President Ram Nath Kovind will be on a 3-nation visit to Iceland, Switzerland and Slovenia from September 9 to 17. During the visit, the focus will be on climate change and growing engagement with Europe.

Deputy press secretary to the President, Dr Nimish Rustagi said, "The President looks forward to having an engagement with his counterparts and also engaging with the business community and students of these countries".&nbsp;

While he will be meeting with the top leadership of all the 3 countries, he will also be engaging with the students at universities of these countries and its business leadership.

Asked if Kashmir will be discussed during the meetings with the political leadership, secretary west Gitesh Sarma in the Ministry of External Affairs said, "When leaders meet, there is a structure in which regional, international, global multilateral issues of national concerns are discussed. We use this opportunity to brief each other. This is a very good setting to hear at the highest level what our perspective is".

On terror, "all 3 countries are very sympathetic to India and this year in the context of Pulwama attack, their sympathies have been with India. They are aware that there is a need to work closely with India", he said.

PM Modi's first leg of the visit will be to Iceland where the focus will be on dealing with climate change. He will deliver a lecture at the University of Iceland in the capital city Reykjaví on "India-Iceland partnership and towards making a greener planet". 80 per cent of Iceland works on geothermal energy, which can help India in its renewable energy programme.

The visit to Iceland is significant given the fact that it is the chair of the Arctic Council and is involved in the Arctic Circle Cooperation. New Delhi is an observer at the Arctic Council and is keen on increasing its engagement with that part of the world. This will be the first time when the president visits a Nordic country.

This will be followed by a visit to Switzerland from September 11 to 15. President Kovind will unveil a bust of 'father of nation' Mahatma Gandhi in Villeneuve. Gandhi had visited the place in 1931. Kovind will also hold an address the University of Bern on the topic "India-Switzerland, new age partnership, connecting Himalayas with Alps".

On the issue of black money, both the countries started the automatic exchange of financial account information with India started receiving information from Sept 1 with respect to all financial accounts held by Indian residents in Switzerland. The President will visit Slovenia from September 15 to 19.

Interestingly, Bollywood is keen to tap the scenic beauty of these countries. While Switzerland is well known as a location to shoot Bollywood movies, Shah Rukh Khan's movie Dilwale's song 'Gerua' was shot in the south coast of Iceland.

This is for the eleventh time when the President will go abroad after taking charge. This will be his second foreign visit during the third year of his tenure. &nbsp;

President Kovind has been on a state visit to 23 countries in the 11 visits. After the 3-nation tour, the number of his foreign visits will go up to 26. Other European countries he has visited include Cyprus, Bulgaria, Czech Republic and Croatia.

President Ram Nath Kovind will be on a 3-nation visit to Iceland, Switzerland and Slovenia from September 9 to 17. During the visit, the focus will be on climate change and growing engagement with Europe.

President Ram Nath Kovind will be on a 3-nation visit to Iceland, Switzerland and Slovenia from September 9 to 17. During the visit, the focus will be on climate change and growing engagement with Europe. Deputy press secretary to the President, Dr Nimish Rustagi said, "The President looks forward to having an engagement with his counterparts and also engaging with the business community and students of these countries". While he will be meeting with the top leadership of all the 3 countries, he will also be engaging with the students at universities of these countries and its business leadership. Asked if Kashmir will be discussed during the meetings with the political leadership, secretary west Gitesh Sarma in the Ministry of External Affairs said, "When leaders meet, there is a structure in which regional, international, global multilateral issues of national concerns are discussed. We use this opportunity to brief each other. This is a very good setting to hear at the highest level what our perspective is". On terror, "all 3 countries are very sympathetic to India and this year in the context of Pulwama attack, their sympathies have been with India. They are aware that there is a need to work closely with India", he said. PM Modi's first leg of the visit will be to Iceland where the focus will be on dealing with climate change. He will deliver a lecture at the University of Iceland in the capital city Reykjaví on "India-Iceland partnership and towards making a greener planet". 80 per cent of Iceland works on geothermal energy, which can help India in its renewable energy programme. The visit to Iceland is significant given the fact that it is the chair of the Arctic Council and is involved in the Arctic Circle Cooperation. New Delhi is an observer at the Arctic Council and is keen on increasing its engagement with that part of the world. This will be the first time when the president visits a Nordic country. This will be followed by a visit to Switzerland from September 11 to 15. President Kovind will unveil a bust of 'father of nation' Mahatma Gandhi in Villeneuve. Gandhi had visited the place in 1931. Kovind will also hold an address the University of Bern on the topic "India-Switzerland, new age partnership, connecting Himalayas with Alps". On the issue of black money, both the countries started the automatic exchange of financial account information with India started receiving information from Sept 1 with respect to all financial accounts held by Indian residents in Switzerland. The President will visit Slovenia from September 15 to 19. Interestingly, Bollywood is keen to tap the scenic beauty of these countries. While Switzerland is well known as a location to shoot Bollywood movies, Shah Rukh Khan's movie Dilwale's song 'Gerua' was shot in the south coast of Iceland. This is for the eleventh time when the President will go abroad after taking charge. This will be his second foreign visit during the third year of his tenure. President Kovind has been on a state visit to 23 countries in the 11 visits. After the 3-nation tour, the number of his foreign visits will go up to 26. Other European countries he has visited include Cyprus, Bulgaria, Czech Republic and Croatia.

President Kovind to visit Iceland, Switzerland and Slovenia with focus on climate change

Greenland facing the brunt of climate change as region becoming warmer, ice depleting. Watch this report to know more.

Greenland facing the brunt of climate change as region becoming warmer, ice depleting

Swedish climate change campaigner Greta Thunberg has taken part in her first demonstration on US soil since arriving by zero-carbon yacht.

Greta Thunberg joins climate protest outside United Nations

The long-term outlook for Australia's Great Barrier Reef has been downgraded to "very poor" for the first time by the official agency charged with managing the World Heritage Site.

'Great Barrier Reef outlook very poor', says Australia

Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg finally sets sights on the lights of New York City as her zero-carbon transatlantic journey nears its end. Photographs show Thunberg on her boat, a mere 119 miles away from the shores of New York. Another image captured at night shows New York's lights in the distance. The 16-year-old is headed towards New York and will take part in a UN environmental summit. In posts on social media, Thunberg says she expects to arrive on Wednesday

Highlights from Greta Thunberg’s trans-Atlantic journey as it nears its end

The Amazon is not on fire. There are fires in the Amazon rainforest, as there are every year in July-September, because this is the dry season. There may be more fires than usual this year, and it may even be the fault of Jair Bolsonaro, the Donald Trump mini-me who became the president of Brazil last January, but that is not still clear.

Yet, there is a great outcry, with French President Emmanuel Macron saying that Bolsonaro lied to him about his stance on climate change. Macron is even threatening to withhold French ratification of the recently signed free trade agreement between the European Union and Mercosur (of which Brazil is the biggest member).

Meanwhile, British prime minister Boris Johnson declares that it is “an international crisis”, and Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel calls the fires “an acute emergency...for the whole world.” The Finnish foreign minister even suggests that the EU should boycott Brazilian beef. Concerted international action at last!

Well, no. They might have done it at the G7 summit of the world’s richest countries in Biarritz, but they all knew it would just prompt another Donald Trump walk-out like last year’s. And some of their advisers may be warning them by now that they are not on very safe grounds when they paint Bolsonaro as the sole culprit of the piece.

Bolsonaro is not a good person. He is an obtuse and obnoxious bully who doesn’t give a fig about the climate and advocates ‘developing’ the Amazon in ways that would ultimately destroy the rainforest.

When environmental activists claimed that farmers encouraged by Bolsonaro’s incendiary rhetoric were setting fires to clear Amazonian land for ranching, he blamed the activists themselves, saying that they were setting the fires to discredit him. He had no evidence, he admitted, but he had a “feeling” about it.

Of course, Brazilian farmers and the agribusiness interests behind them are setting fires to destroy bits of the forest, but this is not new with Bolsonaro. The amount of forest they destroyed annually went into steady decline after the Workers’ Party (PT) took power in 2003, but the damage has been trending back up again since the last PT president, Dilma Rousseff, was impeached by Congress in 2015.

Bolsonaro is definitely the icing on the cake, but it’s questionable how much impact he has had after less than eight months in power. The number of fines handed out for illegal burning has dropped by a third this year, but the great majority of illegal burns always went unpunished anyway.

When Brazil’s National Space Research Institute reported an 88% increase in deforestation in June compared with the same month a year ago, nobody except Bolsonaro questioned the data. But, that was before this year’s burning season (Queimada) began, and presumably referred to losses of forest due to illegal logging and land-clearing for mining operations, not to fires.

When the same Brazilian space institute claimed more recently that satellite data showed an 83% increase this year in forest fires, mainly in the Amazon region, Bolsonaro promptly fired its director, claiming that he was manipulating the data for political reasons.

Bolsonaro’s relationship with the truth is as distant as Trump’s, but it must be pointed out that NASA’s Earth Observatory — also relying on satellite data — reported on 22 August that “total fire activity across the Amazon basin this year has been close to the average in comparison to the past 15 years.”

There is, to be sure, a pall of smoke hanging over São Paulo — Brazil’s biggest city — at the moment. It’s as bad as Singapore six years ago or Vancouver last summer, and there’s no doubt that it comes from forest fires. They are, however, fires in the Bolivian part of the Amazon, not Brazil’s.

What the hell, you may say. Bolsonaro may not be guilty this time, but he’s guilty of lots of other things, so let’s hang him anyway. This is not a wise way of proceeding, even if you are doing it with the best of intentions. 
 
(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-bolsonaro-may-not-be-the-real-culprit-of-the-amazon-fire-2785439">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The Amazon is not on fire. There are fires in the Amazon rainforest, as there are every year in July-September, because this is the dry season. There may be more fires than usual this year, and it may even be the fault of Jair Bolsonaro, the Donald Trump mini-me who became the president of Brazil last January, but that is not still clear.

The Amazon is not on fire. There are fires in the Amazon rainforest, as there are every year in July-September, because this is the dry season. There may be more fires than usual this year, and it may even be the fault of Jair Bolsonaro, the Donald Trump mini-me who became the president of Brazil last January, but that is not still clear. Yet, there is a great outcry, with French President Emmanuel Macron saying that Bolsonaro lied to him about his stance on climate change. Macron is even threatening to withhold French ratification of the recently signed free trade agreement between the European Union and Mercosur (of which Brazil is the biggest member). Meanwhile, British prime minister Boris Johnson declares that it is “an international crisis”, and Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel calls the fires “an acute emergency...for the whole world.” The Finnish foreign minister even suggests that the EU should boycott Brazilian beef. Concerted international action at last! Well, no. They might have done it at the G7 summit of the world’s richest countries in Biarritz, but they all knew it would just prompt another Donald Trump walk-out like last year’s. And some of their advisers may be warning them by now that they are not on very safe grounds when they paint Bolsonaro as the sole culprit of the piece. Bolsonaro is not a good person. He is an obtuse and obnoxious bully who doesn’t give a fig about the climate and advocates ‘developing’ the Amazon in ways that would ultimately destroy the rainforest. When environmental activists claimed that farmers encouraged by Bolsonaro’s incendiary rhetoric were setting fires to clear Amazonian land for ranching, he blamed the activists themselves, saying that they were setting the fires to discredit him. He had no evidence, he admitted, but he had a “feeling” about it. Of course, Brazilian farmers and the agribusiness interests behind them are setting fires to destroy bits of the forest, but this is not new with Bolsonaro. The amount of forest they destroyed annually went into steady decline after the Workers’ Party (PT) took power in 2003, but the damage has been trending back up again since the last PT president, Dilma Rousseff, was impeached by Congress in 2015. Bolsonaro is definitely the icing on the cake, but it’s questionable how much impact he has had after less than eight months in power. The number of fines handed out for illegal burning has dropped by a third this year, but the great majority of illegal burns always went unpunished anyway. When Brazil’s National Space Research Institute reported an 88% increase in deforestation in June compared with the same month a year ago, nobody except Bolsonaro questioned the data. But, that was before this year’s burning season (Queimada) began, and presumably referred to losses of forest due to illegal logging and land-clearing for mining operations, not to fires. When the same Brazilian space institute claimed more recently that satellite data showed an 83% increase this year in forest fires, mainly in the Amazon region, Bolsonaro promptly fired its director, claiming that he was manipulating the data for political reasons. Bolsonaro’s relationship with the truth is as distant as Trump’s, but it must be pointed out that NASA’s Earth Observatory — also relying on satellite data — reported on 22 August that “total fire activity across the Amazon basin this year has been close to the average in comparison to the past 15 years.” There is, to be sure, a pall of smoke hanging over São Paulo — Brazil’s biggest city — at the moment. It’s as bad as Singapore six years ago or Vancouver last summer, and there’s no doubt that it comes from forest fires. They are, however, fires in the Bolivian part of the Amazon, not Brazil’s. What the hell, you may say. Bolsonaro may not be guilty this time, but he’s guilty of lots of other things, so let’s hang him anyway. This is not a wise way of proceeding, even if you are doing it with the best of intentions. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Jair Bolsonaro may not be the real culprit of the Amazon fires

By Susan Harris Rimmer 
&nbsp; 
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has had a busy fortnight of international diplomacy. Barely had the dust settled from his performance at the Pacific Island Forum in Tuvalu, then the prime minister announced troop commitments to the Straits of Hormuz, then fronted a delicate press conference in Vietnam speaking about the South China Sea, en route to France.

After a year in the top job, Morrison may be slowly understanding what it takes to make an impact at a global level in order to pursue Australia’s interests.

The Golden G7 Ticket

Morrison scored a rare and valuable invitation to the 45th Group of Seven (G7) Summit in Biarritz, France. The G7 membership consists of the industrialised economies of US, France, Germany, Japan, the UK, Italy and Canada, along with the Presidents of the European Union and European Commission, and usually Spain. The World Bank, IMF, OECD, African Union, ILO, African Development Bank and NEPAD are also usually invited, the UN Secretary-General was also there.

The G7 used to be the G8, but Russia is still suspended. On March 24 2014, the G7 members cancelled the planned G8 summit that was to be held in June that year in the Russian city of Sochi, and suspended Russia’s membership of the group, due to Russia’s annexation of Crimea. However, Russia has not been permanently expelled.

French President Emmanuel Macron used his invitations strategically to promote a “league of democracies” concept. He invited leaders from Australia, India, Chile and South Africa to join the outreach activities at the summit, in particular, to attend a Sunday night dinner to discuss environmental challenges.

Australia is a member of the G20, which includes India, Indonesia and China. But it has often cast a wistful eye to Canada’s participation in the G7/8, despite the relative similarity in economic strength between the two nations.

