#Heatwave in Pakistan

[flip12345-blog2]

Ghost Radar : Funny Detector - Prank, and detect ghosts ! have fun with friends.#23rdyokoyosterday #Drisey #OneWithBINI #Drisey #Crowdstrike #deprem #heatwave #Pakistan #BidenHarris2024 #Galladay https://www.directcpi.com/view.php?id=5537484&pub=2684978

[thegirlintheredchair]

Today was good. Allhamdulillah ✨️

[wordingworlds]

Outlier(s) VII

Early September just like mid April brought four days of rebel heat.

Hot sun piercing my neck

NYC's air is thick as goo.

This unseasonable swamp is a heavy woe.

Just like the news of an Omega block in Europe,

uniting the Mediterranean through extreme heat and flash floods,

taking all in their wake like syrup.

It's hard to process wet-bulb globe temperatures,

plum colored bar charts,

uneven cooling opportunities.

I wear jumpers at work while Central Pakistan's hospitals struggle to cool wards full with people weakened by heat strokes.

Empty dispensaries swept away in previous floods.

When the night rolls in

many bodies still aren't cooling,

no sound asleep, no respite in this heavy heat.

[risingpakistan]

ہم اپنے سابق انگریز حکمرانوں سے کتنا پیچھے رہ گئے ہیں؟

ہم نے اپنی 76 سلہ تاریخ میں کتنی ترقی کی ہے اور ہم اپنے اوپر حکومت کرنے والے انگریز حکمرانوں کے مقابلے میں کس حد تک پسماندہ قوم ہیں۔ کچھ قارئین دیگر ترقی پذیر ممالک سے مقابلہ کرنے کے بجائے سابق انگریز حکمرانوں سے مقابلے کو غیرمنصفانہ قرار دیں گے۔ لیکن یہاں موازنہ کرنے کا مقصد یہ ہے کہ چند سماجی اقتصادی اشاریوں کے لحاظ سے برصغیر پر دو صدیوں تک حکمرانی کرنے والے پاکستان اور برطانیہ کے درمیان ترقی کی رفتار میں فرق کو اجاگر کیا جاسکے۔ اب شرح خواندگی کو ہی بطورِ مثال لے لیں۔ برطانیہ نے 18ویں صدی کے آغاز میں(1701ء) بالغ افراد (15 سال اور اس سے زائد عمر) کی خواندگی کی شرح 54 فیصد حاصل کی جبکہ ہم نے 2006ء میں 54 فیصد (10 سال اور اس سے زائد عمر) کی شرح خواندگی حاصل کی۔ اس کا مطلب ہے کہ ہم 2006ء میں شرحِ خواندگی میں برطانیہ کے مقابلے میں 305 سال پیچھے تھے۔ ہم نے مالی سال 2022ء میں اپنی شرح خواندگی کو تقریباً 63 فیصد تک بڑھانے کے لیے اقدامات کیے جبکہ یہ سطح برطانیہ نے 1850ء یا اس کے آس پاس کے برسوں میں حاصل کر لی تھی۔ اس کا مطلب ہے کہ ہم نے خواندگی کے لحاظ سے اپنی پسماندگی کو 16 سالہ عرصے میں 305 سے کم کر کے 172 سال کر دیا ہے۔   ہم اپنے سابق حکمرانوں کے برابر آنے کی کوششیں تیز کیوں نہیں کرتے؟ آخرکار ہم نے 76 سال قبل اپنے نوآبادیاتی آقاؤں سے ملتی جلتی حکمرانی کی ذہنیت بھی تو اپنائی تھی، جو آج بھی ہمارے طرزِ حکمرانی میں ظاہر ہوتی ہے۔ کیا ہماری یہ ذہنیت خود ہماری پسماندگی کی وجوہات میں سے ایک نہیں ہے؟ اگر برطانیہ اسی نوآبادیاتی ذہنیت کے ساتھ اپنے ملک پر بھی حکمرانی کرتا جس طرح ہم پر کی گئی تو برطانیہ میں 20ویں صدی کے آغاز میں خواندگی کی شرح تقریباً 100 فیصد تک نہ پہنچ پاتی۔ آزادی سے پہلے ہمارے آقا ہمارے دشمن تھے۔ ان کے جانے کے بعد ہم اپنے اندر اپنے دشمن تلاش کرنے کی کوشش (کامیابی سے) کر رہے ہیں۔ یہ ہمارے موجودہ آقاؤں کی بنیادی کوشش معلوم ہوتی ہے۔ شاید میں نے آغاز میں ہی غلط سوالات پوچھے تھے۔ لیکن مجھے اپنی اس تحقیق میں مشغول رہنے دیں۔ میں اگر پہلے پیراگراف میں مجموعی شرحِ خواندگی کے بجائے خواتین کی خواندگی کا انتخاب کرتا تو صورت حال مزید خراب ہوتی۔ لیکن (اگر ممکن ہو تو) مجھے دیگر اشاریوں میں تسلی تلاش کرنے دیں۔ ہماری اوسط متوقع عمر 1950ء میں 35 سال کے لگ بھگ تھی جبکہ یہ سطح برطانیہ نے 16ویں صدی کے وسط (1550ء) میں ہی حاصل کر لی تھی۔

