CC essays Flashcards
CC & synoptic essays
The policies to manage national population change are more successful than those used to manage CC. To what extent do you agree?
Range of challenges, which are complex & policies used & success of these depends on the place & the political will. In theory would expect population to be more successful as only delivered at a national scale. CC – includes adaptation and mitigation – adaptation at the smallest scale – tailored to specific place & usually more successful if finance available. Mitigation – COP – global scale & difficult to achieve.
1. Thailand & anti natalist
2. France & Pro natalist
3.Adaptation - range - Sundarbans.
4. Mitigation - COP
Successful population policy - Thailand
Power to adapt to population growth shown in Thailand
1969 6.5 fertility & by 2019 1.5 children – contraception 16-73%……
Mr.Condom man – Economist
1.Mothers – ensure everyone has access to contraception – trained shop keeper.
2. Religion – blessed the condoms
3. Education – fun games – educated about sexual health.
4. Vasectomies
5. Military – radios
6. Micro finance schemes – only available to women if using contraception.
France - Pro-natalist policy - is it really working?
1939 – Code de la famille – aim to increase fertility rate to just above replacement level. Use incentives ( baby bonus, tax incentives & free subsidized creche), paternity leave..
UN stated not going to reach goals, only 0.6mn increase expected 2030 – 2050. It is costing billions of euros and the govenrment also needs to support an ageing population. Paternity leave is also costing companies as it has been extended to 25 days 7 up to 32 days if multiple children.
Adaptation - Sundarbans - BRAC, Goalbari & Mangrove Action Project.
local scale effective – Sundarbans – but is it only in the short term?
UN women & BRAC – 30 rural communities – 19,000 supported & resilience increased. 10yrs boat classrooms – 500 boats & housed 15,000 children.
Goalbari – floating farms outside Dhaka – women’s coop, collecting savings and then providing small loans, can buy assets – livestock & raised housing of 1.2mn.
Mangrove Action project ( US NGO) – works with local NGOs – workshops in 6 rural schools – educates legacy in schools how under threat and why need to protect/benefits. Also encourages and trains how to restore mangroves.
Mitigation - Global
Intended national Determined Contributions ( INDCs) not ambitious enough. Leaders can change e.g. Obama & Trump – slips down agenda. No one really held accountable. No country meeting target of 1.5 degrees. Statement of intent. Renewables can’t yet fill the gap & geoengineering expensive
The growth of the middle class will inevitably accelerate climate change.
Intro – People with a disposable income – spend on consumer goods & at upper end cars/holidays. Definition varies but can be defined at $10,000+
1. Yes - China -
2. No - cities and govenrments can mitigate.
3.Already accelerated & experiencing positive feedback loops?
Yes, Middle Class are accelerating CC.
1 in 5 middle class in China. China – No.1 carbon polluter in 2020, disposable income has increased, more driving cars and meat consumption has gone up 150%. Agriculture large contributor to GHG emissions – deforestation of rainforest for cattle & feed, plus methane ( 120kg per cow per year). 800mn Amazonian trees felled for beef. Manufacturing & factory emissions.
No, Middle Class don’t need to accelerate have ability to mitigate.
cities can mitigate – green roofs – Vancouver and green buildings – Milan. Public transport – cycle lanes – Tervuren. More educated and wealthier can afford in green technology. COP conferences, social media & NGOs.
China is also the leader green technology ( solar/wind) – investing the most and x4 that of USA.
UK - 2010 7% renewables and today over 40%. Want to redyce 1990 emissions by 68% by 2030. £1bn set aside for renewables and £500mn on top for offshore wind.
Has it already accelerated & Middle Class only adding?
Has it already accelerated & are we not already experiencing positive feedback naturally amplifies – Permafrost, ocean, Amazon. Have we already reached a tipping point?
Changes in the global energy balance are primarily the result of natural processes rather than human activity. To what extent do you agree with this statement?
Intro: Global energy balance is the relationship between incoming shortwave radiation and outgoing longwave radiation. The balance has changed over both the long and short term due to events like glacial periods, and the present day enhanced GHE.
1. Natural Processes- short term =volcano - months/years & sun spots - decades, Long term =Milankovitch cycles.
2. Human Processes
3. Feedback loops
Natural Process - Short Term
Short term ( months & years) – Volcanic eruptions – 1991 Pinatubo – ash and dust reflected solar radiation. Average temp fell 0.5 for 2 yrs.
Short term ( decades) – Sun spots ( solar flares) where there are more higher temp. Cycle btw low and high activity occurs over 11yrs. Can be longer Mini Ice age – lasted 70yrs – few sun spots – frost fairs on Thames river.
Natural Process - Long term
( 10,000-100,000yrs) Milankovitch cycles – changes in the orbit ( orbital forcings). Eccentricity – changes from circular to elliptical, obliquity – tilt changes due to gravitational pull of planets & precession – wobbles slowly- changes axes. Combined together they cause long term changes – glacial periods and interglacial periods.
Human Processes
Last 150yrs warmed and C02 has risen exponentially due to humans. 2/3 warming occurred since 1975.
Industrial Revolution – more dependent on fossil fuel energy, globalization & trade, methane x30 more potent than C02 – released from landfills, cows. 25% GHEs from agriculture. Cement 1000kg = 900kg C02 ( 5% of all emissions).
Feedback loops
Natural – but have been influenced by humans – albedo & oceans & Permafrost & methane.
Conclusion
Natural forcings did cause significant changes in the past resulting in ice ages… but when looking at the hockey stick graph we can see that natural forcings are too weak to explain this recent rise in temperatures.