Kenneth Lee

Just a week before the tragic earthquake in Nepal, a group of earthquake specialists gathered in the capital, Kathmandu, to discuss how to prepare the region for the impending “big one”. For decades, experts have warned that the whole Himalayan region was at risk. Unfortunately, due to Nepal’s underdevelopment, there were no earthquake warning systems or earthquake resistant building codes in effect on April 25.

There is a reactionary mentality to earthquakes; most governments simply implement response mechanisms rather than measures to mitigate potential damage. While humanitarian operations have improved significantly in recent years thanks to technological innovations, the current policy approach toward earthquakes is unsustainable. Massive earthquakes are not freak disasters; they occur relatively frequently across the globe, leaving developing countries most at risk (e.g., Indonesia, Chile and Haiti).

Contrary to popular opinion, the approximate location and intensity of earthquakes can be predicted. Scientists are even developing estimated timeline technology. Armed with this promising research, the global community needs to aid developing countries in becoming equipped with the necessary technology, warning systems and architectural knowledge to mitigate earthquake damage. Japan is a clear example of an immensely successful proactive approach to earthquakes, regularly withstanding massive earthquakes above 7.0-magnitude. There is no excuse for the international community not cooperating on earthquake preparedness as it has on issues such as disease and poverty.

Dan Morgan-Russell

The New York Times’ Wednesday headline blared that the earthquake revealed the “hubris and imbalance” on Mount Everest, Nepal’s main attraction for foreigners. However, the climbing world has known about the appalling and embarrassing racial politics on Everest for decades.

Western adventure seekers often pay tens of thousands of dollars to join guided expeditions up Everest. These expeditions cheaply hire local Nepali Sherpas to haul gear while treating the Sherpas as second-class citizens. Sherpas break trails on the most dangerous parts of the mountain–places like the Khumbu Icefall, a glacial river of ice, where crevasses miles into the earth shift day by day. Sherpas on Everest have incredibly high death rates, higher even than US soldiers operating in Iraq from 2003 to 2007.

Himalayan expeditions have been unequal since Westerners started summiting Everest. At the start of the 1953 expedition, when Sir Edmund Hillary (a New Zealander) and Tenzing Norgay (a Nepali Indian) first stood atop the world, the Western climbers were given bunks in the homes of British embassy staff in Kathmandu, while the 20 Sherpas were offered a place on the garage floor of the embassy. After the expedition, the Queen knighted Sir Edmund Hillary for his successful summit, but did not bestow the same honor upon Sherpa Tenzing Norgay.

Nepal is an underdeveloped country, but with the Himalayan climbing industry becoming increasingly popular in recent decades, there is no reason for Nepal to remain destitute. Paying living wages to Sherpa guides and treating them with the respect they deserve is an important first step.

Erin Wong

With over 6,000 dead and 14,000 wounded, Nepal has suffered its greatest natural disaster of the century. Earthquakes in this region are not surprising, since the country lies directly on a fault line. Location, however, may not have been the only cause of Saturday’s tragedy.

Each year, the monsoon season brings heavy rainfall over the Himalayas, gathering in rivers basins in India and Bangladesh. The seasonal influx and outflow of rainwater weighs down the Indian subcontinent’s tectonic plate and builds potential energy along its edges. Over the weekend, this tension may have contributed to the Indian plate slipping under the Eurasian plate, causing the fatal earthquake. When climate change interferes with the natural magnitude of monsoon season in South Asia, this externality creates greater sensitivity between the two plates.

Geologists are predicting an increased frequency in earthquakes and volcanic action in the years to come. According to a team at University College London, humanity will face a series of “extreme geological events” in the near future. Simply put, changing weather patterns and the melting of major ice caps will lead to a massive displacement of water and weight, triggering abrupt seismic activity. There is no way to pinpoint exactly where these disasters will occur, but the Himalayas are among those regions most at risk.

This week, and for many thereafter, the international community must extend its prayers and support to those in Nepal. What this disaster has taught us is that the effects of climate change are no longer limited to the weather and will come at a great cost.

Jack Anderson

The earthquake in Nepal has brought the small country into the spotlight, and the picture is atrocious. Stratfor, a global intelligence company, made its assessment of Nepal’s geographical challenges available for free in the wake of the quake. On a seismically calm day, Nepal would probably still look incredibly disorganized and largely undeveloped. Nepal is landlocked high in the Himalayas, and its weak economy is heavily dependent on foreign tourists who want to see places like Mount Everest or to experience the local culture. A natural disaster is the last thing this tenuously positioned, poor and ill-governed country needed.

Vice News has been releasing video dispatches from Nepal, which show that the problems facing Nepalis in cities like Kathmandu and in small villages across the countryside are multitudinous. The government cannot help them all, even with the millions of dollars, tons of supplies and thousands of volunteers pouring into the country. Even the best organized recovery efforts would take years to get Nepal back to where it was before the quake–and that isn’t a very desirable state to be in anyway. Nepal’s recent history is rife with tragedies. Perhaps this one can be turned into an opportunity to build a country the right way. Their future survival might depend on it.