آزادی کے وقت بھی ہم اپنے انگریز حکمرانوں سے تقریباً 400 سال پیچھے تھے۔ اس کے بعد سے ہم نے مالی سال 2020ء میں 67 سال کی اوسط متوقع عمر حاصل کرنے کی کوشش کی جبکہ ہمارے سابق نوآبادیاتی آقاؤں نے 1947ء میں ہی یہ ہدف حاصل کر لیا تھا۔ اس لیے، مالی سال 2022ء میں متوقع عمر کے لحاظ سے ہم برطانیہ سے صرف 75 سال پیچھے تھے۔ 2021ء میں برطانیہ کی متوقع عمر 81 سال تھی۔ ہمیں اس سطح تک پہنچنے میں مزید کتنا وقت لگے گا؟ سال 1950ء میں بچوں کی شرح اموات (پیدا ہونے والی ہزار بچوں میں سے جو اپنی پہلی سالگرہ سے پہلے مر جاتے ہیں) 278 تھی۔ 1861ء میں برطانیہ میں یہ تعداد 150 تھی جبکہ پاکستان نے تعداد 1968ء میں حاصل کی۔ اس سے یہ ثابت ہوا کہ نومولود بچوں کی شرحِ اموات کے معاملے میں 1968ء میں ہم برطانیہ سے 107 سال پیچھے تھے۔ اس کے بعد ہم نے 2023ء میں نوزائیدہ بچوں کی اموات کی شرح 56 تک دیکھی۔ یہ سطح برطانیہ نے 1940ء کے آس پاس حاصل کی تھی، یعنی ہم بچوں کی شرح اموات کے لحاظ سے ان سے 83 سال پیچھے ہیں۔

بچوں کی اموات کا تخمینہ لگانے والے اقوامِ متحدہ کے انٹر ایجنسی گروپ کے مطابق، 1950ء میں پاکستان میں بچوں کی اموات کی شرح (1000 بچوں میں سے جو 5 سال کی عمر سے پہلے انتقال کر جائیں) 377 تھی۔ بچوں کی اموات کی اتنی زیادہ شرح برطانیہ میں 200 سال میں پہلے کبھی نہیں دیکھی گئی۔ 1950ء میں برطانیہ میں ہر ہزار بچوں میں اموات کی تعداد 37 تھی (جوکہ پاکستان سے 10 گنا زیادہ کم ہے)۔ 2021ء میں اس حوالے سے تخمینہ شدہ تعداد برطانیہ میں تقریباً 4 جبکہ پاکستان میں 63 تھی۔ اگرچہ ہم برطانیہ سے کئی سال پیچھے ہیں لیکن عمر بچوں کی شرحِ اموات کم کرنے میں ہمیں کوششیں قابلِ ذکر ہیں۔ 1964ء میں ہمارے ملک میں نوجوانوں کی شرح اموات (5 سے 14 سال کے درمیان) 27 کے قریب تھی جبکہ 2021ء میں یہ کم ہو کر 7 رہ گئی۔ 2021ء میں برطانیہ میں اس شرح میں صرف 3.6 سے 0.7 فیصد تک کمی دیکھی گئی۔ 2021ء میں یہ شرح پاکستان میں برطانیہ کے مقابلے میں 10 گنا زیادہ تھی۔ 

