The Tragedy of the
Himalayas
By BRYAN WALSH /
LEH Friday, Dec.
04, 2009
NEXT
ttp://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1929071_1929070_1945667-1,00.html
The Indian town of Leh
(altitude 11,500 ft.) receives almost no precipitation and depends on
Himalayan glaciers to supply most of its water.
The road to Khardung La begins in the Indian town of Leh on the
northwestern fringe of the Himalayas. Exhaust-spewing army trucks
rattle up the side of dry rock, past Buddhist monasteries clinging to
the craggy mountainside and alongside small farms barely scraping
fertility from the earth. Khardung La, the highest motorable mountain
pass in the world, is more than 18,000 ft. above sea level, the air so
thin that just standing there a few minutes leaves you feeling as if
your head might lift off like a balloon. But if 65-year-old Syed Iqbal
Hasnain is bothered by the altitude, he isn't showing it. The Indian
glaciologist hops lightly from a car and walks to the edge of the
pass, beneath fluttering Buddhist prayer flags. The rock is dusted
with early winter snow, and there might not be much more this season
or next, he says.
Reports from Leh indicate that precipitation has dropped during the
past quarter-century as temperatures have risen, a possible
consequence of climate change. But the real threat is to the heart of
the greater Himalayas and the vast Tibetan Plateau, where more than
40,000 sq. mi. of glaciers hold water in the largest collection of
land ice outside the polar regions. "These glaciers are central
to the region," says Hasnain, looking over Khardung La. "If
we don't have snow and ice here, people will die."
(See pictures of Himalayan glaciers under threat.)
Scientists call
it the third pole - but when it comes to clear and present threats
from climate change, it may rank first. The high-altitude glaciers of
the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau - which cover parts of India,
Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan and China - are the water tower of Asia.
When the ice thaws and the snow melts every spring, the glaciers birth
the great rivers of the region, the mightiest river system in the
world: the Ganges, the Indus, the Brahmaputra, the Mekong, the Yellow,
the Yangtze. Together, these rivers give material and spiritual
sustenance to 3 billion people, nearly half of the world's population
- and all are nursed by Himalayan ice. Monsoons come and go, filling
the rivers at times and then leaving them lethargic, but the ice melt
has always been regular and dependable in a region where water - or
the lack of it - defines civilization. "This isn't like the
polar ice caps," says Shubash Lohani, an officer with the Nepal
program of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). "You have a huge
population downstream from the Himalayas who are dependent on
it."
(Watch TIME's video "Creating New Land for Climate Refugees in
Bangladesh.")
It's a population
that is stressed for water, even if the ice doesn't disappear.
According to the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), most
of South Asia is already in a state of water scarcity, as is much of
China. At the same time, the population in this part of the world is
set to expand, even as economic growth increases competition for water
used in agriculture and industry.
Regardless of the
impact of climate change, there is a widening gap between water
supplies and needs. In fact, a new report from the international
consulting group McKinsey & Co. estimates that by 2030, India
alone will have only 50% of the water that it needs under a
business-as-usual scenario. Nor is Asia the only region that will
grapple with water scarcity in a warmer world: the McKinsey report
estimates that the globe will have 40% less water than it needs by
2030 if nothing is done to change current consumption patterns.
"The countries where water is already scarce are going to be the
ones really vulnerable to climate change," says Colin Chartres,
director general of the IWMI.
)
That makes the
security of the Himalayan glaciers all the more important for the
region and their potential loss all the more threatening. While it's
difficult to get a comprehensive assessment of the tens of thousands
of glaciers in the Himalayas - all above 10,000 ft. - independent
scientific studies indicate that the third pole is melting fast,
probably because of warming temperatures brought on by climate change.
