India shortsighted about global warming?

Sama · Oct 24th, 2009, 08:27

"Yet today Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said that India will not sacrifice its development for a new climate change deal in Copenhagen. Sadly, Singh is following a long line of short-sighted leaders failing to see that development will be not only arrested but reversed in the severe climate change scenarios looming if Copenhagen fails to yield a consequential decision....The truth is, few people are more dependent on its outcome than the people of India—the 1 in 7 on Earth who will suffer more than you and me—even though my country produced the majority of greenhouse gases plaguing the world now....So Singh can stubbornly say he will not sacrifice his nation's economic development for a climate change deal in Copenhagen. But what he's really saying to the people of India is: Screw you."

India Stands to Lose Most at Copenhagen

capt_mahajan · Oct 24th, 2009, 08:43

Not really about shortsightedness. It is about who will pay and how much for cleaning up the global act.

federica · Oct 24th, 2009, 17:19

Still it's short-sighted, as the countries less affected don't want to pay for it, either. Nobody willingly wants to pay for it. But as sooner as more countries are taking serious measures, as sooner the pressure on the others can be increased and as sooner this stupid game will end.

It's a matter of facing the future and taking up responsibility. I really hope more and more leaders will realize this (in my own country, too.

)

deburn · Nov 3rd, 2009, 23:04

Growing up in India, I remember this song we used to sing. It went something like this: if you get to heaven before me, keep the door open for me. If I get to heaven before you, "I'll close that door, and to hell with you!"

And that's what any discussion of what needs to be done on global warming invariably reminds me of. The West, having for decades plundered the earth, now, having achieved their prosperity, wants the East to "learn from our mistakes" and make choices that may be the best long-term approach, but cost a lot of money, far more than these economies can afford, given the other, more pressing issues they have to deal with.

The data on how much garbage the West generates, especially the US and Canada, compared to less developed economies is astounding. It's an order of magnitude difference. Yet ask any American (or Canadian) to take the train to work instead of driving in, alone, every day, 10 times a week, and see the uproar you'll get. Driving is an American right, so we say. Raise the price of gas and you might even get us to put down the remote control long enough to email our senators!

Yes, we've now recycle a lot of what we consume, but the (main) problem is the amount we consume. Consumption in countries like India is far lower and reusing things (as opposed to recycling) is a way of life for most.

federica · Nov 3rd, 2009, 23:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by deburn

The West, having for decades plundered the earth, now, having achieved their prosperity, wants the East to "learn from our mistakes" and make choices that may be the best long-term approach, but cost a lot of money, far more than these economies can afford

But do you think repeating the same "development" way like in the West would be a good solution? What would be the outcome?

Bargaining about cheap/free technology transfers and leaving the "high-energy-consumption-phase" out would be less short-sighted. It's pretty clear that especially India can hardly cut down its per-capita CO2 emissions.

A position like: "Ok, we're trying our best not to increase them much, but we need better technologies at affordable rates" would help much more than "Our economy cannot afford any restrictions regarding CO2 emissions (Wasn't that an American statement of the Bush-era?)". It would help everyone, except maybe those in out-dated industries.

Boston123 · Nov 4th, 2009, 03:12

I think Manmohan Singh is shrewd and doing right by India. After all, why should he step forward, when China, Brazil and others are not stepping forward? Besides, as he says, sacrificing short term 'prosperity', or not mitigating poverty, will be unacceptable to the vast masses of India, who are still waiting for the payoff from India's recent economic growth. Curbing greenhouse gases has a immediate impact on growth today,and pain borne by Indians alone; while the benefits are( maybe?)long term, and shared by all countries? Why would you take up such a wager? Think of short term benefits of DDT( mosquito eradication)versus the longer term cancer risks... which would you accept, if you were in India?

I think China and India can be trusted to develop their own renewable energy industries( it is happening now BTW, in some cases, faster than in the US), as they see the potential to choke on their own pollution; but that's a decision best left to India.

federica · Nov 4th, 2009, 05:18

If everyone is thinking like this, nobody will start and nothing will change. Wasn't it Gandhi who said "be the change you want to see happen"?

