A new United Nations study forecasting an uptick in natural disasters due to climate change has shifted its focus from prevention to mitigation, signaling in some ways that the effects of manmade warming on the planet are irreversible.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report, authored by a group of Nobel-Prize winning scientists, is set to be released in full on Sunday. It explains that no country is immune to the effects of global warming – including Qatar.
In a summary of the IPCC released a few weeks ago, the authors warned that extreme weather instances such as killer heat waves, wildfires, droughts and flooding around the world are only set to increase in frequency in the coming years.
Speaking to Doha News, Dr. Joy Pereira, one of the report’s lead authors, said that rising temperatures in Western Asia, the group that Qatar was classified in, is one example of climate change at work.
She added that some of the most imminent threats for Qatar are health-related.
“These are increased risk of heat-related mortality (and) increased risk of drought-related water and food shortage causing malnutrition.”
Pereira continued:
“Another threat that has been identified is increased risk of water shortage in arid areas of Asia but it is of medium confidence. The lower confidence statement results from lack of evidence due to inadequate studies…
Increased investment in developing adaptation measures for water management as well as studies on the health effects of changes in potable water quality and quantity, will be of great benefit to countries such as Qatar.”
Change needed
Qatar has one of the world’s largest carbon footprints per capita, but is a relatively small contributor of greenhouse gases on the global level, where China is the biggest offender.
The Gulf state has been working to improve its environmental record for years, and hosted the United Nations COP18 conference on climate change in 2012. At the time, an Arab environmental activist told Doha News that Middle Eastern countries have “been the least serious” about global warming.
Wael Hmaidan, director of the Climate Action Network – International added that many countries in this region depend heavily on fossil fuels, making change difficult. But he said:
“Global warming/climate change is a challenge that can lead to the human collapse of human civilization globally – this is an agreed scientific reality.
If we don’t sharply change the way we consume energy in the coming five to seven years, we might not be able to avoid this fate.”
Echoing this sentiment, the UN report recommends that governments reduce carbon emissions and begin preparing for the fallout from climate change. According to the Guardian, smarter choices in urban planning and investment in public transportation in areas particularly at risk are also advised.
Reminding people that it’s not too late, Kaisa Kosonen, senior political advisor of Greenpeace International, said in a statement:
“Scientists are warning us, but they are not telling us to give up. The solutions are already here. A growing wave of people, communities, corporations and investors around the world are already making a difference by moving to clean and safe renewable energy and demanding governments to stand with them. There’s a better future than the one we are currently offered and it’s ours if we want to grasp it.”
Thoughts?
The IPCC in my eyes are discredited, they have not produced any evidence that man is responsible for an increase in temperatures of that humans can do anything to mitigate its effects. Prof Lovelace has probably the best idea, we should try and adapt to the change in temperature rather than waste time and money trying to stop something which is due to natural processes.
Great idea!!!!!!!!!!
ostrich.head.sand
Are you an expert in this field? Please expand using your knowledge of the cause of warming in the last 30 years. Although there has been a pause for the last 10 years
I prefer to defer to the actual experts rather than use anonymous people on internet forums – How about the list on this page or do you consider them “unqualified”?
– http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
This is actually an area I have some knowledge in. Climate prediction on a planet wide scale is a wild guess at best. (Let’s face it most metrologists struggle to predict the weather accuratley one week in advance). These scientists are making assumptions, (guesses) on incomplete data. Yes they know that earth has experienced a period of warming but then again that is hardly surprising due to the fact only left a period of cooling in 1850. So for them to say it is due to human acitivies is them guessing because of course if they say it is due to natural phenonmen doesn’t attract the same level of funding.
(1). Are you seriously trying to tell me you have more knowledge on this subject than this list of eminent scientists? (2). 97% – do you even understand that figure? (3). climate and weather are not the same thing – they’re not even spelt the same! (4). Conspiracy theories are great because nut-jobs keep making things up so you can never prove them wrong.
I am not saying that I am more knowledgeable than them, (although I am more honest than the scientists at UEA who fabricated data to match climate change models), what I am saying is they don’t know with any certainty and neither do I. At one point all ‘leading’ scientists agreed the universe revolved around the earth, just because they all jumped on one bandwagon doesn’t make them right.
