FOR more than a decade, climatologists have been sounding the alarm: continued release of greenhouse gases will almost certainly warm the world. Average annual temperatures for the earth's surface are already up 1 degree Fahrenheit in the last 100 years. And the pattern of warming - more in the Arctic than near the equator, more at night than day, more in winter than summer - fits the one predicted by computer models of manmade climate change better than it does natural climate variability. Such findings spurred the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - some 2570 scientists from academia, environmental groups, industry and government from 150 nations - to conclude in 1996 that manmade warming has already been discerned.

Gases such as carbon dioxide from deforestation and burning of coal, oil and natural gas act like little panes of glass in a greenhouse. With nations pouring at least seven billion tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere every year there is 30 per cent more carbon dioxide in the air today than in 1860. Scientists reached this conclusion by analysing pockets of air trapped in ice cores. They determine the age of the core by counting layers of ice deposition much like counting tree rings. So much warming is built into the atmosphere already that the planet will heat up another half degree in the next 20 years. Paradoxically, global temperatures are like bank rates. A small change can make a big difference. One per cent rise in surface temperature could cause major disruptions in weather patterns that could produce flash floods and unexpected droughts. It could also melt the ice shelves in Arctic and Antarctica that could raise sea levels with catastrophic consequences to island nations.

Such freak weather conditions were widespread throughout the globe over the last few years. Across the globe countries were reeling under its arching trajectory. The grimmest warning came from Professor Rajendra Pachauri, now head of the IPCC. Professor Pachauri says, "There is a high probability that the freaky weather we are seeing now has a direct relationship with the phenomenon of global warming that we are screaming about". Set up in 1988 - after the 1980s saw six of the warmest years in weather record - the IPCC has in the past decade been analysing scientific information on climate change across the globe. In its most recent assessment, presented late last year, the IPCC confirmed that there was strong evidence to prove that global average temperature would go up by 1.4 to 5.8 degrees Celsius in the next few decades. Compare this with a rise of 0.4 degrees Celsius in the entire 20th century. Much of the warming is caused by doubling of carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, which in turn is the result of excessive consumption of fossil fuels such as coal, petroleum and natural gas. Such large layers of gas act like a globe of glass around the planet and reflect back radiated heat from the sun, raising the earth's temperature to debilitating levels.

Apart from wreaking havoc on life and property, global warming is likely to have a major impact on food grain production. Rice production in our region is expected to fall by 15 to 20 percent over the next decade because of unfavourable climatic conditions. Global warming would also melt giant ice shelves in the Arctic and Antarctica, pushing sea levels by over a metre or two. That would swallow up the coastline of many countries such as Bangladesh. This has been revealed by studies of water level in coastline areas of Cox's Bazar and water level in the Hiron Point in the Sunderbans shows an annual rise of 4mm. It would also threaten coastal cities such as Mumbai, Miami and New York, leading to vast losses in prime economic zones. As if to remind that global warming is for real, two massive ice shelves in Antarctica, each over 1,000 square kilometres, collapsed and formed giant floating icebergs in the Indian oceans a few months ago.

The situation may be so grim that we may have difficulty in finding the Maldives on a map of the world. They look like flyspecks on the Indian Ocean: corals and sand atolls where 2,70,000 people live at a maximum altitude of about five feet above sea level. Ever since President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom's car got swept into water by a freak wave in 1987 and he almost drowned, he felt convinced about the possibility that manmade pollution is behind the world's warming, the polar ice cap's melting and the sea's encroaching. In 1992, he told US President George HW Bush, "A few feet of rise is the end of my country". Bush the father replied, "Mr

President, the U.S. will not allow that to happen to the Maldives." Bush the son has failed to make good on that promise, rather his "Clear Skies Initiative" and other related measures calling for voluntary reduction of greenhouse gases, instead of mandatory cut, scientists reckon, would increase actual gas emissions by almost 30 per cent over 1990 levels.

Maybe, rich countries in temperate climates will adapt faster, but poorer countries near the equator will face new hardships. Climate change, to be more precise, may widen the gap between haves and have-nots. Very bleak future haunts most countries of Asia, Africa and even South America. Tropical diseases like malaria and dengue may spread in these regions. Rising sea levels could kill fish and put most of Egypt's cropland under water. Hotter summer and less winter now could reduce the appeal of European vacation spots. A two-degree rise in temperature could make Uganda too hot to grow coffee. The clear skies part of the Bush plan calls for a cap on the emissions of sulphur oxides (SO2), nitrous oxides (NOx) and mercury from American power plants. But Kyoto focuses on carbon dioxide (CO2), which accounts for about 80 per cent of gas emissions.

The Japanese are important advocates of the Kyoto Protocol, despite the real pain to their economy the plan would inflict. But Japan can possibly sustain any such untoward disaster it suffers. But poor and overcrowded Bangladesh faces flooding rivers, rising seas and fiercer cyclones. As for the Maldives a rumour is circulating that president Gayoom has made a deal with Australia to take in his people 30 years from now. "In exchange Australia would get the fishing rights." However, Maldivians are not happy about such "International refugee status". But sure enough, there is no such escape route for Bangladesh. Ironically such ice melts may actually be beneficial in a leaner summer. But in the long run, this would prove catastrophic. In the initial years, it would cause massive floods as rivers would be unable to cope with the tons of water released. Meanwhile, declining snow cover over the Himalayas could dramatically alter the ecology of the region causing desertification of fertile mountain valleys and even affecting progress of the monsoon.

Presumably, Big Oil's influence in having no limit on curbing emissions is quite apparent. The linkage of growth and emissions feature prominently in their planning and policy actions and executives of Exxon talk about solutions like carbon storage through wise forest and agricultural processes". These new and growing plants are called "sinks" because they absorb carbon from the atmosphere and hold on to it for a long time. This, advocates argue, reduces a country's net emissions. On this argument, reforestation and ending deforestation deserve credit for strengthening carbon sinks. Scientists agree that sinks are important but their properties are not well understood. Two new studies highlight some of the uncertainties. Researchers at Britain's Hadley Centre, a leader in climate modelling have used their analysis to show that sinks may not be as permanent as their proponents argue.

In a study just published in "Nature" the groups models show that as temperatures rise forest may emit more CO2 leading to greater warming. One of the groups, Peter Cox explains that vegetation and soils, which currently absorb about a quarter of human-made carbon dioxide emissions could accelerate future climate change by releasing carbon to the atmosphere as the "planet warms". Another team of French and American researchers suggests that forests, oceans and other sinks might be highly variable in their effects from year to year - perhaps because of the effect of El Nino weather pattern. The tough stands taken by some countries except the US is possibly a way out from this catastrophic situation: imposing economic sanctions on countries that fail to meet their targets by 2008-12. The Americans accept that compliance is essential but reject financial penalties.

There are other rancorous issues, most of them centred on developing countries. America insists on "meaningful participation" by poor countries, who retort with some justice that it was the rich world that put nearly all the man-made pollutants in the air through industrialisation. Low-lying islands, coastal regions and countries that are probable victims want compensation and technology transfers. Hypocritically, the big oil producing countries are demanding compensation for the harm they will suffer from lost oil sales. More so, they are trying to block the Kyoto process as a conspiracy to damage their economies.