent of the population of West Africa live in coastal cities, and it is expected that the 500km of coastline between Accra and the Niger delta will become a continuous urban megalopolis of more than 50 million in habitants by 2020 (Hewawasam,2002). By 2015,three coastal megacities of at least 8million in habitants will be located in Africa(Klein et al.,2002;Armah et al.,2005; Gommes et al.,2005). The projected rise in sea level will have significant impacts on these coastal megacities because of the concentration of poor populations in potentially hazardous are as that may be especially vulnerable to such changes (Klein etal. 2002; Nicholls, 2004)
Coastal agriculture (e.g., plantations of palm oil and coconuts in Benin and Côte d’Ivoire, shallots in Ghana) could beat risk of inundation and soil salinisation. In Kenya, losses for three crops (mangoes, cashew nut sand-coconuts) could costal most US$500 million for a 1 m sea-level rise (RepublicofKenya, 2002). In Guinea, between 130 and 235km2 of rice fields (17% and 30% of the existing rice field area) could be lost as a result of permanent flooding, depending on the inundation level considered (between 5 and 6m) by 2050 (République de Guinée,2002). In Eritrea, a 1 m rise in sea-level is estimated to cause damage of over US$250 million as a result of the sub-mergence of infrastructure and other economic installations in Massena, one of the country’s two port cities (StateofEritrea,2001).
Climate change has an indirect impact on socio-economic condition of the people of vulnerable region, specially the coastal zone of low land areas.
3.1.6 Impacts of climate change on forests
  Increased temperatures and levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide as well as changes in precipitation and in the frequency and severity of extreme climatic events, due to  Climate change is having notable impact on the world’s forests and the forest sector IPCC,2001). Living species as well as plants rely on a certain range in seasonal temperatures and precipitation for proper function in their various life stages. When variations exceeds an acceptable range, damage individuals so that they die or their function is impaired (Bassow et al. 1994).
Large-scale incidents of forest dieback have been positively correlated with extreme weather events (Auclair et al. 1990, 1996). Warmer temperatures reduced water use efficiency of because it increases water losses from evaporation and evapotranspiration (Mortsch, 2006). Longer, warmer growing seasons can intensify these effects resulting in severe moisture stress and drought. Such conditions can lead to reductions in the growth and health of trees although the severity of the impacts depends on the forest characteristics, age-class structure and soil depth and type (Mortsch, 2006). Seedlings and saplings are particularly at risk whereas large trees are capable to store nutrients and carbohydrates tend to be less sensitive to drought, though they are affected by more severe conditions. Trees and plants of Shallow-rooted species are more susceptible to water deficits because they are adapted to shallow soil.
Some impact of climate change on forest:
·        Forest supports a large and diverse ecosystem. Any small impact can alter the whole complex. Up to 50% of the Asia’s total biodiversity is at risk due to climate change (Mortsch, 2006).
·        Boreal forests in North-Asia would move further north. Projections under doubled-CO 2 climate using two GCMs show that 105 to 1,522 plant species and 5 to77 vertebrates in China and 133 to 2,835 plants and 10 to 213 vertebrates in Indo-Burma could become extinct (Malcolm et al.,2006).
·        In central Alaska, permafrost degradation is widespread and rapid leading to large ecosystem shifts from birch forests to fens and bogs (Jorgenson et al., 2001). Permafrost degradation in response to warming has also been reported from Western Canada where forested bogs are becoming non-forested poor fens as a result of rising water levels (Vitt, Halsey and Zoltai, 2000). Alaska yellow-cedar (Chamaecyparis  nootkatensis), normally an extremely hardy and  resilient species, is dying on about 200 000 ha in Alaska and Canada, as early spring melt  exposes their shallow roots to spring freezing injury and death( Hennon et al., 2008).

Forests are subjected to a variety of disturbances such as fire, drought, landslides, species invasions, insect and disease outbreaks, and storms such as hurricanes, windstorms and ice storms influence the composition, structure and function of forests that are themselves influenced by climate. (Dale et al., 2001).
Most vulnerable disturbance is  forest fires, may  occur more frequently, affect larger areas, become more  commonplace in settings where these events currently  are rare, or otherwise do more damage (Bachelet et al.,  2003, 2004; Scholze et al., 2006). Statistics indicate that fire activity has increased in the United States, for example, in recent decades. On average; 1.8 million hectares have burned each year since 1960, although the average from 1997 through 2006 was nearly 2.4 million hectares per annum. Most of the scientists suggest that climate change is the reason of increasing activity of forest fire in the western part of the country (Westerling et al, 2006).
 The observations in the past 20 years show that the increasing intensity and spread of forest fires in North and South-East Asia were largely related to rises in temperature and declines in precipitation in combination with increasing intensity of land uses. One study on the impacts of climate change on fires show that for an average temperature increase of1°C, the duration of wildfire season in North Asia could increase by 30% (Vorobyov, 2004), which could have varying adverse and beneficial impacts on biodiversity, forest structure and composition, outbreaks of pest and diseases, wild life habitat quality and other key forest ecosystem function.
These changes in climate may increase forest’s susceptibility to wildfire. In areas of the west which experience significant yearly danger of forest fire, there are projections of no change in precipitation or substantial drying accompanying projected rises in temperature (Manabe et al. 1991, Cubasch et al. 1992, Murphy 1995). Either of these dynamics could result in a higher probability of catastrophic fires, but decreases in precipitation would likely increase that danger substantially. Historically, occurrence of fire in western forests has varied directly with variations in temperature, and varied inversely with fluctuations in precipitation (Swetnam 1993). Forests in the western states already suffer the effects of deprivation of normal fire regimes, and of insect infestation (Sampson et al. 1994). These conditions have led to unprecedented losses of timber- lands to catastrophic fires in recent years as stand structures have departed from their historic range of variability.

3.1.7 Impact on Hydrology and water resources:
Climate change is expected to lead to reductions in water supply in most regions in the united state. Scientists predict significant loss of snowpack` glacier in the western mountains, a critically important source of natural water storage for California. At the global scale, there is evidence of a broadly rational  pattern  of  change  in  annual  runoff,  with  some  regions  experiencing an increase (Tao  et al., 2003a, b, for China;  Hyvarinen,  2003, for Finland; Walter  et al.,  2004, for the  coterminous USA), particularly at higher latitudes, and others a  decrease, for example in parts of West Africa, southern Europe  and southern Latin America (Milly et al., 2005).

The loss of snowpack will reduce the availability of water for California and the other Colorado River basin states (Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming). Snow accumulates until spring and early summer, when warming temperatures melt the snowpack, releasing water as runoff. In most river basins of the West, snow is the largest source of water storage (even greater than man-made reservoirs). As a result, snowpack has been the primary source of water for arid western states during the spring and summer, when their water needs are greatest. But increasing temperature became a threat for snow accumulation. Labat et al.  (2004) claimed a 4% increase in global total runoff per 1°C rise in temperature during the 20th century, with regional variation around this trend.

Climate change affects groundwater recharge rates (i.e., the renewable groundwater resources) and depths of groundwater also. The hydrological cycle is consisting with groundwater flow in shallow aquifers and with surface water flow. Groundwater contributes flow to many rivers and streams and is an important source of drinking and irrigation water. It is affected by climate variability and change through recharge processes (Chen et al., 2002), as well as by human interventions in many locations (Petheram et al., 2001)Groundwater levels of many aquifers around the world  show a decreasing trend over the last few decades. Aquifers will suffer from the trend of heavier precipitation events, because more water will go to runoff before it can percolate into aquifers. Thus, even in a future where overall precipitation increases, aquifer levels may decrease, due to the increased intensity of precipitation events.
There some regions,  such as south-western Australia, where increased groundwater  withdrawals have been caused not only by increased water  demand  but  also  because  of  a  climate-related  decrease  in  recharge from surface water supplies (Government of Western  Australia, 2003).

Figure-21: Impact of sea level rise on surface water and ground water (source: lal,2003)

Almost 40 percent of the world population lives in coastal areas, less than 60 kilometers from the shoreline, these regions may face loss of freshwater resources more than originally thought.

Relatively humid coastal areas will face their own challenges. Increasing salinity in freshwater supplies will become a bigger concern in coastal areas as the sea level rises due to thermal expansion (expansion of water as it warms) of the oceans, increased melting of glaciers, and melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps. Rising sea levels push saltwater further inland in rivers, deltas, and coastal aquifers, causing saltwater intrusion on coastal freshwater supplies in many coastal states. Salinity problems in coastal areas are typically most acute during late summer and early fall. Water demand at these times is high, and additional pumping from aquifers facilitates saltwater intrusion. Releasing water from reservoirs can sometimes help keep saltwater out of aquifers (by reducing demand), but water availability to reservoirs is typically low in late summer and early fall. In addition, the earlier snowmelt expected from warming temperatures will extend the drier summer season and create more opportunity for saltwater intrusion.

3.1.8 Health:
Health is essential to the quality of life and is viewed by many as a fundamental human right. Climate change is an emerging threat to global public health. According to statistics from the World Health Organization (WHO), regions or populations already experiencing the most increase in diseases attributable to temperature rise in the past 30 years ironically contain those populations least responsible for causing greenhouse gas warming of the planet.The IPCC has assessed that the global mean temperature is likely to rise by 1.4–5.8°C between 1990 and 2100 with associated changes in the hydrological cycle. These will cause a range of health impacts.
The World Health Organization (WHO) quantitative assessment, taking into account only a subset of the possible health impacts, concluded that the effects of the climate change that have occurred since the mid-1970s may have caused a net increase of over 150,000 deaths in 2000. It also concluded that these impacts are likely to increase in the future.