A large number of people do not believe in evolution even in the face of overwhelming evidence and some of those people are considered educated, climate change is something than does not have the weight of evidence than evolution does to back it up yet it seems the ordinary person in the street is willing to take it on face value.
Yes the climate of the earth varies over time, but is that due to changes in sun activity, man kind, geothermal processes, geological changes or something else in this complex system we don’t yet understand they don’t know and neither do I.
Yeah? And my dad’s bigger than your dad!
“This is actually an area I have some knowledge in.” HAHAHA ya just like every single topic on this website.
Do you EVER have anything intelligent to say? As bad as you THINK the expats are on here you’re about ten x worse.
How could they not be immune. Qatar is #1 in carbon emissions footprint per capita. Rest of the Gulf makes up the top 5.
I find it interesting that you choose such a misleading indicator as the per capita one! I suggest you go and check the list of countries by actual amounts of Carbon emissions. Even if Qatar reduced it’s Carbon emissions to zero, it would no real impact, not when compared to the likes of China & the U.S.!
http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/energy/great-energy-challenge/global-footprints/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions#List_of_countries_by_2012_emissions_estimates
He’s an idiot that’s why.
At least he didn’t choose to be insulting to anyone rather than go through the effort to have a reasoned discussion.
He or she gave a perfectly valid statistic that is often bandied about, and per capita measurements do have their place, as do other forms of measurement. Oddly, I have never heard anyone say “Oh, Qatar isn’t the richest country in the world, it is really 47th (or whatever)”, people seem quite happy with per capita measurement when it suits them.
Call the choice of measurement misleading, or inappropriate for the task at hand if you wish, as Abdulrahman did above, but don’t insult someone for telling one version of the truth.
Ok Dr.Phil.
Mmm, the hairline is about right, but moustaches have never suited me.
In fact, he, on more than one occasion, used insults and such. Not mention that insults are often presented in the form of seemingly “reasoned” looking discussion.
I’m curious here Ivan, since you have a problem with LoveItOrLeaveIt choice of words, how come, on the many occasions a certain someone has called me all sorts of names, like the story about Mr. Q a short while back, you never seemed to have an issue with it!
I did? Really? When? Please do tell.
Dude, I really don’t have the time or energy to dig into it. However, I’ll make sure in the future to point this out when you do. You do the same for, K 😉
Then don’t make false accusations. Being a Qatari you’d think you’d understand the implications of insulting or making false accusations against someone both culturally and by law. Defamation is punishable by law. Strangely even if true So start digging…
lol I’m sorry, are you saying that I, a Qatari, could be arrested or held accountable in anyway for wronging an expat? Since when? I mean, does not that go against the stereotype you and others have been spreading about Qatar here?
However, since you have asked so nicely, here are just 3 examples, which I’m sure you’re going argue are okay:
1) Referring to LoveorLeaveit as LoveItOrDontReadIt, many times over
2)That has got to be the most idiotic statement to date ever
on this site. Can we close the voting now? We gotta a weiner…I mean winner. From the story‘Worker’s City’ to be partially completed this spring, Barwa
official says
3) Making general insulting comments about Qatar like, “In Qatar, Yes Guilty until proven Innocent. The rest of the world it’s the opposite. Unless of course you’re Qatari and then nothing is
your fault.” From the story, American couple charged with murder parts ways with Qatar
employer
Calling someone an idiot is more egregious than questioning or disagreeing with an argument, which is acceptable. I don’t recall any personal insults aimed at you recently, if I didn’t point them out it is because I didn’t see them, not because I support them.
In fairness, you don’t take much of a stand against the hatred of Deer Bestow and the insulting language of other Qataris, so perhaps we could all agree to a greater effort to maintain a civil atmosphere?
Do you have any links to what you saw as insults on the Mr. Q articles?
The comment by Love it or Leave it was directed at someone else and not you. In fact, it was actually addressed to me about someone else. That’s the difference. If you are saying you are against name calling then that should apply in all cases.
