EcoRadio

Category: Archive

Archived material from historical editions of The Generator

  • Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change

    The big news this week is the release of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. This report goes into the drastic effects of increased temperatures due to climate change on Australia. To read the review and access Sir Nicholas Stern’s presentation and speaking notes, click here.

    This is what the newspapers are saying:

    Analysts sceptical about report’s impact in US

    Julian Borger in Washington
    Monday October 30, 2006 

    Guardian Unlimited The news that Sir Nicholas Stern would be coming to the US to promote the recommendations of his global warming study was welcomed by environmentalists yesterday but there was widespread scepticism that it would contribute to a change of policy while George Bush is in office.
    The White House issued a non-committal statement welcoming the Stern review as a contribution to the body of knowledge on climate changing, but did not address its calls for fundamental change in policy. "The president has long recognised that climate change is a serious issue. He has committed the nation to investing in new technologies," it said.
    After initially expressing doubts, the Bush administration now accepts that industrial emissions are contributing to climate change, but it remains opposed to mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions and the sort of carbon trading scheme outlined in the Stern report. The White House argues that such measures would impose crippling costs on the US economy, in return for uncertain gains. "

    A new Kyoto but let’s not exaggerate: PM

    Phillip Coorey and Stephanie Peatling
    November 1, 2006

    The Sydney Morning Herald   JOHN HOWARD will announce today $60 million in spending on 42 projects aimed at reducing greenhouse gases as he seeks to combat Labor accusations that the Government has dragged its feet on global warming.
    Climate change leapt to the top of the political agenda yesterday after the release of an alarming report by a former World Bank economist, Sir Nicholas Stern, warning of global economic depression should the problem not be dealt with within 10 years.
    As the Prime Minister warned his back bench not to be "mesmerised" by the report, the Opposition Leader, Kim Beazley, accused the Government of not being fair dinkum.

    Stern report a call to action: Greens

    Oct 31, 2006 

    TVNZ.CO.NZ The Greens are hoping the Stern report on climate change will light a fuse under New Zealand’s politicians.

    Pay now or pay much more later to avoid the economic costs of global warming is the stark warning in the much-heralded report from former World Bank economist Sir Nicholas Stern. He says rising temperatures could shrink the world economy by 20%. However, the economist says immediate action will cost just 1% of global GDP.
    Stern says we know enough now to be aware of the magnitude of the risks, and how to act effectively. He says there is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, if we act now and act internationally.

    Stern report on climate change costs

    28 Oct 2006 20:04:59 GMT
    Source: Reuters

    LONDON, Oct 28 (Reuters) – Ignoring climate change could lead to economic upheaval on the scale of the 1930s Depression, underlining the need for urgent action to combat global warming, a British report on the costs of climate change said.

    For highlights of the report, a summary of which was obtained by Reuters, click here .

     

     

  • DU Death Toll Tops 11,000

    This view was expressed by Arthur Bernklau, executive director of Veterans for Constitutional Law in New York, writing in Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter.

    “The real reason for Mr. Principi’s departure was really never given,” Bernklau said. “However, a special report published by eminent scientist Leuren Moret naming depleted uranium as the definitive cause of ‘Gulf War Syndrome’ has fed a growing scandal about the continued use of uranium
    munitions by the U.S. military.”

    The “malady [from DU] that thousands of our military have suffered and died from has finally been identified as the cause of this sickness, eliminating the guessing. . . . The terrible truth is now being revealed,” Bernklau said.

    Of the 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I, 11,000 are now dead, he said. By the year 2000, there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability. More than a decade later, more than half (56 percent) who served in Gulf War I have permanent medical problems. The disability rate for veterans of the world wars of the last century was 5 percent, rising to 10 percent in Vietnam.

    “The VA secretary was aware of this fact as far back as 2000,” Bernklau said. “He and the Bush administration have been hiding these facts, but now, thanks to Moret’s report, it is far too big to hide or to cover up.”

    Terry Johnson, public affairs specialist at the VA, recently reported that veterans of both Persian Gulf wars now on disability total 518,739, Bernklau said.