Figure-22: Relation between climate change and health ;(source :WHO)
10 acts on climate change and health according to WHO:
1.      Over the last 50 years, human activities - particularly the burning of fossil fuels - have released sufficient quantities of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to affect the global climate. The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased by more than 30% since pre-industrial times, trapping more heat in the lower atmosphere. The resulting changes in the global climate bring a range of risks to health, from deaths in extreme high temperatures to changing patterns of infectious diseases.
2.      From the tropics to the arctic, climate and weather have powerful direct and indirect impacts on human life. Weather extremes - such as heavy rains, floods, and disasters like Hurricane Katrina that devastated New Orleans, USA in August 2005 - endanger health as well as destroy property and livelihoods. Approximately 600 000 deaths occurred worldwide as a result of weather-related natural disasters in the 1990s, some 95% of which took place in developing countries.
3.      Intense short-term fluctuations in temperature can also seriously affect health - causing heat stress (hyperthermia) or extreme cold (hypothermia) - and lead to increased death rates from heart and respiratory diseases. Recent studies suggest that the record high temperatures in Western Europe in the summer of 2003 were associated with a spike of an estimated 70 000 more deaths than the equivalent periods in previous years.
4.      Increasing global temperatures affect levels and seasonal patterns of both man-made and natural air-borne particles, such as plant pollen, which can trigger asthma. About 300 million people suffer from asthma, and 255 000 people died of the disease in 2005. Asthma deaths are expected to increase by almost 20% in the next 10 years if urgent actions to curb climate change and prepare for its consequences are not taken.
5.      Rising sea levels - another outcome of global warming - increase the risk of coastal flooding, and could cause population displacement. More than half of the world's population now lives within 60 kilometers of shorelines. Some of the most vulnerable regions are the Nile delta in Egypt, the Ganges-Brahmaputra delta in Bangladesh, and small island nations such as the Maldives in the Indian Ocean, and the Marshall Islands and Tuvalu in the Pacific Ocean. Floods can directly cause injury and death, and increase risks of infection from water and vector-borne diseases. Population displacement could increase tensions and potentially the risks of conflict.
6.      More variable rainfall patterns are likely to compromise the supply of fresh water. Globally, water scarcity already affects four out of every 10 people. A lack of water and poor water quality can compromise hygiene and health. This increases the risk of diarrhoea, which kills approximately 1.8 million people every year, as well as trachoma (an eye infection that can lead to blindness) and other illnesses.
7.      Climatic conditions affect diseases transmitted through water, and via vectors such as mosquitoes. Climate-sensitive diseases are among the largest global killers. Diarrhoea, malaria and protein-energy malnutrition alone caused more than 3 million deaths globally in 2002, with over one third of these deaths occurring in Africa.
8.      Malnutrition causes millions of deaths each year, from both a lack of sufficient nutrients to sustain life and a resulting vulnerability to infectious diseases such as malaria, diarrhoea, and respiratory illnesses. Increasing temperatures on the planet and more variable rainfalls are expected to reduce crop yields in many tropical developing regions, where food security is already a problem. Mali is a good example. Unless adaptive measures are taken, climate change is projected to approximately double by the 2050s the percentage of its population at risk of hunger and associated health effects.
9.      Malnutrition causes millions of deaths each year, from both a lack of sufficient nutrients to sustain life and a resulting vulnerability to infectious diseases such as malaria, diarrhoea, and respiratory illnesses. Increasing temperatures on the planet and more variable rainfalls are expected to reduce crop yields in many tropical developing regions, where food security is already a problem. Mali is a good example. Unless adaptive measures are taken, climate change is projected to approximately double by the 2050s the percentage of its population at risk of hunger and associated health effects.
10.  Steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or lessen the health impacts of climate change could have positive health effects. For example, promoting the safe use of public transportation and active movement - such as biking or walking as alternatives to using private vehicles - could reduce carbon dioxide emissions and improve public health. They can not only cut traffic injuries, but also air pollution and associated respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. Increased levels of physical activity can lower overall mortality rates

The World Health Organization (WHO) has begun to quantify a few specific health outcomes influenced by climatic factors, as part of its large international Comparative Risk Assessment (CRA) (Ezzati et al., 2004)
Figure-23 : impacts of climate change and global warming on human health. (source, WHO)
The impacts of climate on human health will not be evenly distributed around the world. Developing country populations, particularly in Small Island States, arid and high mountain zones, and in densely populated coastal areas, are considered to be particularly vulnerable

3.1.9  Food security:
 Degradation of natural resources is likely to hinder increases in agricultural productivity and could dim optimistic assessments of the prospects of satisfying growing world food demand at acceptable environmental cost.’(IPCC, 2001, Working Group II). Food security is a central concept in this reasoning. Soil degradation is seen as one of the major challenges for global agriculture.
Agriculture is important for food security in two ways: it produces the food people eat; and (perhaps even more important) it provides the primary source of livelihood for 36 percent of the world’s total workforce (ILO, 2007). In the heavily populated countries of Asia and the Pacific, this share ranges from 40 to 50 percent, and in sub-Saharan Africa, two-thirds of the working population still make their living from agriculture (ILO, 2007). If agricultural production in the low-income developing countries of Asia and Africa is adversely affected by climate change, the livelihoods of large numbers of the rural poor will be put at risk and their vulnerability to food insecurity increased.  
Temperature; Most plant processes related to growth and yield are highly temperature dependent. The optimum growth temperature frequently corresponds to the optimum temperature for photosynthesis, the process by which plants absorb CO2 from the atmosphere and convert it to sugars used for energy and growth. Temperature also affects the rate of plant development. Higher temperatures speed annual crops through their developmental phases. This shortens the life cycle of determinate species like grain crops, which only set seed once and then stop producing. Figure illustrates the temperature effects on photosynthesis and crop growth duration. It shows that for a variety currently being grown in a climate near its optimum, a temperature increase of several degrees could reduce photosynthesis and shorten the growing period. Both of these effects will tend to reduce yields.
Figure-24; temperature effects on net photosynthesis, and effects of temperature deviation from normal temperature on developmental rate; (Source: parry, 1990)

Results of recent studies suggest that substantial decreases in cereal production potential in Asia could be likely by the end of this century as a consequence of climate change. However, regional differences in the response of wheat, maize and rice yields to projected climate change could likely be significant (Parry et al.,1999;. In Bangladesh, production of rice and wheat might drop by 8% and 32%, respectively, by the year 2050 (Faisal and Parveen,2004) so we can imagine the future situation of our country.
 Doubled CO2 climates could decrease rice yields, even in irrigated low-lands, in many prefectures in central and southern Japan by 0 to 40% (Nakagawa et al.,2003) through the occurrence of heat-induced floret sterility (Matsui and Omasa, 2002). Crop simulation modeling studies based on future climate change scenarios indicate that substantial loses are likely in rain-fed wheat in South and South-East-Asia (Fischer et al.,2002). For example, a 0.5° C rise in winter temperature would reduce wheat yield by 0.45 tonnes per hectare in India (Lal et al., 1998; Kalra et al., 2003). More recent studies suggest a 2 to 5% decrease in yield potential of wheat and maize for a temperature rise of 0.5 to 1.5°C in India (Aggarwal, 2008). Studies also suggest that a 2°C increase in mean air temperature could decrease rain-fed rice yield by 5 to 12% in China (Lin et al., 2004).

Figure 25; Projected climate change impact on agriculture Gross domestic production(GDP) and cereal production in 2080; Source: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

The impact of climate change on live stock farming in Africa was examined by Seo and Mendelsohn (2006a,b). They showed that a warming of 2.5°C could increase the income of small livestock farms by 26% (+US$1.4billion). This increase is projected to come from stock expansion. Further increases in temperature would then lead to a gradual fall in net revenue e per animal. A warming of 5°C would probably increase the income of small livestock farms by about 58% (+US$3.2billion), largely as a result of stock increase (Rosenzweig et al., 2001). By  contrast, a warming of 2.5°C would be likely to decrease the income of large livestock farms by 22%(–US$13billion) and a warming of 5°C would probably reduce income by as much as 35% (–US$20billion) (.
 The higher temperatures are beneficial for small farms that keep goats and sheep because it is easy to substitute animals that are heat-tolerant, and contrast, large farms are more dependent on species such as cattle, which are not heat-tolerant (Mendelsohn, 2006) Increased precipitation is likely to be harmful to grazing animals because it implies a shift from grass land to forests and an increase in harmful disease vectors, and also a shift from livestock to crops.
Figure-26: temperature ranges in which farm animal performance is most efficient. (Source parry1990)

3.1.10 Emergence of new pest and disease:
There  is  clear  evidence  that  climate  change  is  altering  the  distribution,  incidence  and  intensity  of  animal and plant pests and diseases such as Bluetongue, a sheep disease that is moving north into more  temperate zones of Europe. Cannon (Raymond J. C. et al 2004) found examples of plant pests whose distribution is  shifting  in  the  United  Kingdom and  other  parts of  Europe, most  likely  due  to  climatic  factors.  Migrant  moths  of  the  Old  World  bollworm  (Helicoverpa  armigera)  had  a  phenomenal  increase in the United Kingdom from 1969-2004 and there have been outbreaks at the northern edge of  its  range  in  Europe;  cottony  cushion  scale  (Icerya  purchasi)  populations  appear  to  be  spreading  northwards  perhaps  as  a  consequence of  global  warming;  and  cottony  camellia  scale  (Pulvinaria  –  Chloropulvinaria – floccifera) has become much more common in the United Kingdom, extending its  range northwards in England  and  increasing its  host  range in  the last decade  or  so,  which  is  almost  certainly  in  response  to  climate  change(Raymond J. C. et al 2004)
The range of the oak processionary  moth (Thaumetopoea  processionea)  has  extended northward  from  central and  southern  Europe  into  Belgium, Netherlands and Denmark. The oak processionary  moth’s  northward  progression  was  due  to  improved  synchrony  of  egg  hatch  and  reduction  of  late  frosts( Hugh,2000)  .  He  also  found  that  the  massive  population buildup of mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) and its northward progression  in the North American Pacific Northwest has most likely been due to a combination of warmer winter  temperatures,  reduced  episodes  of  under bark  mortality  and  increased  drought  which  weakened  the  trees. Kiratani (2007) 2 reported on the polar extension of several plant pests in Japan over the period 1965 to 2000. Yukawa has found that about 40 of the 250 butterfly species in Japan have exhibited northward range extensions in recent years (see Annex 3). A particular case study reported by Yukawa  showed  that  Nezara  viridula, a  tropical  and subtropical crop pest,  is  gradually moving northward in southwestern  Japan,  possibly  due  to  global  warming,  replacing  the  more  temperate  species  Nezara  antennata.
  In  addition,  unforeseen  emergence  of  “new”  diseases  and  pests  has  been  relatively  common.  New vectors, selection and recombination of disease genotypes may occur when animal species and breeds and plant species and varieties mix or when insect pests and vectors are introduced without their natural enemies. Change in climate resulting in changes in species composition and interactions will augment the emergence of unexpected events, including the emergence of new diseases and pests.  
Climate  change  will  especially  impact  vector-borne  animal  diseases  due  to  the  effects  of  climate  change on the arthropod vectors and macro-parasites of animals due to the climate effects on the free  stages of these parasites( Diarmid;2007). Climate change may also result in new transmission modalities and different host species. Although developing countries are already subject to an enormous animal disease burden,  both  developing  and developed  countries  will  be  subject to increased  incidence  or newly  emerging  diseases that are difficult to predict. Temperate countries will be particularly vulnerable to invasions by exotic arthropod-borne virus diseases and macroparasites (cannon,2002).
Drivers of plant pest change include increases in temperature, variability in rainfall intensity and distribution, change in seasonality, drought, CO2 concentration in the atmosphere and extreme events (e.g. hurricanes, storms), intrinsic pest characteristics (e.g. diapause, number of generations, minimum, maximum and optimum growth temperature of fungi, interaction with the host) and intrinsic ecosystem  characteristics (e.g. monoculture, biodiversity) also affect change. Emerging pests are often plant pests  of related species known as “new encounter” pests, which come into contact with new hosts that do not  necessarily have an appropriate level of resistance, or are plant pests introduced without their biological  control agents (in particular, insect pests, nematodes and  weeds).  

