English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

The more accurate estimates project a gloomier global warming scenario, says new study

Published

on

The more accurate estimates project a gloomier global warming scenario, says new study

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Global temperatures are likely to rise by 4C, drowning islands, worsening water scarcity and creating prolonged heat waves

The gloomier the prediction, the more realistic it is – that is the conclusion of a new study on climate change models to assess future warming of the planet.

The findings, published Wednesday in the journal Nature, suggest that the target to keep global temperatures from rising by two degrees Celsius (over pre-industrial era, before 1850 CE), reiterated in Paris Climate Agreement, may be too optimistic and ambitious as it relies on projections that underestimate how much the planet will warm and, by extension, underestimate the cuts in greenhouse gas emissions needed to stave off catastrophic impacts of climate change.

The study, by Patrick Brown and Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California, examined climate change simulations, or “models,” that researchers use to project the future of the planet based on the physical equations that govern the behaviour of the atmosphere and oceans.

Co-author of the study Patrick Brown said, “We find that the models that do the best at simulating the recent past project more warming.”

“Our study indicates that if emissions follow a commonly used business-as-usual scenario, there is a 93 per cent chance that global warming will exceed 4C by the end of this century,” said Dr Ken Caldeira, who co-authored the new study.

This is a marked increase in probability of such warming over past estimates, which placed it at 62 per cent.

A warming of 4C would have severe impacts, drowning small islands, eliminating coral reefs, exacerbating water scarcity, loss of biodiversity and creating prolonged heat waves around the world, scientists say.

The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) puts the top range for warming between 3.2C to 5.9C by 2100, giving equal weightage to about three dozen models used by researchers to understand global warming and its impacts.

Climate models are tools for scientists attempting to understand the impacts of greenhouse-gas emissions. They are constructed using fundamental knowledge of physics and the world’s climate. But, given the complexity of the climate system, there is disagreement about how best to model key aspects of it and scientists have produced dozens of climate models predicting a range of different global warming outcomes resulting from greenhouse-gas emissions.

Climate change deniers and opponents of carbon regulation have used these differences in projections to label the models unreliable, inaccurate or just plain wrong.

Patrick Brown and Ken Caldeira looked for a way to narrow the uncertainty by determining which models were better. To do this, they looked at the models that were best at simulating climate patterns in the recent past – that is, they saw how the models predicted recent climate conditions and compared that to what actually happened.

“It makes sense that the models that do the best job at simulating today’s observations might be the models with the most reliable predictions,” said Dr Caldeira.

“The IPCC uses a model democracy—one model, one vote—and that’s what they’re saying is the range,” Brown explained. “We’re saying we can do one better. We can try to discriminate between well- and poor-performing models. We’re narrowing the range of uncertainty.”

“… if you take the best models, those are the ones projecting the most warming in the future,” he said.

In a worst-case scenario, the study finds that global temperatures could rise 15 percent more than projected by the IPCC – 0.5C more in the 3.2C-5.9C range – by the end of this century.

The research by Dr Brown and Dr Caldeira focuses specifically on models of energy flow from Earth to space, of the balance of incoming and outgoing radiation that ultimately determines the Earth’s temperature, as measured by satellites. They found the models that do the best job capturing the Earth’s actual “energy imbalance,” as the authors put it, are also the ones that simulate more warming in the planet’s future.

They suggest that the amount of sunlight reflected away from the planet by clouds will decrease as the world gets warmer, increasing the magnitude of climate change.

While the findings were appreciated by scientists, they also raised a point of caution. “This is only one line of evidence. Other lines of evidence based on the historically observed warming suggest the simulations with slightly cooler projections may fit best. We need to consider all the lines of evidence before we jump to conclusions,” Professor Piers Forster, a climate-change specialist at the University of Leeds who was not involved in the study told ‘Independent’.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Latest world news

Trump says Iran getting more serious in talks, no decision yet on major strikes

Donald Trump says Iran is becoming more serious in negotiations with the US but insists no decision has been taken on launching major military strikes against Tehran.

Published

on

Donald Trump

US President Donald Trump has said he has not yet decided whether to authorise major military strikes against Iran, stating that Tehran has become “more serious” in its negotiations with Washington even as tensions between the two countries remain high.

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office on Friday, Trump said discussions with Iran were continuing and suggested diplomatic efforts were showing signs of progress.

“We’re talking to them right now. I think they’re getting more and more serious as the days go by,” Trump said, adding that no final decision had been taken on launching military action.

Trump says diplomacy remains an option

Trump said the United States remained prepared for military action if required but indicated that ongoing talks could still lead to an agreement.

“We’re locked and loaded and ready to go. But we’re talking to them, so I think while we’re talking, we’ll see what comes of it. I believe they’re very serious. They should be,” he said.

The US President also warned that Iran would face a “much higher level” of strikes if negotiations failed, while reiterating that preventing Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon remained his key red line.

