Vulnerability to nature is, unfortunately, characteristic of life for the poor everywhere. Millions of people live in conditions of poverty, malnutrition and disease and are vulnerable to natural disasters and weather-related events like floods and droughts.
At the UN's global warming conference in Nairobi, activists and government agencies were touting these problems as evidence that Africa is already experiencing the devastating effects of global warming.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that water will be drastically affected by the earth's rising temperatures, especially through a decline in rainfall in Africa. This, it is alleged, will cause more droughts and damaging floods, resulting in threats to water supplies, harming agriculture, human health and the natural environment.
Yet current predictions of adverse effects of global warming on water supplies, floods and droughts in Africa are completely unfounded, both in theory and measurement. Alarmists have been quick to uphold regional variations in rainfall as evidence of global warming -- but no evidence supports this claim.
More broadly, they have assumed that all climatic change is undesirable. In fact, an increase in the magnitude and frequency of heavy rains would be beneficial over most of Africa.
South Africa is the ideal sub-continental region to observe climatic signals related to global warming and water. The eastern part has high rainfall, while the west is an arid desert. The south receives rain in the winter, while the north receives it in the summer. The average annual rainfall for the whole region is 500mm, compared with a world average of more than 850mm.
Studying the South African data, we find that the mean annual precipitation over almost the whole of South Africa has progressively increased by at least 9 percent during the 78-year period of record with a high degree of assurance.
The 19 districts that constitute the southern and western Cape benefited from a 17 percent (57mm) increase in rainfall from 1950 to 1992. Obviously, in a region like South Africa that suffers from water shortage, such change is desirable.
Although the 1990s were reported to be the warmest decade of the past millennium, this was not reflected in an unusual increase in the numbers and magnitudes of exceptional hydrological events in South Africa.
More recently, last year's global temperatures were proclaimed to be higher than any in the recent geological past.
Yet again, no exceptional rainfalls, river flows, floods or droughts occurred during the year. Any additional global warming will further increase the annual rainfall over South Africa.
The possibility that it will decrease the rainfall in the foreseeable future is remote and without scientific merit.
Meanwhile, neither South African climatologists nor their overseas counterparts have produced evidence that links increased CO2 emissions to South African rainfall patterns.
The increases discussed above were already occurring early in early parts of the 20th century -- well before post-World War II increases in industrial activity and carbon dioxide emissions.
While the causal linkage between variations in solar activity and global climate can be debated, the parallel increases in sunspot numbers, surface air temperature, open water surface evaporation and rainfall during the last century are incontestable. Records show a significant 21-year periodicity in the South African annual rainfall and river flow records that is synchronous with solar activity.
It is water, not temperature, that determines the habitability of our planet. Furthermore, temperature is a measurement -- not a property.
Temperature does not feature in hydrological analyses: their principal variables are rainfall, river flow and open water surface evaporation.
Their relative values vary greatly from region to region in South Africa.
Moreover, it is the consequences -- such as changes in rainfall and river flow -- that are important, not changes in the atmospheric and oceanic processes that produce them. Proof of global warming is not proof of the postulated undesirable consequences.
In recent years, high losses of life and damage to property in South Africa and elsewhere in the world were primarily the consequence of rising populations and not enough space, so people moved to flood-prone areas.
The floods were worsened by socio-economic conditions -- not increases in flood magnitude or frequency. This is similarly the case with droughts.
Recently some scientists have repeated their predictions that global warming will degrade the natural environment, based on the assumption that future climate will be warmer and drier. This alarmist view suffers from two fundamental errors. First, rainfall is increasing -- not decreasing. Second, the predicted increases in temperature are no more than the temperature increase between dawn and midday, to which vegetation is already well adapted. It is thus unlikely that large swathes of natural vegetation will be destroyed.
Sadly, many claims about how global warming will affect us all are not backed up by scientific evidence -- and those who make them appear to be indifferent to the needs of much of humanity. Environmental doomsayers and alarmist scientists have effectively stifled the debate over climate change -- with serious implications for many other issues.
For instance, South Africa is rapidly approaching the limit of its available water resources.
The only large-scale, viable alternative is energy-consuming seawater desalination. The most economical source of this energy is from coal-fired power stations near the site. If this is not possible because it will increase greenhouse gas emissions, the obvious inevitable consequence will be that South Africa's future development will be increasingly constrained by lack of water supplies.
If the present alarmism continues, the poor will be the first casualties of the war on global warming.
Will Alexander is professor emeritus in the department of civil and biosystems engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa, and was a member of the UN's Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters from 1994 to 2000.
Over the past few years, migrant workers’ rights have improved in Taiwan, but there has not been a comparable improvement in protections for employers, who are faced with a range of challenges, such as family nurses mistreating patients or workers threatening to change brokers or demanding that employers change their jobs. Then there is the decrease in work standards. Migrant workers too often find the lure of the underground jobs market irresistible, are unaware of employment laws and regulations, or have found that National Immigration Agency (NIA) checks are lax, and as a result abscond. If this happens, what protections or
The World Health Assembly (WHA) held its annual meeting this week; Taiwan was still not represented. Its journalists were also barred from covering the online-only proceedings, despite the nation’s clearly demonstrated pandemic expertise that has set an example for the world. When the SARS epidemic reached Taiwan from southern China in 2003, dozens of lives were lost, but its health experts learned the importance of general testing, masks, technology to locate infected persons, swift decisions and quarantines. The lessons were applied immediately across Taiwan when COVID-19 arrived this year. From 2009 to 2016, Taiwan participated as an observer in the assembly under
The Central Epidemic Command Center (CECC) has been giving daily COVID-19 updates for almost four months, and on several occasions when major developments have arisen, the news conferences have attracted large numbers of viewers. The entire nation is anxious about the pandemic, and interest in the latest news has become a part of daily life. Watching the center’s daily news conferences has become something of a national ritual. The pandemic has stabilized within Taiwan due to the admirable efforts of each person living in the nation conducting themselves with the utmost responsibility, and in certain cases making considerable sacrifices within their