ورلڈ بینک کے اعداد و شمار کے مطابق، 2020ء میں پاکستان میں زچگی کے دوران ہونے والی اموات کا تناسب جو ایم ایم آر کہلاتا ہے (ایم ایم آر ہر ایک لاکھ پیدائشوں میں خواتین کی اموات کی تعداد ہے) 154 تھا۔ تاہم قومی اقتصادی سروے 2022ء کے مطابق سال 2020ء میں اموات کی تعداد 186 تھی۔ 2020ء میں برطانیہ میں ایم ایم آر صرف 10 تھا۔ عالمی بینک کے مطابق ہمارا ملک اسے 2000ء میں 387 سے کم کر کے 2020ء میں 154 کرنے میں کامیاب رہا۔ سال 2000ء میں برطانیہ کا ایم ایم آر 11 تھا۔ پاکستان میں زیادہ ایم ایم آر کی کچھ وجوہات صحت کی سہولیات کا فقدان خاص طور پر دیہی علاقوں میں، خواتین کے خلاف تشدد، غربت، حفظانِ صحت کا خیال نہ رکھنا اور تعلیم کی کم سطح ہے۔ 2020ء میں پاکستان میں تپ دق کے مریضوں کی تعداد ایک لاکھ افراد میں 250 سے 275 کے قریب تھی۔ یہ شرح اس حد کے اندر پچھلے 20 سالوں سے بہت آہستہ آہستہ نیچے جارہی ہے۔ عالمی ادارہِ صحت نے پاکستان کو زیادہ بوجھ والے ملک کے طور پر درجہ بندی کیا ہے (بھارت، بنگلہ دیش اور 27 دیگر ممالک بھی اس میں شامل ہیں)۔ بھارت اور بنگلہ دیش میں پاکستان کے مقابلے میں یہ اعداد کم ہیں۔ 

برطانیہ میں، ٹی بی کے واقعات 1914ء میں 250 سے 275 کی حد سے کم ہو کر 2020ء میں صرف ایک لاکھ میں سے 150 افراد پر آگئے۔ ہم ٹی بی پر قابو پانے میں برطانیہ سے ایک صدی پیچھے ہیں۔ ترقی کا ایک اہم پہلو ایسا ہے جس میں ہمارے ملک نے نمایاں کارکردگی کا مظاہرہ کیا ہے۔ ہم نے انتہائی غربت کو کم کرنے میں کامیابی حاصل کی ہے، جس کی پیمائش ’ڈالر یومیہ‘ کے بینچ مارک سے کی گئی ہے جو کہ 2017ء کی پرچیز پاؤر پیریٹی کی قیمتوں پر دراصل 2.15 ڈالر یومیہ ہے۔ ورلڈ بینک کے مطابق، پاکستان میں 1987ء انتہائی غربت کی شرح 67.3 فیصد سے کم ہو کر 2022ء میں 3.9 فیصد تک آگئی۔ برطانیہ میں انتہائی غربت 1987ء میں صرف 1 فیصد تھی، جو 2021ء میں کم ہو کر 0.3 فیصد رہ گئی۔ ہمارا ملک اس حوالے سے برطانیہ سے تو پیچھے ہے لیکن اس کے باوجود ہم نے اس معاملے میں ہندوستان اور بنگلہ دیش دونوں سے بہتر کارکردگی کا مظاہرہ کیا ہے۔ مندرجہ بالا بیان کردہ دیگر تمام اشاریوں کے لحاظ سے، پاکستان نے برصغیر کے دیگر ممالک کے مقابلے بدتر کارکردگی کا مظاہرہ کیا ہے۔ ہمارے سماجی اقتصادی اشاریوں سے مطمئن ہونا تقریباً ناممکن ہے۔ تو کیا ہمیں اس حقیقت سے مطمئن ہوجانا چاہیے کہ ہم نے مئی 1998ء میں ایٹمی دھماکہ کیا تھا؟