The United States has said its military operations are aimed at preventing Iran from closing the strategically important Strait of Hormuz. Iran, meanwhile, has carried out retaliatory strikes on US bases, with four American service members reported killed.

Reports claim Trump discussed large-scale military operation

Trump’s remarks came after media reports suggested he met senior advisers to discuss the possibility of a large-scale military operation against Iran. Another report said he was considering a “massive attack”, although Trump did not confirm those reports during his interaction with journalists.

He also acknowledged that the prolonged conflict, which he had earlier expected to last only a few weeks, was approaching its fifth month and had become a political challenge ahead of the US midterm elections scheduled for November.

Trump issues warning over support for Iran

Trump also addressed reports claiming that Russia and China were providing intelligence or military support to Iran. He said both Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin had assured him they would not arm Tehran.

“I think they wouldn’t want to have me disappointed,” Trump said.

In a separate post on his Truth Social platform, Trump warned Moscow and Beijing against supplying weapons to Iran, saying such a move would not be in their interests.

He further stated that Xi had assured him during their meeting in Beijing in May that China would not provide weapons to Iran, while Putin had conveyed a similar position despite the ongoing war in Ukraine.

Continue Reading

India News

For second time, US strikes ship with Indian crew near Strait of Hormuz

Published

on

By

Strait of Hormuz

The United States Central Command (CENTCOM) has said that an oil tanker carrying Indian crew was drifting with its engine switched off near the Strait of Hormuz before it was struck by US forces.

A CENTCOM spokesperson said the vessel had stopped due to engine failure and was drifting after its crew repeatedly sought additional time to carry out repairs. US officials said the tanker was struck only after it failed to comply with directives issued by US forces enforcing a blockade on vessels allegedly transporting Iranian oil. The military said the strike was aimed at disabling the ship by targeting its engine room rather than sinking it.

The incident involved a tanker carrying Indian seafarers near the Gulf of Oman, close to the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s busiest maritime trade routes. The strike triggered a fire onboard, prompting rescue efforts by Omani authorities and maritime agencies. Indian authorities closely monitored the situation and coordinated with local officials regarding the welfare of the crew members.

The incident has drawn concern in India, with the government emphasising the safety of Indian nationals working aboard commercial vessels in the conflict-hit region. The Ministry of External Affairs has remained in touch with the authorities concerned as tensions between the United States and Iran continue to pose risks to international shipping.

In June, three Indian sailors were killed in a US strike on another oil tanker. The Strait of Hormuz handles a significant share of the word’s oil trade, and the latest incident has renewed concerns over the security of merchant vessels operating in the region. Maritime experts have warned that escalating hostilities could further disrupt commercial shipping and endanger civilian crews navigating one of the world’s most strategically important waterways.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Trump announces phased tariff of up to 200% on generic drug imports, India may face impact

US President Donald Trump has announced a phased tariff plan on imported generic medicines, raising duties to 200% after three years, a move that could affect India’s pharmaceutical exports.

Published

on

Donald Trump

The United States has announced a phased tariff plan for imported generic medicines that could have implications for pharmaceutical exporters, including India. US President Donald Trump said the policy is intended to encourage companies to shift generic drug manufacturing to the United States by imposing steep tariffs after a two-year transition period.

The announcement is particularly important for India, one of the world’s largest suppliers of affordable generic medicines and a major exporter to the US market.

Trump outlines phased tariff plan

In a post on his Truth Social platform, President Trump said the new policy will take effect from August 1, 2026. Under the plan, imported generic medicines will continue to attract zero tariffs for the first two years.

Beginning in the third year, the tariff will increase to 100%, before rising further to 200% thereafter.

Trump said the measure is designed to encourage pharmaceutical companies to establish manufacturing facilities in the United States instead of relying on imports.

He added that companies choosing not to invest in US-based production during the transition period would face the higher tariff rates. According to Trump, the existing policy governing patented, branded and innovative medicines will remain unchanged.

Why India could be affected

India is widely regarded as the “pharmacy of the world” because of its large-scale production and export of generic medicines.

Indian generic drugs account for nearly 40% of the US generic medicine market by volume. According to a Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) report, India exported pharmaceutical products worth USD 9.7 billion to the United States during the 2024-25 financial year, representing around 38% of the country’s total pharmaceutical exports of USD 25.8 billion.

However, the immediate impact of the newly announced tariff policy on Indian pharmaceutical companies remains uncertain.

Existing trade agreement and industry concerns

India and the United States struck a trade pact in February that states India would receive negotiated outcomes regarding generic pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients.

Despite that provision, previous tariff threats by Trump had already raised concerns within the pharmaceutical industry over the future of affordable medicine exports from India.

Indian pharmaceutical companies supply a wide range of generic medicines used to treat conditions including hypertension, diabetes, depression, cancer, infectious diseases and mental health disorders.

According to a Financial Post report cited in the source material, around 65% of birth control pill prescriptions in the United States during 2024 were manufactured by two India-based companies — Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and Lupin Ltd.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com