Since 1960, almost a fifth of the Indian Himalayas' ice coverage has
disappeared, and the 2007 global-warming assessment by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change judged that glaciers in the
Himalayas were "receding faster than at any other place in the
world." If global warming goes unchecked, the Himalayan melt will
certainly get worse. This year Chinese researchers projected a 43%
decrease in glaciated area by 2070. If that happens, the impact could
be catastrophic. Losing Himalayan meltwater would only stress the
remaining resources further. High-mountain states like Nepal and
Bhutan could suffer flash floods as glacial lakes gave way under the
rush of accelerated melting. And since the rivers of the Himalayas are
shared by nuclear powers that have engaged in violent conflict over
the past half-century - India, Pakistan and China - the threat of
a war over water can't be denied. "The warming of the past 20
years is getting more and more intense," says Yao Tandong, head
of China's Institute of Tibetan Plateau Research. "If warming
continues, [the impact] will be even more serious."
Whether the
warming will continue is largely up to us. Next week, representatives
from more than 190 nations will meet in Copenhagen, where they will
work to hammer out a new, more equitable - and more effective -
global climate deal. Expectations for the summit have been tamped down
in recent weeks, in part because of sluggishness on the part of the
U.S. Senate, which has yet to act on a bill that would cap and reduce
the country's carbon emissions. There is some good news: President Obama will be in
Copenhagen, and
the U.S. is pledging to cut carbon emissions 17% below 2005 levels by
2020, while China is promising to improve its energy efficiency. But
now is the time to make the hard decisions that will set the world on
a cleaner path, one that gives us a chance to avoid truly dangerous
climate change. The potential loss of Himalayan ice is by no means the
only threat from global warming, but it's one that can be seen in real
time, with our own eyes. It can be hard to imagine the amount of
energy it takes to melt a mountain glacier; it will take even more
imagination to stop the melting. "We must have a global policy to
reverse this trend," says Madhav Kumar Nepal, the Prime Minister
of Nepal, whose impoverished country will be an early victim of
warming. "This question is one of survival."
Scenes from a
Warmer World
There's a saying about Leh that "the passes are so high and the
land is so barren, only a dear friend or a serious enemy will reach
here." That truth overlooks the stark beauty of this town of
27,000 in India's mountainous Ladakh region, but it accurately
captures the harsh climate. At 10,000 ft. and surrounded by even
higher mountains, Leh is in a cold desert, receiving less than 5 in.
of precipitation a year. Young Buddhist monks in training carry tanks
of water to the towering monasteries poised in cut-rock valleys. The
region is permanently water-stressed, and the growth of tourism there
has only stretched resources thinner. Without snowmelt from the
mountains above and the Indus River, which flows south of the town,
it's difficult to imagine anything living there at all. "Leh has
always been dependent on the glacier for our livelihood," says
Nisa Khatoon, who runs the WWF office in Leh. "When there is less
snowfall, less ice, there is a water problem for Leh."
That's exactly
what seems to be happening in Leh, whose people, along with those in
other high-altitude regions of the Himalayas, are the first in the
world to feel the impacts of ice loss. According to a study by the
French environmental group GERES, average winter temperatures in the
region have risen 1C, and snowfall has generally declined over the
past 25 years. Although relatively little scientific study has been
done on the cumulative effect of that warming on the ice and snowpack
in the region - a problem that crops up repeatedly in research on
the Himalayas, where sheer inaccessibility makes science expensive and
dangerous - elders in the region say the ice they remember from
childhood is long gone, having receded up the mountains, and water
isn't as plentiful as it once was.
The community has
been forced to adapt in unexpected ways. Chewang Norphel, a
74-year-old engineer who has lived in the region his entire life, has
been building what he terms artificial glaciers, stone cisterns that
can gather and store what meltwater exists. Because he keeps his
"glaciers" in the shade - and because they're small, less
than 30,000 sq. ft. - the water stays frozen after the winter and
can be tapped in the spring to irrigate the farming villages that
surround Leh. His invention is a way to compensate for the area's
fluctuating water levels, but it's no replacement for glacial ice,
which locals say is vanishing. "I have seen glaciers disappear in
my own life," says Norphel. "I don't need the scientific
data. I am the scientific data."