Any increase in the frequency or severity of extreme weather events, including droughts, heat waves, windstorms, or floods, could also disrupt the predator-prey relationships that normally keep pest populations in check(World Health Organization, Geneva, 1996) . An explosion of the rodent population that damaged the grain crop in Zimbabwe in 1994, after 6 years of drought had eliminated many rodent predators, shows how altered climate conditions can intensify pest problems. The effect of climate on pests may add to the effect of other factors such as the overuse of pesticides and the loss of biodiversity that already contribute to plant pest and disease outbreaks [McMichael et al,1996).
Those scenarios are show very alarming consequences for the world, particularly for developing countries. Because there is a lack of institutional and financial capacity in those countries.

3.1.11 Climate change conflict: The main consequences of climate change are land losses, fresh water scarcity, sea food losses, losses of agricultural field productivity, sea food losses, etc. but climate change became threat to the global peach.
Many scholars argue that there is a relationship between that climate change and conflict. Barnett (2001a, b; 2003) explores ways in which climate change might lead to conflict. He argues that ‘because sovereignty over delineated territory is the  material substrata of national security, then physical processes such as sea- level rise may undermine national security in serious ways’ (Barnett, 2001b:  4).
 ‘For centuries, wars have been fought for territorial expansion, ideological or religious dominance, and national pride. In the future, as climate change progresses and its effects become more pronounced, conflicts over natural resources could increasingly take centre-stage’.( Byers & Dragojlovic,2004)
The conflict in Darfur is most known case. They claim that the conflict in Darfur is probably linked to the changing climate in the Sahel region of North Africa. The climate change has forced nomadic herders to move into adjoining farming are as for longer periods of time, ‘often outstaying their welcome. As competition for fertile land and access to water intensified, ‘numerous local clashes broke out and the herders and farmers began to acquire more deadly weapons’ (Byers & Dragojlovic, 2004).
Mark Halle of the World Conservation Union stated in the foreword of an expert report to the OECD in 1999 that ‘the relationship between environment and security feels right’, and that ‘it seems intuitively correct to assume a direct correlation between environmental degradation on the one  hand and social disruption and conflict on the other’ (Halle et al., 1999).
Changes in global climate and atmospheric composition  are likely to have an impact on most of these( agriculture, forest, and wetland) goods and services, with significant impacts on socioeconomic systems (Winnett, 1998), and climate  change is likely to interact with other global changes, including population  growth and migration, economic growth, urbanization, and changes in land  use and resource degradation.
 The most dangerous bad impact of climate change is the food scarcity (Winnett, 1998).Agriculture, fisheries sector are directly environment depended. In case of Bangladesh the agriculture is totally seasonal. Small fluctuation causes huge loss. So food security as the main security issue of the future, outlining competition over fishing rights and water conflicts between Bangladesh and India among the future scenarios (Lester Brown 1977). He argued that militaries are incapable of solving the challenges posed by the deterioration of biophysical systems.
The widely-publicized report prepared for the US Department of Defense (Schwartz & Randall, 2003) presents a scenario for rapid climatic change, and the possible implications for US national security. According to this report, the result of climate change could then be significant drop in the human carrying capacity of the Earth’s environment. The report then explores how scenarios of abrupt climate change could ‘potentially de-stabilize the geo-political environment, leading to skirmishes,  battles, and even war due to resource constraints’ (Schwartz & Randall, 2003) such as food short- ages, decrease in the availability of clean fresh water, floods and droughts,  and disrupted access to energy supplies due to extensive sea ice and storminess. 
So we are the people of Bangladesh facing another consequence of climate change, conflict with India.
3.1.12 Extreme event:
The observed changes in the global climate during the 20th century are described in the report of Working Group I of the IPCC. Extreme events are closely associated with changes in temperature and precipitation, and with the frequency of events. Extreme events Altered frequencies and intensities of extreme weather, together with sea level rise, are expected to have mostly adverse effects on natural and human systems (Table ). (WGII IPCC).Examples for selected extremes and sectors are shown in Table

Table 4: Examples of possible impacts of climate change due to changes in extreme weather and climate events, based on projections to the mid to late 21st century. These do not take into account any changes or developments in adaptive capacity. The likelihood estimates in column two relate to the phenomena listed in column one.
Source: Working group I, IPCC
a) See Working Group I Fourth Assessment Table 3.7 for further details regarding definitions.
b) Warming of the most extreme days and nights each year.
c) Extreme high sea level depends on average sea level and on regional weather systems. It is defined as the highest 1% of hourly values of observed sea level at a station for a given reference period.
 d) In all scenarios, the projected global average sea level at 2100 is higher than in the reference period. The effect of changes in regional weather systems on sea level extremes has not been assessed.

New evidences on recent trends, particularly on the increasing tendency in the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events in Asia over the last century and in to the 21st century (Penner et al. 2001), are briefly discussed below and summarized in Table .In South-East Asia, extreme weather events associated with El-Niño were reported to be more frequent and intense in the past 20years (Trenberth and Hoar, 1997; Aldhous, 2004). Significantly longer heat-wave duration has been observed in many countries of Asia, as indicated by pronounced warming trends and several cases of severe heat-waves (De and Mukhopadhyay,1998;Kawahara and Yamazaki, 1999; Zhai et al.,1999;).Generally, the frequency of occurrence of more intense rainfall events in many parts of Asia has increased, causing severe floods, landslides, and debris and mud flows, while the number of rainy days and total annual amount of precipitation has decreased (Zhai et al.,1999; Khan et al.,2000; Zhai,2004). However, there are reports that the frequency of extreme rainfall in some countries has exhibited a decreasing tendency (Manton etal.,2001; Kanai et al.,2004).
 Increasing frequency and intensity of droughts in many parts of Asia are attributed largely to a rise in temperature, particularly during the summer and normally drier months, and during ENSO events (Webster et al., 1998). Recent studies indicate that the frequency and intensity of tropical cyclones originating in the Pacific have increased over the last few decades(FanandLi,2005). In contrast, cyclones originating from the Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea have been noted to decrease since 1970 but the intensity has increased (Lal,2001). In both cases, the damage caused by intense cyclones has risen significantly in the affected countries, particularly India, China, Philippines, Japan, Vietnam and Cambodia, Iran and Tibetan Plateau (PAGASA, 2001;ABI, 2005; GCOS,2005a, b).

Table 5 : Summary of observed changes in extreme events and severe climate anomalie
Source: Working group I, IPCC

 Scientists predict we will see more heavy rainfall days in the future than we currently get. The Environment Agency Sustainable Development Unit, said in June 2001: “Major floods that have only happened before say, every 100 years on average, may now start to happen every 10 or 20 years. The flood season may become longer and there will be flooding in places where there has never been any before”.So, the risk of flooding looks greater throughout the whole World.
The UK has experienced devastating floods throughout the last five years, which have affected thousands of people and caused millions of pounds worth of damage. Five million people in England and Wales are now at risk from flooding every year and two million homes have been built in the natural floodplain of rivers or the coast and are vulnerable to flooding. The total financial cost of all of the property, land and assets in these areas has been put at a value of $214 billion (lal.2003).
For many people around the World, particularly in developing countries, the dangers associated with flooding are serious. Houses, or even shacks, in many countries can be destroyed instantly as a result of heavy rain and flooding. In recent years flooding in China and Bangladesh have left thousands of homeless. Whether those floods are due to climate change is difficult to say, however they were examples of how some areas in the World struggle to cope with such situations.

By examining, the number of tropical cyclones and cyclone days as well as tropical cyclone intensity over the past 35 years, in an environment of increasing sea surface temperature. A large increase was seen in the number and proportion of hurricanes reaching categories 4 and 5 (P. J. Webster et al 2005). The largest increase occurred in the North Pacific, Indian, and Southwest Pacific Oceans, and the smallest percentage increase occurred in the North Atlantic Ocean.
During the hurricane season of 2004, there were 14 named storms in the North Atlantic, of which 9 achieved hurricane intensity (Lunt et al. 2005). Four of these hurricanes struck the southeast United States in rapid succession, causing considerable damage and disruption.
Recently, a causal relationship between increasing hurricane frequency and intensity and increasing sea surface temperature (SST) has been posited assuming an acceleration of the hydrological cycle arising from the nonlinear relation between saturation vapor pressure and temperature
Numerous studies have addressed the issue of changes in the global frequency and intensity of hurricanes in the warming world. The basic conceptual understanding of hurricanes suggests that there could be a relationship between hurricane activity and SST. It is well established that SST > 26°C is a requirement for tropical cyclone formation in the current climate
 Hurricane intensity shows a substantial change in the intensity distribution of hurricanes globally. The number of category 1 hurricanes has remained approximately constant but has decreased monotonically as a percentage of the total number of hurricanes throughout the 35-year period (P. J. Webster et al 2005). The trend of the sum of hurricane categories 2 and 3 is small also both in number and percentage. In contrast, hurricanes in the strongest categories (4 + 5) have almost doubled in number (50 per pentad in the 1970s to near 90 per pentad during the past decade) and in proportion (from around 20% to around 35% during the same period) (Woth 2005). These changes occur in all of the ocean basins. A summary of the number and percent of storms by category is given in Table 6 binned for the years 1975–1989 and 1990–2004.