This year, the Henry Jackson Society released its second Audit of Geopolitical Capability report, which assesses the geopolitical capability of the Group of 20 nations plus Nigeria. It ranked Australia as the eighth-most capable in the world, ahead of India and Russia.

But since the election of Donald Trump as US president, the G7 has lost much of its consensus and related power. The 2019 summit was like an Agatha Christie play, full of shocks, tensions, surprise reveals and difficulties.

Tensions and Diplomatic Shocks

The US president walked out early from last year’s G7 summit in Canada over criticism of his tariffs policy, and then refused to sign the final statement. Macron, therefore, organised the summit to have a two-hour lunch alone with the president and abandoned the idea of a final communique.

Saturday working sessions were held on jobs, global inequality, climate change and women’s empowerment, leading to criticisms from the US delegation that the agenda was too “niche”. Sunday was devoted to the extremely difficult trade discussions and the Amazon forest fires.

The European G7 nations, as well as other EU members such as Ireland and Spain, sparred over whether to block the EU-Mercosur free trade agreement unless Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro takes forceful action on the forest fires raging in the Amazon and on climate change in general.

Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement in 2017, shortly after he attended his first G7 in Italy. Climate was still a sticking point at this summit, with leadership from the G7 unlikely on climate as an economic risk.

The Saturday dinner was thrown into an uproar by Trump championing the re-entry of Russia to the G7, with the EU arguing back that Crimea would be better.

Sunday saw the surprise arrival of Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif to meet with Macron. Zarif, sanctioned by the US, said salvaging the 2015 nuclear deal would be difficult but “worth trying”.

Trump withdrew the US from the Iran nuclear accord in 2018, leaving European signatories scrambling to preserve the pact. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she welcomed efforts toward deescalation. Europeans have so far declined to join Australia, the US, Bahrain and the UK by engaging in the Strait of Hormuz. The situation in Hong Kong was barely raised.

Salty Summit

Just before the summit, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson – attending his first G7 summit – and European Council President Donald Tusk traded barbs over the UK’s exit from the European Union. Tusk said he would not negotiate a no-deal scenario, and said he hoped the prime minister did not want to go down in history as “Mr No Deal”. Johnson took a swim in the sea and created a lengthy metaphor for journalists about Brexit as a result.

Most world leaders attending the summit declared they would ask the US to resolve the trade war with China. However, Trump announced additional duties on Chinese imports one day before he arrived in France. He then threatened to levy import duties on French wine “Like they’ve never seen before”. The US president also said the British would lose “the anchor around their ankle” after leaving the EU.

Outside the summit, more than 9,000 anti-G7 protesters marched peacefully over a bridge linking France and Spain, about 30 kilometres from Biarritz. Yellow Jacket protesters held pictures of Macron upside-down.

Australian Leadership on Digital Hate

In the midst of such turmoil, it would be difficult to make an impact as an invited guest. However, Morrison kept up his advocacy on the Christchurch Call.

At the close of the G7, Morrison announced an undisclosed amount of funding from the OECD and $300,000 to fund the development of voluntary transparency reporting protocols for social media companies to prevent, detect, and remove terrorist and violent extremist content.

A Summit of ‘Senseless Disputes’

This was the EU President Tusk’s final G7 Summit and he reflected sadly on Saturday that leaders of the world’s richest and most powerful democracies are increasingly unable to find “common language”, and were instead at risk of getting caught up in “senseless disputes among each other”.

The summit seems to have borne out his worse fears. Hopefully, Scott Morrison was inspired by the fractured state of the big stage to become part of the solution.

(Susan Harris Rimmer is Australian Research Council Future Fellow, Griffith Law School, Griffith University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/g7-throws-up-plenty-of-controversy-and-debate-but-little-compromise-122042">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

By Susan Harris Rimmer Prime Minister Scott Morrison has had a busy fortnight of international diplomacy. Barely had the dust settled from his performance at the Pacific Island Forum in Tuvalu, then the prime minister announced troop commitments to the Straits of Hormuz, then fronted a delicate press conference in Vietnam speaking about the South China Sea, en route to France.

By Susan Harris Rimmer Prime Minister Scott Morrison has had a busy fortnight of international diplomacy. Barely had the dust settled from his performance at the Pacific Island Forum in Tuvalu, then the prime minister announced troop commitments to the Straits of Hormuz, then fronted a delicate press conference in Vietnam speaking about the South China Sea, en route to France. After a year in the top job, Morrison may be slowly understanding what it takes to make an impact at a global level in order to pursue Australia’s interests. The Golden G7 Ticket Morrison scored a rare and valuable invitation to the 45th Group of Seven (G7) Summit in Biarritz, France. The G7 membership consists of the industrialised economies of US, France, Germany, Japan, the UK, Italy and Canada, along with the Presidents of the European Union and European Commission, and usually Spain. The World Bank, IMF, OECD, African Union, ILO, African Development Bank and NEPAD are also usually invited, the UN Secretary-General was also there. The G7 used to be the G8, but Russia is still suspended. On March 24 2014, the G7 members cancelled the planned G8 summit that was to be held in June that year in the Russian city of Sochi, and suspended Russia’s membership of the group, due to Russia’s annexation of Crimea. However, Russia has not been permanently expelled. French President Emmanuel Macron used his invitations strategically to promote a “league of democracies” concept. He invited leaders from Australia, India, Chile and South Africa to join the outreach activities at the summit, in particular, to attend a Sunday night dinner to discuss environmental challenges. Australia is a member of the G20, which includes India, Indonesia and China. But it has often cast a wistful eye to Canada’s participation in the G7/8, despite the relative similarity in economic strength between the two nations. This year, the Henry Jackson Society released its second Audit of Geopolitical Capability report, which assesses the geopolitical capability of the Group of 20 nations plus Nigeria. It ranked Australia as the eighth-most capable in the world, ahead of India and Russia. But since the election of Donald Trump as US president, the G7 has lost much of its consensus and related power. The 2019 summit was like an Agatha Christie play, full of shocks, tensions, surprise reveals and difficulties. Tensions and Diplomatic Shocks The US president walked out early from last year’s G7 summit in Canada over criticism of his tariffs policy, and then refused to sign the final statement. Macron, therefore, organised the summit to have a two-hour lunch alone with the president and abandoned the idea of a final communique. Saturday working sessions were held on jobs, global inequality, climate change and women’s empowerment, leading to criticisms from the US delegation that the agenda was too “niche”. Sunday was devoted to the extremely difficult trade discussions and the Amazon forest fires. The European G7 nations, as well as other EU members such as Ireland and Spain, sparred over whether to block the EU-Mercosur free trade agreement unless Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro takes forceful action on the forest fires raging in the Amazon and on climate change in general. Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement in 2017, shortly after he attended his first G7 in Italy. Climate was still a sticking point at this summit, with leadership from the G7 unlikely on climate as an economic risk. The Saturday dinner was thrown into an uproar by Trump championing the re-entry of Russia to the G7, with the EU arguing back that Crimea would be better. Sunday saw the surprise arrival of Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif to meet with Macron. Zarif, sanctioned by the US, said salvaging the 2015 nuclear deal would be difficult but “worth trying”. Trump withdrew the US from the Iran nuclear accord in 2018, leaving European signatories scrambling to preserve the pact. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she welcomed efforts toward deescalation. Europeans have so far declined to join Australia, the US, Bahrain and the UK by engaging in the Strait of Hormuz. The situation in Hong Kong was barely raised. Salty Summit Just before the summit, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson – attending his first G7 summit – and European Council President Donald Tusk traded barbs over the UK’s exit from the European Union. Tusk said he would not negotiate a no-deal scenario, and said he hoped the prime minister did not want to go down in history as “Mr No Deal”. Johnson took a swim in the sea and created a lengthy metaphor for journalists about Brexit as a result. Most world leaders attending the summit declared they would ask the US to resolve the trade war with China. However, Trump announced additional duties on Chinese imports one day before he arrived in France. He then threatened to levy import duties on French wine “Like they’ve never seen before”. The US president also said the British would lose “the anchor around their ankle” after leaving the EU. Outside the summit, more than 9,000 anti-G7 protesters marched peacefully over a bridge linking France and Spain, about 30 kilometres from Biarritz. Yellow Jacket protesters held pictures of Macron upside-down. Australian Leadership on Digital Hate In the midst of such turmoil, it would be difficult to make an impact as an invited guest. However, Morrison kept up his advocacy on the Christchurch Call. At the close of the G7, Morrison announced an undisclosed amount of funding from the OECD and $300,000 to fund the development of voluntary transparency reporting protocols for social media companies to prevent, detect, and remove terrorist and violent extremist content. A Summit of ‘Senseless Disputes’ This was the EU President Tusk’s final G7 Summit and he reflected sadly on Saturday that leaders of the world’s richest and most powerful democracies are increasingly unable to find “common language”, and were instead at risk of getting caught up in “senseless disputes among each other”. The summit seems to have borne out his worse fears. Hopefully, Scott Morrison was inspired by the fractured state of the big stage to become part of the solution. (Susan Harris Rimmer is Australian Research Council Future Fellow, Griffith Law School, Griffith University) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

G7 Summit throws up plenty of debate, but little compromise

* By Jos Barlow and Alexander C Lees

Imagine a rainforest at dawn – the tall canopy laden with dripping ferns and orchids, tree trunks covered in spongy mosses and lichens, and the morning mist only slowly burning away as the sun rises. While there is fuel everywhere, it seems unimaginable that such humid ecosystems could ever catch fire.

And without human intervention, they don’t. The charcoal record points towards infrequent fires in the Amazon even during periods of pre-Columbian human settlement, and the 8,000 or more Amazonian tree species have none of the evolutionary adaptations to fire found in their savanna or boreal cousins.

But, with thousands of fires currently burning across the Amazon, it’s worth looking at how these wildfires behave. In this context, a “wildfire” is one which has gone out of control, even if started by humans. What do they mean for a forest that hasn’t evolved with fire? And what is needed to prevent further damage?

Contrary to many images circulated online depicting blazing canopies, wildfires in previously undisturbed tropical forests do not appear as ecosystem changing events. Flames advance just 200 to 300 metres a day and rarely exceed 30cm in height, burning only leaf litter and fallen wood.

Most mobile animals are able to flee, and firefighters – if present – can bring it to a halt by raking simple fire breaks. Indeed, the humble trails of leaf cutter ants were sufficient to stop forest fires in an experiment in the southern Amazon.

But the intensity of a fire does not necessarily predict its severity. The lack of natural adaptation to deal with wildfires make rainforest species incredibly sensitive. Even a low intensity wildfire can kill half the trees. While small trees are initially most susceptible, larger ones often die in subsequent years leading to an eventual loss of more than half of the forest’s carbon stocks. These large trees hold the most carbon, and subsequent regrowth of pioneer species is no compensation – once-burned, forests hold 25 per cent less carbon than unburned forests even after three decades of regrowth.

With such a devastating impact on the trees, it is not surprising that forest-dependent animals and people are also affected. Primates are less abundant in burned forests and many specialist insectivorous birds disappear altogether. And local people, who use forests for game, building materials and medicines, lose one of their most important safety nets.

All this happens when a forest burns for the first time. However, the situation is very different when forests suffer recurrent fires. Then, fuel from previous tree mortality creates a veritable bonfire, tinderbox dry under an open canopy. Flame heights in these forests often reach the treetops, causing the death of almost all remaining trees.

Such a scenario has been likened to “savannisation” – but while the resulting scrub and sparse trees may share superficial similarities with fire-dependent tropical grasslands, they contain none of their unique biodiversity or cultural values. Instead, recurrent wildfires are more likely to hasten the Amazon’s transition to a low diversity and low carbon ecosystem with a fraction of its current social and ecological value.

The burning issue

We know that forest fires are not a natural process in Amazonia, so why are so many fires happening now? Unfortunately, it is not yet clear exactly what has been burning – satellites detecting active fires and smoke are imprecise guides, and we will only get greater clarity when burn scars are accurately mapped across all land uses. But the current increase is likely to be a mix of three different fire types.

Some of the fires are related to a recent spike in deforestation, when the cut vegetation is burned to create cattle ranches and support land claims. Others will be agricultural burns, when fires are used in rotational agriculture or to clear encroaching scrub from existing pasture.

Alarmingly, and even though this dry season is considered normal, there is evidence that these intentional fires have led to wildfires in standing forests, including in indigenous reserves.

Addressing these fires is complex as many of the activities are illegal or politically motivated. For example, there was a marked increase in fire detection during the recent “day of fire”, and loggers or land speculators have previously been implicated in causing wildfires in indigenous reserves. Furthermore, it is important to separate these illegal fires from the small-scale slash-and-burn agriculture used by Amazonia’s traditional and indigenous people. Although these fires can escape into forests, they are also essential for maintaining the livelihoods of some of Amazon’s poorest people.

When fires do enter the forest, they can be fought with low-tech approaches such as fire breaks. Yet effective combat remains rare, and in most cases help is either delayed or fails to arrive at all.

Under Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s president, funds for the Brazilian environmental protection agency IBAMA have been cut by 95 per cent. This has resulted in a R$17.5m reduction in funds for fire fighting that have been exacerbated by the loss of an Amazon Fund from Norway and Germany.

Addressing forest flammability

Reducing wildfires requires going beyond addressing the ignition sources and fighting the flames themselves, and also encouraging actions that limit forest flammability. Tackling deforestation remains key as it exposes forest edges to the hotter and drier microclimate of agricultural land, and contributes to regional reductions in rainfall.

Selective logging also plays a key role in making tropical forests more flammable. Walking in a selectively logged forest in the dry season, you feel the sun’s heat directly on your face and the leaf litter crackles and crunches underfoot. In contrast, unlogged primary forests are a shadier world where the leaf litter remains moist. Fire prevention needs to be a key condition of long-term forest stewardship. This will only work if widespread illegal logging is effectively controlled, as cheaper timber undermines the viability of best-practice forest management.

Finally, climate change itself is making dry seasons longer and forests more flammable. Increased temperatures are also resulting in more frequent tropical forest fires in non-drought years. And climate change may also be driving the increasing frequency and intensity of climate anomalies, such as El Niño events that affect fire season intensity across Amazonia.

Addressing these challenges requires integrated national and global actions, collaboration between scientists and policymakers, and long-term funding – approaches that the current Brazilian administration seems intent on destroying.

(Jos Barlow is Professor of Conservation Science, Lancaster University; Alexander C Lees is Senior Lecturer in Conservation Biology, Manchester Metropolitan University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/amazon-fires-explained-what-are-they-why-are-they-so-damaging-and-how-can-we-stop-them-122340">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

* By Jos Barlow and Alexander C Lees Imagine a rainforest at dawn – the tall canopy laden with dripping ferns and orchids, tree trunks covered in spongy mosses and lichens, and the morning mist only slowly burning away as the sun rises.