You can check that story about the Mr. Q blog and you’ll find my comment expressing pessimism about his efforts. You even replied to that comment, twice. Which is why I thought you would’ve seen that one comment by that certain someone.
For the record, there is a simple reason why I don’t get involved between you and Deer Bestow; your exchanges tend to be too long, and neither one of you seem to get where the other is coming from. Basically, I just cannot bare to read your exchanges.
However, in the interest of maintaining a civil atmosphere, I’ll try to get involved if I see her making insulting comments about you.
I am against personal name calling – however, criticizing ideas – or the language or action of political or thought leaders is acceptable, as is criticism of the policy of nations; in addition, weak thought processes are also fair game – personal attacks on individuals are unacceptable.
As for the rest, we each try in our own way to maintain a civil atmosphere, and if I don’t always call out rude and provocative behaviour, it doesn’t mean I support it. I don’t always see exchanges, and like you, I skip over many posts from those I find obnoxious and tiresome.
Take my advice, I don’t bother with them. They can bark all they want as long as they are under my feet. They are not here to discuss.
Thank you. LoveItorLeaveIt is what she is.
I guess his point is, that humanity is in this together and to say we will keep our 10 cars, our A/Cs, our imported food, etc, etc because they are only a few of us comes across as selfish.
It is a perfectly valid measure though if you want to make the numbers relevant to a person and their life. To say that they average American has far more impact on the environment than the average Indian, and the average Qatari has far more than the average American, is an acceptable way of describing the issue at the level of the individual and in a way that is less abstract than talking about national numbers, and is useful to highlight lifestyle choice impact.
To draw any sort of equality between Qatar and China and the US is silly – you are correct that they aren’t in the same league in this measure. If Qatar fell off the planet tomorrow its impact on the environment would be negligible, but if China vanished it would have a huge impact. However, they are both valid measures, just with different purposes.
Wow, Ivan! I really don’t know where to begin with this. Before anything though, let me say this; had desertcard bothered to expand on his comment, the way you did, then I wouldn’t have had that much of an issue with it.
How many examples do I have to give of Fox News and right wing radio personalities using “statistics’ to justify anything from why you’re more likely to be mugged / robbed by an African American to justifying racial profiling of Arabs and Muslims? They always have “facts” to support their claims. Of course these facts often distort reality, just like the one desertcard presented above.
And how come you didn’t ask him for his “references” just like you’ve recently asked in reference to Lees Trading not being a Qatari company?
If you’re simply looking for a way to make Qataris look like the worst poulterers on the planet, then sure, by all means, use the “average Qatari” argument. Never mind the fact that most of the emissions coming from Qatar are due to the natural gas production, and that, save for a few, the average Qatari has little to no say over the decisions related to the pace of development and such.
DesertCard’s statistic is not a ‘distortion’ of reality, it is one interpretation of it, as is your example, which as I understand it is correct, but lacking in context – the same as the per capita argument for Qatar. I don’t know why you seem to feel such umbrage, we are agreeing with each other. On another note, I feel no need to ask for references as I have seen and heard this statistic before, so it wasn’t surprising to me.
The assertion that Lee Trading was foreign owned is new to me and I don’t know whether Mr. Al-Banai is repeating what he read in media elsewhere, hence the need for ‘references’.
I have no interest one way or another how Qataris look; I am far more concerned with the damage that the Tar Sands are doing, and what the emissions there have done to damage Canada’s environmental credentials.
As in Qatar, the average Canadian has little say over decisions related to emissions, but I wouldn’t hesitate to use an individual example to show how the footprint of an ‘individual’ Canadian has increased over the last two decades. It is, with the proper caveats, a perfectly acceptable away of visualising relationships – so it is with the depiction of Qatar’s emissions.
What do African Americans have to do with Muslims Arabs? Or the conversation at hand?
It doesn’t matter where the emissions come from does it? So my argument on CO2 emissions justifies profiling of muslim arabs? No I think 911 did that. I’m really confused now.
You’re always confused. Point is, just as racist people in the U.S. try to use numbers to justify racial profiling, just as your trying to use the per capita carbon emission to justify painting Qatar as the worst polluter on the planet.