Table 6: Change in the number and percentage of hurricanes in categories 4 and 5 for the 15-year periods 1975–1989 and 1990–2004 for the different ocean basins.

East Pacific Ocean
West Pacific Ocean
North Atlantic
Southwestern Pacific
North Indian
South Indian




Source (P. J. Webster et al 2008)

Table 7: Top five deadliest extreme weather events 1970-2002
3.2 Positive impact of climate change: Though climate change is a threat for the mankind, especially for the poor people, some developed countries claim that the will be happy with climate change.  Some of the good impacts are given bellow:
3.2.1 Increased food supply:
Alarmists will tell that global warming endangers the world's food supply. This is because they do not have a basic understanding of agronomic production (G. Zavarzin,1999). Russian scientists claim that global warming is an advantage to their agro production.  They (G. Zavarzin,1999) explain it as, that there are three things that crops need more than anything else to grow and produce high yields: heat, moisture, and carbon dioxide. Some crops can get too much heat, but even the worst predictions of global warming alarmists don't call for such temperatures. In most cases, increased temperatures will increase yields (kokorine, 1999). Moreover, millions of acres that are now too cold  in Russia and other cold countries to grow crops will become warm enough (kokorine, 1999). Furthermore, in traditional crop-growing areas, it is entirely possible that, with a shorter, warmer winter, farmers will be able to plant their crops earlier and harvest them later. What this means is that they might be able to get two crops planted and harvested in one year, effectively doubling the yield. And ultimately production increases. that the predicted wetter and warmer climate over much of Russia may indeed result in higher crop yields and in the expansion of crop-growing areas (Alcamo et, al,  2003). But expansion could be limited by poor soils, lack of infrastructure, and/or remoteness from agricultural markets. Better conditions for crops could also mean better conditions for pests, diseases and weeds.
Meanwhile, a dryer and warmer climate is predicted for the current crop growing and exporting areas of southeastern Russia. This could threaten productivity and cause more frequent years of bad harves (Jeremy,2001). Thus, gains in Russia 's potential new crop areas may be cancelled out by losses in current crop production areas.

3.2.2 Climate change could enhance forest production:
Andrew Burton, an associate professor at Michigan Tech and head of the National Institute for Climatic Change Research's Midwestern Regional Center, is part of a team of researchers that has been monitoring and measuring the temperature, moisture levels and nitrogen deposited by acid rain or varying levels of experimental nitrogen at four forest sites ranging from northwestern to southern Michigan since 1987. He's found that the trees grow faster at higher temperatures and store more carbon at greater concentrations of nitrogen, a chemical constituent of acid rain, providing there is sufficient moisture.
It may well be that increasing temperature and nitrogen deposition are good things, up to a point, (Burton, 2006).Increasing temperature,  precipitation and nutrient availability have good impact on productivity and health (Burton ,2006) . Forest productivity and species diversity typically increase with, although species may differ in terms of their tolerance (Das, 2004). As a key factor that regulates many terrestrial biogeochemical processes, such as  soil respiration, litter decomposition, nitrogen mineralization and nitrification, denitrification,  methane emission, fine root dynamics, plant productivity and nutrient uptake, temperature  changes are likely to drastically alter forests and ecosystem dynamics in many ways (Norby  et al., 2007). The impacts of elevated temperatures on trees and plants will vary throughout the year since warming may relieve plant stress during colder periods but increase it during hotter periods (Garrett et al., 2006).  
He explained that the rise in temperature is extending the growing season, So far, Burton and colleagues have measured 10 to 11-day longer growing seasons. “Our growing season isn't that long in the first place,” he pointed out, “so 10 or 11 days is significant.” A longer growing season could benefit the timber industry, enabling them to harvest more wood (Garrett et al., 2006). 
3.2.3 Fewer cold-related deaths: Many, many more people die from cold than from heat (though the cold related deaths don't get as much media attention) (Neilson,1995). The warmer it gets, the fewer people will die from cold. Moreover, global warming models all predict that the coldest times of the year, the coldest times of the day, and the coldest parts of the world will warm much more than the warmest times of the year, times of the day, and parts of the world (IPCC, 2003). So, the positive effect of warming in the cold areas/times will more than offset, by a huge margin in fact, the negative effect of warming in the warm areas/times.

3.2.4 Energy.  A warming climate holds the possibility of milder and shorter heating seasons, which in turn may lead to reduced Russian energy demand.  Increased water availability—particularly along those Siberian rivers that are used for  hydroelectric power—should result in increased power production in certain  parts of the country.  However, existing and future energy infrastructure for the all-important petroleum industry will experience more pronounced challenges— structural subsidence, risks associated with river crossings, and construction difficulties as permafrost thaws earlier and deeper, impeding the construction of vital new production areas.

3.2.5 Water supply:  Many parts of Russia’s massive territory will experience increases in the availability of water, including much of Siberia, the Far North, and northwestern Russia.  This change will bring certain positive impacts—including for hydroelectric generation (above).  However, managing the increased flows will pose other problems, especially when these increased flows coincide with extreme weather events such as downpours, or springtime ice-clogged floods.  In addition, increasing water shortages are predicted for southern parts of European Russia, areas that already experience significant socioeconomic and sociopolitical stresses.  Moreover, a number of densely populated Russian regions that are already subject to water shortages are expected to face even more pronounced difficulties in decades to come.
Those are the most important positive and negative consequences of climate change. Though climate change has some good impact but the negatives are more and seriously harmful to mankind.


International Mitigation Measures

4.1.The Kyoto Protocol:

The Kyoto Protocol was the most complex non-military treaty negotiations in history.” — The Wall Street Journal

“It’s an historic agreement. If countries who sign the treaty put in place the requisite policies and actions, the world will be set on a new course, one which is less dependent on fossil fuels, less polluting and less a threat to human health.” — Jonathan Lash, President, World Resources Institute

After 48-hours of non-stop talks, 160 nations negotiated a global treaty on December 11, 1997, to limit the production of greenhouse gases. Known as the Kyoto Protocol (Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) after the Japanese city where the final marathon bargaining session was held, this treaty will have profound implications on our economy and lifestyles. Although the majority of the world’s nations have negotiated the treaty, it still has to be formally signed and ratified. At least 55 countries representing 55 percent of emissions from developed countries, plus Central and Eastern Europe, have to sign the treaty by March 1999, and then take the legal steps necessary to ratify it.
4.1.1 Historical Background of Kyoto Protocol
 In 1990, the United Nations General Assembly established the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to negotiate the UNFCCC and merely after 15 months the Convention was adopted in Rio de Janeiro on 9 May 1992.    Under the UNFCCC, the parties agreed to stabilize the GHG emissions in the atmosphere “at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.”(Article 2, UNFCCC).  
Countries listed in Annex I agreed to work to return GHG emissions levels to 1990 and “to demonstrate a reversal in the trend towards growing emissions before the year 2000.” (Article 4.2. (b), UNFCCC) 
 Also, the UNFCCC stated that Annex I countries “may implement policies and measures jointly with other parties.” (Article 4.2. (a), UNFCCC). This is a brief reference to the so called “flexible mechanisms” of Joint Implementation (JI), Emission Trading (ET) and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), further implemented in the Kyoto Protocol.
    The UNFCCC was designed to be only a framework agreement depending upon subsequent protocols for implementation. It established a governing body known as the Conference of the Parties (COP). The COP will meet annually in order to deal with issues related to climate change. 

     Signed and ratified
      Signed, ratification pending
      Signed, but not ratified
Figure-27; Participation in the Kyoto Protocol (source, Wikipedia)

4.1.2 The key elements of treaty
 The commitments agreed to at Kyoto apply only to 38 developed nations and the countries in transition in Central and Eastern Europe (Russia, Ukraine, etc.). While individual nations have different targets, the overall reduction in greenhouse gases from 1990 levels is 5.2 percent. Rather than setting a single year as the deadline, the treaty allows countries to average their emissions over a five-year period (2008-2012), to allow for variations in economic growth, weather and other factors. (Details on the six greenhouse gases covered by the Treaty and their chemical properties are listed in an accompanying chart.)
The treaty also has a number of “flexibility provisions” to allow countries to find the lowest cost options to meet their targets. These include: investing in activities which store carbon; emissions banking and trading; and joint implementation of projects with developing countries. Let’s look at these in more detail: carbon dioxide from the atmosphere:
 Countries can claim “credits” for investing in tree-planting or other activities which take carbon out of the atmosphere. These are called carbon sinks (see glossary). The rapid cutting of the earth’s forests since the 19th century accounts for about half the build-up of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere, calculates Stephen Schneider, a climatologist at Stanford University. Countries that help reverse this trend by expanding their forest cover can claim credits to offset their emissions of greenhouse gases.  In essence, each nation that implements the Kyoto Protocol will have a greenhouse gas “bank account.” Rules for calculating credits and deductions of emissions and offsets will be the subject of negotiations at the next U.N. climate change conference in Buenos Aires in November 1998.  Clean Development Mechanism and Joint Implementation:

 The Clean Development Mechanism provides an encouragement for industrialized countries to invest in initiatives in developing countries that cut net greenhouse gas emissions. Appropriate clean energy projects could include: building a small-scale hydro plant or replacing an old, coal-fired electrical generating plant with a high-efficiency natural gas turbine. Under the clean development mechanism, the savings in carbon dioxide emissions will be recorded as a credit, which will be shared among the parties to the transaction.
Generally, investments in developing countries offer opportunities for greater reduction in greenhouse gas emissions per dollar than in developed countries. Industrial economies have already achieved higher levels of efficiency in their factories and infrastructure. Furthermore, the higher growth rates in many developing countries create more opportunities for earlier deployment of energy efficient technologies.
Joint implementation is the name given to projects carried out in partnership among developed nations and economies in transition in Central and Eastern Europe. For example, it has been estimated that Russia loses a significant amount of its oil and gas as a result of leaks in pipelines, and inefficient refining and materials handling. Many firms from Alberta’s oil patch already have contracts to transfer management and engineering skills to Russia’s energy industry. Under the Kyoto Protocol, these projects may earn emissions reduction credits. Emissions trading:
The Kyoto agreement permits the emissions trading among countries. It provides for countries with commitments under the treaty to buy and sell units of emission reduction among themselves. The kind of valuation system that would apply to such transactions, and the identification of an international body to monitor and regulate this trade will be determined at future negotiations.
4.1.3 The participation of developing countries
Developing countries did not commit to specific reductions, primarily for two reasons. Their priorities are economic growth and poverty reduction; and secondly, industrialized countries consume far more energy, and thus produce far more greenhouse gases. It has been estimated that since the Industrial Revolution in the 19th century, Europe and North America have produced 85 percent of the human- induced carbon dioxide in the atmosphere today.
The developing nations see Kyoto as a test of whether the world’s economic superpowers are serious about climate change. But while developing countries didn’t create the problem, they will have to be part of the solution, because many—China, India, South Korea and Brazil—now have large, rapidly expanding industrial sectors. Indeed, sometime after 2015, developing countries will produce more than 50 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.  Clearly, global warming cannot be addressed without the involvement of developing countries. Through its “Clean Development Mechanism,” the Kyoto Protocol will encourage industrialized countries to invest in “green” projects that transfer climate-friendly efficient technologies to the developing world.

4.2 Montreal Protocol
The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer is an international treaty designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of a number of substances believed to be responsible for ozone depletion.
 Purpose of Montreal Protocol: The treaty is structured around several groups of halogenated hydrocarbons that have been shown to play a role in ozone depletion. All of these ozone depleting substances contain either chlorine or bromine (substances containing only fluorine do not harm the ozone layer). For a table of ozone-depleting substances see:

4.2.1 Background

In 1974 by University of California researchers Sherwood Rowland and Mario Molina, first discover that chlorine atoms released by the breakdown of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in the upper atmosphere could precipitate a chemical chain reaction which would seriously damage the stratospheric ozone layer that protects all life from dangerous ultraviolet radiation (UV-B) emitted by the sun. This theory became the trace back of Montreal protocol. The theory create huge of controversy,
In 1976 the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) released a report that confirmed the scientific credibility of the ozone depletion hypothesis. And  in 1985, British Antarctic Survey.
That same year, 20 nations, including most of the major CFC producers, signed the Vienna Convention, which established a framework for negotiating international regulations on ozone-depleting substances.
The treaty was opened for signature on September 16, 1987 and entered into force on January 1, 1989 followed by a first meeting in Helsinki, May 1989. Since then, it has undergone seven revisions, in 1990 (London), 1991 (Nairobi), 1992 (Copenhagen), 1993 (Bangkok), 1995 (Vienna), 1997 (Montreal), and 1999 (Beijing). It is believed that if the international agreement is adhered to, the ozone layer is expected to recover by 2050. Due to its widespread adoption and implementation it has been hailed as an example of exceptional international co-operation with Kofi Annan quoted as saying that "perhaps the single most successful international agreement to date has been the Montreal Protocol".

4.2.2 Ratification: At present, 195 of 196 United Nations member states have ratified the original Montreal Protocol (see external link below). That one that has not as of April 2009 is Timor-Leste. Fewer countries have ratified each consecutive amendment. Only 154 countries have signed the Beijing Amendment.

The substances in Group I of annex A are:
1.      CFC-11 (CCl3F) Trichlorofluorometh
2.      CFC-12 (CCl2F2) Dichlorodifluoromethane
3.      CFC-113 (C2F3Cl3)  1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethan
4.      CFC-114 (C2F4Cl2) Dichlorotetrafluoroethane
5.      CFC-115 (C2F5Cl) Monochloropentafluoroethane
These two treaties are now internationally very important.

Perception of Developed and Developing Countries

5.1. Perception of Developed Countries:
5.1.1 Perception of USA:
The United States is the home of 5 percent of the world’s population and produces nearly 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions (COB,2009).  As of 2005, the U.S. produced more emissions per year than any other nation, although based on projected growth rates China may now be the largest emitter.

Figure 28: annual growth rate of highest emitters of the world Includes emissions associated with deforestation and land-use changes (Source: IEA; EPA; WRI; UNFCCC; McKinsey analysis)

As a physically large nation with a highly developed, service-based economy, the U.S. emits a greater proportion of GHGs from the buildings, transportation, and electric power sectors than do other great industrialized countries that are more compact and densely populated, like Germany and Japan.  According to an analysis of U.S. government forecasts, the nation's GHG emissions are projected to rise by 2.5 gigatons, from 7.2 gigatons CO2 per year in 2005 to 9.7 gigatons in 2030, at an average annual rate of 1.2 percent. Though the annual rate of change may appear small, it would produce a 35 percent increase in projected annual emissions by 2030 (larson et al.2007)

Table 8: comparison of GHGs emission between USA and world Domestic perception of USA:
·        Science about global warming is not true; The increase in our atmospheric carbon dioxide during the 20th and early 21st centuries has produced no deleterious effects upon Earth’s weather and climate. There is absolutely no correlation between the increase in CO2 and average worldwide and US temperatures. And, predictions of harmful climatic effects do not have experimental knowledge or have any scientific basis( acc0rding to John Coleman,2007)
·        ChinaIndia those  uses coal as a primary energy are  the big polluter (EIA,2007)
·        Their economist suggests that they can more easily adopt with climate change, rather than mitigation, because the mitigation measures directly affect the GDP, their economy, job market. They are capable to adapt with climate change, but not to mitigate this for rest of the world ( according to McMURTY,2002)
·        Kyoto protocol is a politics to the developed countries the bush administration simply deny the climate change. U.S. President George W. Bush has opposed both U.S.  Ratification of the Kyoto Protocol and any national plan that mandates reductions in GHGs (Boger, 2008)
·        They only take the mitigation measure   when developed countries take their responsibility.USA think that if Kyoto protocol is responsible to halt the climate change, this treaty must provide restriction to third world counties.
·        They have no historical responsibility. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a trace element essential to plant growth and a natural product of human breathing and many other normal processes. Yes, it is way up in the atmosphere; but still it is only 37 of every 100,000 atmospheric molecules. Despite all the shouting by global warming advocates that CO2, carbon dioxide, is the smoking gun of global warming, there is absolutely no proven evidence that CO2 has effected temperatures and plenty of evidence it has not.( acc0rding to John Coleman,2007)
·        In addition to opposing national mandatory caps, the Bush Administration has been accused repeatedly by its own government scientists of trying to muffle and even suppress scientific research findings showing the full impacts of global warming (COB,2009). Perhaps the most high-profile scientist to speak out publicly is the Director of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Institute for Space Studies’ James Hansen. Hansen said in  October of 2004: “In my more than three decades in government, I have never seen anything  approaching the degree to which information flow from scientists to the public has been screened  and controlled as it is now.”
·        In the absence of a national direction, many regions, states, and municipalities have begun to implement policies to reduce emissions on their own and in concert with other regions, states, and municipalities. The policies address a variety of sectors – in particular the electricity and transportation sectors and may aim to increase energy efficiency and renewable energy use (COB,2009) Current and proposed U.S. climate change policy:
While the current Congress has enacted various policies that are likely to reduce GHG emissions, the United States currently has no comprehensive national policy to specifically address GHG emissions (Boger, 2008). In February 2002, President Bush announced a goal to reduce “greenhouse gas intensity” – the ratio of GHG emissions to economic output expressed in gross domestic product (GDP) – by 18% in 2012(Boger,2008). Since then, President Bush has proposed additional voluntary measures to achieve this reduction. A GHG intensity goal, however, can decrease the carbon intensity of the economy while allowing GHG emissions to increase, and the continued rise in U.S. emissions indicate that this type of goal will not stabilize or reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the United States (Larsen et al, 2007) 

Figure 29: Government preference case for U.S. emission, Source: U.S. EIA Annual Energy Outlook (2007)