ریاض ریاض الدین  یہ مضمون 10 جون 2023ء کو ڈان اخبار میں شائع ہوا۔

بشکریہ روزنامہ جنگ

[jamesptrevelyan]

Physiological Effects of Hot Climates

How do people survive months of intense heat in countries like India? Cooling is now essential in cities where the heat exceeds physiological limits by several degrees.

Temperatures in Delhi reached 46 °C this week. How does this kind of heat affect people? In my last post “Why do most hot countries remain poor?” I summarised explanations by influential economists and geographers. I reviewed the quantitative evidence that demonstrates the strong inverse link between climate temperature and economic productivity. Of course, a correlation does not necessarily…

[currentclimate]

Climate whiplash is a rapid swing between very wet or dry conditions and can cause far more harm to people than individual extreme events alone. In recent years, whiplash events have been linked to disastrous floods in east Africa, Pakistan and Australia and to worsening heatwaves in Europe and China.

[cognitivejustice]

Clifton Urban Forest is a lush oasis amidst Karachi’s urban sprawl. Initiated on January 8, 2021, by Masood Lohar, the former head of UNDP-GEF SGP, from the platform of Sindh Radiant Organisation, this project aims at restoring the marine ecosystem which once adorned this stretch of the coast.

Today, after a little more than three years, it has flourished into a 220-acre haven of biodiversity and a beacon of hope for urban ecological renewal.

Masood’s story on how it all started is one worth listening. It began in a small blue camper’s tent, surrounded by heaps of garbage that once blighted this area. The bad odour was almost unbearable, he told me. With relentless dedication, he and his team removed tonnes of waste, dug deep to cleanse the land and planted 700,000 trees comprising 101 species, including mangroves, water lilies and lotuses. He has demonstrated unwavering commitment to this urban forest, to the point that he now lives on-site to personally take care of the trees, direct the whole team and prevent the illicit sale of rare birds. This Herculean effort transformed a neglected dump into the largest biodiversity-rich hotspot in Pakistan, attracting both local and migratory wildlife.

But Clifton Urban Forest’s impact extends far beyond flamingos. It hosts around 140 species of birds, including the black-tailed godwit and the Eurasian curlew, both internationally near-threatened species and the first-ever sighting of the crab plover in Pakistan. The forest’s dense foliage, teeming with insects, provides food for larger predators, creating a balanced ecosystem. This intricate web of life supports various species, from lizards and snakes to butterflies and honeybees, some of which are native and threatened species essential for pollination and ecosystem health.

In the face of escalating heatwaves and declining urban air quality, the Clifton Urban Forest plays a critical role in mitigating the harsh effects of climate change. Urban forests are vital for reducing temperatures, improving air quality and providing mental health benefits. This green lung of Karachi not only sequesters carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, but also cools the surrounding areas, making life more bearable even in the hottest of the seasons.

[sataniccapitalist]

“Karachi sweltered through a record-breaking heatwave in October, with a minimum average temperature of 30.9 degrees – the hottest ever recorded in the city in that month.”

[stele3]

https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-nato-poised-unveil-ukraine-aid-reiterate-membership-pledge-summit-2024-07-10/

[dailyunsolvedmysteries-movedd]

The strangest and main events that happened in 2022

The British Queen Elizabeth II died

Will Smith slapped Chris Rock at the Oscars.

The number of COVID-19 cases exceeded 300 million worldwide

The first successful heart transplant from a pig to a human patient occurred

2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine

An outbreak of monkeypox begins when the first monkeypox virus case is reported in London, the United Kingdom.

A large eruption of Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha'apai, a submarine volcano in Tonga, triggered tsunami warnings in Australia, Canada, Chile, Fiji, Japan, New Zealand, Samoa, and the United States.