Kshitij Kumar

In the midst of a humanitarian crisis, politics has not disappeared. Consider the fact that on Monday, Nepal rejected an offer from Taiwan to send a rescue team, citing a desire to “prioritize help from neighboring countries.” Yet, the facts speak otherwise: search and rescue teams have also arrived from countries as far away as the US, Finland and Israel. The Nepali government appears to be prioritizing its belief in “One China” possibly at the expense of those affected by the quake.

China and India seem to be vying to win the hearts of the Nepali people, many of whom are frustrated by their own government’s slow relief response. China has dispatched 300 aid personnel; the Indian Air Force alone has sent 950 personnel and provided 400 tons of aid. Why? Both countries have significant geopolitical interests in the small country. China needs Nepal as an ally against the Tibetan independence movement. India needs Nepal to serve as a buffer against China. However, India has continuously failed to maintain healthy relations with the Nepali government. Perhaps this is why its aid has been so substantial and so quick; this is possibly one of New Delhi’s fastest and most expensive responses to a natural disaster in the region.

As Nepal recovers and begins reconstruction efforts moving forward, both India and China will make politico-economic moves to maintain influence. This soft power battle for the two regional hegemons to woo Nepal should be in the small country’s benefit. Let’s hope that the aid war going does not further hurt the many victims of the quake.

Correction: The previous version of Erin’s response mistakenly referred to the newly researched connection between increased monsoon rainfall and more frequent earthquakes as fact. The article has been corrected to reflect the doubt in the scientific community as to the validity of that conclusion.

The views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect those of the Glimpse from the Globe staff, editors, or governors.

The post The Correspondents Weigh-In: Disaster in Nepal appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.

The UN declared 2014 as the International Year of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) to launch initiatives for collective development, human rights, natural disaster management and environmental sustainability. The declaration also called attention to the dire situation that the SIDS will face in the 21st century. Current levels of global carbon emissions spur the Earth’s rising temperatures, rapidly melting the ice caps, which contribute to the rising sea levels that threaten the survival of these island states.

Five years ago, ABC News correspondent Bill Blakemore identified three types of countries based on their responses to climate change: (1) those that are rich enough to mitigate the immediate consequences of high temperatures and more frequent natural disasters, such as the US, Canada, Australia and most of Europe; (2) those that do not have sufficient resources and would suffer greatly from turbulent weather and declining agricultural production, such as the Middle East, Sub-Saharan Africa and India; and (3) those that would disappear entirely due to rising sea levels, including Micronesia, Fiji and 37 other island states around the world.

The island states of this third tier are already experiencing the detrimental effects of sea level rise. Not only are their shores rapidly eroding, but high tides are also inundating agricultural fields with saltwater, spoiling crops that the population depends on for food and income. Land-based pollution from tainted ocean water is endangering inhabitants and irreparably damaging ecosystems. At some point, these islands will become uninhabitable, forcing millions of people to emigrate. This devastating future may be an impending reality for those closest to sea level. For instance, a one-meter rise in the sea level, which is the lower bound of scientists’ predictions for 2100, would render Micronesia uninhabitable.

In 2013, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) forecasted an increase of between 0.5 and one meter of sea level rise by 2100. This prediction was conditional on every state significantly reducing their carbon emissions in order to reach neutrality; without major improvements, the oceans will rise 0.7 to 1.2 meters by the end of the 21st century, and between 2 to 3 meters by 2300. Earlier this year, new research concluded that 20th century sea levels did not actually rise as much as expected; the height of the ocean was two centimeters shy of the 15 centimeters predicted by the UN subcommittee. Despite this good news, the research also confirmed the acceleration of rising tides; vast ice blocks from Greenland and Antarctica are melting at terrifying rates. Perhaps most sobering of all, however, is the reality that the carbon emissions already in the atmosphere have locked in these rising temperatures, which will continue to rise until the effects of climate change are not just neutralized, but indeed reversed.

The responsibility for environmental stewardship is shared by all states that contribute to climate change, particularly industrializing economies such as India and China. The ramifications of forsaking this duty would be calamitous for all, but especially coastal states. Bangladesh, for example, accounts for only 0.3% of the world’s carbon emissions and, though not an island state, would be the first state to become inhabitable due to flooding.

At the end of the 21st century, as many as 200 million people could be displaced as a result of rising sea levels and coastal flooding, according to a September 2014 Climate Central report. This danger extends throughout low-lying Asian countries, with the top five at-risk countries after China being Vietnam, Japan, India, Bangladesh and Indonesia, in terms of the number of potential climate refugees. Where will all of these people go? There is much talk of biodiversity loss from plant and animal species, but what about the extinction of entire states and their societies?

The potentially catastrophic futures of the SIDS must be a wake up call to those leaders who oppose sustainable development. The urgency of this commitment cannot be understated. Remaining below a two degrees Celsius increase would limit sea level rise to just over one meter, preserving most states. In order to slow environmental decay and save the SIDS, every year forward must include radical sustainable development, or watch civilizations sink beneath the oceans.