Seriously? A Qatari is going to lecture me on racism? That’s funny. This is one of the most racist places I’ve ever been to.
Racial profiling ramped up big time when 19 arab muslim idiots flew planes into several buildings and a field. Racial profiling ramped up when arab muslim PLO idiots slaughtered 11 Israeli athletes at the frickin’ OLYMPICS. Funny how no one in this region seems to understand the implications of those, and many other, actions as it pertains to arabs in general and muslims in particular. It may not be fair in your eyes but what did you expect?
My “data” is just as relevant as yours. No justification needed. Per individual, Qataris have big feet. A small percentage of the population but same levels of CO2 emissions as industrialized, heavily populated countries.
Not sure of your problem in acknowledging these facts and accepting them for what it is. Yes the #2 on the list is the USA. With about 130x more people than Qatar, heavily industrialized,… I’d say thats to be expected. Along with China, #1 on the list, the USA is the other driving force in the world. Qatar is not. Your interpretation “seems” to be taken at face value, “USA is #2 in carbon emissions…”, without investigating the causes. So according to the data you want to ignore it’s a good thing were not all Qataris or this world would already be dead. Guess we’ll just agree to disagree.
“Seriously? A Qatari is going to lecture me on racism? That’s funny. This is one of the most racist places I’ve ever been to.” HAHA THE IRONY ! This guy has a serious mental illness.
where is the irony?
I wasn’t lecturing you on racism, but as usual, you keep missing the point. Now you’re the one dragging 9/11 and the PLO into this discussion. Care to compare the number of Palestinians murdered by Israelis over the years to that of Israelis killed by Palestinians!
What investigation have you done to prove “it’s a good thing were not all Qataris or this world would already be dead. ” You’re simply assuming that becasue Qatar has the highest per capita carbon emissions, it must be the lifestyle of the Qataris, and then you add another spin by saying that if the rest of the world was like us, the world would be dead.
Trinidad and Tobago and Netherlands Antilles are ranked 2 & 3! What, they drive big cars too!
Please stop trying to rationalize you racism and islamophobia, it’s pathetic to no end. You’ll be lectured on racism by all sorts of people as long as you say racist things, regardless of where they come from, so deal with it!
And just cuz, here is a lecture on racism by an African American Professor: http://www.salon.com/2014/02/25/stop_the_post_racial_fantasy_why_false_optimism_on_race_is_insidious_and_deadly/
Well, yes and no. Qatar’s footprint can be seen as being artificially inflated due to the effects of the gas industry, just as Canada’s is higher than say Australia’s in large part because of the Tar Sands. That still doesn’t mean that per capita comparisons are by themselves wrong, they just need the context.
Now this is a excellent comment, thank you. “That still doesn’t mean that per capita comparisons are by themselves wrong, they just need the context.” And that’s all I was trying to say; give the right context 🙂
Dear Ivan, this is a quote form a comment our friend made below trying to explain how he interprets the per capita thingi, “it’s a good thing were not all Qataris or this world would already be dead. ”
You can read the whole comment for yourself for context and to come to your own conclusion on it. Suffice to say, I find it quite racist, but hey, as he has said, Qatari are the most racist people on Earth, so, we don’t get to call anyone else racist!
I just tried to respond to this and got a message about authenticating the user. Anyone know what that is about or how to do it?
Okay, now it works.
Yes, I just read this now. There are things to be agreed with in the comment, though the writing is sloppy and leads to confusion, which I think is part of the reason that this topic causes such strong feelings. Clearly, Qatar residents do have a huge impact ‘per capita’,
but the tiny population and huge oil and gas emissions context for that has already been discussed.
As for your quote above, I read it to mean “it is a good thing that we all don’t have the per capita emission of Qatar residents, or the whole world would already be dead”. I see nothing discriminatory in such a statement – it is probably meant as hyperbole. It is no indictment of the lifestyle of Qatar residents, but is visualization tool for the layman.