A number of large black holes lurking in dwarf galaxies that have previously been overlooked by astronomers were discovered. Our own Milky Way galaxy’s supermassive black hole has been recently discovered by newly discovered black holes.

The UK goes through 3 prime minsters

A series of severe heatwaves from July to August hit Europe, causing at least 53,000 deaths and additionally causing major wildfires, travel disruption, and record high temperatures in many countries

Pakistan declares a "climate catastrophe" and appeals for international assistance, as the death toll from recent flooding in the country exceeds 1,000, the world's deadliest flood since 2017.

A fatal human crush occurs during an association football match at Kanjuruhan Stadium in Malang Regency, East Java, Indonesia, killing 131 people and injuring more than 500

A Hypatia stone from an extra-terrestrial planet could be the first tangible sign of an explosion of type Ia supernova. Among the universe’s most energetic events are these rare supernovas. It is possible that Hypatia is a “forensic” clue from the early formation of our solar system of a cosmic story that spans millions of years.

Those approaching Gatwick Airport were confused after a prankster erected a sign reading “Welcome to Luton.” Air passengers arriving at the UK’s second-largest airport, which is located just over 30 miles south of central London, can make out the 60m (197ft) sign.

A recently developed artificial skin system closely resembles human skin. The system uses electronic signals to sense temperature, humidity, and pressure simultaneously. This is leaning towards more intelligent prostheses being created and also more sensitive robots.

Elon Musk completes his $44 billion acquisition of Twitter.

At least 156 people are killed and another 152 injured in a crowd crush during Halloween festivities in Seoul, South Korea.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Randall Enos

* * * *

We are declaring a climate emergency. Everyone can, in whatever place on Earth they call home. No one needs to wait for politicians any more – we have been waiting for them for decades. What history shows us is that when people lead, governments follow. Our power resides in what we are witnessing. We cannot deny that Great Salt Lake is vanishing before our eyes into a sun-cracked playa of salt and toxic chemicals. Nor can we deny that Lake Mead is reduced to a puddle. In New Mexico a wildfire that began in early April is still burning in late July. Last August, the eye of Hurricane Ida split in two – there was no calm – only 190mph winds ripping towns in the bayous of Louisiana to shreds; and 7m acres in the American west burned in 2021. The future the scientists warned us about is where we live now.

The climate emergency has been declared over and over by Nature and by human suffering and upheaval in response to its catastrophes. The 2,000 individuals who recently died of heat in Portugal and Spain are not here to bear witness, but many of the residents of Jacobabad in Pakistan, where Amnesty International declared the temperatures “unlivable for humans”, are. The heat-warped rails of the British train system, the buckled roads, cry out that this is unprecedented. The estimated billion sea creatures who died on the Pacific north-west’s coast from last summer’s heatwave announced a climate emergency. The heat-devastated populations of southern Asia, the current grain crop failures in China, India, across Europe and the American midwest, the starving in the Horn of Africa because of climate-caused drought, the bleached and dying coral reefs of Australia, the rivers of meltwater gushing from the Greenland ice sheet, the melting permafrost of Siberia and Alaska: all bear witness that this is a climate emergency. So do we. Yet the anxiety we feel, the grief that is ours, pales in comparison to the ferocity of our resolve.

We can choose to live differently and build wiser and more just ways to produce, consume and travel. Our hope lies in our collective actions. A climate emergency means that it’s time for business as usual to halt, for our priorities to shift and to recognize our responsibility to those on the frontlines of the climate crisis. This emergency, which did not begin suddenly and will not end in our lifetimes, nevertheless needs our urgent response. This means doing all we can to stabilize the health of the planet and speed the transition away from fossil fuels. Now. Between the scientists and engineers, philosophers and poets, Indigenous leaders, climate activists and engaged youth, we know what to do and how to do it. We have a multiplicity of tools, we have a kaleidoscopic vision where each of us can offer up the gifts that are ours, and most importantly, we have the spiritual will to change the course of our destiny on fire.

