‘It is time the world’s leading nations took time off from scientific hairsplitting to come up with a global strategy for population displacement caused by environmental factors.'


Michael Chrichton’s 2005 novel “A State of Fear” has perhaps been the most high profile fictionalised account of the sea level rise/ global warming debate. The author of Jurassic Park fame set a part of the novel in the South Pacific and built his tale around the small island nation of “Vanutu” that sounds quite like Vanuatu, but he obviously had Tuvalu in mind. For it is that tiny atoll nation that is in the worldwide spotlight of the sea level rise issue—not Vanuatu.

The novel all but debunked the idea of global warming due to the emission of greenhouse gases. As is his usual style, he produced copious statistical data—both current and historical—to support the underlying theme of his novel—that global warming has little to do with the melting of the polar ice caps and the consequent sea level rise.

His contention in the novel was that the global warming scare is a meticulously contrived bogey raised by the scientific and academic community to gain a continuous source of billions of dollars of funding for research from global agencies. Predictably, Crichton had accusations of being in cahoots with the all-powerful hydrocarbon industry hurled at him.

The novel, however, brought into sharp focus the debate on the causes of sea level rise, which is an indisputable fact of life not just in Tuvalu but also other similar atoll nations like Kiribati.

Former United States Vice-President Al Gore has presented a completely antipodal view through his much acclaimed multi-million dollar-spinning film “An Inconvenient Truth”. Last month, there were reports the film is being nominated for the Oscars.

Gore’s film—also producing an impressive volume of statistics to match Crichton’s novel—squarely lays the blame on hydrocarbons and other greenhouse gases spewed out by the developed world; particularly the United States and countries of the European Union with China and India (both considered developing countries) fast catching up.

Gore’s film could well be the best possible and most convincing effort to get countries to sign the Kyoto Protocol—something that 166 countries have already done. Almost all the developed world has signed on, the two notable exceptions being the United States and Australia, despite a great deal of internal pressure from their respective countries’ environment groups.

But for the first time late last year, a country that had already signed the Kyoto Protocol reneged on its agreement: Canada’s new conservative government changed its previous climate change policy and decided to abandon the emission reduction targets set by the Kyoto Protocol.

What is more, it cancelled a $5 million pledge to help least developed countries adapt to climate change. Its action has shocked the world not to mention a sizeable number of Canada’s own population and most affected countries like Tuvalu.

While there is empirical evidence of our planet getting warmer and sea levels rising, there has been no agreement at all on the causes. There has been a small group of scientists who have always held on to the idea that global warming and sea level rise is a cyclical process and has happened many times before in the planet’s long history.

Chrichton’s novel and Gore’s film epitomise the intense debate on the real cause of global warming and sea level rise that has raged on for 20 years—and the vested interests that are involved in pushing ahead the different cases.

Every year, new evidence surfaces to support the different positions. And as more evidence on the non-greenhouse gas increases, more countries can be expected to contemplate following Canada’s footsteps.

New research and studies in tectonics and geology have thrown up new theories that the earth has been expanding continually and any melting of the polar ice caps due to warming would not result in a rise in sea levels.

Tuvalu and the atolls around it may in fact be sinking because of geophysical reasons more than rising sea levels, say some theorists—and their number is steadily rising.

There are also new theories that the erratic weather patterns of the last decade or so can be attributed to geological factors more than greenhouse gases.

It has been known for sometime now that the El Nino effect has a strong geological side to it.

It naturally follows that as non-greenhouse gas theories gain ground, countries with weaker economies will be more disposed to reconsider the emission reduction deadlines set by the Kyoto Protocol.

We may not hear the last on the debate for decades. But the real issue is that the sea is definitely encroaching on the small, flat atoll nations whose people have nowhere to go.

It is time the world’s leading nations took time off from scientific hairsplitting to come up with a global strategy for population displacement caused by environmental factors.

They need to have a time-bound action plan to evacuate and resettle these populations with dignity. And having made their millions from the raging environmental debate, Messrs Chrichton and Gore would do well to turn their considerable persuasive skills to get the world taking some firm action on what to do with the soon to be displaced nationals of the sinking atolls. That effort would be worth a million Oscars.