    “The long-term effect of DU is a virtual death sentence,” Bernklau said. “Marion Fulk, a nuclear chemist, who retired from the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab, and was also involved in the Manhattan Project, interprets the new and rapid malignancies in the soldiers [from the second war] as ‘spectacular’­and a matter of concern.’ ”

    While this important story appeared in a Washington newspaper and the wire services, it did not receive national exposure­a compelling sign that the American public is being kept in the dark about the terrible effects of this toxic weapon. (Veterans for Constitutional Law can be reached at (516) 474-4261.)
     

    Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute – as long as full credit is given to American Free Press – 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003

  • Finally, Minister gives green light to test electric car

    At last, the Federal Government says a trial all-electric car may have a future in Australia, if its importers allow it to undergo rigorous testing.

    The Adelaide importer of the Indian Reva car says it may have to be crushed at the end of the week when its year-long licence expires, because it does not have approval to be driven on local roads.

    The federal Roads Minister, Jim Lloyd, says such drastic action might not be necessary.

    "You know we’re talking to them at the moment in being able to take the vehicle off their hands and actually let it undergo the full ADR (Australian Design Rules) testing," he said.

    "So once and for all we can know whether it will meet the standards.

    "If it meets the standards, well then, we can go forward on it, if it doesn’t well then it won’t be on Australian roads."

    The Reva, designed and manufactured in India, has been on Indian roads since 2001 and is exported internationally. For the Indian market, the Government offers a generous subsidy to public institutions such as educational institutions, government and public sector organisations, hospitals and for the tourism industry.

    Considering Australians dependence on motor vehicles and high national greenhouse gas emissions output, it is reasonable to ask Mr Lloyd why he has not moved more quickly to have the Reva undergo a full ADR. After all, the importer has been pushing for this for over 12 months.

  • NSW law to prevent climate change action

    • Part 3A already gives the Planning Minister a disturbing degree of discretionary power, and removes many avenues for legal challenge of the Minister’s decisions. These amendments will completely remove the requirement for proponents to even assess the development’s impacts.
    • This will affect projects far beyond Anvil Hill, and will remove the need for any Part 3A project to thoroughly assess environmental impacts.
    • The Government is facing a legal challenge regarding the Anvil Hill coal mine proposal. The challenge seeks to ensure that the climate change impacts on the environment and community of NSW are fully assessed.
    • Frank Sartor introduced the amendments this week, claiming that they were “housekeeping measures” but they will nullify the court challenge by removing the requirement for the Minister to consider any environmental assessment.
    Will it affect projects beyond Anvil Hill?
    The amendments will affect all Major Projects.
    • Specific transitional arrangements in the amending Bill ensure that all projects that have approval pending will be affected by these changes. That means Anvil Hill, and dozens of other Major Projects, and if passed it will affect all developments declared as Major Projects from now on.
    • In order to avoid assessing the full impacts of Anvil Hill, the Government is winding back 25 years of planning law, and is disregarding the public interest, and even public safety.
    • Companies undertaking Major Projects, like chemical plants or mines, are currently required to undertake assessment within parameters set out by the Government.
    • Following these changes, they will be able to write Environmental Assessments, if they write them at all, that do not discuss dangerous or destructive impacts of their project.
    • This means that the public and the Government will be in the dark, and will not have the opportunity to avoid the worst impacts of Major Projects.
    • This might expose NSW to serious risk of damage inflicted by private companies, for which the Government will be liable, because they will have abrogated their responsibility to assess the environmental impacts of the project.
    What should we do about it?
    You can click this link to send an email to every member of NSW parliament
    http://anvilhill.org.au/letter_writing_guide_p3aleg.php#emailform
    Plus: Write immediately to the Premier, and copy your letter to the press.
    Tell Morris Iemma that:
    • I am disgusted that the Government is seeking to hide and evade true environmental impacts of coal mining and other destructive industries in NSW through the Environmental Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2006
    • I am concerned that these amendments will allow private companies to hide the potentially destructive impacts of Major Projects, exposing the public to danger and the Government to litigation.
    • I call on you to sack your Planning Minister, Frank Sartor for misleading the parliament and the public by understating the intent and the substance of these amendments
    Background:
    The amendment that will excuse companies from conducting adequate environmental assessment will change section 75J of the EP&A Act. The Act currently says:
    75J Giving of approval by Minister to carry out project
    (1) If:
    (a) the proponent has duly applied to the Minister for approval under this Part to carry out a project, and
    (b) the environmental assessment requirements under this Division with respect to the project have been complied with,
    the Minister may approve or disapprove of the carrying out of the project.
    The amendments will change this section:
    [6] Omit section 75J (1) (a) and (b). Insert instead:
    (a) the proponent makes an application for the approval of the Minister under this Part to carry out a project, and
    (b) the Director-General has given his or her report on the project to the Minister,
    The Government has ensured through Savings and Transitional Arrangements for the Bill, that the amendments will apply to all projects for which approval is pending. This includes the Anvil Hill coal mine proposal, as well as the new Coal Exporting Terminal at Newcastle Harbour, the controversial Moolarben Coal Project and many others.
    To find out about Anvil hill, and the battle to save it, visit www.anvilhill.org.au
    For background information about the impacts of the export coal industry www.risingtide.org.au
    See the Environmental Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2006 at http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/NSWBills.nsf/0/5250B708FEE10903CA257211001D24E9
    For further help, contact the Hunter Community Environment Centre: ph. 49261641 or visit www.hcec.org.au