The future needs us. We need each other. At a time when the majority of Americans want to see serious climate action, too many politicians have failed us and undermined those who are trying. We ourselves must respond for those who will be born next week and next decade and next century, who need a planet alive and flourishing in all its exquisite diversity of land and creatures and humans. We have no right to rob them or the young people staring at a chaotic future now of their birthright. We do not represent them, but we can represent ourselves, as people in solidarity with all life. In that spirit, we join those around the world who have already declared a climate emergency, and we invite everyone to join us.

Rebecca Solnit is a Guardian US columnist

Terry Tempest Williams is a writer, naturalist, and activist

[mariacallous]

In the lead up to the COP27 climate summit, the urgency of climate change had never been clearer. A third of Pakistan had submerged under water, half of China’s landmass was parched by drought, and repeated heatwaves set Europe ablaze with some regions losing up to 80% of their harvest.

Despite this, the global community in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt was unable to muster the financial commitments needed to adequately respond to the climate crisis. Achieving the Paris Agreement’s temperature and adaptation goals requires an estimated global investment of $3-6 trillion a year until 2050, but current investment levels are nearly a tenth of that, just around $630 billion. Further, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), annual climate finance to developing countries needs to increase by four to eight times by 2030, yet COP27’s new finance pledges came nowhere near this target, and no headway was made on a new 2025 finance goal.

There were some victories, like the establishment of the Global Shield fund for climate risk, and a historical Loss and Damage Fund to help countries recover from climate impacts. But the details of these funds could take years to formalize before any country sees the proceeds. In the meantime, emerging market and developing economies will continue to face the brunt of the impacts of climate change with the fewest resources, while also being the least responsible for warming the planet.

Given this context, a new tool, debt-for-adaptations swaps, could be a game changing way to accelerate the lethargic pace at which climate finance is made accessible to countries desperately in need.

In a debt-for-adaptation swap, countries who borrowed money from other nations or multilateral development banks (e.g., the IMF and World Bank) could have that debt forgiven, if the money that was to be spent on repayment was instead diverted to climate adaptation and resilience projects. This has an opportunity to both alleviate debt distress and increase funding to adaptation which has proved far more difficult to finance than clean power. There has been a lot of interest in debt swaps from developing countries and multilateral development banks, especially at COP27, but not specifically focused on adaptation.

The U.S. should take on a leading role in this effort, not only because it is the right thing to do but also because it advances U.S. interests in its geo-strategic rivalry with China. As developing nations look to see who will help them out of the climate catastrophe, the U.S. has a chance to pioneer an alternate model to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, which is entrapping developing countries into loans and debt distress.

Moreso, the sovereign debt burden of developing countries is largely a historical product of colonialism. By championing debt-for-adaptation swaps, the Biden administration can advance its environmental justice objectives and quickly channel critical resources to vulnerable communities.

The State of Play: Loans and Mitigation Dominate, Grants and Adaptation Lag Behind

There is no common, universal definition for what “climate finance” means but it generally refers to two types of financial flows: (1) climate investments which seek to generate financial returns, and (2) climate aid which is given as a grant with no expectation of repayment.

Nearly 94% of existing climate finance is in the first category[1]—an investment through either debt or equity where the funder is expecting some financial return. These funders include commercial banks and investors, governments, and multilateral and national finance institutions (e.g., World Bank, International Monetary Fund, U.S. International Development Finance Corporation).

The expectation of revenue generation for climate investments structurally binds the success and likelihood of deals to broader macroeconomic and political trends. Therefore, climate investment has been slow in developing countries due to a real and perceived risk of doing business in countries which may be involved in or adjacent to armed conflicts, face political or economic instability, or experience humanitarian disasters. While private investors do want to invest in the developing world, most such projects are at very high-risk levels, well above what is considered “investment grade.”

Projects that do meet the “investment grade” criteria are almost all focused on renewable energy. Indeed, 90% of all climate finance last year went exclusively to activities which mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. This makes sense from an investor perspective because electricity can be bought and sold, generating predictable cash flows to yield returns.