The ice loss is visible elsewhere too, including on the world's
tallest mountain, in neighboring Nepal. The famous Khumbu glacier,
near the end of the trail to the base camp for Mount Everest, has
receded 5 km since Tenzing Norgay and Edmund Hillary first ascended
the peak in 1953. Sherpas who guide climbers up the mountain today say
the trekking has gotten more treacherous and the trail harder to
predict as warming has stolen the ice. More dangerous are the risks of
bursting glacial lakes and flash flooding because of glaciers weakened
by warming. The early stages of Himalayan melt will result in an
increase of water flow and pressure within glaciers; when glaciers
give way, releasing hundreds of thousands of gallons of water per
second, entire villages could be wiped out in an instant, as happened
at the glacial lake of Dig Tsho in 1985. "This threat is not
theoretical for us," says Dawa Sherpa, a veteran Everest trekking
guide. "This is real, and it will happen more and more. We don't
see a very bright future."
In Nepal it's easy
to gauge the threat of warming, where the vanishing glaciers can be
seen with one's own eyes. But downstream, in the farmland and cities
of India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and China, the consequences are both
more dire and less evident. According to the estimate of an Indian
researcher, melt from the glaciers of the Himalayas supplies the
rivers of Asia with more than 300 million cu. ft. of water every year
- as much as 50% of the water flow of some major rivers (like the
Indus, which irrigates India and Pakistan), according to the
International Center for Integrated Mountain Development, an advocacy
group based in Kathmandu, Nepal. Although more-rapid melting from
warming would increase that water flow in the short term, potentially
aiding agriculture, it would be like making ever larger withdrawals
out of a limited bank account: eventually it will run dry. Given how
fickle the monsoon can be - and the additional risk of climate
change weakening those vital rains - the water tower of the
Himalayas becomes all the more important. "It is the ice melt
from these glaciers that sustains irrigation," says Lester Brown,
president of the Earth Policy Institute. "The melting of these
glaciers is the most massive threat to food security that we have ever
projected."
It is also a
threat to global security. In developing nations such as China and
India, growing prosperity means ever greater demand for - and
potential battles over - water. For countries that have long
grappled with famine, that's a frightening possibility and one that
could trigger international conflict. The rivers of the Himalayas
crisscross international borders, while the mountains are shared by
several nations. Already China has come under fire from its neighbors
for damming rivers that eventually flow into other nations. And while
security experts point out that cross-border conflict over water has
been relatively rare - even India and Pakistan have so far managed
to share the Indus - water scarcity has frequently led to internal
civil conflict. In a water-stressed region with nuclear capabilities,
it could be disastrous to let the most valuable commodity become rarer
still. "Climate change is a real specter that we don't fully
understand yet," says the IWMI's Chartres. "The impacts
already seem to be stronger than we expected, and we could have real
difficulties in the developing world."
The Search
for Science
The trouble is that while melting glaciers remain a leading indicator
of climate change, determining exactly how quickly they're melting has
been difficult, especially in the remote Himalayas. Data on the ground
remain thin, and records may go back only a few decades or are all but
nonexistent in the case of many glaciers. Nor does it help that the
nations that share the Himalayas do so jealously. India does not allow
Chinese researchers to visit its glaciers, China is sensitive because
of concerns over Tibet, and India and Pakistan cooperate little on
science or almost anything else.
There is,
unsurprisingly, active scientific disagreement about the impact of
climate change on the glaciers. An Indian-government-backed report
published in October claimed that many Indian glaciers are stable or
that the rate of retreat has slowed in recent years, despite clear
warming. Critics pointed out that the report was not peer-reviewed in
a scientific journal and had major data gaps. But the lack of clarity
makes it that much more difficult for policymakers to craft the right
response. "The Himalayan data just isn't there," says
Richard Armstrong, a senior research scientist at the National Snow
and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo., who is skeptical that the
glaciers are receding rapidly. "These glaciers are at a very high
altitude, and what precipitation they get tends to fall as snow, which
can add to their mass. There's a tendency to
oversimplify."