* By Jos Barlow and Alexander C Lees Imagine a rainforest at dawn – the tall canopy laden with dripping ferns and orchids, tree trunks covered in spongy mosses and lichens, and the morning mist only slowly burning away as the sun rises. While there is fuel everywhere, it seems unimaginable that such humid ecosystems could ever catch fire. And without human intervention, they don’t. The charcoal record points towards infrequent fires in the Amazon even during periods of pre-Columbian human settlement, and the 8,000 or more Amazonian tree species have none of the evolutionary adaptations to fire found in their savanna or boreal cousins. But, with thousands of fires currently burning across the Amazon, it’s worth looking at how these wildfires behave. In this context, a “wildfire” is one which has gone out of control, even if started by humans. What do they mean for a forest that hasn’t evolved with fire? And what is needed to prevent further damage? Contrary to many images circulated online depicting blazing canopies, wildfires in previously undisturbed tropical forests do not appear as ecosystem changing events. Flames advance just 200 to 300 metres a day and rarely exceed 30cm in height, burning only leaf litter and fallen wood. Most mobile animals are able to flee, and firefighters – if present – can bring it to a halt by raking simple fire breaks. Indeed, the humble trails of leaf cutter ants were sufficient to stop forest fires in an experiment in the southern Amazon. But the intensity of a fire does not necessarily predict its severity. The lack of natural adaptation to deal with wildfires make rainforest species incredibly sensitive. Even a low intensity wildfire can kill half the trees. While small trees are initially most susceptible, larger ones often die in subsequent years leading to an eventual loss of more than half of the forest’s carbon stocks. These large trees hold the most carbon, and subsequent regrowth of pioneer species is no compensation – once-burned, forests hold 25 per cent less carbon than unburned forests even after three decades of regrowth. With such a devastating impact on the trees, it is not surprising that forest-dependent animals and people are also affected. Primates are less abundant in burned forests and many specialist insectivorous birds disappear altogether. And local people, who use forests for game, building materials and medicines, lose one of their most important safety nets. All this happens when a forest burns for the first time. However, the situation is very different when forests suffer recurrent fires. Then, fuel from previous tree mortality creates a veritable bonfire, tinderbox dry under an open canopy. Flame heights in these forests often reach the treetops, causing the death of almost all remaining trees. Such a scenario has been likened to “savannisation” – but while the resulting scrub and sparse trees may share superficial similarities with fire-dependent tropical grasslands, they contain none of their unique biodiversity or cultural values. Instead, recurrent wildfires are more likely to hasten the Amazon’s transition to a low diversity and low carbon ecosystem with a fraction of its current social and ecological value. The burning issue We know that forest fires are not a natural process in Amazonia, so why are so many fires happening now? Unfortunately, it is not yet clear exactly what has been burning – satellites detecting active fires and smoke are imprecise guides, and we will only get greater clarity when burn scars are accurately mapped across all land uses. But the current increase is likely to be a mix of three different fire types. Some of the fires are related to a recent spike in deforestation, when the cut vegetation is burned to create cattle ranches and support land claims. Others will be agricultural burns, when fires are used in rotational agriculture or to clear encroaching scrub from existing pasture. Alarmingly, and even though this dry season is considered normal, there is evidence that these intentional fires have led to wildfires in standing forests, including in indigenous reserves. Addressing these fires is complex as many of the activities are illegal or politically motivated. For example, there was a marked increase in fire detection during the recent “day of fire”, and loggers or land speculators have previously been implicated in causing wildfires in indigenous reserves. Furthermore, it is important to separate these illegal fires from the small-scale slash-and-burn agriculture used by Amazonia’s traditional and indigenous people. Although these fires can escape into forests, they are also essential for maintaining the livelihoods of some of Amazon’s poorest people. When fires do enter the forest, they can be fought with low-tech approaches such as fire breaks. Yet effective combat remains rare, and in most cases help is either delayed or fails to arrive at all. Under Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s president, funds for the Brazilian environmental protection agency IBAMA have been cut by 95 per cent. This has resulted in a R$17.5m reduction in funds for fire fighting that have been exacerbated by the loss of an Amazon Fund from Norway and Germany. Addressing forest flammability Reducing wildfires requires going beyond addressing the ignition sources and fighting the flames themselves, and also encouraging actions that limit forest flammability. Tackling deforestation remains key as it exposes forest edges to the hotter and drier microclimate of agricultural land, and contributes to regional reductions in rainfall. Selective logging also plays a key role in making tropical forests more flammable. Walking in a selectively logged forest in the dry season, you feel the sun’s heat directly on your face and the leaf litter crackles and crunches underfoot. In contrast, unlogged primary forests are a shadier world where the leaf litter remains moist. Fire prevention needs to be a key condition of long-term forest stewardship. This will only work if widespread illegal logging is effectively controlled, as cheaper timber undermines the viability of best-practice forest management. Finally, climate change itself is making dry seasons longer and forests more flammable. Increased temperatures are also resulting in more frequent tropical forest fires in non-drought years. And climate change may also be driving the increasing frequency and intensity of climate anomalies, such as El Niño events that affect fire season intensity across Amazonia. Addressing these challenges requires integrated national and global actions, collaboration between scientists and policymakers, and long-term funding – approaches that the current Brazilian administration seems intent on destroying. (Jos Barlow is Professor of Conservation Science, Lancaster University; Alexander C Lees is Senior Lecturer in Conservation Biology, Manchester Metropolitan University) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Why are Amazon fires so damaging and how can we stop them

World leaders will talk about Climate Change in G7 Summit but protests have been taken place before the arrival of the leaders.

G7 Summit: World leaders to talk on Climate Change

In the heart of the Amazon, the Mura indigenous people have vowed to protect their traditional land amidst threats from farmers, logging and raging fires. A record number of wildfires have raged for weeks and are decimating the Brazilian Amazon, the world's largest tropical rainforest whose protection scientists say is critical to the fight against climate change. The blazes have nearly doubled this year compared with the same period in 2018, according to Brazilian officials, prompting a global outcry.

'Until my last drop of blood' - Amazon tribe vows to protect sacred land

Climate change and energy usage are the need of the hour in India. Energy, in particular, renewable and sustainable energy, is becoming increasingly necessary due to India’s exponentially increased levels of population, pollution, international presence and trade over the past few years. In fact, it is safe to say that the way India handles energy development will determine the long-term health of the economy. While it’s easy to say that India should adopt sustainable growth, implementation comes with multiple challenges for policymakers, the Centre and state governments. &nbsp;

For starters, the Centre needs to first sort out expenses and allocations of creating and enforcing green energy and its productive use across industries. Additionally, the Modi government also faces significant economic challenges which makes implementing sustainable growth tricky. First, unregulated markets are moving towards regulated markets, but the pace and trend is impossible to track. Next, new industries like e-commerce are growing exponentially, and once again, the pace is unpredictable over the next few years. Yet another factor is the unpredictability of the monsoon season annually. PM Modi needs to somehow integrate green technology and the economic agenda to work together. The aim? In no sector should the market break and cause environmental alarm. &nbsp;

The effects of climate change are now clearly visible with altering sea levels, melting ice caps and changing temperatures. Consequences can be detrimental, quickly fatal, on a large scale if action is not taken right away. The effects of climate change combined with Indian-linked disturbances such as flooding, droughts, pollution and over-exploitation of resources inevitably result in changes in agricultural productivity. This in turn, significantly impacts the Indian economy. &nbsp;

Let’s look at how India currently uses energy. At present, India’s energy is a combination of coal, nuclear energy, hydropower and bio-energy including wind, biogas, bio-diesel, etc.). It is also interesting to note that a significant portion of India’s primary energy comes from forest and agricultural waste. This includes animal waste, wood chips, biofuels, etc. And along with bio-energy, India now also produces the world’s cheapest solar power. &nbsp;

India’s growing population and growing GDP is already faced with the challenge of countering India’s climate change, water, energy and sustainable development. Consumption is increasing and citizens of New India are attaining a better quality of life. This will only increase which in turn rapidly depletes vital natural resources like water. And if India faces more years with weak monsoon, a crisis like what is happening in Chennai over the past four months will be nationwide. Although every Indian resident needs to play a part by adopting sustainable living, the government really needs to play a pro-active role in solving the problem and clearly guiding industries.&nbsp; 
 
This means that individual policies need to be made across every sector and implemented immediately. Furthermore, along with the current aggressive international relations focus, policy-makers should work on required policy adjustments for sustained growth. An excellent example is to try to copy the Nordic commitment; multiple countries are eliminating fossil fuels completely from energy sources by 2020.&nbsp;&nbsp;

The time has also come for energy usage and climate change to be addressed (instead of just discussed) at the international level. A body like the United Nations needs to actively step in and give directions for curbing large-scale environmental pollution in India. It also needs to see through implementation working with the centre. One way is to use existing schemes like Swachh Bharat and engage citizens on a larger scale. Furthermore, agencies like the IEA could also give directions or even help provide India with sustainable sources for development (in smart cities for example) and for global growth. &nbsp;

An important note in our favour: Green technology is not only cheaper, but also labour intensive. Skilled and unskilled employment will constantly be needed for the long-run with its use. In other words, the more we use green technology, the more employment increases. A win-win for India. &nbsp;

Over the next five years, it is essential that the Modi government strongly push and perfect schemes that implement both solar and bio-energy usage. One way to do this is to have the industry grant tax deductions or exemptions for research and development of green innovation. Bio-fuels should also have low taxes or be exempted from taxes completely and higher taxes should be imposed on fossil fuels and fossil-based chemicals. Additionally, green fuels should be exempted completely from taxes. During his election rallies, PM Modi also stressed that sugarcane is used in the production of biofuel; this production should increase exponentially. Modi should also introduce a severe tax or penalty for pollution and emissions as well. Water allocation and management should also be addressed as soon as possible through the new ministry created by the Centre. &nbsp;

NDA 2.0 under PM Modi has already begun these efforts. Moreover, in his latest Mann Ki Baat episode, the PM stressed the importance of conserving water to citizens. This has not only made them more conscious of the severity of the situation but engaged them to be more civically responsible. I am happy that this government cares and is all about action. The new term has only just begun, but I am confident that it is this Prime Minister who will propel New India forward, and that too, sustainably so. &nbsp; 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp;

Climate change and energy usage are the need of the hour in India. Energy, in particular, renewable and sustainable energy, is becoming increasingly necessary due to India’s exponentially increased levels of population, pollution, international presence and trade over the past few years.

Climate change and energy usage are the need of the hour in India. Energy, in particular, renewable and sustainable energy, is becoming increasingly necessary due to India’s exponentially increased levels of population, pollution, international presence and trade over the past few years. In fact, it is safe to say that the way India handles energy development will determine the long-term health of the economy. While it’s easy to say that India should adopt sustainable growth, implementation comes with multiple challenges for policymakers, the Centre and state governments. For starters, the Centre needs to first sort out expenses and allocations of creating and enforcing green energy and its productive use across industries. Additionally, the Modi government also faces significant economic challenges which makes implementing sustainable growth tricky. First, unregulated markets are moving towards regulated markets, but the pace and trend is impossible to track. Next, new industries like e-commerce are growing exponentially, and once again, the pace is unpredictable over the next few years. Yet another factor is the unpredictability of the monsoon season annually. PM Modi needs to somehow integrate green technology and the economic agenda to work together. The aim? In no sector should the market break and cause environmental alarm. The effects of climate change are now clearly visible with altering sea levels, melting ice caps and changing temperatures. Consequences can be detrimental, quickly fatal, on a large scale if action is not taken right away. The effects of climate change combined with Indian-linked disturbances such as flooding, droughts, pollution and over-exploitation of resources inevitably result in changes in agricultural productivity. This in turn, significantly impacts the Indian economy. Let’s look at how India currently uses energy. At present, India’s energy is a combination of coal, nuclear energy, hydropower and bio-energy including wind, biogas, bio-diesel, etc.). It is also interesting to note that a significant portion of India’s primary energy comes from forest and agricultural waste. This includes animal waste, wood chips, biofuels, etc. And along with bio-energy, India now also produces the world’s cheapest solar power. India’s growing population and growing GDP is already faced with the challenge of countering India’s climate change, water, energy and sustainable development. Consumption is increasing and citizens of New India are attaining a better quality of life. This will only increase which in turn rapidly depletes vital natural resources like water. And if India faces more years with weak monsoon, a crisis like what is happening in Chennai over the past four months will be nationwide. Although every Indian resident needs to play a part by adopting sustainable living, the government really needs to play a pro-active role in solving the problem and clearly guiding industries. This means that individual policies need to be made across every sector and implemented immediately. Furthermore, along with the current aggressive international relations focus, policy-makers should work on required policy adjustments for sustained growth. An excellent example is to try to copy the Nordic commitment; multiple countries are eliminating fossil fuels completely from energy sources by 2020. The time has also come for energy usage and climate change to be addressed (instead of just discussed) at the international level. A body like the United Nations needs to actively step in and give directions for curbing large-scale environmental pollution in India. It also needs to see through implementation working with the centre. One way is to use existing schemes like Swachh Bharat and engage citizens on a larger scale. Furthermore, agencies like the IEA could also give directions or even help provide India with sustainable sources for development (in smart cities for example) and for global growth. An important note in our favour: Green technology is not only cheaper, but also labour intensive. Skilled and unskilled employment will constantly be needed for the long-run with its use. In other words, the more we use green technology, the more employment increases. A win-win for India. Over the next five years, it is essential that the Modi government strongly push and perfect schemes that implement both solar and bio-energy usage. One way to do this is to have the industry grant tax deductions or exemptions for research and development of green innovation. Bio-fuels should also have low taxes or be exempted from taxes completely and higher taxes should be imposed on fossil fuels and fossil-based chemicals. Additionally, green fuels should be exempted completely from taxes. During his election rallies, PM Modi also stressed that sugarcane is used in the production of biofuel; this production should increase exponentially. Modi should also introduce a severe tax or penalty for pollution and emissions as well. Water allocation and management should also be addressed as soon as possible through the new ministry created by the Centre. NDA 2.0 under PM Modi has already begun these efforts. Moreover, in his latest Mann Ki Baat episode, the PM stressed the importance of conserving water to citizens. This has not only made them more conscious of the severity of the situation but engaged them to be more civically responsible. I am happy that this government cares and is all about action. The new term has only just begun, but I am confident that it is this Prime Minister who will propel New India forward, and that too, sustainably so. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Energy, green technology to define New India

Iceland unveils memorial plaque for lost glacier

The team behind teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg's<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/climate-campaigner-greta-prepares-to-sail-to-the-us-to-avoid-flying-242767"> yacht voyage to New York</a> on Sunday fended off claims that her trip will create carbon emissions because team members will make transatlantic flights.&nbsp;

The<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/teen-climate-activist-greta-thunberg-gets-amnesty-prize-225552">16-year-old Swede</a>, whose school strikes have inspired children across the world to protest against global warming, refuses to fly because of the carbon emissions caused by planes.