I've seen the situation in some areas in Kerala, where the beaches have vanished some years ago and every unusual high tide has a massive effect on the low areas of the hinterland and the not-so-rich population there. When I think of other coastal areas in India (like the border to Bangladesh), but also the situation in the Himalayas, great. Where will these people go when their environment is destroyed?

It's not that I don't know that India hasn't capacities for its own technical development, it was just the answer to this "we can't afford technology thing".

Using and selling its own technology would even contribute to a sustainable economical growth.

If nobody thinks something should be done, ok, I am living in an area that will most probably profit from global warming, most areas in India won't.

Still I do care and undertake steps to reduce my personal impact on it. Am I crazy as I am not only caring for my tiny little box?

Boston123 · Nov 4th, 2009, 07:42

Federica,

Your point is valid. Its just that the Indian govt finds the US approach somewhat hypocritical, given the US's reluctance for example, to tax gasoline as a way of curbing consumption( as many EU countries have done). I think India and China( or at least the leaders) realize that if they load up cars and (coal based)power plants at current rates, they will not have any air to breathe, or water to drink.. its just that most western solutions being advocated, center upon reduced energy consumption, or non-use of polluting technologies as a solution.

BTW, China I think is the 2nd largest car market in the world now, and is expected to overtake the US in total number of cars sold/ year, in the very near future.. and pretty much all these cars are gasoline powered..

capt_mahajan · Nov 4th, 2009, 08:21

How to marry the burning need of the world to step back from the brink with an almost equally burning need of the developing countries not to get exploited again- in the name of the environment this time- is the big q.

camelgirl · Nov 4th, 2009, 09:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by capt_mahajan

Not really about shortsightedness. It is about who will pay and how much for cleaning up the global act.

Yes it is-- it's completely about shortsightedness. It's pay now, before we're at the abyss & fighting over water rights, coal pollution, etc. (already happening here in the U.S.) or pay later when it's much harder and more expensive to undo the damage. The world will pay one way or another.

But humans have a way of endlessly postponing fixing problems of any kind on a personal, regional, national and global level. I believe we're chronically short-sighted. Maybe it's how we manage to keep going in the face of overwhelming problems.

Wow, very philosophical right before bedtime.

Sama · Nov 4th, 2009, 11:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by deburn

Yet ask any American (or Canadian) to take the train to work instead of driving in, alone, every day, 10 times a week, and see the uproar you'll get. Driving is an American right, so we say.

It's very easy to say that Americans should take public transportation. However, that's hard to do in places without a public transportation system. duh.

I grew up in Chicago with excellent public transportation: buses in the city, subways, elevated trains, and commuter rail in the suburbs. but not every city has that type of system.

Nick-H · Nov 4th, 2009, 12:55

Sod global warming: if India doesn't stop being short-sighted, it is going to vanish under its own pile of garbage and disappear in its own river of effluent.

This should not be seen as an India v. rest-of-world issue: it is an India surviving issue.

solo_trekker · Nov 4th, 2009, 15:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick-H

Sod global warming: India .... is going to vanish under its own pile of garbage...
.

Actually, most of that pile of garbage also comes from the West...!

The jokers we have in the country who rule us simply allow it to be dumped here...! No questions asked...!

One can only hope for the best...

Cheers...!

Nick-H · Nov 4th, 2009, 16:07

I thought somebody would say that!

Yes, it is down to those "jokers". Why is coming here? because somebody is making money out of it*.

As for the "most" --- have no idea about the actual facts, but, judging by the city I live in, I'd say that most Indian cities could bury themselves without external help. It is not just garbage either; it is rabid, uncontrolled development, on every scale --- from a small hut making a lake even smaller, or a river that little bit narrower, to major industrial developments and environmental destruction.

But then (I can feel a collision with the naxalite thread coming!) --- we wouldn't want to do anything that would endanger foreign investment, now, would we?