If I said that Wokawokastan increased its national emission of hydrogen sulfide by 26%
from it’s 2001 levels of 123,000,000 cubic metres, most people wouldn’t be able
to visualize or appreciate that. If I said that that 26% means it went from a ‘per capita’ 3 beer and eggs farts a day to 4 beer and egg farts, it is on a scale that can be understood.
It is often said that it will be impossible for every Chinese to enjoy the lifestyle that the average American has had for the last 40 years because it is environmentally unsustainable. If I said “it is a goodt hing that the Chinese don’t have the per capita emissions of the average American or we would all die”, no one would think of it as racist. It would just be a way visualizing the production of emissions – so to in the case below.
As for the segue into racism – well, it isn’t the topic, but my experience was that Qatar
has large problem with it that as a country it has yet to acknowledge, let alone begin to address. This is not unusual and is not a criticism, just an observation.
It seems to be a sensitive topic among Qataris – I would guess due to demographic concerns, historic and current inter-Qatari/’lesser Arab” discrimination, lingering discomfort over Qatar’s historic roles, and an unspoken acknowledgment that the current system does not meet idealized aspirations, yet concern over how to address the issue without causing dissonance and disruption. This is just my guess, I don’t claim any original thought on the matter. Nowhere in the passage that you referred to was it said
that “Qataris are the most racist people on earth” or any claim of that type. Nor was there any claim of perfection for other countries when it comes to race relations.
Interestingly, A Kuwaiti colleague of mine and I discussed the subject once and he likened it to individual suicide in GCC and the ambivalence to suicide bombers in the greater Muslim world. He said it happens far more than people openly discuss, that it was far from the ideals people claim to strive for, and that to openly discuss it would lead to conversations that would cause discomfort for many, so the topic was ignored.
Anyway, I can’t claim any of these as original insights of my own and they are based on conversation with Khalid.
In sum, as an outside observer, I found nothing that could be construed as either a personal insult towards you, nor as a ‘racist’, attack on any particular group.
I did note some interesting word choice though, Israelis ‘murder’ and Palestinians ‘kill’, but that is a topic best saved for a linguistics and discourse analysis thread I think.
So, you’re answer is to selectively rewrite his own words for him so he doesn’t sound like a racist! Interesting!
As for you’re saying “It is no indictment of the lifestyle of Qatar residents”, here is what had to say in another comment “Does everyone here need to drive SUVs with the biggest engine they can find? SUVs where I’m from are becoming more and more like dinosaurs.” Oh, and his comment was directed at Qataris (Nationals), not expats who live here.
I guess I also must’ve “misread” the rest of what he said, justifying racial profiling and discrimination against Muslims & Arabs.
So, someone (an American who’s most likely a white republican / libertarian) says Qatar is the most racist place on Earth and your response is basically that, as an observation, we have a big problem with racism but it’s a sensitive issue and you understand why Qataris avoid talking about it!
Please feel free to ask me whatever you want about these “sensitive” issues, I’m not afraid of the truth. However, I have to say, looking at all the time and effort into writing these comments here, with nothing to show for, I’m beginning to think that Love it or Leave it and Deer Betsow do have the better approach when dealing with such people as our pal here. Maybe I should do the same.
Mmmm, that is a whole different kettle of fish though, isn’t it? I was asked my opinion on the passage below re: “Qataris…dead”. I made an assessment of that passage which I stand by.
As for the whole thread, I have taken the time and read it coherently from beginning to end, you are definitely correct, there are many instances of subtly, and not so subtly, insulting language. However, there are also instances of comments misinterpreted, the whole ‘per capita’ thing being an example. It is clearly a topic which arouses passions and loosens inhibitions. That being said, I have the feeling that you have become so sensitized to anti-Qatari sentiment that you may see it where it doesn’t actually exist.
As a question, why do you think DesertCard’s comments wind you up so much when those of MIMH, which can be equally as provocative, don’t seem to have the same effect? In fact, you sometimes play along with MIMH. Not trying to be all Dr. Phil as LoveItOrLeave put it, but I’ve spent time reflecting on why Deer Beestow is so infuriating to me, when LoveItOrLeave it is not, when they seem to be cut from the same cloth. I’m curious how you dealt with people like DesertCard when you were a student in the US? Presumably you met more than your fair share of his/her type, or were you able avoid having much interaction with them since you were there in the halcyon pre-911 days?