The post Under the Sea: Next Century Island States appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.

There is a narrow but growing sector at the nexus between clean energy and international development—one that may be leveraged to simultaneously address both climate change and wealth inequality. Developing states are increasingly taking advantage of this synergy to galvanize their economies with zero carbon footprints. At the heart of this movement is solar energy, the energy source that will soon be a major catalyst for international sustainable development.

Energy poverty, the state of living without access to household electricity, is concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia and India, and is moderately prevalent throughout the Middle East and South America. Of the one and a half billion people living in energy poverty around the world, nearly 85% are in rural areas, which lack the complex infrastructure of a city that allows electricity to be transmitted through a grid. Solar energy is the solution to powering these underdeveloped regions, because it is a natural, renewable resource that allows citizens the freedom to harness electricity for themselves.

While other types of clean energy require public utilities to harvest and allocate electricity through vast networks, solar energy sidesteps the barriers of centralized energy as a type of distributed generation. Both wind and hydroelectric power demand large-scale construction and capital, not to mention the ownership of viable land and rivers. Even nuclear energy, which has the potential to power hundreds of households, calls for the most extensive upkeep and a preexisting grid. Solar alone fits the bill for small-scale development, because photovoltaic cells are modular, which allows batteries to be independent and easily scalable, ranging in size from a single lantern to a solar farm.

Flexibility is essential to powering rural areas, because the energy infrastructure is decentralized. The small-scale version of a centralized system is the microgrid: a generator that supplies electricity to multiple users. Because village communities typically consist of less than 100 households, pushing the electricity through a grid over great distances is more expensive than building a smaller power source. Originally, microgrids were only a temporary interim between a centralized power system and distributed electricity generation. But, more than ever, rural populations are adopting microgrids as a permanent solution since they allow developing regions to leapfrog building a complex energy infrastructure and start employing modern technologies immediately.

Looking to the future, decentralized, renewable energy will be a major component of environmental resilience. As fossil fuel prices fluctuate, solar energy is particularly important in low-income regions, which are extremely susceptible to the impending shortage of global oil. Additionally, damage to major power plants can shut down entire neighborhoods and take days to fix; but, if a single microgrid suffers from mechanical failure or a natural disaster, then the others will remain intact. Climate change will inevitably hit impoverished and marginalized communities the hardest because they cannot afford rising market prices of kerosene, oil, or coal, nor can they tolerate the pollution of natural resources, which they may use for water, shelter, or income. Solar energy is not only a short-term solution to electricity, but must also be a long-term solution to development.

To date, several developing countries have begun to adopt substantial solar energy projects. In early 2014, Schneider Electric, specialists in energy management, introduced the Microsol Project to Kenya: the creation of village-size public utility models that use solar thermodynamics to provide drinking water, heating and electricity to dozens of households. With a lifespan of 20 years, a Microsol produces 50 MWh/year, 1000 m³/year of clean water, 800 MWh/year of heat. Annually, 50 MWh would provide over 100 rural households with two lights and a cell phone charger, or the equivalent of five American households. In July, Dharnai became the first village in India to be entirely solar powered, serving 2,400 residents, two schools, one health centers and over 50 growing businesses. This is just one of many instances in India where solar energy fosters community and entrepreneurship; to produce one’s own power is liberating, and this equips students and business owners with the ability to work at night and embrace modern technologies. In addition to sustainability, distributed solar energy allows rural areas to leapfrog into the modern economy.

Even in the developed world, however, solar is becoming a major asset. For example, more than half of Germany’s energy is now generated by the sun. Thanks to China, panel production escalated to meet Germany’s demand, the price of solar energy has fallen by 70% in the last five years. As the upfront cost of going solar continues to drop, it becomes more and more expensive for households, and whole cities, to stay dependent on fossil fuels. Environmentalism no longer has to be incentivized morally, but can be inspired by the prospects of long-term economic advantage and equality.

Despite these successes, sunlight is not the catch-all, end-all solution to international development. Though solar energy has made significant progress in certain countries, those without sufficient sun exposure may have to wait for a more long-term solution, like storing solar power in batteries, to become affordable. The presence of NGOs has also boosted the presence of solar, but regions that gain less nonprofit attention suffer from the high upfront costs of solar installation. While the cost of solar panels has dropped by over 99% per watt since 1997, and now sits below retail prices in the Western world, the transition remains daunting for rural populations in developing countries. However, access to a personal cell phone and lighting at night has a high rate of return for loans and investment; microfinance has already begun to play a leading role in support for solar energy. Furthermore, solar panels, once established, require negligible maintenance and zero operating costs after an initial investment.

The looming prospects of global warming and volatile fossil fuel prices have jumpstarted a solar revolution. As solar energy becomes cheaper and more developing regions catch on to its multifaceted potential, the outlook of the next few decades is hopeful that clean energy will simultaneously combat climate change and provide electricity around the world.

The views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect those of the Glimpse from the Globe staff, editors, or governors. 

The post Empowering the Developing World with Solar Energy appeared first on Glimpse from the Globe.