*yes, we can talk about the people who send it, to whom it is out of site and mind at minimum cost to them, and-couldn't-care-less about cost to anybody else, too. but, if India wasn't in the market for accepting it, it couldn't come here.

solo_trekker · Nov 4th, 2009, 17:56

Someday, we'll hopefully find a legal way to send it all back; and with interest...!

Yes, the external help in the garbage pile is only a part of the whole...
But, like we said, we have our own jokers; we dont really need help from imported ones...!

A prime always-in-the-news example remains 'Alang'...
The port which breaks up all the ships and sea-liners...

We live on hope...!

Cheers...!

Oct 24th, 2009, 08:27	#1
Sama a pain in the asana Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: the India inside my heart Posts: 6,421	India shortsighted about global warming? "Yet today Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said that India will not sacrifice its development for a new climate change deal in Copenhagen. Sadly, Singh is following a long line of short-sighted leaders failing to see that development will be not only arrested but reversed in the severe climate change scenarios looming if Copenhagen fails to yield a consequential decision....The truth is, few people are more dependent on its outcome than the people of India—the 1 in 7 on Earth who will suffer more than you and me—even though my country produced the majority of greenhouse gases plaguing the world now....So Singh can stubbornly say he will not sacrifice his nation's economic development for a climate change deal in Copenhagen. But what he's really saying to the people of India is: Screw you." India Stands to Lose Most at Copenhagen __________________ *MY INDIA, 2005-2008* "Once you have felt the Indian dust, you will never be free of it." (Rumer Godden, 1975)

Oct 24th, 2009, 08:43	#2
capt_mahajan Infidel Sufi Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: styx Posts: 13,600	Not really about shortsightedness. It is about who will pay and how much for cleaning up the global act. __________________ . Outside the machine

Nov 3rd, 2009, 23:04	#4
deburn Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Boston Posts: 38	Who gets to heaven first? Growing up in India, I remember this song we used to sing. It went something like this: if you get to heaven before me, keep the door open for me. If I get to heaven before you, "I'll close that door, and to hell with you!" And that's what any discussion of what needs to be done on global warming invariably reminds me of. The West, having for decades plundered the earth, now, having achieved their prosperity, wants the East to "learn from our mistakes" and make choices that may be the best long-term approach, but cost a lot of money, far more than these economies can afford, given the other, more pressing issues they have to deal with. The data on how much garbage the West generates, especially the US and Canada, compared to less developed economies is astounding. It's an order of magnitude difference. Yet ask any American (or Canadian) to take the train to work instead of driving in, alone, every day, 10 times a week, and see the uproar you'll get. Driving is an American right, so we say. Raise the price of gas and you might even get us to put down the remote control long enough to email our senators! Yes, we've now recycle a lot of what we consume, but the (main) problem is the amount we consume. Consumption in countries like India is far lower and reusing things (as opposed to recycling) is a way of life for most.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
About cows and global warming...	Larkilli	Dogs, Cats, and Langurs	1	Apr 15th, 2009 20:02
global warming to dry up ganges	Sama	Chai and Chat	12	Dec 1st, 2007 20:49
Global warming needs Eco spirituals?	rangers	Chai and Chat	0	Jul 19th, 2007 18:44

Oct 24th, 2009, 17:19	#3
federica Maha Guru Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Bavaria Posts: 1,774	Still it's short-sighted, as the countries less affected don't want to pay for it, either. Nobody willingly wants to pay for it. But as sooner as more countries are taking serious measures, as sooner the pressure on the others can be increased and as sooner this stupid game will end. It's a matter of facing the future and taking up responsibility. I really hope more and more leaders will realize this (in my own country, too. )

Nov 4th, 2009, 03:12	#6
Boston123 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: boston Posts: 242	I think Manmohan Singh is shrewd and doing right by India. After all, why should he step forward, when China, Brazil and others are not stepping forward? Besides, as he says, sacrificing short term 'prosperity', or not mitigating poverty, will be unacceptable to the vast masses of India, who are still waiting for the payoff from India's recent economic growth. Curbing greenhouse gases has a immediate impact on growth today,and pain borne by Indians alone; while the benefits are( maybe?)long term, and shared by all countries? Why would you take up such a wager? Think of short term benefits of DDT( mosquito eradication)versus the longer term cancer risks... which would you accept, if you were in India? I think China and India can be trusted to develop their own renewable energy industries( it is happening now BTW, in some cases, faster than in the US), as they see the potential to choke on their own pollution; but that's a decision best left to India.