But she has been offered a lift on the Malizia II racing yacht and set off on August 15 along with her father Svante and a filmmaker to document the journey, in order to attend the UN talks in September with a clear conscience.

However, a spokesman for German round-the-world sailor Boris Herrmann, the yacht's co-skipper, told Berlin newspaper TAZ that several people would fly into New York to help take the yacht back to Europe. Hermann himself will return by plane, according to the spokesman.

The paper estimated that in fact, Thunberg's boat trip would end up being more polluting than if she and her companions had just taken flights to New York themselves.

'An imperfect solution'&nbsp;

That conclusion was quickly picked up on social media sites among Thunberg's detractors.

But Team Malizia manager Holly Cova insisted that the young activist's journey would be climate neutral.

"All Team Malizia flights are offset," she said in a statement issued by Thunberg's entourage.

She explained that the New York trip had been organised "at very short notice, and as a result, two people will need to fly over to the US in order to bring the boat back".

"We only have one boat, so they cannot easily sail over to meet them. Altogether, four crew will be sailing the boat back. These are logistical decisions that Team Malizia alone has taken," she added.

Cova admitted "this is an imperfect solution," adding that "the world has not yet found a way to make it possible to cross an ocean without a carbon footprint."

&nbsp;'I will just ignore them'&nbsp;

The 60-foot (18-metre) yacht is skippered by Hermann and Pierre Casiraghi, vice president of the Monaco Yacht Club and a member of the principality's ruling family.

It can travel at speeds of around 35 knots (70 kilometres an hour) but will be heading into the wind for much of the time so will be slower, and the captain wants a smooth ride.

Ahead of the UN summit on September 23, Thunberg will take part in youth demonstrations, before heading to Canada, Mexico and then to Chile for another UN conference in December. It is not clear how she will be travelling.

"I don't know yet how I will get home," she said before she set off from the English port of Plymouth.

Thunberg has become a figurehead for climate action with her stark warnings of catastrophe if the world does not act now to cut carbon emissions and curb global warming.

She has received criticism and abuse for her uncompromising attitude but shows little concern at how she might be received among climate change deniers in the United States.

"I will just ignore them because I'm only acting and communicating the science, and if they don't like that, what have I got to do with that?" she said.

The team behind teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg's yacht voyage to New York on Sunday fended off claims that her trip will create carbon emissions because team members will make transatlantic flights.

The team behind teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg's yacht voyage to New York on Sunday fended off claims that her trip will create carbon emissions because team members will make transatlantic flights. The16-year-old Swede, whose school strikes have inspired children across the world to protest against global warming, refuses to fly because of the carbon emissions caused by planes. But she has been offered a lift on the Malizia II racing yacht and set off on August 15 along with her father Svante and a filmmaker to document the journey, in order to attend the UN talks in September with a clear conscience. However, a spokesman for German round-the-world sailor Boris Herrmann, the yacht's co-skipper, told Berlin newspaper TAZ that several people would fly into New York to help take the yacht back to Europe. Hermann himself will return by plane, according to the spokesman. The paper estimated that in fact, Thunberg's boat trip would end up being more polluting than if she and her companions had just taken flights to New York themselves. 'An imperfect solution' That conclusion was quickly picked up on social media sites among Thunberg's detractors. But Team Malizia manager Holly Cova insisted that the young activist's journey would be climate neutral. "All Team Malizia flights are offset," she said in a statement issued by Thunberg's entourage. She explained that the New York trip had been organised "at very short notice, and as a result, two people will need to fly over to the US in order to bring the boat back". "We only have one boat, so they cannot easily sail over to meet them. Altogether, four crew will be sailing the boat back. These are logistical decisions that Team Malizia alone has taken," she added. Cova admitted "this is an imperfect solution," adding that "the world has not yet found a way to make it possible to cross an ocean without a carbon footprint." 'I will just ignore them' The 60-foot (18-metre) yacht is skippered by Hermann and Pierre Casiraghi, vice president of the Monaco Yacht Club and a member of the principality's ruling family. It can travel at speeds of around 35 knots (70 kilometres an hour) but will be heading into the wind for much of the time so will be slower, and the captain wants a smooth ride. Ahead of the UN summit on September 23, Thunberg will take part in youth demonstrations, before heading to Canada, Mexico and then to Chile for another UN conference in December. It is not clear how she will be travelling. "I don't know yet how I will get home," she said before she set off from the English port of Plymouth. Thunberg has become a figurehead for climate action with her stark warnings of catastrophe if the world does not act now to cut carbon emissions and curb global warming. She has received criticism and abuse for her uncompromising attitude but shows little concern at how she might be received among climate change deniers in the United States. "I will just ignore them because I'm only acting and communicating the science, and if they don't like that, what have I got to do with that?" she said.

Carbon dioxide row over climate activist Thunberg's yacht trip to New York

Iceland on Sunday honours the passing of Okjokull, its first glacier lost to climate change, as scientists warn that some 400 others on the subarctic island risk the same fate.&nbsp;

A bronze plaque will be unveiled in a ceremony starting around 1400 GMT to mark Okjokull -- which translates to "Ok glacier" -- in the west of Iceland, in the presence of local researchers and their peers at Rice University in the United States, who initiated the project.

Iceland's Prime Minister Katrin Jakobsdottir, Environment Minister Gudmundur Ingi Gudbrandsson, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson are also due to attend the event.

<img alt="Okjokull" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="d664452d-6a4b-46de-bbb1-d58cb45338c6" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design_28.jpg" />

(Left to Right) Okjökull glacier atop the Ok Volcano in Iceland on September 7, 1986. And a NASA handout image taken on August 1, 2019 showing the top of the Ok Volcano where the Okjokull glacier has melted away throughout the 20th century and was declared dead in 2014.&nbsp;

"This will be the first monument to a glacier lost to climate change anywhere in the world," Cymene Howe, associate professor of anthropology at Rice University, said in July.

The plaque bears the inscription "A letter to the future," and is intended to raise awareness about the decline of glaciers and the effects of climate change.

"In the next 200 years, all our glaciers are expected to follow the same path. This monument is to acknowledge that we know what is happening and what needs to be done. Only you know if we did it," the plaque reads.

It is also labelled "415 ppm CO2," referring to the record level of carbon dioxide measured in the atmosphere last May.

"Memorials everywhere stand for either human accomplishments, like the deeds of historic figures, or the losses and deaths we recognise as important," researcher Howe said.

"By memorialising a fallen glacier, we want to emphasise what is being lost -- or dying -- the world over, and also draw attention to the fact that this is something that humans have 'accomplished', although it is not something we should be proud of."

Howe noted that the conversation about climate change can be abstract, with many dire statistics and sophisticated scientific models that can feel incomprehensible.

"Perhaps a monument to a lost glacier is a better way to fully grasp what we now face," she said, highlighting "the power of symbols and ceremony to provoke feelings".

Iceland loses about 11 billion tonnes of ice per year, and scientists fear all of the island country's 400-plus glaciers will be gone by 2200, according to Howe and her Rice University colleague Dominic Boyer.

Stripped in 2014

Glaciologists stripped Okjokull of its glacier status in 2014, a first for Iceland.

In 1890, the glacier ice covered 16 square kilometres (6.2 square miles) but by 2012, it measured just 0.7 square kilometres, according to a report from the University of Iceland from 2017.

In 2014, "we made the decision that this was no longer a living glacier, it was only dead ice, it was not moving," Oddur Sigurdsson, a glaciologist with the Icelandic Meteorological Office, told AFP.

To have the status of a glacier, the mass of ice and snow must be thick enough to move by its weight. For that to happen the mass must be approximately 40 to 50 metres (130 to 165 feet) thick, he said.

According to a study published by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)in April, nearly half of the world's heritage sites could lose their glaciers by 2100 if greenhouse gas emissions continue at the current rate.&nbsp;

Sigurdsson said he feared "that nothing can be done to stop it."

"The inertia of the climate system is such that, even if we could stop introducing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere right now, it will keep on warming for a century and a half or two centuries before it reaches equilibrium."

Iceland's Vatnajokull National Park, which was added to UNESCO's World Heritage List in early July, is home to and named after, the largest ice cap in Europe.

Iceland on Sunday honours the passing of Okjokull, its first glacier lost to climate change, as scientists warn that some 400 others on the subarctic island risk the same fate.

Iceland on Sunday honours the passing of Okjokull, its first glacier lost to climate change, as scientists warn that some 400 others on the subarctic island risk the same fate. A bronze plaque will be unveiled in a ceremony starting around 1400 GMT to mark Okjokull -- which translates to "Ok glacier" -- in the west of Iceland, in the presence of local researchers and their peers at Rice University in the United States, who initiated the project. Iceland's Prime Minister Katrin Jakobsdottir, Environment Minister Gudmundur Ingi Gudbrandsson, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson are also due to attend the event. (Left to Right) Okjökull glacier atop the Ok Volcano in Iceland on September 7, 1986. And a NASA handout image taken on August 1, 2019 showing the top of the Ok Volcano where the Okjokull glacier has melted away throughout the 20th century and was declared dead in 2014. "This will be the first monument to a glacier lost to climate change anywhere in the world," Cymene Howe, associate professor of anthropology at Rice University, said in July. The plaque bears the inscription "A letter to the future," and is intended to raise awareness about the decline of glaciers and the effects of climate change. "In the next 200 years, all our glaciers are expected to follow the same path. This monument is to acknowledge that we know what is happening and what needs to be done. Only you know if we did it," the plaque reads. It is also labelled "415 ppm CO2," referring to the record level of carbon dioxide measured in the atmosphere last May. "Memorials everywhere stand for either human accomplishments, like the deeds of historic figures, or the losses and deaths we recognise as important," researcher Howe said. "By memorialising a fallen glacier, we want to emphasise what is being lost -- or dying -- the world over, and also draw attention to the fact that this is something that humans have 'accomplished', although it is not something we should be proud of." Howe noted that the conversation about climate change can be abstract, with many dire statistics and sophisticated scientific models that can feel incomprehensible. "Perhaps a monument to a lost glacier is a better way to fully grasp what we now face," she said, highlighting "the power of symbols and ceremony to provoke feelings". Iceland loses about 11 billion tonnes of ice per year, and scientists fear all of the island country's 400-plus glaciers will be gone by 2200, according to Howe and her Rice University colleague Dominic Boyer. Stripped in 2014 Glaciologists stripped Okjokull of its glacier status in 2014, a first for Iceland. In 1890, the glacier ice covered 16 square kilometres (6.2 square miles) but by 2012, it measured just 0.7 square kilometres, according to a report from the University of Iceland from 2017. In 2014, "we made the decision that this was no longer a living glacier, it was only dead ice, it was not moving," Oddur Sigurdsson, a glaciologist with the Icelandic Meteorological Office, told AFP. To have the status of a glacier, the mass of ice and snow must be thick enough to move by its weight. For that to happen the mass must be approximately 40 to 50 metres (130 to 165 feet) thick, he said. According to a study published by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)in April, nearly half of the world's heritage sites could lose their glaciers by 2100 if greenhouse gas emissions continue at the current rate. Sigurdsson said he feared "that nothing can be done to stop it." "The inertia of the climate system is such that, even if we could stop introducing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere right now, it will keep on warming for a century and a half or two centuries before it reaches equilibrium." Iceland's Vatnajokull National Park, which was added to UNESCO's World Heritage List in early July, is home to and named after, the largest ice cap in Europe.

Iceland commemorates first glacier lost to climate change

Swedish teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg will set sail for New York on Wednesday, crossing the Atlantic in a racing yacht with no shower or toilet to join protests in the United States and take part in a United Nations summit. To avoid travelling by air, Thunberg is making her trans-Atlantic trip onboard the 60-ft yacht, the Malizia II, fitted with solar panels and underwater turbines that produce electricity on board, with the aim of making the journey zero-carbon.

Climate campaigner Greta Thunberg prepares to sail to the US

It is like a ticking time bomb and the people who can stop it are doing nothing but stare.

"Feels frustrating that we have to remind them to save our home - it is theirs too! Isn't it our collective duty? There is no planet B" -- some of the chants one gets to hear at marches, demonstrations and vigils being organized across India with one common objective - to save our planet.

School students have also been joining the protests - taking inspiration from Sweden's 16-year-old activist Greta Thunberg.

The children want to educate adults on how denial and subsequent inaction on climate change mean we are wasting precious time.
<img alt="School students" data-align="center" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="c25b6932-4725-4dd4-a737-1d8b1b9cc551" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/climate_0.jpg" />
15-year-old climate activist Asheer Kandhari is one of them. She has been taking to the streets with her school friends as part of 'Fridays for Future', a global movement pushing for climate action.

Asheer grew up learning that each one can do their bit - with her mother telling her to switch off the lights when leaving the room or closing the tap while brushing - basics that go a long way.

"Climate Change doesn't affect just us humans. Thousands of species are bearing the brunt of our actions. We have no right to destroy their natural habitats. How is it that we can see what's coming and others cannot? Or do they not want to? What are they leaving behind for future generations?", she asks.

But one can no longer pretend to not see Climate Change. It is all around us. And it's only getting worse. 
The threat is as real as it can get. July 2019 was the hottest month in Earth’s recorded history.

So far this year, world headlines have been dominated by news of heatwaves, floods, tsunamis and wildfires.

India is already staring at its worst long-term water crisis. 
 
21 Indian cities are predicted to run out of groundwater by 2020 according to the government think-tank NITI Aayog. 
 
600 million people or nearly half of the country's population are at risk of facing an acute shortage. 
 
And at least one-third of Himalayan ice, among the world’s most vital water resources, is set to disappear by the end of the century.

The list of warnings is endless. But the time to act is limited. 
 
We are the last generation that can prevent irreparable damage to our planet. And we have just over a decade's time to do so.

There are many who realise the urgency. And Aman Sharma is trying his best to reach out to those who don't. The Delhi-based 16-year-old activist is on a mission.

He launched a petition in May this year calling on the Indian Government to declare a climate emergency. It now has over 230,000 signatures.

"The issue first has to be officially recognised as an emergency; a threat to our citizens. Until we acknowledge that climate change is a problem, we cannot come up with a solid plan", says Aman.

