Flawed Data on Himalayan Glaciers Uncovered, Highlights Need for Medea
The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recently apologized for publishing assertions based on flawed data in its 2007 report. They asserted that:
Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world, and if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate. Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometers by the year 2035. “
Michael Zemp, an expert on glacier monitoring, stated in an article from CNN that reliable data on the Himalayas simply doesn’t exist to confirm the IPCC claim. Telegraph, in fact reported in this article that geologists believe that melting of the Siachen glacier has been considerably exaggerated—with an actual melting of around 60cm not the reported 7.5 m per year.
Based on the IPCC data, ASP incorrectly asserted in its Climate Security Index, in past blog entries, and public appearances that the melting of the Siachen Glacier due to climate change, threatened the Indus river treaty and peace in the region. A potential water conflict in the region will remain a major concern as irrigation needs increase, allegations that India is misappropriating water remain, and low-level conflict in the area continues.
This mistake however, does not invalidate the overwhelming evidence that climate change is occurring or that is effects on security will be felt. It highlights the need for government programs such as Medea (Measurements of Earth Data for Environmental Analysis) to facilitate collaboration between the intelligence and scientific communities to capture and analyze reliable and extensive data (for more information see this blog post on Medea). Programs like Medea ensure that the government is making decisions on security and climate change based on facts and the most up to date information available — not off of date popular science journals.
1 Comment
Comments are closed.
Good post.
Very true — good science, and good information are important. Its unfortunate that the IPCC was using such clearly bad information, and bad science.
Its important to note that the underlying fact remains, the glaciers are still melting, and that is a security risk.
http://climatesecurity.blogspot.com/2010/01/glaciers-of-himalayas-are-still-melting.html
You note in the article from the Telegraph. For some reason, this seems to have become a political debate from the Indian government, and I’m not sure why.