The question of how to address climate change and is still hotly debated in the United States.
The question of how to address climate change and is still hotly debated in the United States. A  January 2007 Pew Research Center poll shows that 77% of U.S. citizens believe that the earth is  warming, but there is far less agreement as to the cause (47% believe it is due to human activity;  20% believe it is due to natural causes; 16% aren’t sure).  In addition, polls generally agree that  of environmental issues, Americans consider global warming to be most critical,( Pew Research Center for People and the Press,2007) but they view  global warming as a relatively low priority compared to other issues of the day.  
To the limited extent that the U.S. has enacted national policies that affect climate change, it has done so through sectoral efforts. Perhaps the most significant policies affecting U.S. GHGs have been signed as laws that affect energy use, in the form of the 2005 Energy Policy Act and the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act. 
5.1.2 Perception of RUSSIA:
Russia is the world’s third largest emitter of greenhouse gases with its 1,700 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions a year and a steady projected annual growth rate, thereby significantly contributing to climate change.  So for the success of the attempts to reducing the tide of global warming and mitigate its effects Russian action is therefore vital. While certain Russian experts believe that a warmer climate could be advantageous, climate change is generally expected to have terrible consequences that will indirectly affect Russian economic well-being.
Figure 30 : Share of Russia's CO2 emissions in the world, Source: Key World Energy Statistics, 2003
Russia's GHG emissions are calculated on the basis of forecasts of CO2 emissions caused by fossil fuel combustion since their share in overall national emissions is more than 80%. The following figure represenets the history and the prediction of the dynamics and share of different GHGs in total amount of Russian GHG  emissions up to 2020.
Figure 31: the use of fossil fuel, past scenario and future prediction
Source: RF Ministry of economic development and trade National perception of Russia:
1. Climate change provides greater advantages to Russia. Russia is the only pollutant country which does not agree to take any mitigation measure to reduce GHG emission. The most important advantages of climate change in Russia will likely include the following: 
Energy: A warming climate holds the possibility of milder and shorter heating seasons, which in turn may lead to reduced Russian energy demand.  Increased water availability-particularly along those Siberian Rivers that are used for hydroelectric power- should result in increased power production in certain parts of the country. 
Water:  Many parts of Russia’s massive territory will experience increases in the availability of water, including much of Siberia, the Far North, and northwestern Russia.  This change will bring certain positive impacts—including for hydroelectric generation.
Agriculture: As growing seasons become longer and precipitation patterns change, using lands for agricultural purposes that previously would have been too far north- too cold for too much of the year- will become possible.  Raising new crops and new varieties of crops that are currently grown in Russia also could become possible. 
2. Though Russia has some advantages from climate change, but they face some disadvantages too. But they do not agree to mitigate climate change. Think that they have the ability to adapt with climate change. Domestic policy of Russia:
Though Russia has much more advantages derived from the climate change, they ratified Kyoto protocol and developed a environmental policy o mitigate climate change. Russia’s President signed it into law in 2004 on the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN FCCC) and it entered into force in February 2005. Russia is now bound to limit anthropogenic GHG emissions by the end of the Protocol 1st commitment period (2008-2012) at the level of country’s GHG emissions in 1990 while the Marrakech agreements of 2001 establish carbon sink targets of 33 Mt per year for Russia.
According to Russia's Ministry of Economic Development (MEDT), Russia will not only  meet its obligations under the Kyoto Protocol but will have significant GHG emission  quota surplus equal to over 3 billion tons of CO2-equivalent, which may partly be  transferred to the next Kyoto compliance period. Russia has basically completed the first stage of development of regulations and legislation needed for implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. By its decision, Russian Government has established a national system of assessment of GHG emission and sequestration. An AAU (assigned allowance units) registry has been established. The following actions are taken by Russia:
1.      Relevant normative acts and regulations have been made by the Russian Federal Service for Hydrometeorology and Environmental monitoring and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation.
2.      Russian Government has also recently approved  (May 2007) the National rules and regulations for Joint Implementation scheme of the  Kyoto Protocol,
3.       Russia's prime-minister signed an act of the Russian government that sets up a legal base for signing and implementing joint implementation (JI) projects to reduce GHG emissions. 54 such projects offered by Russia are ready for implementation that would result in GHG emission cuts amounting to 79.2 mill tons.   
4.      Russian regions actively participate in implementation of the Kyoto Protocol.

Figure 32: Interest in the Kyoto Protocol by Russian regions, (Source: V.Gavrilov, 2006)
But there are a number of criticisms about the Russia’s policies; few scientists say those are very weak and false! Some lacking is given below:
1.      There is been not a single JI project has been registered till May 27, 2007, mainly due to a lack of the proper national legislation concerning Kyoto Protocol implementation. It is expected that with recent approval by the Russian Government of the National rules and regulations on JI, this problem will quickly be solved.
2.      It remains ambiguous whether Russia will continue to participate in the Kyoto process after 2012, or not? A MEDT senior official said, “This will be a matter to be discussed at international negotiations. It depends whether we shall manage to protect our interests or not. Then we shall think if it is worthwhile to join the next period” (Ibid). Some experts also express concern that Russia may exceed its GHG  emission limit and incur considerable financial losses under the Kyoto Protocol, if carbon  intensity of Russian economy is not radically reduced (A.Kokorbn. Ibid, p.58).

5.2. Perception of developing countries:
5.2.1 Perception of INDIA:
India is now the world’s fourth largest emitter of GHG gases. Between 1990 and 2004, emissions increased by 97 per cent—one of the highest rates of increase in the world.  In 2005 india produces about 1.4 GtCO2 (Australian Government, Treasury, 2006). The following graph illustrates the major sources of India’s GHG emissions.
Figure, 33: India’s GHG Emissions by sector (2004)
(Source: Pew Centre on Global Climate Change) National perception of India
India is a participant in the Kyoto Protocol and is the second largest source of CDM emission credits after China. However, like China it has reportedly rejected the imposition on any binding limits on its GHG emissions (Pew Centre on Global Climate Change, 2008). India is concerned to further develop its economy and continue its policies aimed towards poverty alleviation and appears determined to peruse these goals in addition to any policies aimed at reducing its GHG emissions (HRD, 2007/2008).
Despite this, India has already declared that even as it pursues its social and economic development objectives, it will not allow its per capita GHG emissions to exceed the average per capita emissions of the developed countries. This effectively puts a cap on India‘s emissions, which will be lower if the developed country partners choose to be more ambitious in reducing their own emissions (Shyam, 2009).
In common with other developing countries India considers that the solution to the world’s climate change problems is primarily the responsibility of the developed industrialized world. It has resisted efforts for a limit to be placed on its own GHG emissions (Ramesh, 2009). Domestic climate change policy :
On 30 June 2008, the Indian Prime Ministers Council on Climate Change released India's National Action Plan on Climate Change. This document primarily offers a list of eight technological efforts, the pride of place being given to research and development of solar energy. But the report does not set any numerical goals for emission reductions or for energy intensity.This document also lists both new and existing policies. Many of these policies are already being implemented as part of the centralized economic plan drawn up by India’s Planning Commission. The current plan, the 11th, covers the years from 2007–2012. Individual Indian ministries were to submit action plans in response to this document by December 2008.In addition the government is seeking to expand the amount of forest cover in India by 1 per cent a year through to 2012 (The Pew Centre on Global Climate Change, India, ibid.).
Our people have a right to economic and social development and to discard the ignominy of widespread poverty.  For this we need rapid economic growth. But I also believe that ecologically sustainable development need not be in contradiction to achieving our growth objectives.  In fact, we must have a broader perspective on development. It must include the quality of life, not merely the quantitative accretion of goods and services.  Our people want higher standards of living, but they also want clean water to drink, fresh air to breathe and a green earth to walk on.”
                                                                                          Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh
This citation of Indians Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, definitely expose the perspective of India.

5.2.2 Perception of CHINA:
In 2005 china produces highest amount of Green House Gas, about 7.2 GtCO2  (Australian Government, Treasury,2006). They take the opportunity provided by Kyoto protocol as a developing country. China is now either the largest or second largest individual contributor to GHG emissions in the world, behind or near the total GHG emissions of the United States of America. The following graph illustrates the comparative sources of China’s GHG emissions in 2005.

Figure 34 : Comparative sources of China’s GHG emissions 2005
Source: US Congressional Research Service graph from IEA estimates
in the air have provided the primary rationales for most Chinese clean energy policies to date. National Perception of China
Chinese negotiators adhere to the principle of ‘common but differentiated’ responsibilities, agreed in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. They argue that emissions per person in China are low and that raising incomes must be their highest priority. Like Brazil, China also argues that that industrialized countries bear primary responsibility for the historical build-up of GHGs and should thus lead in mitigating emissions domestically. Industrialized countries also, China argues, should assist developing countries to mitigate emissions and adapt to coming climate related changes. ( ibid, pp. 175 -177 ) Domestic Chinese Climate Policy
China in recent years has paid serious attention to the linked issues of climate change and clean energy. China released its National Climate Change Program, In June 2007,. The program outlines activities both to mitigate GHG emissions and to adapt to the consequences of potential climate change. Within the Program, perhaps most challenging is China’s goal to lower its energy intensity (ibid, pp. 175 -177) by 20 per cent by 2010.
Related goals include more than doubling renewable energy use by 2020, expansion of both nuclear, gas and renewable generated power to displace thCe use of coal fired power, closure of inefficient industrial facilities, tightened efficiency standards for buildings and appliances, and forest coverage expanded to 20 per cent (Leggett, et al,, 2007) However, it is a notable feature of this policy that it rejects mandatory limits on emissions.

5.2.3 Perception of BANGLADESH:
Bangladesh is one of the lowest contributors of GHG both as a nation and on per capita basis. We are not at all responsible for the global climate change, but we are mainly the victims.
Bangladesh produces only 200kg CO2 very tiny amount because. Its economy is agriculture base, has sufficient amount of natural gases and does not depend coal as like India (BCAS). Bangladesh is facing various climate changes impacts and climate related extreme events due to its location and being a nascent and extremely flay delta. The country is located between the great Himalayans Mountains in the North with large river systems and the Bay of Bengal in the South. Bangladesh has been identified by the world scientists as one of the most vulnerable and potentially one of the most severely impacted countries by climate change including extreme weather events. Recent extreme event are supported this prediction. The enormous, forceful and devastating cyclone Sidr, hitting the coast of Bangladesh in November 2007, killed several thousands of people and devastated the lives of over 30 million people (MoEF, 2008). This intensification of cyclones is also consistent with prediction of Fourth Assessment of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
It is apprehended that the possible sea level rise will affect the country by inundating coastal areas of Bangladesh. A 30-45cm sea level will affect the coastal ecosystems, water and agriculture and food production. But this will also dislocate about 35 million people from coastal districts by the year 2050. For a 30 cm sea level rise, it anticipated that next 30 year's development investment would be wiped out in Bangladesh (IPCC, 2007). These may create severe problems in rural livelihood, local, regional and sectoral development as well as in sharing scarce resources (land, water, forest and fisheries) and thus it will enhance rural to urban migration and social conflicts in near future. Six Pillars of Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy:
The Bangladesh climate change strategy and action plan emphasizes on both adaptation and  mitigation and is built on six  pillars, which include: food  security, social and health;  comprehensive disaster  management; infrastructure to  protect human lives and assets;  mitigation and low carbon  development path, capacity  building and institutional  strengthening and research,  innovation and knowledge  management (The Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan 2008).
The climate change action plan comprises immediate, short, medium and long-term programmes. The needs of the poor and vulnerable communities including women and children will be prioritized in all activities implemented under the action plan. The government of Bangladesh has already allocated some money to implement actions under the strategy and trying to get funding for this from development partners. The government has already got some good responses from donors and developed country like the UK
There is currently a great deal of attention being paid to estimating the costs for adaptation in developing countries, raising the funds to meet those costs, and designing international finance mechanisms to channel these funds to developing countries. However, the preoccupation with raising funds at the international level for adaptation assumes that, once funding is available, developing countries have significant „absorptive capacity‰ to receive and spend this money in a cost efficient and effective manner to build the adaptive capacity of vulnerable communities on the ground. Many of the most vulnerable developing countries and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States do not have comprehensive climate change adaptation strategies, policies, or mechanisms in place to deal with the receipt and disbursement of adaptation funds and the implementation of adaptation action. However, Bangladesh is currently ahead of the game in this regard. Bangladesh, has not only taken steps to develop a new climate change strategy and action plan, but also got assurance for funding from an innovative Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) for addressing climate change. Immediate and urgent responses to address climate change and its impacts:
Bangladesh is one of the lowest contributors of GHG both as a nation and on per capita basis. It is not at all responsible for the global climate change, but we are mainly the victims. It as a country, which can do very little to tackle the causes of problem. Hence, we have to work collectively with the world community. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol under the Convention give it the scope and structure to work together and raise our voice to the global community and influence global decision making in our favor. However, Bangladesh has to work with the alliance of Group-77 and LDC to achieve good results from the Conference of the Parties (COP) negotiations to reduce GHG emission and lower the risk from the impacts climate change on people, society, economy and ecosystems.  Bangladesh government actually has no capacity for the mitigation of climate change; its policy is to take adaptive measures (BCAS).