Nov 4th, 2009, 05:18	#7
federica Maha Guru Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Bavaria Posts: 1,774	If everyone is thinking like this, nobody will start and nothing will change. Wasn't it Gandhi who said "be the change you want to see happen"? I've seen the situation in some areas in Kerala, where the beaches have vanished some years ago and every unusual high tide has a massive effect on the low areas of the hinterland and the not-so-rich population there. When I think of other coastal areas in India (like the border to Bangladesh), but also the situation in the Himalayas, great. Where will these people go when their environment is destroyed? It's not that I don't know that India hasn't capacities for its own technical development, it was just the answer to this "we can't afford technology thing". Using and selling its own technology would even contribute to a sustainable economical growth. If nobody thinks something should be done, ok, I am living in an area that will most probably profit from global warming, most areas in India won't. Still I do care and undertake steps to reduce my personal impact on it. Am I crazy as I am not only caring for my tiny little box?

Nov 4th, 2009, 07:42	#8
Boston123 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: boston Posts: 242	Federica, Your point is valid. Its just that the Indian govt finds the US approach somewhat hypocritical, given the US's reluctance for example, to tax gasoline as a way of curbing consumption( as many EU countries have done). I think India and China( or at least the leaders) realize that if they load up cars and (coal based)power plants at current rates, they will not have any air to breathe, or water to drink.. its just that most western solutions being advocated, center upon reduced energy consumption, or non-use of polluting technologies as a solution. BTW, China I think is the 2nd largest car market in the world now, and is expected to overtake the US in total number of cars sold/ year, in the very near future.. and pretty much all these cars are gasoline powered..

Nov 4th, 2009, 08:21	#9
capt_mahajan Infidel Sufi Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: styx Posts: 13,600	How to marry the burning need of the world to step back from the brink with an almost equally burning need of the developing countries not to get exploited again- in the name of the environment this time- is the big q.

Nov 4th, 2009, 12:55	#12
Nick-H This is just a cameo appearance Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Chennai, India Posts: 36,173	Sod global warming: if India doesn't stop being short-sighted, it is going to vanish under its own pile of garbage and disappear in its own river of effluent. This should not be seen as an India v. rest-of-world issue: it is an India surviving issue.

Nov 4th, 2009, 16:07	#14
Nick-H This is just a cameo appearance Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Chennai, India Posts: 36,173	I thought somebody would say that! Yes, it is down to those "jokers". Why is coming here? because somebody is making money out of it. As for the "most" --- have no idea about the actual facts, but, judging by the city I live in, I'd say that most Indian cities could bury themselves without external help. It is not just garbage either; it is rabid, uncontrolled development, on every scale --- from a small hut making a lake even smaller, or a river that little bit narrower, to major industrial developments and environmental destruction. But then (I can feel a collision with the naxalite thread coming!) --- we wouldn't want to do anything that would endanger foreign investment, now, would we? yes, we can talk about the people who send it, to whom it is out of site and mind at minimum cost to them, and-couldn't-care-less about cost to anybody else, too. but, if India wasn't in the market for accepting it, it couldn't come here.

Nov 4th, 2009, 17:56	#15
solo_trekker Maha Guru Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: around delhi Posts: 880	Someday, we'll hopefully find a legal way to send it all back; and with interest...! Yes, the external help in the garbage pile is only a part of the whole... But, like we said, we have our own jokers; we dont really need help from imported ones...! A prime always-in-the-news example remains 'Alang'... The port which breaks up all the ships and sea-liners... We live on hope...! Cheers...!