The tradeoff is that climate adaptation has been almost entirely neglected in climate finance flows despite being more urgent for many developing countries. Roughly $50 billion in adaptation finance was tracked between 2019-2020, compared to $571 billion for mitigation. The U.N. estimates that developing countries already need $70 billion per year to cover adaptation costs now and will need $140–$300 billion in 2030, rising to $280-500 billion by 2050. The damage from this year’s monsoon flood in Pakistan alone will exceed $40 billion.

There are a range of reasons why adaptation projects like drought-resistant seeds, resilient buildings, environmental restoration, or sea walls have struggled to attract private sector financing. At its core, it is more difficult to capture the benefits of adapting to climate change in a way that generates revenue. Suffice it to say, as long as profit-motive drives the majority of climate finance flows, adaptation finance will lag behind.

What adaptation lacks in revenue generation opportunities, though, it makes up for in avoided damages. Adaptation finance can help avoid the costs of infrastructure collapse, climate refugees, and potential failed states. A conservative estimate finds that by 2050, the economic cost of climate change will be between $1 trillion and $1.8 trillion (not including non-economic losses like loss of cultural sites).

The hope is that climate aid, or money that’s given without expectation of financial return (e.g., grants), can fill this gap in climate adaptation finance. Unfortunately, developed countries have channeled a comparatively meager amount of overall climate finance through grant-based instruments. In total, grants currently account for only 6% of climate finance. Between 2016-2018, grant-based bilateral climate finance accounted for 34% of all U.S. contributions ($645M), 12% of Japan’s ($1.2B), and only 3% of France’s ($146M). There have been some bright spots, however, with 91% of the U.K.’s contributions coming through grants ($1.3B), 99% of Australia’s ($111M), and 100% of Sweden’s ($482M). At COP27, developed countries failed to make headway on the Glasgow Climate Pact to double adaptation finance, nor did they define the Global Goal on Adaptation (equivalent to the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C mitigation target).

In the U.S., there has been political reluctance to legislatively disburse funds for climate aid grants. President Biden requested $11.4 billion in climate aid every year till 2024, but Congress has authorized just $1 billion total. The politics of grant-based aid remain controversial, as Republicans and Democrats are virtually in different worlds on how to address the climate crisis and the role of the U.S. in supporting other countries.

Therefore, in the absence of a significant inflow of grant money, innovative solutions are needed to overcome the barriers to scaling up climate finance for adaptation. By using debt-for-adaptation swaps, climate finance for adaptation can be mobilized while

[cleverhottubmiracle]