A birder at heart, Aman knew it was time to act when he saw the changes happening in our urban ecosystem.

"My brother and father developed conditions due to rising levels of pollution which meant we couldn't stay in Delhi during the Diwali festive period because of how horrible the air was. Plus the decrease in a number of birds with each passing year and our cities getting hotter. All of this made me ask - if we don't act now, then when?"

He started off from his own school where he won his first battle against plastic. 
 
After noticing that students were purchasing multiple bottles of water from the school canteen which meant that hundreds of plastic bottles were getting sold each day, Aman resolved to put an end to this.

He spoke to the owner of the canteen, gave the authorities a letter talking about what plastic was doing to marine life and ultimately with the help of efforts from the school Principal, the canteen stopped housing plastic bottles.

"The next step will be to completely eliminate single-use plastic items."

Aman demands an enforced ban in the country on the use of plastic, an increase in green cover along with the regulated implementation of waste segregation policies.

He also talks about the need to focus energies on finding innovative ways to tackle the crisis. For instance, an emission control device that turns pollutants into ink. Manufactured as part of an initiative led by a team of young Indian engineers - Arpit Dhupar, Kushagra Srivastava and Prateek Sachan - it captures emissions from the exhaust of diesel generators and the particulate matter is then processed into usable products like inks and paints.

"It is so scary to imagine that we are using up our resources like they are unlimited. One straw that you use for a minute to have your drink is going to be around till after my children die. This is not a distant crisis", Aman says.

The crisis, in fact, is as immediate as it can be. After a heatwave in several parts, India is now witnessing floods in the states of Kerala, Karnataka and Maharashtra - a year after Kerala was ravaged by the worst flood in a century.

"In Asia, mitigation alone is not enough. We also have to focus on climate change adaptation for which preparedness is an essential strategy. Plus India has a long coastline which makes it crucial to protect natural flood barriers like mangrove forests that are currently under threat due to coastal infrastructure projects", warns Rozita Singh, a young sustainability researcher and urban development practitioner.

She takes a keen interest in promoting the practice of composting. "Each person can contribute to controlling greenhouse gas emissions. People think it is the government's job, not theirs. That's where they are wrong. Composting can easily begin at home. You just need to identify your needs and find the right kind of vessel. It is an extremely simple process that nature will thank you for."

They say little drops make the mighty ocean. So little drops can also save it.

Will you make yours count?

After all, we are in this together. And as Aman puts it - there is no Iron man or Thor coming to rescue us. We have to save ourselves. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

It is like a ticking time bomb and the people who can stop it are doing nothing but stare. "Feels frustrating that we have to remind them to save our home - it is theirs too!

It is like a ticking time bomb and the people who can stop it are doing nothing but stare. "Feels frustrating that we have to remind them to save our home - it is theirs too! Isn't it our collective duty? There is no planet B" -- some of the chants one gets to hear at marches, demonstrations and vigils being organized across India with one common objective - to save our planet. School students have also been joining the protests - taking inspiration from Sweden's 16-year-old activist Greta Thunberg. The children want to educate adults on how denial and subsequent inaction on climate change mean we are wasting precious time. 15-year-old climate activist Asheer Kandhari is one of them. She has been taking to the streets with her school friends as part of 'Fridays for Future', a global movement pushing for climate action. Asheer grew up learning that each one can do their bit - with her mother telling her to switch off the lights when leaving the room or closing the tap while brushing - basics that go a long way. "Climate Change doesn't affect just us humans. Thousands of species are bearing the brunt of our actions. We have no right to destroy their natural habitats. How is it that we can see what's coming and others cannot? Or do they not want to? What are they leaving behind for future generations?", she asks. But one can no longer pretend to not see Climate Change. It is all around us. And it's only getting worse. The threat is as real as it can get. July 2019 was the hottest month in Earth’s recorded history. So far this year, world headlines have been dominated by news of heatwaves, floods, tsunamis and wildfires. India is already staring at its worst long-term water crisis. 21 Indian cities are predicted to run out of groundwater by 2020 according to the government think-tank NITI Aayog. 600 million people or nearly half of the country's population are at risk of facing an acute shortage. And at least one-third of Himalayan ice, among the world’s most vital water resources, is set to disappear by the end of the century. The list of warnings is endless. But the time to act is limited. We are the last generation that can prevent irreparable damage to our planet. And we have just over a decade's time to do so. There are many who realise the urgency. And Aman Sharma is trying his best to reach out to those who don't. The Delhi-based 16-year-old activist is on a mission. He launched a petition in May this year calling on the Indian Government to declare a climate emergency. It now has over 230,000 signatures. "The issue first has to be officially recognised as an emergency; a threat to our citizens. Until we acknowledge that climate change is a problem, we cannot come up with a solid plan", says Aman. A birder at heart, Aman knew it was time to act when he saw the changes happening in our urban ecosystem. "My brother and father developed conditions due to rising levels of pollution which meant we couldn't stay in Delhi during the Diwali festive period because of how horrible the air was. Plus the decrease in a number of birds with each passing year and our cities getting hotter. All of this made me ask - if we don't act now, then when?" He started off from his own school where he won his first battle against plastic. After noticing that students were purchasing multiple bottles of water from the school canteen which meant that hundreds of plastic bottles were getting sold each day, Aman resolved to put an end to this. He spoke to the owner of the canteen, gave the authorities a letter talking about what plastic was doing to marine life and ultimately with the help of efforts from the school Principal, the canteen stopped housing plastic bottles. "The next step will be to completely eliminate single-use plastic items." Aman demands an enforced ban in the country on the use of plastic, an increase in green cover along with the regulated implementation of waste segregation policies. He also talks about the need to focus energies on finding innovative ways to tackle the crisis. For instance, an emission control device that turns pollutants into ink. Manufactured as part of an initiative led by a team of young Indian engineers - Arpit Dhupar, Kushagra Srivastava and Prateek Sachan - it captures emissions from the exhaust of diesel generators and the particulate matter is then processed into usable products like inks and paints. "It is so scary to imagine that we are using up our resources like they are unlimited. One straw that you use for a minute to have your drink is going to be around till after my children die. This is not a distant crisis", Aman says. The crisis, in fact, is as immediate as it can be. After a heatwave in several parts, India is now witnessing floods in the states of Kerala, Karnataka and Maharashtra - a year after Kerala was ravaged by the worst flood in a century. "In Asia, mitigation alone is not enough. We also have to focus on climate change adaptation for which preparedness is an essential strategy. Plus India has a long coastline which makes it crucial to protect natural flood barriers like mangrove forests that are currently under threat due to coastal infrastructure projects", warns Rozita Singh, a young sustainability researcher and urban development practitioner. She takes a keen interest in promoting the practice of composting. "Each person can contribute to controlling greenhouse gas emissions. People think it is the government's job, not theirs. That's where they are wrong. Composting can easily begin at home. You just need to identify your needs and find the right kind of vessel. It is an extremely simple process that nature will thank you for." They say little drops make the mighty ocean. So little drops can also save it. Will you make yours count? After all, we are in this together. And as Aman puts it - there is no Iron man or Thor coming to rescue us. We have to save ourselves. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Saving our burning home

Swedish teenage climate activist <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/teen-climate-activist-greta-thunberg-gets-amnesty-prize-225552">Greta Thunberg </a>will set sail for New York this week, crossing the Atlantic in a racing yacht to join protests in the United States and take part in a United Nations summit.

To avoid travelling by air, Thunberg is making her trans-Atlantic trip onboard the 60-ft yacht, the Malizia II, fitted with solar panels and underwater turbines that produce electricity on board, with the aim of making the journey zero-carbon.

On Monday, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/french-right-wingers-to-shun-greta-thunberg-at-parliament-237929">Thunberg </a>tweeted a picture of herself on board the boat with the caption: "Test sailing off the English coast today!"

Earlier this month, the boat's skipper told Reuters the 16-year-old activist, who has become a figurehead for young environmental protesters, faced an uncomfortable voyage onboard the yacht which is designed for speed rather than a luxury.

"Greta taking on this challenge of sailing across on a race boat with zero comforts really shows her commitment to the cause and how far she’s willing to push herself," Boris Herrmann said.

Thunberg is due to depart this week from an as-yet-undisclosed location in Britain and will be accompanied by her father, Svante, and a cameraman on the journey.

When she arrives, she will join the UN&nbsp;Climate Action Summit in New York in September and the COP 25 climate change conference in Santiago, Chile in December.

"Me speaking to the UN&nbsp;is not going to change the situation but if that can help to create awareness ... then I think that together we can try to ... make a change," Thunberg said on a visit to a German anti-coal protest camp on Friday.

Swedish teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg will set sail for New York this week, crossing the Atlantic in a racing yacht to join protests in the United States and take part in a United Nations summit.

Swedish teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg will set sail for New York this week, crossing the Atlantic in a racing yacht to join protests in the United States and take part in a United Nations summit. To avoid travelling by air, Thunberg is making her trans-Atlantic trip onboard the 60-ft yacht, the Malizia II, fitted with solar panels and underwater turbines that produce electricity on board, with the aim of making the journey zero-carbon. On Monday, Thunberg tweeted a picture of herself on board the boat with the caption: "Test sailing off the English coast today!" Earlier this month, the boat's skipper told Reuters the 16-year-old activist, who has become a figurehead for young environmental protesters, faced an uncomfortable voyage onboard the yacht which is designed for speed rather than a luxury. "Greta taking on this challenge of sailing across on a race boat with zero comforts really shows her commitment to the cause and how far she’s willing to push herself," Boris Herrmann said. Thunberg is due to depart this week from an as-yet-undisclosed location in Britain and will be accompanied by her father, Svante, and a cameraman on the journey. When she arrives, she will join the UN Climate Action Summit in New York in September and the COP 25 climate change conference in Santiago, Chile in December. "Me speaking to the UN is not going to change the situation but if that can help to create awareness ... then I think that together we can try to ... make a change," Thunberg said on a visit to a German anti-coal protest camp on Friday.

Climate campaigner Greta Thunberg prepares to sail to US to avoid flying

July 2019 now stands as Alaska’s&nbsp;hottest&nbsp;month&nbsp;on record, the latest benchmark in a long-term warming trend with ominous repercussions ranging from rapidly vanishing summer sea ice and melting glaciers to raging wildfires and deadly chaos for marine life.

July's statewide average temperature rose to 14.5 degrees Celsius, a level that for denizens of the Lower 48 states might seem cool enough but is actually 5.4 degrees above normal and nearly a full degree higher than&nbsp;Alaska's&nbsp;previous record-hot month.

The new high was officially declared by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in its&nbsp;monthly climate report, released on Wednesday.

More significantly, July was the 12th consecutive&nbsp;month&nbsp;in which average temperatures were above normal nearly every day, said Brian Brettschneider, a scientist with the Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Policy (ACCAP) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.

Of&nbsp;Alaska's&nbsp;10 warmest&nbsp;months on record, seven have now occurred since 2004.

''You can always have a random kind of warm&nbsp;month, season or even year,'' Brettschneider said. ''But when it happens year after year after year after year after year, then statistically it fails the test of randomness and it then becomes a trend.''

Alaska, like other parts of the far north, is warming at least twice as fast as the planet as a whole, research shows. And over the past 12months, Brettschneder said, that warming has crossed a threshold – shifting Alaska from an environment with average temperatures below freezing to above freezing.

It used to be that Alaska was generally a frozen state, he said, adding, ''Now we're an unfrozen state.''

Runoff from accelerated melting of glaciers and high-altitude snowfields sent some rivers to near or above flood stage in early July, despite a drought gripping much of the state, including the world's largest temperate rain forest in southeastern Alaska.

Sea ice, which has been running at record or near-record lows since spring across the Arctic, completely vanished from waters off Alaska by the start of August. The nearest stretch of ice this summer, said ACCAP climate scientist Rick Thoman, lies about 150 miles (240 km) north of Kaktovik, a village above the Arctic Circle on the northeastern edge of Alaska.

No ice for walruses

The effect on Pacific walruses is particularly acute.

Walruses normally perch on the floating ice to rest while diving for food and to take care of their newborn calves. Now, with no ice in sight, the walruses have crowded onto the Chukchi Sea shoreline earlier in the year than at any time on record, according to the US&nbsp;Fish and Wildlife Service.

Thousands of walruses – almost all adult females and their young calves – congregated by July 25 on a Chukchi Sea beach near the Inupiat village of Point Lay. Walruses have been coming ashore there almost every year since 2007, then a record-low Arctic ice year, but they have rarely been forced ashore before autumn.

Beach crowding can be dangerous for the large, tusked creatures. If they are spooked by noise or the appearance of a predator, they might stampede into the water, trampling younger and smaller animals to death.

They are not the only marine mammals suffering through the hot Alaska summer.

Thirty-two dead grey whales have been found in Alaska waters this year, six of them in the Bering Strait region or the Chukchi Sea off northwestern Alaska, said Julie Speegle, an NOAA spokeswoman in Juneau. As of mid-July, 137 dead seals had been found on Bering Strait-area beaches, Speegle said.

Seabird carcasses are littering beaches in what has shaped up as the fifth consecutive year of large bird die-offs in Alaska.

High numbers of salmon, apparently overcome by the heat before getting the chance to spawn, have been found floating dead in rivers and streams around western Alaska.

The warming trend has been uncomfortable for humans as well.

Fueled in part by the heat, wildfires across the state have burned more than 2.4 million acres (970,000 hectares) as of early August, spewing smoke and soot that has fouled the air quality of several cities and regions. The smoke pollution poses an unusual quandary for sweltering Alaskans, most of whom live without air conditioning.

“When it’s hot and smoky, Alaska doesn’t have a good way to cope with that,” said Thoman, the ACCP climate scientist whose hometown of Fairbanks was particularly hard hit by wildfire smoke. “Open your windows and you get smoked up. Keep your windows closed and you get hot.”

In Anchorage, where temperatures reached a record daytime high of 90 degrees Fahrenheit (32.2 degrees Celsius) last&nbsp;month, Brettschneider had a similar take.

“I tell people we’re not built for heat. Our houses are built to store heat,” he said.

July 2019 now stands as Alaska’s hottest month on record, the latest benchmark in a long-term warming trend with ominous repercussions ranging from rapidly vanishing summer sea ice and melting glaciers to raging wildfires and deadly chaos for marine life.

July 2019 now stands as Alaska’s hottest month on record, the latest benchmark in a long-term warming trend with ominous repercussions ranging from rapidly vanishing summer sea ice and melting glaciers to raging wildfires and deadly chaos for marine life. July's statewide average temperature rose to 14.5 degrees Celsius, a level that for denizens of the Lower 48 states might seem cool enough but is actually 5.4 degrees above normal and nearly a full degree higher than Alaska's previous record-hot month. The new high was officially declared by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in its monthly climate report, released on Wednesday. More significantly, July was the 12th consecutive month in which average temperatures were above normal nearly every day, said Brian Brettschneider, a scientist with the Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Policy (ACCAP) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. Of Alaska's 10 warmest months on record, seven have now occurred since 2004. ''You can always have a random kind of warm month, season or even year,'' Brettschneider said. ''But when it happens year after year after year after year after year, then statistically it fails the test of randomness and it then becomes a trend.'' Alaska, like other parts of the far north, is warming at least twice as fast as the planet as a whole, research shows. And over the past 12months, Brettschneder said, that warming has crossed a threshold – shifting Alaska from an environment with average temperatures below freezing to above freezing. It used to be that Alaska was generally a frozen state, he said, adding, ''Now we're an unfrozen state.'' Runoff from accelerated melting of glaciers and high-altitude snowfields sent some rivers to near or above flood stage in early July, despite a drought gripping much of the state, including the world's largest temperate rain forest in southeastern Alaska. Sea ice, which has been running at record or near-record lows since spring across the Arctic, completely vanished from waters off Alaska by the start of August. The nearest stretch of ice this summer, said ACCAP climate scientist Rick Thoman, lies about 150 miles (240 km) north of Kaktovik, a village above the Arctic Circle on the northeastern edge of Alaska. No ice for walruses The effect on Pacific walruses is particularly acute. Walruses normally perch on the floating ice to rest while diving for food and to take care of their newborn calves. Now, with no ice in sight, the walruses have crowded onto the Chukchi Sea shoreline earlier in the year than at any time on record, according to the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Thousands of walruses – almost all adult females and their young calves – congregated by July 25 on a Chukchi Sea beach near the Inupiat village of Point Lay. Walruses have been coming ashore there almost every year since 2007, then a record-low Arctic ice year, but they have rarely been forced ashore before autumn. Beach crowding can be dangerous for the large, tusked creatures. If they are spooked by noise or the appearance of a predator, they might stampede into the water, trampling younger and smaller animals to death. They are not the only marine mammals suffering through the hot Alaska summer. Thirty-two dead grey whales have been found in Alaska waters this year, six of them in the Bering Strait region or the Chukchi Sea off northwestern Alaska, said Julie Speegle, an NOAA spokeswoman in Juneau. As of mid-July, 137 dead seals had been found on Bering Strait-area beaches, Speegle said. Seabird carcasses are littering beaches in what has shaped up as the fifth consecutive year of large bird die-offs in Alaska. High numbers of salmon, apparently overcome by the heat before getting the chance to spawn, have been found floating dead in rivers and streams around western Alaska. The warming trend has been uncomfortable for humans as well. Fueled in part by the heat, wildfires across the state have burned more than 2.4 million acres (970,000 hectares) as of early August, spewing smoke and soot that has fouled the air quality of several cities and regions. The smoke pollution poses an unusual quandary for sweltering Alaskans, most of whom live without air conditioning. “When it’s hot and smoky, Alaska doesn’t have a good way to cope with that,” said Thoman, the ACCP climate scientist whose hometown of Fairbanks was particularly hard hit by wildfire smoke. “Open your windows and you get smoked up. Keep your windows closed and you get hot.” In Anchorage, where temperatures reached a record daytime high of 90 degrees Fahrenheit (32.2 degrees Celsius) last month, Brettschneider had a similar take. “I tell people we’re not built for heat. Our houses are built to store heat,” he said.

Alaska records warmest month ever in July

The world must overhaul how it feeds itself and manages Earth's forests, pasture and resources in order to avoid food insecurity and the worst impacts of climate change, a landmark UN assessment said Thursday.&nbsp;

The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change warned that failure to act rapidly on reducing land degradation, food waste and agriculture's carbon footprint could challenge food systems and undermine efforts to head off disastrous global warming.&nbsp;

The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change on Thursday delivered the most comprehensive scientific overview yet of the links between the land we live off and global warming.

The report was compiled by more than 100 climate and land use scientists, drawing on thousands of data sets.

It depicts a world ravaged by humankind's insatiable appetite for food and natural resources.

Human activity is now imprinted on more than 70 per cent of all ice-free land on Earth; agriculture uses 70 per cent of the planet's freshwater.

At the same time, human activity is expanding the world's deserts, with the area of dryland experiencing drought increasing around 1 per cent each year.

Land, with its soil, vegetation and ability to reflect much of the Sun's heat, sucked up as much as 29 per cent of mankind's CO2 emissions in the decade to 2016.

But as temperatures rise across the globe, there are fears that absorption rate will slow.&nbsp;

The land is also a source of greenhouse gases, with agriculture, forestry and other activities accounting for 23 per cent of total net man-made emissions.

1.5C already? 

The IPCC sprung to global attention in 2018 with its assessment on how to limit global warming to 1.5C (2.6 Fahrenheit), as aimed for in the Paris climate deal.&nbsp;

It spelt out the need for drastic greenhouse gas emissions cuts achieved partly by a near-immediate fall in fossil fuel consumption.&nbsp;

Earth's surface has already heated 1C since pre-industrial times, but temperatures on land rise faster than in the ocean.&nbsp;

Thursday's report suggested that compared with the pre-industrial average, land temperatures have already risen 1.53C.

It highlighted an increased risk of crop vulnerability, land degradation and extreme weather events exacerbated by climate change, with women, children and the elderly at most immediate risk.

It also warned that the risk of food insecurity would go from "high" under 1.5C of warming, to "very high" under 2C.

Overweight, underfed

Between 25-30 per cent of all food produced is currently lost or wasted.&nbsp;

This waste comes amid an epoch of vastly heightened meat and fat consumption in wealthy nations, and indeed global per capita food calories have increased around one third since 1961.&nbsp;

Two billion adults are classified as overweight or obese, while at least 820 million people go to bed hungry every night.

Trade-offs

The report looks at ways that humanity can use land to combat climate change. It stresses the value of maintaining and even restoring forests to suck carbon from the atmosphere.

In addition, it runs the rule over bioenergy schemes, including as yet untested systems that use biomass to sequester greenhouse gases, and later get burned for energy as an alternative to fossil fuels.&nbsp;

But the area of land needed to keep to a 1.5-C limit varies in projections depending on global consumption patterns in the decades to come.&nbsp;

Even under a low-consumption trajectory, where populations rise slower than anticipated in a less resource-intensive world, a "high risk" of food insecurity occurs in the IPCC models at warming between 2.5-3.5C.&nbsp;

For a world on its current consumption path, that happens at just 1.3C.&nbsp;

The report warns that land given over to bioenergy at the scale required to scrub out global missions, could "increase risks for desertification, land degradation, food security and sustainable development".

Emissions reductions

The land use assessment repeats the 1.5C report warning that man-made greenhouse gas emissions need to start falling immediately in order to avoid "irreversible loss in land ecosystem functions and services required for food, health, habitable settlements and production".&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The world must overhaul how it feeds itself and manages Earth's forests, pasture and resources in order to avoid food insecurity and the worst impacts of climate change, a landmark UN assessment said Thursday.

The world must overhaul how it feeds itself and manages Earth's forests, pasture and resources in order to avoid food insecurity and the worst impacts of climate change, a landmark UN assessment said Thursday. The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change warned that failure to act rapidly on reducing land degradation, food waste and agriculture's carbon footprint could challenge food systems and undermine efforts to head off disastrous global warming. The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change on Thursday delivered the most comprehensive scientific overview yet of the links between the land we live off and global warming. The report was compiled by more than 100 climate and land use scientists, drawing on thousands of data sets. It depicts a world ravaged by humankind's insatiable appetite for food and natural resources. Human activity is now imprinted on more than 70 per cent of all ice-free land on Earth; agriculture uses 70 per cent of the planet's freshwater. At the same time, human activity is expanding the world's deserts, with the area of dryland experiencing drought increasing around 1 per cent each year. Land, with its soil, vegetation and ability to reflect much of the Sun's heat, sucked up as much as 29 per cent of mankind's CO2 emissions in the decade to 2016. But as temperatures rise across the globe, there are fears that absorption rate will slow. The land is also a source of greenhouse gases, with agriculture, forestry and other activities accounting for 23 per cent of total net man-made emissions. 1.5C already? The IPCC sprung to global attention in 2018 with its assessment on how to limit global warming to 1.5C (2.6 Fahrenheit), as aimed for in the Paris climate deal. It spelt out the need for drastic greenhouse gas emissions cuts achieved partly by a near-immediate fall in fossil fuel consumption. Earth's surface has already heated 1C since pre-industrial times, but temperatures on land rise faster than in the ocean. Thursday's report suggested that compared with the pre-industrial average, land temperatures have already risen 1.53C. It highlighted an increased risk of crop vulnerability, land degradation and extreme weather events exacerbated by climate change, with women, children and the elderly at most immediate risk. It also warned that the risk of food insecurity would go from "high" under 1.5C of warming, to "very high" under 2C. Overweight, underfed Between 25-30 per cent of all food produced is currently lost or wasted. This waste comes amid an epoch of vastly heightened meat and fat consumption in wealthy nations, and indeed global per capita food calories have increased around one third since 1961. Two billion adults are classified as overweight or obese, while at least 820 million people go to bed hungry every night. Trade-offs The report looks at ways that humanity can use land to combat climate change. It stresses the value of maintaining and even restoring forests to suck carbon from the atmosphere. In addition, it runs the rule over bioenergy schemes, including as yet untested systems that use biomass to sequester greenhouse gases, and later get burned for energy as an alternative to fossil fuels. But the area of land needed to keep to a 1.5-C limit varies in projections depending on global consumption patterns in the decades to come. Even under a low-consumption trajectory, where populations rise slower than anticipated in a less resource-intensive world, a "high risk" of food insecurity occurs in the IPCC models at warming between 2.5-3.5C. For a world on its current consumption path, that happens at just 1.3C. The report warns that land given over to bioenergy at the scale required to scrub out global missions, could "increase risks for desertification, land degradation, food security and sustainable development". Emissions reductions The land use assessment repeats the 1.5C report warning that man-made greenhouse gas emissions need to start falling immediately in order to avoid "irreversible loss in land ecosystem functions and services required for food, health, habitable settlements and production".

In landmark assessment, UN body suggests ways to avoid food insecurity, worst impacts of climate change

Many argue that climate change is not a recent problem and has been occurring for millions of years, citing examples of the Little Ice Age. What they fail to realise is that humans have much more to lose now than they had then. Further, today humans are in a position to prevent and reduce climate change because they are the ones causing it.

Having said that, humans are not the only species bearing the brunt of climate change. Insects are also feeling the heat. However, the insect, animal and avian world have been bearing the cross of human progress for centuries. Dodo’s, passenger pigeons, the cheetah in India and a host of other species have been squashed underfoot in the march of progress. It is reported that since humans overran the planet after the last ice age, more than 300 mammal species have been wiped out.

Did their disappearance have an impact on human existence? Nobody knows because neither are the consequences immediately visible nor is the connection between the extinction of species and its impact on humans easy to ascertain.

In the modern world, the first impacts of the use of chemical pesticides was documented in Rachel Carsen’s book ‘Silent Spring’. She observed the absence of bird song and related it to the use of pesticides. These chemicals were not only killing weeds and bugs, but also birds and other insects -natural predators of such bugs. Chemicals are very secular, they harm everyone without prejudice.

In time, pests not only became immune to pesticides, but their natural predators also reduced, resulting in more chemicals in the field. Exposure to chemicals also began to affect humans. Skin rashes, breathing problems and lower IQ in children were some of the problems that began to be reported from farms. The war on pests has resulted in collateral damage both on humans and other species.

A study by the Zoological Society of London and World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) states that ‘we have wiped out 58 per cent of animal life between 1970 and 2012’. &nbsp;

Recent reports suggest insects are facing mass extinction. A study conducted in the rain forests of Puerto Rico reported a decline, by a factor of four or eight, in the number of insects and invertebrates caught in traps. While the number of insects caught in sticky traps declined by a factor of 60, all caused by chemical-intensive agriculture, climate change and urbanisation.

A global scientific review reported in The Guardian states that the global mass of insects is falling at the rate of 2.5 per cent a year. They could vanish within a century. These are food for other creatures higher up in the food chain. As per researchers, this decline has coincided with the loss of birds, lizards and frogs.

Now, why should this be a worry for us? It can be argued that this should be the least of our worries as we are on top of the food chain, can make babies and meat in the laboratory, and can harness the wind and sun.

We should be concerned and here is why. According to scientists, it would take almost 3 million years for evolution to naturally replace species made extinct by humans.

Insects are pollinators and waste management experts, controlling other insects, keeping the soil healthy while also serving the most important function – being food for those higher up the food chain.

In the absence of pollinators, many plant species will disappear. Sure, the argument can be made that humans will be able to recreate such plants in the laboratory.

Approximately 87 per cent of the over 300,000 species of plants need external pollinators, where would one begin?

There is enough proof to declare that our handling of excreta is not as good as that of the dung beetle. Can human’s copy the magic that the earthworm performs on the soil? That being said, seed companies develop seeds in the laboratories to be sold to farmers along with pesticides and other chemicals. So, some can argue that agriculture will not be affected by insect decline. However, chemical residue in food and water sources links back to pesticide and fertiliser use.

There have been five earlier mass extinctions in the last 4 billion years. These were caused by volcanic eruptions, meteorite impacts and the ice age. Humans did not have much to lose then as they do now. One is not only speaking about death.

The development has inured many of us to a way of life far removed from hardships, money has been invested to ensure that one is not accosted by survival issues that our forefathers faced. The collapse of the insect world will potentially add to other woes destabilising the socio-economic system. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Is the decline of insects an existential threat like climate change? The answer is I don’t know, nor would I like to find out. &nbsp;

Are we equipped to battle a potential second existential threat? The answer is a NO, looking at the way we are handling the climate crisis.

Many in power either refuse to acknowledge the threat of Climate Change or don’t do enough to reduce the impact their economies have on the climate, for example moving to renewables from fossil fuels. Humanity is already paying for this dilly-dallying monetarily. According to a report by Christian Aid, the cost of 10 major climatic events in 2018, including the floods in Kerala, ranged from $1 billion to seven billion each.

Though there are many reports on the decline of insect populations, there is no official acknowledgement of this threat and its potential impacts. But should we wait for that? As individuals, there are many things that can be done. Going organic, using natural pesticides at home, growing home gardens are some of the day-to-day activities that come to mind. If you haven’t started as yet, there is no better time than now. 
&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-bearing-brunt-of-climate-change-2778913">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Many argue that climate change is not a recent problem and has been occurring for millions of years, citing examples of the Little Ice Age. What they fail to realise is that humans have much more to lose now than they had then.

Many argue that climate change is not a recent problem and has been occurring for millions of years, citing examples of the Little Ice Age. What they fail to realise is that humans have much more to lose now than they had then. Further, today humans are in a position to prevent and reduce climate change because they are the ones causing it. Having said that, humans are not the only species bearing the brunt of climate change. Insects are also feeling the heat. However, the insect, animal and avian world have been bearing the cross of human progress for centuries. Dodo’s, passenger pigeons, the cheetah in India and a host of other species have been squashed underfoot in the march of progress. It is reported that since humans overran the planet after the last ice age, more than 300 mammal species have been wiped out. Did their disappearance have an impact on human existence? Nobody knows because neither are the consequences immediately visible nor is the connection between the extinction of species and its impact on humans easy to ascertain. In the modern world, the first impacts of the use of chemical pesticides was documented in Rachel Carsen’s book ‘Silent Spring’. She observed the absence of bird song and related it to the use of pesticides. These chemicals were not only killing weeds and bugs, but also birds and other insects -natural predators of such bugs. Chemicals are very secular, they harm everyone without prejudice. In time, pests not only became immune to pesticides, but their natural predators also reduced, resulting in more chemicals in the field. Exposure to chemicals also began to affect humans. Skin rashes, breathing problems and lower IQ in children were some of the problems that began to be reported from farms. The war on pests has resulted in collateral damage both on humans and other species. A study by the Zoological Society of London and World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) states that ‘we have wiped out 58 per cent of animal life between 1970 and 2012’. Recent reports suggest insects are facing mass extinction. A study conducted in the rain forests of Puerto Rico reported a decline, by a factor of four or eight, in the number of insects and invertebrates caught in traps. While the number of insects caught in sticky traps declined by a factor of 60, all caused by chemical-intensive agriculture, climate change and urbanisation. A global scientific review reported in The Guardian states that the global mass of insects is falling at the rate of 2.5 per cent a year. They could vanish within a century. These are food for other creatures higher up in the food chain. As per researchers, this decline has coincided with the loss of birds, lizards and frogs. Now, why should this be a worry for us? It can be argued that this should be the least of our worries as we are on top of the food chain, can make babies and meat in the laboratory, and can harness the wind and sun. We should be concerned and here is why. According to scientists, it would take almost 3 million years for evolution to naturally replace species made extinct by humans. Insects are pollinators and waste management experts, controlling other insects, keeping the soil healthy while also serving the most important function – being food for those higher up the food chain. In the absence of pollinators, many plant species will disappear. Sure, the argument can be made that humans will be able to recreate such plants in the laboratory. Approximately 87 per cent of the over 300,000 species of plants need external pollinators, where would one begin? There is enough proof to declare that our handling of excreta is not as good as that of the dung beetle. Can human’s copy the magic that the earthworm performs on the soil? That being said, seed companies develop seeds in the laboratories to be sold to farmers along with pesticides and other chemicals. So, some can argue that agriculture will not be affected by insect decline. However, chemical residue in food and water sources links back to pesticide and fertiliser use. There have been five earlier mass extinctions in the last 4 billion years. These were caused by volcanic eruptions, meteorite impacts and the ice age. Humans did not have much to lose then as they do now. One is not only speaking about death. The development has inured many of us to a way of life far removed from hardships, money has been invested to ensure that one is not accosted by survival issues that our forefathers faced. The collapse of the insect world will potentially add to other woes destabilising the socio-economic system. Is the decline of insects an existential threat like climate change? The answer is I don’t know, nor would I like to find out. Are we equipped to battle a potential second existential threat? The answer is a NO, looking at the way we are handling the climate crisis. Many in power either refuse to acknowledge the threat of Climate Change or don’t do enough to reduce the impact their economies have on the climate, for example moving to renewables from fossil fuels. Humanity is already paying for this dilly-dallying monetarily. According to a report by Christian Aid, the cost of 10 major climatic events in 2018, including the floods in Kerala, ranged from $1 billion to seven billion each. Though there are many reports on the decline of insect populations, there is no official acknowledgement of this threat and its potential impacts. But should we wait for that? As individuals, there are many things that can be done. Going organic, using natural pesticides at home, growing home gardens are some of the day-to-day activities that come to mind. If you haven’t started as yet, there is no better time than now. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Bearing brunt of climate change

By Akash Rai

French mountaineer Bryan Mestre recently discovered the alarming site of&nbsp;melting of glaciers at the height of 11,100 ft on the Mont Blanc mountain range, the highest mountain in the Alps.

Mestre was shocked to discover the lake&nbsp;at such a high altitude&nbsp;measuring around 100 feet-wide,&nbsp;in a place where temperatures are normally too cold to support liquid water.&nbsp;

It is to believe that a direct impact of the recent heatwave in Europe resulting in&nbsp;such a large meltdown of the glacious above, forming this lake.&nbsp;

Speaking exclusively to WION, Bryam shared his experience and raised some serious concern regarding climate change.

Here are the excerpts from his conversation with WION.

WION:&nbsp;Tell us what did you saw when you reached the height of 11,000 ft on Mont Blanc mountain range?

Bryan Mestre:&nbsp;I was going past Col de Rochefort, at the foot Dent du Géant, a deep blue lake, made from the melting of the glacier and the intense heat that struck the continent at the end of June 2019.

WION: Was&nbsp;this your first experience to capture such a huge lake at the height of 11,000 ft?

Bryan Mestre:&nbsp;Yes it was, I have been to this very place six times before.

WION:&nbsp;How&nbsp;worrying sign it is?

Bryan Mestre:&nbsp;It very worrying, it shouldn't be happening not at this altitude. I know that for some people, 3400 metres is low, in the Himalayas there are towns and plantations at this altitude, but every massif is different and has it's own climate and ecosystem, usually, the freezing altitude in the Alps in summer is around 2900-3000 metres.

WION:&nbsp;As a mountaineer what impact have you noticed in the mountain range due to climate change/global warming?

Bryan Mestre:&nbsp;Massive changes, all the routes have changed, some have disappeared, crumbling down in massive rockfalls, or just have ice. An article came out recently, about Rébuffat's (famous French alpinist) the Alps 100's finest climbs, today, less than 10 of the 100 are still doable.

WION:&nbsp;We are noticing glaciers all over the world are melting at an exponential speed, what is your stand on this, and how we can overcome this?

Bryan Mestre:&nbsp;I am afraid, we as single individuals cannot do much, unless we drastically change our habits like stopping our fuel consumption, stop consuming too much electricity and water. States can do a lot more, like stop coal power plants, develop hydrogen, nuclear and green energy, ban tourism cruise ship (a dozen of these ships burn more fuel than all of the world's cars in a year).

WION:&nbsp;Do you believe that people are not realising their responsibility towards the climate and environment?

Bryan Mestre:&nbsp;I believe that slowly people are realizing it, but there isn't much they can do, and since governments are not helping at all, the little they do is shadowed and becomes insignificant.

WION: Do you think the time has come to&nbsp;sound an alarm about global warming?

Brayan Mestre:&nbsp;I think the alarm has been raised long ago, AlGore, Dicaprio, the United Nations, everybody keeps talking about it, people in the mountains, forests, and coasts that are directly affected keep trying to manage something, but governing powers just don't care. It doesn't generate enough profit for them to step in. They don't care what they will leave behind when they will be gone.

By Akash Rai French mountaineer Bryan Mestre recently discovered the alarming site of melting of glaciers at the height of 11,100 ft on the Mont Blanc mountain range, the highest mountain in the Alps.

By Akash Rai French mountaineer Bryan Mestre recently discovered the alarming site of melting of glaciers at the height of 11,100 ft on the Mont Blanc mountain range, the highest mountain in the Alps. Mestre was shocked to discover the lake at such a high altitude measuring around 100 feet-wide, in a place where temperatures are normally too cold to support liquid water. It is to believe that a direct impact of the recent heatwave in Europe resulting in such a large meltdown of the glacious above, forming this lake. Speaking exclusively to WION, Bryam shared his experience and raised some serious concern regarding climate change. Here are the excerpts from his conversation with WION. WION: Tell us what did you saw when you reached the height of 11,000 ft on Mont Blanc mountain range? Bryan Mestre: I was going past Col de Rochefort, at the foot Dent du Géant, a deep blue lake, made from the melting of the glacier and the intense heat that struck the continent at the end of June 2019. WION: Was this your first experience to capture such a huge lake at the height of 11,000 ft? Bryan Mestre: Yes it was, I have been to this very place six times before. WION: How worrying sign it is? Bryan Mestre: It very worrying, it shouldn't be happening not at this altitude. I know that for some people, 3400 metres is low, in the Himalayas there are towns and plantations at this altitude, but every massif is different and has it's own climate and ecosystem, usually, the freezing altitude in the Alps in summer is around 2900-3000 metres. WION: As a mountaineer what impact have you noticed in the mountain range due to climate change/global warming? Bryan Mestre: Massive changes, all the routes have changed, some have disappeared, crumbling down in massive rockfalls, or just have ice. An article came out recently, about Rébuffat's (famous French alpinist) the Alps 100's finest climbs, today, less than 10 of the 100 are still doable. WION: We are noticing glaciers all over the world are melting at an exponential speed, what is your stand on this, and how we can overcome this? Bryan Mestre: I am afraid, we as single individuals cannot do much, unless we drastically change our habits like stopping our fuel consumption, stop consuming too much electricity and water. States can do a lot more, like stop coal power plants, develop hydrogen, nuclear and green energy, ban tourism cruise ship (a dozen of these ships burn more fuel than all of the world's cars in a year). WION: Do you believe that people are not realising their responsibility towards the climate and environment? Bryan Mestre: I believe that slowly people are realizing it, but there isn't much they can do, and since governments are not helping at all, the little they do is shadowed and becomes insignificant. WION: Do you think the time has come to sound an alarm about global warming? Brayan Mestre: I think the alarm has been raised long ago, AlGore, Dicaprio, the United Nations, everybody keeps talking about it, people in the mountains, forests, and coasts that are directly affected keep trying to manage something, but governing powers just don't care. It doesn't generate enough profit for them to step in. They don't care what they will leave behind when they will be gone.

Glaciers melting at height of 11,000 ft on Mont Blanc mountain range: French mountaineer Bryan Mestre to WION

The record-shattering heatwave that baked much of northern Europe last month was likely between 1.5 to 3.0 degrees Celsius hotter due to manmade climate change, an international team of scientists said Friday.

The three-day peak saw Temperature records tumble in Belgium, the Netherlands and Britain while the city of Paris experienced its hottest day ever with the mercury topping out at 42.6C (108.7 Fahrenheit) on July 25.

The ferocious heat came off the back of similar soaring temperatures in June, helping that month to be the hottest June since records began.&nbsp;

Scientists from the World Weather Attribution (WWA) team combined climate modelling with historical heatwave trends and compared it with monitoring data across the continent.&nbsp;

They concluded that the temperatures produced by the climate models were as much as 3C (5.5 degrees Farenheit) lower than those actually observed during the heatwave in Europe.

"In all locations, an event like the observed would have been 1.5 to 3C cooler in an unchanged climate," the WWA said, adding that the difference was "consistent with increased instances of morbidity and mortality."

Global warming also made the July heatwave in some countries between 10-100 times more likely to occur, compared with computer simulations.

Such temperature extremes in northern Europe, without the additional 1C centigrade humans, have added to the atmosphere since the industrial era, would be expected on average once every 1,000 years.

Michael Byrne, lecturer in Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of St Andrews, said the analysis had "found the fingerprints of climate change all over (last month's) extreme temperatures."

"We know without a doubt that climate change will bring increasingly severe heatwaves, but also heavier downpours and more flooding," added Byrne, who was not involved in the research.

The July heatwave caused widespread disruption, prompting train cancellations and emergency measures in many cities. Several heat-related deaths were reported, although a precise toll is likely to take weeks to materialise.

The June heatwave itself was likely made at least five times more likely by climate change and was around 4C hotter than an equivalent heatwave a century ago.

 
&nbsp;'Not science fiction'&nbsp;

Europe has experienced exceptionally intense heatwaves in 2003, 2010, 2015, 2017, 2018 and two this year, peaks consistent with the general warming trend: the four hottest years on record globally were the last four years.

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) on Friday said that preliminary data showed July may have been the hottest month ever recorded.

Temperature readings and data provided by the European Union's Copernicus monitoring service showed that the first 29 days of July 2019 were equal to or possibly warmer than the hottest month ever, currently July 2016.

While the data needs confirming, the WMO said the figures were "particularly significant" as July 2016 occurred during a strong El Nino warming event, absent in 2019.

"July has re-written climate history, with dozens of new temperature records at local, national and global level," said WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas.&nbsp;

July also saw unprecedented melting of the Greenland ice sheet, with 12 billion tonnes of ice flowing into the sea, and wildfires in the Artic spewing out thousands of tonnes of planet-warming CO2.

"This is not science fiction. It is the reality of climate change. It is happening now and it will worsen in the future without urgent climate action," said Taalas.

The record-shattering heatwave that baked much of northern Europe last month was likely between 1.5 to 3.0 degrees Celsius hotter due to manmade climate change, an international team of scientists said Friday.

The record-shattering heatwave that baked much of northern Europe last month was likely between 1.5 to 3.0 degrees Celsius hotter due to manmade climate change, an international team of scientists said Friday. The three-day peak saw Temperature records tumble in Belgium, the Netherlands and Britain while the city of Paris experienced its hottest day ever with the mercury topping out at 42.6C (108.7 Fahrenheit) on July 25. The ferocious heat came off the back of similar soaring temperatures in June, helping that month to be the hottest June since records began. Scientists from the World Weather Attribution (WWA) team combined climate modelling with historical heatwave trends and compared it with monitoring data across the continent. They concluded that the temperatures produced by the climate models were as much as 3C (5.5 degrees Farenheit) lower than those actually observed during the heatwave in Europe. "In all locations, an event like the observed would have been 1.5 to 3C cooler in an unchanged climate," the WWA said, adding that the difference was "consistent with increased instances of morbidity and mortality." Global warming also made the July heatwave in some countries between 10-100 times more likely to occur, compared with computer simulations. Such temperature extremes in northern Europe, without the additional 1C centigrade humans, have added to the atmosphere since the industrial era, would be expected on average once every 1,000 years. Michael Byrne, lecturer in Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of St Andrews, said the analysis had "found the fingerprints of climate change all over (last month's) extreme temperatures." "We know without a doubt that climate change will bring increasingly severe heatwaves, but also heavier downpours and more flooding," added Byrne, who was not involved in the research. The July heatwave caused widespread disruption, prompting train cancellations and emergency measures in many cities. Several heat-related deaths were reported, although a precise toll is likely to take weeks to materialise. The June heatwave itself was likely made at least five times more likely by climate change and was around 4C hotter than an equivalent heatwave a century ago. 'Not science fiction' Europe has experienced exceptionally intense heatwaves in 2003, 2010, 2015, 2017, 2018 and two this year, peaks consistent with the general warming trend: the four hottest years on record globally were the last four years. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) on Friday said that preliminary data showed July may have been the hottest month ever recorded. Temperature readings and data provided by the European Union's Copernicus monitoring service showed that the first 29 days of July 2019 were equal to or possibly warmer than the hottest month ever, currently July 2016. While the data needs confirming, the WMO said the figures were "particularly significant" as July 2016 occurred during a strong El Nino warming event, absent in 2019. "July has re-written climate history, with dozens of new temperature records at local, national and global level," said WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas. July also saw unprecedented melting of the Greenland ice sheet, with 12 billion tonnes of ice flowing into the sea, and wildfires in the Artic spewing out thousands of tonnes of planet-warming CO2. "This is not science fiction. It is the reality of climate change. It is happening now and it will worsen in the future without urgent climate action," said Taalas.

July heatwave up to 3C hotter due to climate change

UK's 10 hottest years on record have all occurred since 2002, in a sign of the effects of climate change, a report by the UK Met Office published on Wednesday shows.

On Monday, the UK's national weather service confirmed that <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/uk-record-high-temperature-of-387c-reached-on-july-25-weather-service-239392">Britain's highest ever temperature of 38.7 Celsius </a>(101.7 Fahrenheit) in Cambridge on July 25 during a heatwave which gripped Europe.

Climate scientists have said such heatwaves are becoming more frequent as a result of global warming from greenhouse gas emissions.

In a report published in the International Journal of Climatology, the Met Office extended its temperature records for Britain by 26 years back to 1884.

Analysing that data, it found that the warmest year on record in Britain was 2014; followed by 2006, 2011, 2007, 2017, 2003, 2018, 2004, 2002, and 2005.

"Looking back further into the UK's weather reveals a very interesting timeline with the top ten warmest years at the most recent end, since 2002," said Mark McCarthy, the head of the Met Office's National Climate Information Centre.

"Notably, 1892 is the coldest year in the series, when the average temperature was just over seven degrees. By contrast 2014, which was the warmest year in the series, saw an average temperature approaching 10 degrees Celsius," he added.

The top 10 coldest years in order were 1892, 1888, 1885, 1963, 1919, 1886, 1917, 1909, 1887, and 1962.

The report also said that although last year was the most significant snowfall since 2010, snow events have generally declined since the 1960s.

Over the past decade, summers have been 13% wetter and winters have been 12% wetter than in the period 1961-1990.

The average sea level around Britain was also the highest on record in 2015 and 2018 since records from 1901.

Commenting on the Met Office report, scientists said it was a sign of the "new normal".

"With global emissions of greenhouse gases on the rise, the UK will continue to get warmer and wetter as global warming accelerates. The science of climate change is now clear," said Michael Byrne, lecturer in Earth &amp; Environmental Sciences, University of St Andrews.

Worldwide, average temperatures have risen 1 degree Celsius above pre-industrial levels since the mid-1800s.

Governments have agreed to limit temperature rises to within 2C this century but current emissions cut pledges are not enough and put the world on course for a 3-5C rise.

UK's 10 hottest years on record have all occurred since 2002, in a sign of the effects of climate change, a report by the UK Met Office published on Wednesday shows.

UK's 10 hottest years on record have all occurred since 2002, in a sign of the effects of climate change, a report by the UK Met Office published on Wednesday shows. On Monday, the UK's national weather service confirmed that Britain's highest ever temperature of 38.7 Celsius (101.7 Fahrenheit) in Cambridge on July 25 during a heatwave which gripped Europe. Climate scientists have said such heatwaves are becoming more frequent as a result of global warming from greenhouse gas emissions. In a report published in the International Journal of Climatology, the Met Office extended its temperature records for Britain by 26 years back to 1884. Analysing that data, it found that the warmest year on record in Britain was 2014; followed by 2006, 2011, 2007, 2017, 2003, 2018, 2004, 2002, and 2005. "Looking back further into the UK's weather reveals a very interesting timeline with the top ten warmest years at the most recent end, since 2002," said Mark McCarthy, the head of the Met Office's National Climate Information Centre. "Notably, 1892 is the coldest year in the series, when the average temperature was just over seven degrees. By contrast 2014, which was the warmest year in the series, saw an average temperature approaching 10 degrees Celsius," he added. The top 10 coldest years in order were 1892, 1888, 1885, 1963, 1919, 1886, 1917, 1909, 1887, and 1962. The report also said that although last year was the most significant snowfall since 2010, snow events have generally declined since the 1960s. Over the past decade, summers have been 13% wetter and winters have been 12% wetter than in the period 1961-1990. The average sea level around Britain was also the highest on record in 2015 and 2018 since records from 1901. Commenting on the Met Office report, scientists said it was a sign of the "new normal". "With global emissions of greenhouse gases on the rise, the UK will continue to get warmer and wetter as global warming accelerates. The science of climate change is now clear," said Michael Byrne, lecturer in Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of St Andrews. Worldwide, average temperatures have risen 1 degree Celsius above pre-industrial levels since the mid-1800s. Governments have agreed to limit temperature rises to within 2C this century but current emissions cut pledges are not enough and put the world on course for a 3-5C rise.

UK's 10 hottest years all occurred since 2002: Met Office

Plastic junk spawns desert island disaster in Pacific

Climate change leading to rock faces collapsing. Permafrost is any ground that remains completely frozen. Year-round ice found at high altitude now melting. Mont Blanc is the highest mountain in the Alps. Rockfalls also make it dangerous for mountain climbers. Watch this video to know more.

France: Mont Blanc's rocky glaciers collapsing

United Nations special envoy was in India, he took a short ride on an electric rickshaw and appreciated India's efforts for climate change. Watch our report to know more.

UN climate change summit: UN special envoy appreciates India's efforts

Climate Change Will Bring A New Disaster Every Week: United Nations A disaster every week seems to be the new norm as extreme weather wreaks havoc across the world. Palki sums up the latest on Hurricane Barry in Louisiana, fire in Hawaii and storm in Greece.

Gravitas: Extreme weather: The new norm

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Friday (July 12) called on the international community to provide more aid to Mozambique, where two cyclones spurred by climate change killed hundreds and wrought widespread destruction earlier this year.

United Nations chief calls for more support for cyclone-hit Mozambique

Will Plantation Of More Trees Save The Planet From Global Warming? A Recent Research Predicts So As the world reels from the effects of climate change, here's a silver lining in sight. A recent study says that signficant amount of greenhouse gas emissions can be absorbed by increasing the forest cover. Will plantation of more trees save the planet from a climate disaster? Here's a report

Gravitas: Study: Reforestation can help halt climate change

A glacier in Antarctica is approaching the "tipping point" that would lead to an catastrophic global sea level rise, a study has said.

The Thwaites Glacier, which is roughly the size of Florida or Britain, in West Antarctica, is at an unstoppable point now and once the "instability" begins, nothing could prevent the ice from melting, the Nasa-backed study said. Some of the low-lying areas of coastline will be drowned completely, it warned.

The melting can happen at present-day ice melting rates, the study further said.

Britain and the United States launched a $25 million project last year to study the risks of the collapse of the Thwaites Glacier. The five-year research, involving 100 scientists, is the two nations' biggest joint scientific project in Antarctica since the 1940s.

Ice is thawing from Greenland to Antarctica and man-made global warming is accelerating the trend.

Thwaites and the nearby Pine Island Glacier are two of the biggest and fastest-retreating glaciers in Antarctica.

If both abruptly collapsed, allowing ice far inland to flow faster into the oceans, world sea levels could rise by more than a metre (three feet), threatening cities from Shanghai to San Francisco and low-lying coastal regions.

Other scientists from South Korea, Germany, Sweden, New Zealand and Finland are also contributing in the project.

The United States is keeping up research even though US President Donald Trump doubts mainstream scientific findings that human activities, led by the burning of fossil fuels, are the main cause of global warming.

(With inputs from agencies)

A glacier in Antarctica is approaching the "tipping point" that would lead to an catastrophic global sea level rise, a study has said. The Thwaites Glacier, which is roughly the size of Florida or Britain, in West Antarctica, is at an unstoppable point now and once the "instability" begins, nothing could prevent the ice from melting, the Nasa-backed study said.

A glacier in Antarctica is approaching the "tipping point" that would lead to an catastrophic global sea level rise, a study has said. The Thwaites Glacier, which is roughly the size of Florida or Britain, in West Antarctica, is at an unstoppable point now and once the "instability" begins, nothing could prevent the ice from melting, the Nasa-backed study said. Some of the low-lying areas of coastline will be drowned completely, it warned. The melting can happen at present-day ice melting rates, the study further said. Britain and the United States launched a $25 million project last year to study the risks of the collapse of the Thwaites Glacier. The five-year research, involving 100 scientists, is the two nations' biggest joint scientific project in Antarctica since the 1940s. Ice is thawing from Greenland to Antarctica and man-made global warming is accelerating the trend. Thwaites and the nearby Pine Island Glacier are two of the biggest and fastest-retreating glaciers in Antarctica. If both abruptly collapsed, allowing ice far inland to flow faster into the oceans, world sea levels could rise by more than a metre (three feet), threatening cities from Shanghai to San Francisco and low-lying coastal regions. Other scientists from South Korea, Germany, Sweden, New Zealand and Finland are also contributing in the project. The United States is keeping up research even though US President Donald Trump doubts mainstream scientific findings that human activities, led by the burning of fossil fuels, are the main cause of global warming. (With inputs from agencies)

Glacier the size of Britain could disappear and drown low-lying coasts: Study

A recent study has suggested that the process of reforestation around the world would be the most effective method to combat <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/tornado-hits-northeast-china-as-more-extreme-weather-strikes-six-killed-190-injured-232916">climate change</a>.

Around 0.9 billion hectares of land worldwide would be suitable for reforestation, which could ultimately capture two-thirds of human-made carbon emissions.

Researchers investigated nature-based solutions to climate change. In the latest study published in the journal 'Science', researchers for the first time, showed where in the world new trees could grow and how much carbon they would store.

"One aspect was of particular importance to us as we did the calculations, we excluded cities or agricultural areas from the total restoration potential as these areas are needed for human life," study lead author Jean-Francois Bastin explained.

The researchers calculated that under the current climate conditions, Earth's land could support 4.4 billion hectares of continuous tree cover. That is 1.6 billion more than the currently existing 2.8 billion hectares.

Of these 1.6 billion hectares, 0.9 billion hectares fulfil the criterion of not being used by humans. This means that there is currently an area of the size of the US available for tree restoration.

Once mature, these new forests could store 205 billion tonnes of carbon,&nbsp;about two-thirds of the 300 billion tonnes of carbon that has been released into the atmosphere as a result of human activity since the Industrial Revolution.

"We all knew that restoring forests could play a part in tackling climate change, but we didn't really know how big the impact would be. Our study shows clearly that forest restoration is the best climate change solution available today. But we must act quickly, as new forests will take decades to mature and achieve their full potential as a source of natural carbon storage," said co-author of the study, Prof. Thomas Crowther.

The study also shows which parts of the world are most suited to forest restoration.

The greatest potential can be found in just six countries:

Russia (151 million hectares)&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/why-china-is-afraid-of-us-abrams-tanks-to-be-delivered-to-taiwan-234260#us-army-infantry-battalions-m1-abrams-tanks-234232">US</a> (103 million hectares)

Canada (78.4 million hectares)

Australia (58 million hectares)

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/lionel-messi-slams-brazil-fix-after-copa-red-card-233729/amp">Brazil</a> (49.7 million hectares)

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/sale-of-weapons-to-taiwan-violates-one-china-policy-cancel-it-immediately-china-to-us-234236">China</a> (40.2 million hectares).

Many current climate models are wrong in expecting climate change to increase global tree cover, the study warns. It finds that there is likely to be an increase in the area of northern boreal forests in regions such as Siberia, but tree cover there averages only 30 to 40 per cent.&nbsp;

These gains would be outweighed by the losses suffered in dense tropical forests, which typically have 90 to 100 per cent tree cover.

A recent study has suggested that the process of reforestation around the world would be the most effective method to combat climate change. Around 0.9 billion hectares of land worldwide would be suitable for reforestation, which could ultimately capture two-thirds of human-made carbon emissions.

A recent study has suggested that the process of reforestation around the world would be the most effective method to combat climate change. Around 0.9 billion hectares of land worldwide would be suitable for reforestation, which could ultimately capture two-thirds of human-made carbon emissions. Researchers investigated nature-based solutions to climate change. In the latest study published in the journal 'Science', researchers for the first time, showed where in the world new trees could grow and how much carbon they would store. "One aspect was of particular importance to us as we did the calculations, we excluded cities or agricultural areas from the total restoration potential as these areas are needed for human life," study lead author Jean-Francois Bastin explained. The researchers calculated that under the current climate conditions, Earth's land could support 4.4 billion hectares of continuous tree cover. That is 1.6 billion more than the currently existing 2.8 billion hectares. Of these 1.6 billion hectares, 0.9 billion hectares fulfil the criterion of not being used by humans. This means that there is currently an area of the size of the US available for tree restoration. Once mature, these new forests could store 205 billion tonnes of carbon, about two-thirds of the 300 billion tonnes of carbon that has been released into the atmosphere as a result of human activity since the Industrial Revolution. "We all knew that restoring forests could play a part in tackling climate change, but we didn't really know how big the impact would be. Our study shows clearly that forest restoration is the best climate change solution available today. But we must act quickly, as new forests will take decades to mature and achieve their full potential as a source of natural carbon storage," said co-author of the study, Prof. Thomas Crowther. The study also shows which parts of the world are most suited to forest restoration. The greatest potential can be found in just six countries: Russia (151 million hectares) US (103 million hectares) Canada (78.4 million hectares) Australia (58 million hectares) Brazil (49.7 million hectares) China (40.2 million hectares). Many current climate models are wrong in expecting climate change to increase global tree cover, the study warns. It finds that there is likely to be an increase in the area of northern boreal forests in regions such as Siberia, but tree cover there averages only 30 to 40 per cent. These gains would be outweighed by the losses suffered in dense tropical forests, which typically have 90 to 100 per cent tree cover.

Experts find land as big as US for reforestation to reverse climate change effects

climate-change

Climate Change, News on Climate Change, stories on Climate Change, articles on Climate Change, Climate Change stories at Wion, Climate Change news, Climate Change latest news