Conflictual Perspectives: Developed Vs developing Countries

Climate change is a global problem. It is a result of unequal development and consumption of developed countries. Now this problem became a threat for developing nations. They asked the developed counties to take the mitigation measures to halt climate change and vice versa. This situation creates controversy among developed and developing countries.  The most controversial facts are given below:

6.1. Kyoto protocol:
The Kyoto protocol is the most prominent international agreement on climate change. The objective of the protocol is the “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system”, as mentioned in Article 2 of the UNFCCC.
The UNFCCC agreed to a set of a “common but differentiated responsibilities”. The parties agreed that:
  • The largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries.
  • Per capita emissions in developing countries are still relatively low.
  • The share of global emissions originating in developing countries will grow to meet their social and development needs. .
 For this above agreement protocol the Kyoto became a hottest topic of controversy between developed and developing countries. Those are given below

6.1.1. Developing countries get an unfair economic advantage:
The developed countries think that the biggest polluter in the world (China) is not restricted from polluting, and coming up fast is India also not restricted. This treaty is a pretty open attack on the west and capitalism (Boger, 2008).
The U.S. did not support the split between Annex I countries and others. Bush said of the treaty: “This is a challenge that requires a 100% effort; ours, and the rest of the worlds. The world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases is the People's Republic of China. Yet, China was entirely exempted from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol. India and Germany are among the top emitters. Yet, India was also exempt from Kyoto ... America's unwillingness to embrace a flawed treaty should not be read by our friends and allies as any abdication of responsibility. To the contrary, my administration is committed to a leadership role on the issue of climate change ... Our approach must be consistent with the long-term goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere” (Boger, 2008)

According to CBO, (2009) The Senate’s of united state concerns about developing country participation in the FCCC process were at least twofold.  First, they think that the developing will get more advantages for the industrial production. There was also the concern that U.S. manufacturing, and hence U.S. jobs, would move abroad to take advantage of relaxed environmental regulations there. Second, the Senate believed that an effective climate treaty absolutely required developing country participation.  They mentioned that large developing countries were rapidly increasing their emissions. As for example, some senators pointed out that by 2015 China will become the world’s leading producer of GHGs.
There also an economic concern of developed nations. President Bush claimed that the treaty requirements would harm the U.S. economy, leading to economic losses of $400 billion and costing 4.9 million jobs. Bush also objected to the exemption for developing nations(Larson, 2007) . The president’s decision brought heavy criticism from U.S. allies and environmental groups in the U.S. and around the world

Russia mentioned, “Kyoto protocol is established due to protect the environment from pollution. But it permits the developed countries to emit to achieve the goal of development. India uses coal as their primary energy and India’s growing consumption is perceived as a major future source of global warming. So why allow this burden on our economic growth? China produces cheap good due to low energy efficient technology which create economic losses to the developed countries” (Zavarzin, 1999).
But developing countries accept the Kyoto protocol, because developing countries increases their GDP without taking any measure to protect the environment (lin erda, 22007). These different perspectives are becoming more complex over time.

6.1.2. Common but differentiated responsibility:
This is the another key principle of Kyoto protocol and more controversial .According to this key principles, industrialized countries would take the escort in addressing the climate problem, specially excluding developing countries from obligatory GHG emissions reductions. And this principle arise a strong ground of debate between developed developing nations.
   According to UNFCCC, this principle is grounded in shared notions of fairness:  the developed countries are disproportionately responsible for historical GHG emissions and have the greatest capacity to act. Thus, the Convention makes few demands on the much less responsible and usually much less capable developing countries.  The exclusion of developing countries became one of the most contentious issues before and during the Kyoto conference (and remains so), especially because the United States insisted that developing countries make “meaningful” contributions to future GHG reduction efforts(Pew Research Center for People and the Press,2007). These U.S. demands appear to contradict the CBDR principle.

As a nascent principle of international environmental law, “common but differentiated responsibility” evolved from the notion of the “common heritage of mankind.”  The latter concept gained stature in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, as well as the international designation of certain areas (e.g., Antarctica and the deep seabed) and resources (e.g., whales) as “common interests” of humankind.In so far as the climate is of such crucial “common concern” to humankind, it follows that there is a responsibility on the part of countries to protect it.  This begs the question of who is responsible for climate pollution.  The answer is a function of each country’s historical responsibility for the problem, its level of economic development, and its capability to act. All countries could suffer from climate change, although it is likely that poor countries will suffer most, due to their vulnerable geographies and economies.  In addition, it is the economically developed countries of the so-called global North that have generated the most GHGs since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, and they have thereby benefited from using the global atmosphere as a sink for the harmful by-products of their economic development. 
The developed countries remain the largest sources of greenhouse gases, but the developing countries are expected to overtake them in coming decades (Erica, 2009). The United States currently produces more GHGs than any other country, but China is currently in second place and will rival the United States for output within a generation. Thus, it is essential that the large developing countries eventually join in limiting their greenhouse gases (CBO, 2009).
6.1.3 Clean development mechanism (CDM):
CDM is meant to be a vehicle for transfer of clean technology to the developing countries.  There is the COP -7  decision of periodic  review of regional  distribution of CDM  projects, but it is likely  the LDCs may not get a  fair share of CDM,  which is synonymous  with FDI (World Bank report).  Once the operation of CDM is left to the market forces alone, CDM projects will tend to be concentrated in the front-runner developing countries.
The CDM is the world’s biggest carbon offsets market (World Bank report). Theoretically, the CDM allows industrialized countries to support projects that decrease emissions in developing countries and then use the resulting emissions reduction credits towards their own reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol. Industrialized countries supported the establishment of the CDM because it would provide them with flexibility in how they can meet their Kyoto targets, particularly if domestic reductions turn out to be more costly than expected. Developing countries supported the CDM because they would receive funds for “sustainable development” (Gillenwater et al, 2007)
Each CDM credit – known as a certified emission reduction (CER) – supposedly represents one metric ton of carbon dioxide not emitted to the atmosphere. Governments can purchase credits directly or companies can buy them to comply with national-level legislation or, in Europe, with the European Union’s (EU) Emissions Trading Scheme. Currently, over 1000 projects are registered (approved) under the CDM, most commonly hydropower dams (Barbara haya, 2007)
The developing countries claim that the CDM is failing miserably and is undermining the effectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol. In the process, the CDM is not only failing to support climate change mitigation and sustainable development in developing countries, but also provides industrialized countries with a way out of meeting their own domestic reduction obligations.
The journal ‘Climatic Change’ in 2007 investigated whether the CDM was delivering on its sustainable development mandate. But even worse, many projects in the CDM pipeline have severe negative social and environmental impacts.

Case study 1:
Sondu Miriu Hydro Power Project, Kenya
IT is a 60 MW hydro project in Kenya; according to different media news when public protest this hydro power, resulted in the shooting and possible attempted murder by the Kenyan police of protest leader Argwings Odera.
The purpose of protests were to demand that the developers live up to agreements they had made to the community including to mitigate the project’s environmental and social impacts. The diversion of thirteen kilometers of the river was expected to take a main water source away from 1500 households. Project accounts describe that community members have suffered eye and respiratory problems from the dust caused from project construction, and that untreated water released back into the river had already led to the loss of local fish that were once abundant in the river. The organized communities also demanded that the project developers live up to the agreements they had made with the community to provide jobs at negotiated salary rates, fair compensation for displacement for over 1000 households, health services, irrigation facilities and electricity. The discussion of environmental impacts and stakeholder consultations in the PDD fails to address many of these concerns. In a case where a community leader’s life was threatened because he spoke openly about the project in the past, any new stakeholder consultations cannot be taken as an accurate representation of stakeholder views, and therefore can not be accepted as fulfilling the requirements for stakeholder consultations. (Source- Barbara haya, 2007)
6.1.4        Carbon  trading
It is a process of giving compensation for the emission of carbon dioxide over a specific limit. Polluters are purchasing carbon credits to cancel out the carbon emissions they produce. The credits, sold by entities which store more carbon than they make (or produce less carbon than their cap, and are therefore in 'credit'), are traded on a market very similar to a futures exchange. The largest market is in the EU. The companies are trying to become 'carbon neutral', which ultimately means stabilizing the overall amount of carbon entering the atmosphere in order to slow climate change (Larry,2008)
Proponents of offsets claim that third-party certified carbon offsets are leading to increased investment in renewable energy, energy efficiency, methane biodigesters and reforestation and avoided deforestation projects and claim that these alleged effects are the intended goal of carbon offsets.
Some environmentalists of developing countries have questioned the effectiveness of tree-planting projects for carbon offset purposes. Critics point to the following issues with tree planting projects:
·         Timing. Trees reach maturity over a course of many decades. Project developers and offset retailers typically pay for the project and sell the promised reductions up-front, a practice known as "forward selling".
·         Permanence. It is difficult to guarantee the permanence of the forests, which may be susceptible to clearing, burning, or mismanagement. The well-publicized instance of the "Coldplay forest," in which a forestry project supported by the British band Coldplay resulted in a grove of dead mango trees, illustrates the difficulties of guaranteeing the permanence of tree-planting offsets.
·         Monocultures and invasive species. In an effort to cut costs, some tree-planting projects introduce fast-growing invasive species that end up damaging native forests and reducing biodiversity. However, some certification standards, such as the Climate Community and Biodiversity Standard require multiple species plantings.
·         Indigenous land rights issues. Tree-planting projects can cause conflicts with indigenous people who are displaced or otherwise find their use of forest resources curtailed.

