The end of Bangalore

What I was afraid of has finally happened. As part of a patriotic and anti-colonial posturing by the oh-so humble Indian politicians, another city (my old city) has lost its identity. Bangalore has been renamed Bengaluroo. Hmm ... doesn't that sound like the capital of West Bengal?



Bangalore was a name which I loved because it packed a phonetic bang. "Bang-a-lore" I would sing riding around on my trusty motorcycle. When I first arrived in Bangalore, the head of the state goverment was Chief Minister Bangarappa (Bang-a-rapper?). I got my college degree from 'Bangalore University' a name that's known internationally. Believe it or not, Bangalore is an globally recognized (pronounce-able) brand associated with the information technology revolution of India. Due to its loss, the city will take a hit.

      

It's even funny to know what Bengaluroo may actually mean. There's a popular story that a king from the Hoysala dynasty, while on a hunting expedition, stopped for a meal break and was fed boiled beans by a kindly old lady, and thus he named the old hamlet after that dish - benda kala ooru (in Kannada), the village of boiled beans. However some historians seek to console us that it's not true and that the name actually derives from some specimen of flora.

Indian cartographers have been tearing out their hair vigorously for the past decade or so. Trivandrum became Thiruvananthapuram (even Indians have problems saying that out loud). Bombay (now, did't that sound explosive) became an uninspiring Mumbai. Madras became Chennai (which sounds like another food item). Calcutta became Kolkata (in Hindi that would sound like 'I bit [something] yesterday'). And I haven't even started discussing individual street names yet.

"But it's all the Britisher's fault", protests the Indian politician, "because they couldn't pronounce the Indian dialect, they twisted it into a English sounding word". Granted, but that does not mean that you are doing anyone favours by renaming these cities 40 years after Independence. When the true generation of Indian freedom fighter did not have any problem with these names, why do you?

These names have become identities or brands in their own right, with long histories. A Bombay or Madras does not get located in Britain because of its name. There are no other places in the world with theses names. These names also belonged to India, in fact the India of your fathers and grandfathers. Bangalore had been named thus since 1537.

The politician thinks he or she can go down in history as the person who got the city's name changed. Let me tell you - history doesn't care. In another 100 years your contributions will be judged on other criteria. And what would happen if other politicians got the same idea? Even worse, what would happen if the latest pundit, numerologist, psychic or guru-ji decided that the current name is 'cursed with bad luck'? Well, we'll go skipping along singing another name-changing tune.

See also article in the Economist

Review: An Inconvenient Truth

I rate it a full '5 stars'. If you can see it, see it on a big screen, that's where the scale of the presentations make an impression. I went with my wife today, on a Saturday morning, and found the cinema empty. It was a fun exclusive screening.

Though many of the facts are popularly known, this movie meets the challenge of presenting these in their true context while making an impact. Along the way, Al Gore explains his life-long involvement in the issue, and that this is not a new fad that he has picked up. Examples of worldwide glacier reduction and desertification are very shocking. Many areas neglected in the popular media, show some of the most disturbing illustrations.

This movie may have an effect where everything else seems to have failed - changing the perception of the US public. Most of them don't really care, think that environment concerns are questionable, don't affect them, or is just another way to spoil their economy. Strangest of all the US administration seems to agree with this. Perhaps its just that US government is heavily swayed by mercantile lobby. The movie does acknowledges that US accounts for more carbon dioxide emissions than most of the earth's continent combined. The refusal to ratify the Kyoto protocol is highlighted. It is also noted that some states of the US are disagreeing with the central administration and trying to pass smarter emission regulations. Most of the states shown seemed to be democratic.

But its more than that - Asia is rising and following on the same paths that developed countries have. With all the talk of leapfrogging technology era's, perhaps Asia can leapfrog over the industrial irresponsible practices and be more environment friendly. Japan is shown to have the worlds best car emission regulations. In New Delhi, the public transport system buses and autorickshaws have been converted to Natural Gas engines, perceptibly improving the air quality of the city.

The Environment and Resources: A Bonfire of Insanities

With India and China joining the fray in rapid industrialisation, and with their increasingly affluent populations being able to afford more consumption, the pressure on the earth's resources is higher than ever.

And meanwhile the amount of greenhouse carbon dioxide gas being released into the air is increasing.

Dr. Carl Sagan once remarked, a couple of decades ago, in the series 'Cosmos' that we have an example of an extreme greenhouse effect planet in our solar system itself - Venus, the evening star. It is a planet which is a neighbour of Earth, entirely covered in a haze of dense cloud 2 km thick, the top of which is carbon dioxide. On sending probes into the planet's atmosphere, it was discovered that these clouds rain down concentrated sulfuric acid onto the surface. The clouds also trap all the heat coming onto the planet, and the surface temperature stands at 380 degrees celsius (900 degrees fahrenheit). Dr. Sagan remarked that 'Venus is the one place in the Solar System most like hell'.



Responsibility and leadership on environment initiatives is expected from the most developed countries who have contributed the most to this problem. Unfortunately, that is still lacking, in fact it is the less developed countries who are addressing this problem.

The typical model lifestyles marketed by western nations are now known to be unsustainable. If the typical UK household water consumption was mirrored in every other nations, the rivers would have run dry long ago. In India, in many cities municipality water is pumped into houses for only a few hours a day - this is usually collected and stored, and then used carefully for the rest of the day. Naturally, it is not something people are happy with and many of the better-off have installed groundwater pumps to pull up the groundwater for domestic use. As this increases, is it any surprise that groundwater levels are also dropping?

David Suzuki once remarked in an interview "we are all having a big party with the earth, how long will it last?". Carl Sagan said "we are using up the Earth's resources, as if they are only for this generation". Again due to the increasing affluence of world citizens, and their ability to consume more - manufacture has been increased.



The earth was made with all it's riches embedded together. Human civilization is based on the separation of the elements from each other and using each for its unique qualities. But once we have used these, we leave a complete mess, perhaps even more entangled than when we found it. Consider that a used and disposed computer contains a 1000 toxic elements in it, all melded into a tight micro-technology. Recovering the components from our creations is usually more costly than the creation itself.

I took the Karnataka Express in the summer of 2001 from the southern Indian city of Bangalore to the North-Central capital New Delhi. It's the longest passenger train in India going on a 2-day and 2-night train ride. I had a nice window seat where I spent much of my time looking at the landscape outside. I found the state of the land disturbing. During the entire trip, the land looked dry and whatever streams and rivers we crossed were either small trickles or entirely dry. I wondered if the country would one day become a desert.

I recieved a sort of confirmation a few days ago when on TV a panel of experts started discussing the increasing desertification of certain areas. Many of the world's intelligence agencies are reported to be saying that all future wars will be over water. There are worries in India that China is diverting the Brahmaputra river that runs from it into India. Karnataka and Tamil Nadu states routinely enter into dispute over the Cauvery river that they both share, including violent protests by students.

This brings me to 'the good old days', when we weren't really damaging the environment. What were we doing right. First of all, the population today is three times what it was in 1940 - we didn't need so much. Second is that the technology of that time didn't have the range of materials we have now. Third, is that we couldn't exploit the world at the scale that we have perfected at present. Fourth, is that we could't afford so much.

What happens when the resources start running out? Will we go back to the ration-system of war-time, with the government controlling how much we are allowed to consume. Will this require a regression from democratic systems of government.

The environment is who we are and we will be affected in every way from it. I don't think we can afford space suits for each of us to live on earth.