Economics and Politics of Global Warming

K Vijayachandran

Indian intelligentsia, it seems, has uncritically accepted the hypothesis of global warming and its consequences, as propagated by international environmentalists. Even the Peoples Democracy, the mouth piece of CPI(M), the leading political party of Indian left, had turned an ardent supporter of the global warming theory. On the strength of the proceedings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that met in Paris, the science columnist of the journal has argued in its recent issue: The first report in Paris in February 2007 asserted the harsh reality of anthropogenic climate change and elaborated the scientific basis for this understanding: perennial doubters and climate change deniers such as US conservatives and right-wing think-tanks, are now equivalent to those who believe the earth is flat!

Global warming theories are now traded as absolute scientific laws and given the status of even Galilean discoveries and the laws of motion and gravitation formulated by Newton. Indian media in its enthusiasm to sell hard core environmental stuff to its burgeoning middle class clientèle, find hardly any merit in reporting dissenting views of hard core scientists from all over the world, who are globally marginalized by a united front of popular scientists, sensation media-men and opportunist politicians. Quoted below are the words of Dr. Timoth Ball from a recent article titled titled, Global Warming, the Cold Hard Facts: "Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was one of the first Canadian Ph.Ds. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. ....

".....Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets."

Dr. Ball points out that the world was warming up ever since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age (LIA) that has generally continued to the present. The recent climate changes are well within natural variability and explained quite easily by changes in the sun and there is nothing unusual going on, argues Dr. Ball, whose carrier as a climatologist spanned two climate cycles: Temperatures had declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling was the consensus. By the 1990's trend appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. Like Dr. Ball, several hard core scientists have ridiculed the so called consensus approach to formulating scientific hypothesizes.

It was the very same consensus approach to scientific theories and discoveries, that had sent Galileo to gallows: for his dissenting views on the shape of the earth. Compared to middle ages, today's establishments have far more elegant tools at their disposal, for fabricating consensus and for fighting dissent: grant or denial of public funds for research. Western economies generate huge surpluses and the bulk of it get appropriated by Governments as taxes, and then recycled as research funds. That was part of the Keynesian solution for solving the inherent imbalances in market economies, which were inevitably leading to small and big wars, one after the other. Wars and preparations for wars continue to serve as safety valves even after the end of cold war, as evidenced by Iraq, Iran and North Korea. Nevertheless, infractuous research on weapon systems, environment and global poverty are seen as far more civilized methods of fighting economic imbalances. Bulk of human intelligence, today, is directly or indirectly deployed on such unproductive enterprises: Diversion of even a fraction of these resources could totally eradicate global poverty, as theorized by Professor Galbraith in his celebrated book of late fifties, Affluent Society.

United Nations Organization (UNO) has promoted several institutions like UNIDO, UNDP, UNCTAD and others, aimed at the development of humanity as a whole, through global cooperation and peaceful coexistence of nations. However, most of these UN agencies are dysfunctional today for lack of support from developed nations: UNEP (UN Environmental Program) and its joint venture with WMO (World Meteorological Organization), the IPCC, are the main fund receivers from developed countries, especially the USA, ever since their inceptions in 1972 and 1988. Billions of dollars are pumped into UNEP and ICPP every year, as pointed out by Dr. Ball, and we have massive volumes of reports and presentations dumped on Governments and general public, year after year, repeating the same old story but without caring to answer the numerous defects and inconsistencies, pointed out by scientific community. Even the Paris report of 2007 February, referred to earlier, is silent on these fundmental objections to digital models, that are unsupported by basic theories, and it mainly deals with the ill effects of climate change and the measures for mitigating them.

Last chance to save the earth was the slogan raised in the Rio conference organized by UNEP in 1992, four years after the formation of IPCC. After Rio, the issue of saving the earth was discussed several times over, but there was no unanimity on who should bare the cost of saving the planet! After several rounds of negotiations and bargaining, the Kyoto protocol for containing green gas emissions was unanimously agreed to in 2000. In the meanwhile, European Community had developed a host of green technologies to be traded through the Carbon Credit Scheme, designed by liberal economists. However, US is refusing to ratify the protocol for reducing carbon emissions by using the green technologies of the EC and has proposed a Global Nuclear Energy Program (GNEP), obviously under its own hegemony, as an alternative route to saving the planet! The conflict could not be resolved even in the recent G-8 Summit held in Germany.

The two sides are contending for the hegemonic control of future energy systems, that will be drive global economy. Solutions proposed by neo-liberal economists to mount a WTO like platform, on the strength of Kyoto protocol and IPCC reports, have temporarily failed to take off, and the US is keen to enforce its own hegemony through the nuclear route. Russia and China have declined to sign any global treaty. In India, environmentalists as well as the Government are in utter confusion: Left activists want Kyoto type agreements and neo-liberal solutions, while rightists like Dr. Pachouri, the present Chairman of IPCC, press for a nuclear tie-up with USA!

20-06-2007