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

6.2. Binding Targets on Greenhouse Emissions :
Limiting the emissions of developing countries is widely seen as crucial and may be a condition for US involvement. Yet poor countries are adamant that they will not take on commitments until the industrialized world, most notably the US, has shown leadership by cutting emissions (martin khor, 2007).  Those perspectives create conflict between developed and developing countries especially between united state and India and china.
China on Tuesday promised to "do its best" on fighting climate change but rejected calls that Asia should sign up to binding targets on cutting carbon emissions. Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi said China and other Asian nations cannot bear the same responsibility for restricting greenhouse gas emissions as the developed world. The developed world should do more but China will do its best", he said at the closing press conference of the Europe-Asia meeting (ASEM) of foreign ministers in Hamburg that brought together top diplomats from 43 countries (Maythu, 2007).
India has so far stoutly refused to commit to any mandatory GHG emission reduction target, arguing that most of the extra GHG in the atmosphere today has been put there by industrialised countries, so these countries must reduce their GHG emissions, because:
·         Current emissions are, of course, adding to the problem incrementally. The accumulated stock of GHGs in the atmosphere is mainly the result of carbon-based industrial activity in developed countries over the past two centuries and more.  It is for this reason that the UNFCCC stipulates deep and significant cuts in the emissions of the industrialized countries as fulfilment of their historic responsibility.

·         The NFCCC itself does not require developing countries to take on any commitments on reducing their GHG emissions. This was also recognized in the subsequent Kyoto Protocol which only set targets for developed countries, the so-called Annex I countries.

·         India can, by no stretch of imagination, be described as a so-called “major emitter”. Our per capita CO2 emissions are currently only 1.1 tonnes, when compared to over 20 tonnes for the US and in excess of 10 tonnes for most OECD countries.  Furthermore, even if we are No. 3 in terms of total volume of emissions, the gap with the first and second-ranking countries is very large. The US and China account for over 16% each of the  total global emissions, while India trails with just 4%, despite its  very large population and its rapidly growing economy.

(Source: Public diplomacy division, Ministry of environment)

India highlighted the growing tension between rich and poor countries over climate change when it criticized calls for developing countries to curb greenhouse gas emissions.   They believe it would be deeply unfair to accept emissions limits that are many times less than those of developed countries (Shyam, 2009)
In this case, the industrial countries e.g. USA try to pressurize the India and china, without taking any permissible measure. They claim that the target of Kyoto protocol is unrealistic, harmful for their economy. (Larson et al, 2007)
Brazil has argued that the burden of emissions reductions should be distributed according to countries' cumulative contribution to the rise in global temperature from 1840 onwards. Actually they push each other without taking any target.

6.3. Historical responsibility:
Historically, and even currently, the excessive levels of emission of greenhouse gases have originated in the industrialized countries. Each inhabitant of the planet has an equal right to the atmosphere. By have grossly exceeding their fair share of atmospheric resources, the industrialized countries have caused climate change. India’s per capita carbon dioxide emissions are just over 1 tonne, compared to the OECD average of over 11 tonnes . (ClimeAsia, 14 no). If all countries had the same per capita emission levels as India, the planet would not have faced a climate change problem, Indian perspectives!  Since1950 the USA individually has emitted more than 60 billion tonne of CO2, while India produces only 5 billion tones. The developed world has caused the problem with many decades of unsustainable development process. But it is the poorer countries that will be worst affected.
The proposed reduction target for developing countries, which is still in brackets- which in UN jargon means there’s no agreement on it, is 15-30 percent by 2020, measured from a 2000 baseline. India is under pressure from industrialized countries to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 15-30 percent by 2020. For industrialized countries, the proposed target is a 25-40 percent reduction by 2020 and 75-85 percent by 2050, measured from a 1990 baseline (Shyam, 2009)Industrialized countries have pledged to reduce their emissions by five percent from 1990 by 2012 though it is unclear how many of them will meet this mandatory target.
But industrialized countries have pointed out that India is already the world’s fourth largest GHG emitter - China is first and the US second - and climate change cannot be controlled without more effort on the part of large developing countries like China and India.  Indian negotiators have also said there can be no question of developing countries agreeing to reduce or even cap GHG emissions unless industrialized countries fulfill their commitment to help them do so - by providing money and transferring technology (Shyam, 2009)
Recently the scientists of developed countries claim that the life time of CO2 are not thousands of years, there are much more evidence prove that this life time is 50-100 years. According to this study there is no historical responsibility of developed countries {Wilby, 2008)

6.4. Coast-benefit analysis:
 Nordhaus (1996), one of the prominent neoclassical economist working on ‘global cost-benefit analysis of climate change’ showed that costs of damages from global warming are less than the costs of the actions for emissions abatement necessary to avoid these damages. Bluntly, it was cost effective to go along with global warming, not to resist  (Nordhaus, 1996) . For industrial paradigm, limitations on the emissions of GHGs could lead to reductions in the levels of industrial output and economic activity. The cost of compliance to meet the targets outlined by the Kyoto Protocol could reach ten billion euros per year in Europe alone (Costa and Usher, 2005). For this reason neoclassical economists advocate international trading system for GHGs or carbon markets which they think could reduce the costs of reaching global targets and at the same time could support industrial development. These are the notion of the developed countries.
 Indian press characterized this neoclassical approach as economics of genocide. Deep ecologists comment that the whole exercise seemed to have the character of a self-fulfilling prophecy in favor of business (Rudolf Bahro, 1994). How the poor nations fight with these notions of developed countries?

6.5. Market and non-market valuation of resources:
Climate change has different economical and non-economical damages. Some are measurable by the amount of money and some are not, those are ecological value. The developed countries are become economically stable on the basis of capitalism. They think that GDP is the main and only one way to keep satisfied the citizens. The neoclassical paradigm is very much compatible with concept of capitalism. The neoclassical paradigm has adopted utilitarianism as its moral foundation which views human happiness as the main unit of value, expressed as utility. Its core ethic is “maximization of the total utility of society” (Nelson, 1991). Utilitarianism is problematic for the environmental issue such as climate change as it “perpetuates a false view of humanity’s place in the world” and does not explain why all the millions of nonhuman species in the world should be in service to man (Brown, 2005). In the neoclassical economics framework, non-humans and ecosystems are only valued to the extent that they affect human utility (Brown, 1998). The cost-benefit analysis privileges human wellbeing and undervalues the negative consequences of global warming and this way the preservation of endangered species only enters the equation in terms of utility to humans (Brown, 1998). Some deep ecologists see global warming as a strategic tool for Western industry to shore up its power and usher in a new era of economic growth (Chatterjee and Finger, 1994).  Others see it as a metaphor.
From neoclassical perspective, global warming is often cited as a paradigmatic example of market failure. Dlugolecki (2005) argues that who can claim for potential damages of global warming such as sea level rise or loss of biodiversity that has not been crystallized today into lower property values or lost economic opportunities? He observes loss of biodiversity as a non-financial damage and shouldn’t be taken into consideration.
 But the most of the country of developing world are directly depended on the environment as well as on nature. Climate change  at first alter  the environment, and then as a indirect result the nature based people of developing countries became vulnerable (IPCC;2001).  So the market based perception is the central problem of industrial countries.
Findings and Conclusion

7.1 Key Findings
On the basis of my previous chapter I got some concrete findings. Climate is a common resource. We only for our economic development used this resource destructively and as a result the global climate is changing. And this rate of changing is far more rapid than anticipated earlier. But n nation take it as there prime priority. In bellow there are most important findings of my study are given below:
  1.  Huge amount of green gases e.g. C0emission is  the main causes of climate change.
  2. Rising of temperature directly correlated to rising amount of C02.
  3. Temperature rise as well as climate change is unequivocal.
  4. Only temperature rise can disrupt the earth natural balance.
  5. Increasing the amount and intensity of recent natural extreme events (flood, drought, cyclone, and heat-wave) are the consequences of climate change.
  6. Poor people of poor country are more susceptible
  7. Industrial countries are responsible for climate change.
  8. Perception of developed countries is ambiguous.
  9. The success of Kyoto protocol is uncertain.
  10. All the country developed or developing, at first think there national priority and then about rest of the world.
  11. Actually the developed nation are not desires to taken any action those have any negative impact on their GDP, because they are the believer of Neo-classical paradigm.
  12.  Developing countries e.g. India, china, first wants economic self sufficiency, and then the take action to mitigate the climate change.
  13.  That means we the people of vulnerable low lying areas lost our land, lost every thing without any mistake of us.
  14.  And finally I like to say that, there is a lack of justice, fairness and the humanity.

7.2 Conclusion:
Climate change is the greatest to challenges the mankind in the 21st century. The challenges of climate change are multi- dimensional, immediate as well as long term. The causes are global in nature while the impacts are felt locally, often extremely. Poor are the most vulnerable to climate change in developing. According to IPCC, 2001; the developed as well as the industrial countries are more responsible.  The Kyoto protocol is one of the most important international treaties, which want to set some strategy to halt the GHGs emission. But developed countries are not accepted those. Because, theirs main priority is development.  As a result the poor people become more vulnerable.   So there is a sign of inequity. I think a comprehensive and   just solution of climate change problem requires fairness, justice and equity in mitigation.

কোন মন্তব্য নেই:

একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন