Jairam Ramesh says 33% forest cover is an unrealistic goal

India's ambitious target of bringing 33% of its area under green cover is not realistic given the population pressure and the pressure for development, said Jairam Ramesh, minister for environment and forests.

Jairam also criticised the information technology industry for not adhering to green building norms.

According to Jairam, it is better to improve the quality of green cover than to harp on quantity.

"This [the target] is unrealistic in a country like India where the population is 1.2 billion and set to become 1.6 billion by 2040. With the population pressure in our country, with the development pressure in our country, to expect that suddenly India will grow the green cover from the present 21% to 33% is totally unrealistic," Jairam said during the Green Landscape Summit 2011 organised by the Confederation of Indian Industry.

Jairam also pointed out that about 40% of Indian forest is open degraded forest land, meaning when you look up, you easily see the sun. (In forests with good tree cover, it is not possible to see the sun.)

The minister also blasted the IT industry for not adhering to green building norms.

"The IT industry is a huge guzzler for air-conditioning," he said. "IT buildings are horribly inefficient when it comes to meeting energy efficiency levels. I close my ears when the IT czars are giving long lectures on green buildings and when I see their buildings which are poor advertisements of green habitats," the minister said.

According to him, bulk of the carbon emission comes from electricity generation and power plants, to the extent of 38% of the total, followed by the industrial sector at about 23% and 17% from agriculture.

Mangroves or Mukesh? You must choose, Jairam

Is the Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance SEZ more important to the Maharashtra government than mangrove conservation?

Union Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh has suggested that if the State government and the Union Civil Aviation Ministry want Mumbai's second airport to come up at the proposed site in Navi Mumbai, they should use some of the land allotted to the Special Economic Zone which abuts the site to the south, rather than destroying mangroves on the north.

This was among the suggestions made in pursuit of a compromise solution after the Prime Minister's Office asked for a quick decision on an environmental clearance for the airport project. On September 3, the PMO sent a note to the Environment Minister, forwarding a letter from Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan who urged a speedy clearance. Mr. Ramesh says, he replied the same day saying that “we will find a way out, providing there is cooperation from the Civil Aviation Ministry and the State government.”

The two major obstacles blocking the way to an environmental clearance are the 400 acres of mangroves that will be destroyed and the two rivers which will have to be diverted.

While land has already been acquired and allotted to the SEZ projects being developed by the Reliance and CIDCO, Mr. Ramesh says “if the State government is really serious, it can take back some of those thousands of hectares and use it for the airport, rather than destroying mangroves to the north.”

“If they really want to, they can certainly do it,” he said. “I am willing to accept their argument that no alternative site is possible…They must also give way and compromise on some of these things…I have made several suggestions.”

Another suggestion is related to the “non-essential” parts of the project be shifted to minimise the environmental damage. “What is the need for a five-star hotel at the site? What is the need for a shopping mall there?” he asked.

The developer CIDCO has been asked to come back to the clearance panel with a modified proposal incorporating the compromises on September 13. “CIDCO has finally come off its high horse,” said Mr. Ramesh. “We are now working to find a solution.”

The Minister refuted the accusation that the Environment Ministry was dragging its feet on the project. “It was only on July 6, 2010 that the final [Environment Impact Assessment] report and the [Coastal Regulation Zone] approval was submitted,” he said. “So that is when our clock starts ticking. It is just two months since then.”

He added that the timeline submitted as part of Mr. Chavan's letter to the Prime Minister was incomplete. “The project actually started in November 1997, when the Airport Authority of India's expert committee recommended Rewas Mandwa as the best site for Mumbai's second airport.” It was only in December 2000 that, on the recommendation of the State government, the Civil Aviation Ministry shifted its proposal to the Navi Mumbai site instead.

For seven years, the project proponents ignored the fact that an airport at Navi Mumbai would violate the CRZ notification of 1991. Finally, after the Cabinet approved the project in May 2007, the process of amending this notification started. On May 15, 2009 — “exactly two weeks before I took office,” said Mr. Ramesh — the amended notification was issued, permitting the airport to come up provided that measures were taken to reduce the environmental impact.

Incidentally, environmental activists point out that the notification has been amended 25 times in its two decade-existence, mostly to allow “exceptions” for various development projects.

In another obstacle facing the project, a Union government environment clearance may not be enough. According to a Bombay High Court ruling in January 2010, even if a project is cleared by the competent authority on land which includes mangroves, the State government will have to seek the permission of the Court before implementing the project.

 The Hindu

Sea level likely to rise up to 70 cm by 2100

Ocean levels could significantly rise up to 70 cm by 2100 due to climate change and even the most extreme geoengineering approaches would not be able to stop sea levels from rising, according to a new study. The study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ( PNAS) proposes that as many as 150 million people could be affected as ocean levels could rise by 30 cm to 70 cm. 

Scientists led by John Moore from Beijing Normal University, China, said that to combat global warming, people need to concentrate on sharply curbing greenhouse gas emissions and not rely too much on proposed geoengineering methods. "Substituting geoengineering for greenhouse emission control would be to burden future generations with enormous risk," said Svetlana Jevrejeva of the UK's National Oceanography Centre, a co-author of the study. 

Jevrejeva and colleagues from China, Finland and Denmark wanted to see how five geoengineering solutions will affect sea levels. Geoengineering falls into two main types: limiting the effect of the sun's rays, or changing the carbon cycle in some way. The former doesn't change atmospheric CO2 levels in any way, whereas the latter does. 

The team used a well-established model to look at the effect of firing a large amount of sulphur dioxide into the atmosphere, putting mirrors in space, planting huge numbers of trees, biochar (turning plants into a type of charcoal in soil where they boost crop productivity) and switching to bio-energy. 

They investigated how these methods would affect climate change under different CO2 emissions scenarios. They found that using bio-energy for power while capturing the emitted CO2 and storing it deep underground is likely to be the least risky and the most publicly acceptable solution to tackle climate change. This would also lead to fewer fossil fuels being burnt for energy. But this solution wouldn't be as effective as using aerosols or giant mirrors in space at slowing sea level rise.

Link PTI