Vidhura Ralapanawe thought he had more time. The climate scientist, who heads sustainability and innovation for Epic Group, a Hong Kong-based apparel sourcing business, has spent years worrying about how to keep workers protected and factories functioning as the world heats up. He never had high hopes for the industry to take the effects of rising temperatures seriously, viewing international environmental commitments as doing too little, too slowly. But he didn’t expect the consequences of inaction to hit so hard and so fast, either.The last two years have been the hottest on record. In Bangladesh and India — countries where Epic manufacturers — sizzling temperatures sickened workers and strained machinery. Schools shut, power failed and dozens died. “That was a shocker,” said Ralapanawe. “Even for me, knowing the science, I didn’t expect these kinds of massive heatwaves so fast… that really floored me.”The rest of the industry is slowly waking up to climate change as an imminent threat. Kering and LVMH are among the major fashion companies that in regulatory filings have flagged that higher temperatures could hurt access to key raw materials like leather and cotton, killing off cattle and causing crops to shrivel. Warmer winters are bad news for purveyors of puffy coats like Canada Goose and Moncler. Zara-owner Inditex said in its latest annual report that extreme weather damaged stores and disrupted sales on nine separate occasions in 2023, though the impact of these natural disasters on the group’s overall business was immaterial. It’s likely there will be more warnings buried in corporate documents this year, even as the issue is moving down many fashion executive’s agendas. Indeed, instead of focusing on how to adapt to a new, threatening climate reality, climate risk is still largely portrayed as a long-term, unquantified externality — a fancy way of saying “someone else’s problem.” That’s in contrast to more immediate concerns, like how to navigate inflation-linked demand sluggishness, growing trade tensions and delivering on quarterly growth expectations. But there is growing evidence that the world can no longer hope to avoid a climate calamity and the onset of disastrous tipping points may come much more swiftly than previously predicted. “Acting has a cost, but inaction has a higher cost,” said Anna Raffaelli, sector lead for fashion and apparel at climate consultancy The Carbon Trust. “That’s the business case.”The Climbing Costs of Climate ChangeSince 2000, climate-related disasters have caused nearly $4 trillion in economic damage, according to a recent report from consultancy BCG and the World Economic Forum’s Alliance of CEO Climate Leaders. If temperatures continue to rise at their current rate, global GDP could decline by as much as 22 percent by the end of the century. Many of fashion’s largest manufacturing hubs could face severe financial impacts much sooner. Soaring temperatures and increased flooding could curb export earnings for Bangladesh, Cambodia, Vietnam and Pakistan by more than 20 percent by the end of the decade, according to an analysis by Cornell and Schroders published in 2023. The number of high heat days experienced by workers in key cities in these countries has already increased by 42 percent over the last 20 years, an analysis published by Cornell last month found. According to the International Labour Organisation, heat stress alone could reduce global work hours by 2 percent by 2030.Getting a more concrete handle on brand’s climate risks is a challenge. Companies base their analysis on a range of different scenarios, but how the climate crisis evolves is increasingly difficult to predict. Deep and diversified supply chains mean brands have so far been sheltered from the consequences when droughts and floods hit key producing regions. Meanwhile, basic data, like the temperature in factories, remains hard to come by.“If you get a leading global retailer on the phone and press them on the level and quality and confidence in the [climate risk] analysis they’ve done, I think it’s not very high,” said Jason Judd, executive director at Cornell University’s Global Labour Institute. “That’s unnerving.”Risk ManagementThings are beginning to change. Incoming European regulations are set to make brands more responsible for what happens in their supply chains. Large companies operating in the EU will need to publish information on both their environmental impact and exposure to climate risks starting this year. And climate extremes are getting harder to ignore. “Physical climate risk and the social angle of climate risk really hasn’t got enough attention from brands or investors,” said Katie Frame, active ownership manager at Schroders. The asset management company has engaged a number of its apparel holdings on their approach to climate risk and its impact on workers. It’s planning to publish a toolkit in the coming months to encourage broader investor engagement on the issue. Across the industry, thinking on the topic is “still at quite an early stage,” Frame said. Even leading companies are only starting to sketch out their approach to adapt to a new, dangerous climate reality. Kering and LVMH both point to efforts to establish more climate-secure supply chains for raw materials by supporting farming practices that protect and restore soil health and biodiversity. LVMH estimates about 5 to 10 percent of its raw materials are currently produced in line with such standards. H&M Group has established contingency plans to temporarily or permanently move production to lower-risk regions if extreme weather or water scarcity start to have an impact on production or logistics. Nike stands out as having introduced heat stress prevention requirements into its code of conduct for suppliers.But by and large, brands are still acting like climate change is a train that can be stopped, when in reality it’s already careened out of the station with no industry plan in place to prevent a disastrous collision.“People are losing their lives in extreme heat, whether in production facilities or in the field,” said Naidoo. “I don’t think there’s enough recognition of how problematic that is, especially because brands are so far removed from that reality.”For his part Ralapanawe sees developing plans to manage heat levels in Epic’s factories as a matter of urgency. It’s a difficult challenge: The trade off for keeping temperatures bearable inside may be running air conditioning systems that belch yet more planet-warming gases into the atmosphere. And these energy-guzzling cooling systems are expensive to install and run, especially when retrofitting older buildings. In an industry that operates on knife-edge margins, the core issue always comes down to who will pay to manage and address climate exposure.“Places deemed to be higher in climate risk the big brands will leave,” said Ralpanawe. At some point there will be nowhere left to go. Until then, “it’s a different way of racing to the bottom,” he said. Source link