What's needed is
cold, hard data in a cold, hard place. That's what Syed Iqbal Hasnain
is after. A senior fellow at the Energy and Resources Institute in New
Delhi, he began his career as a hydrologist before switching to the
more demanding field of glaciology. For years he and a small band of
students have climbed Himalayan glaciers, like the East Rathong,
measuring them and tracking their changes. It's hard and expensive
work - "not something Indian youth prefer as a profession,"
he says with a chuckle - but he's managed to add to the small body
of scientific literature on Himalayan ice. Now he's embarking on a
joint project with the eminent climatologist V. Ramanathan of the
Scripps Institute of Oceanography and Eric Wilcox, an atmospheric
scientist at NASA, to determine exactly how quickly some benchmark
glaciers in the Indian Himalayas are melting. Hasnain's team will do
the fieldwork, driving stakes with global-positioning-system
capability into glaciers to let the researchers know year by year how
the ice is changing. NASA will be able to augment that research with
satellite data. The team will also test Ramanathan's hypothesis that
black carbon - the heavy black soot from diesel combustion and
wood-burning that pollutes local air - could play a large part in
the melting of the Himalayas in addition to more traditional
greenhouse gases. "Putting all this together, we can begin to get
a reasonable estimate of the regional melt," says
An Agenda for
Copenhagen
For Hasnain, who has devoted his career to studying the dynamics of
Himalayan ice, establishing a firm benchmark will help clear up the
uncertainty that still clouds the subject. But he has little doubt
that the glaciers are melting fast, and he knows saving them will be
vital for India, as well as the rest of Asia and the world. That will
mean reducing carbon emissions. "The debate is over," he
says. "We know the science. We see the threat. The time for
action is now."
The place for
action will be Copenhagen, the Danish capital, where diplomats from
will meet from Dec. 7 to Dec. 18 to discuss a new global climate
treaty. With the Kyoto Protocol - a flawed deal that the U.S.
repudiated and places few demands on major developing nations - set
to expire in 2012, time is running out to approve a more effective and
equitable agreement, one that could put the world on the path to a
safer future in which water will be more plentiful and damaging storms
and other natural disasters less frequent. Global CO2 emissions rose 31%
from 1997 to 2008, and emissions from China alone, now the world's
biggest emitter, have more than doubled. Instead of leveling off, as
many skeptics have argued, the observed effects of climate change,
including glacial melt and species loss, have largely accelerated
since 1997. "Global warming hasn't paused or declined or
reversed," says Eric Steig, a climatologist at the University of
Washington and a co-author of a just-released climate science update.
"There is the possibility that the climate system could continue
to warm to the highest end of the envelope of climate
projections."
But turning back
the momentum of climate change will be a momentous undertaking. A 2008
study by Ramanathan concluded that even if we halt the growth of
greenhouse gas emissions immediately, we're committed to 4.3F of
warming over the next several decades. While the global community,
including the G-8 in a statement last year, has agreed not to allow
the global temperature to rise more than 3.6F above preindustrial
levels, we're already at 1.37F.
The longer we wait
to change, the more carbon we add to the atmosphere and the greater
the chance that we'll be locking ourselves into truly catastrophic
warming. At Copenhagen and beyond, the mission to halt climate change
must be led by the U.S. - though the major developing nations that
will be responsible for most of the world's carbon emissions must
follow closely. "This isn't an environmental problem. It's a
humanitarian problem global in scope," says Frances Beinecke,
president of the environmental-advocacy group Natural Resources
Defense Council. "The longer we wait to act, the more expensive
those changes will be."
If that's not
enough, there are any number of other reasons to cut carbon: to create
clean-energy jobs, to break our dependence on foreign oil, to cut
pollution, to save money through energy efficiency. But ultimately we
need to act because if we fail to do so, the science tells us that we
are committing ourselves to an unstable and dangerous world in which
geographic, economic and national security - not to mention the
health of all earth's species - may be at stake. There are glimpses
of that different world in the Himalayas, where warming has happened
faster than elsewhere on the planet, where a mountain as immutable as
Everest is changing before our eyes. "To me, continuing down our
path is akin to committing suicide," says Ramanathan. "But
for my granddaughter, I'm optimistic that we're going to solve these
problems." If we don't act today, we will fail to safeguard
tomorrow for everyone's children.