  • Sates follow SA’s lead refundable drink containers

    SA Premier Mike Rann called for public comment on plans to increase container deposit levies to 10c or 20c – up from the 5c levy introduced in 1975, reported The Australian (27 October 2006 p7).

    Big savings on aluminium: Environment Minister Gail Gago said recycling helped reduce greenhouse gasses. "The savings on the current levels of aluminium-can recycling at present is the equivalent to removing about 2500 cars off our roads, it’s about 20-odd thousand barrels of oil," she said.

    Vic Opposition keen on deposit system: In Victoria, Liberal leader Ted Baillieu has pledged, if elected, to impose a 5c levy on drinks sold in aluminium cans, plastic and glass bottles, refundable once containers are handed in.

    WA and Tas looking at collecting their empties too: The Western Australian and Tasmanian governments are also considering implementing container deposit schemes.

    The Australian, 27/10/2006, p.7

    Source: Erisk Net 

  • Melbourne set for driest October since 1914

    Melbourne is set to record its driest October since 1914, a year in which there was a disastrous drought and a national wheat crop failure, reported The Age (30/10/2006, p.3).

    Pattern similar to 92 years ago: The drought of 1914-15, which resulted in record low rain in large areas of southern Australia, coincided, like the droughts of 1937-45, with Australian involvement in a world war. Only 7.5 millimetres fell in October 1914 – so far this month there have been 8.8 millimetres with only a few showers forecast for today and tomorrow. The average rain for the month is 67 millimetres.

    El Nino behind 1914 crisis: A strong El Nino – a warm ocean current off South America that causes major temperature changes – is believed to have been the reason for the severe conditions in 1914. The year started hot and Victoria had widespread bushfires in February and March which destroyed more than 100,000 hectares. Good rain brought relief in March and April, but extremely dry conditions prevailed for the rest of the year.

    October records still stand: The months from May to October 1914 have been recorded as the driest for many areas of south-eastern Australia. Melbourne’s lowest October rain and hottest October day were in 1914 – 7.5 millimetres and 36.9 degrees, respectively.

    Murray flow fell to 2pc: By the end of the month, the national wheat crop, then harvested mainly in the southern states, was a total failure. Rivers fell to low levels and millions of sheep, horses and cattle were moved by rail to places where feed was available. The Murray River at Echuca fell to 2 per cent of its normal flow by December and downstream of Swan Hill the river was reduced to a series of stagnant pools.

    The Age, 30/10/2006, p.3

    Source: Erisk Net