I’m quite happy to take you at your word as far as questions go, if you’re serious. It would be good to call upon someone of your expertise. Does Disqus have a private messaging function?
It’s not really about what country you’re from. We’re all “global citizens” and thus should do our part in solving the problem. Since China and USA are heavily industrialized and Qatar is not you could say that Qataris as individuals have much more impact personally than an American or a Chinese citizen. Does everyone here need to drive SUVs with the biggest engine they can find? SUVs where I’m from are becoming more and more like dinosaurs. And for the record the article points out this fact I was just reiterating it.
“It’s not really about what country you’re from. We’re all “global citizens” and thus should do our part in solving the problem.” So why are you trying to paint Qataris as the worst culprits in this? Enough with the BS, dude!
“Since China and USA are heavily industrialized and Qatar is not you could say that Qataris as individuals have much more impact personally than an American or a Chinese citizen.” So, being heavily industrialized justifies making more pollution?
Please show me your evidence that the reason for Qatar having the highest per captia carbon emissions is because we drive SUVs. That’s just you assuming. Has it occurred to you that the reason might be due to the production of natural gas & oil? Oh, and last I checked, most people in the US who can afford them do buy SUVs!
Again: links?!!!
Per capita they ARE the worst culprits. Facts. On a whole the USA is, fact. what’s the problem “dude”?
A light yes. Being heavily industrialized and one of the few pistons that make this world turn, like it or not, has that effect.
The production of ng and oil certainly does. Never denied that. So you don’t think that 100,000 land cruisers affect the ozone any? Doesn’t mean it makes the data different. Your data reads to you that USA is an energy pig and Qatar has legit reasons. OK.
As individuals Qataris could be considered the worst polluters on earth.
these are the worst polluters as a whole not per capita that are close to Qatar on the list. Also I listed population size. All of these countries are more heavily industrialized that Qatar. And all have far higher populations
# – Country —–CO2 Emmissions % of global total Population
74 Denmark 68.30. .15% 5.6 million
75 Bulgaria 67.50 .15% 7.3 million
82 Qatar 60.40 .14% 2.1 million
83 Switzerland 57.40 .13% 8.0 million
84 Norway 54.70 .12% 5.0 million
86Slovakia 50.20 .11% 5.4 million
How does it happen that Qatar is a far greater polluter than countries that are industrialized and have far greater numbers in population?
“How does it happen that Qatar is a far greater polluter than countries that are industrialized and have far greater numbers in population?” Again, you insist on misrepresenting the facts. Qatar, as country, isn’t even in top 10. Also, how about you provide us with actual links to where you get your information from!
The figures I quoted before was a Wiki but after viewing again the per capita from 2012 it linked to a 2005 Wiki overall.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/datablog/2012/jun/21/world-carbon-emissions-league-table-country
This is a Guardian article, data from the USEIA, from 2010. Qatar passed Denmark and that ecological dynamo Bulgaria as well as maintaining their lead on Switzerland and Norway.
Again how am I misrepresenting the facts? The facts are there. It’s not a riddle or anything. So when do we START calling it a problem? At this rate Qatar will have 10 million in 2020 or before. Is it a problem then? In 2030 maybe 20 million. Is it a problem then? I guarantee you that Qatar burns through more fossil fuel on the roads in one day than the city I’m from with half the population does in a week. Again there’s the big footprint. When it does become a problem will everyone stop driving insanely large vehicles to go to the mall or pick the kids up at school?
Guess if it wasn’t for the World Cup there would not be any need for all these construction projects, so no need for all these expat workers and their accommodation, cars, schools, etc. Seems that the World Cup could be responsible for increasing Qatar’s carbon footprint…..plus all those other countries supplying products to Qatar.
If you believe Qataris’ choice of cars and lifestyle makes us the biggest polluters on the planet, then I’ve got word for you:
con·jec·ture:
1. Inference or judgment based on inconclusive or incomplete evidence; guesswork.
2. A statement, opinion, or conclusion based on guesswork.