EcoRadio

Category: Climate chaos

The atmosphere is to the earth as a layer of varnish is to a desktop globe. It is thin, fragile and essential for preserving the items on the surface.150 years of burning fossil fuel have overloaded the atmosphere to the point where the earth is ill. It now has a fever. Read the detailed article, Soothing Gaia’s Fever for an evocative account of that analogy. The items listed here detail progress on coordinating 6.5 billion people in the most critical project undertaken by humanity. 

  • Beachfront residents on own against sea rise

     

    Signalling the scale of future problems along the coastline from rising sea levels, Ms Tebbutt told Cr Hogan the Government would give priority to protecting public works and public safety, not private property.

    “Given the expected magnitude of requests for funding, government financial assistance to councils is unlikely to extend to protecting or purchasing all properties at risk from coastal hazards and sea-level rise,” Ms Tebbutt said.

    A senior official in her department, Simon Smith, bluntly told a federal parliamentary committee recently: “I do not think that many people have realised how significant it is and how much valuable land and property is going to be affected.”

    He also said: “The state’s view is that the risk to a property from sea-level rise lies with the property owner, public or private – or, whoever owns the land takes the risk. They gain the benefit of proximity to the ocean and they bear the risk of proximity to the ocean.”

    The NSW plan is being developed as scientists and councils warn that sea-level rise from climate change will greatly increase the number of beachfront homes at risk of inundation in coming decades, affecting some of the most expensive property in the country.

    Geoff Withycombe, of the Sydney Coastal Councils Group, said: “Coastal property values at present do not reflect their potential risk.” His organisation has has warned of a “black cloud of liability” hanging over councils.

    Yesterday some of Australia’s leading Antarctic climate scientists delivered a fresh warning to the Federal Government that “sea-level rise with associated effects, such as increased frequency of severe storm surges, will be one of the greatest impacts of a warming world on human societies”.

    The NSW Government released a draft policy statement on sea-level rise in February but councils and coastal property owners are only now realising its implications for beachfront properties.

    The policy is based on scientific advice that sea levels are expected to rise up to 0.4 metres by 2050 and up to 0.9 metres by 2100.

    Each centimetre of sea-level rise is expected to cause, on average, a metre of erosion along vulnerable coastlines. Sydney coastal councils were warned this week that the frequency of coastal flooding would increase by a factor of 300 if sea levels rose by half a metre.

    The policy will not be released until September. But residents with properties already threatened by natural or man-made erosion are pressing councils to protect their homes now.

    This week Byron Shire Council was in the Land and Environment Court attempting to prevent a beachfront resident erecting a rock wall to protect his home from erosion allegedly caused by early engineering works.

    The Mayor, Jan Barham, fears residents at risk from sea-level rise caused by climate change will sue councils unless the Government changes its plan.

  • Carbon emissions threaten ‘underwater catastrophe’ , scientist warn

     

    And a separate paper in IOP Publishing’s journal Environmental Research Letters warned that increasing acidity in the seas could damage fish, corals and shellfish – leaving fishing communities facing economic disaster.

    The researchers from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Massachusetts, said emissions from deforestation and burning of fossil fuels had increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere by almost 40% above pre-industrial levels.

    Currently around 30% of the CO2 put into the atmosphere by human activities is absorbed by the oceans where it dissolves, altering the chemistry of the surface sea levels making it more acidic.

    The acidity can damage wildlife, particularly shell-forming creatures and the species that feed on them, with knock-on effects on people who rely on the oceans for food and livelihoods.

    Damage to corals could also reduce the coastal protection from storms that reefs currently provide.

    According to the US researchers, there were almost 13,000 fishermen in the UK in 2007, who harvested £645m of marine products, almost half (43%) of which were shellfish.

    In the US, domestic fisheries provided a primary sale value of $5.1bn (£3.1bn) in 2007, they said.

    The statement from the science academies of 70 countries, warned that despite the seriousness of the problem, there was a danger it could be left off the agenda at Copenhagen.

    The joint statement calls on world leaders to explicitly recognise the dangers posed to the oceans of rising CO2 levels, which it warns are irreversible and could cause severe damage by 2050, or even earlier, if emissions carry on as they are.

    Martin Rees, president of the Royal Society, said the effect of rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere on the oceans had not received much political attention.

    But he said: “Unless global CO2 emissions can be cut by at least 50% by 2050 and more thereafter, we could confront an underwater catastrophe, with irreversible changes in the makeup of our marine biodiversity.

    “The effects will be seen worldwide, threatening food security, reducing coastal protection and damaging the local economies that may be least able to tolerate it.

    “Copenhagen must address this very real and serious threat.”

  • Japan’s 15% target to cut emissions condemned as ‘disaster’

     

    Taro Aso, Japan’s prime minister, announced the target in Tokyo while UN talks on a draft climate agreement are continuing in Bonn. The talks, which finish on Friday, aim to lay foundations for a a meeting in Copenhagen in December when a new global treaty on global warming to succeed the Kyoto protocol will be agreed.

    Observers said Japan’s target was only slightly more ambitious than already required under Kyoto – a cut of 6% on 1990 levels by 2012. Japan’s emissions have actually risen 7% since 1990. Its new 15% reduction commitment uses a 2005 baseline, equating to a 8% cut on 1990 levels by 2020.

    Japan will have to do more to help keep global warming below dangerous levels, said the European environment commissioner Stavros Dimas: “The EU believes that we must be fundamentally guided by science.”

    Japan’s target represents “the weakest target any country has pledged so far”, said Kristian Tangen, at analysts Point Carbon

    The UN climate panel says developed countries should reduce their emissions by 25% to 40% below 1990 levels by 2020 to keep temperature increases to within 2C of pre-industrial temperatures.

    Paul Cook, director of advocacy at development charity Tearfund, said: “This is a disaster. The level of ambition among developed countries is already incredibly weak – way below the 40% emissions reductions needed. . Japan’s decision risks creating a race to the bottom among other developed countries looking for an excuse to evade tough targets.”

    The group said Japan’s decision would make it difficult for EU countries to increase their target of a 20% reduction by 2020 to 30% – which they say they will only do if other developed countries make a similar effort to cut emissions.

    The Obama administration has talked of cutting emissions by 17% on 2005 levels by 2020, about 4% relative to 1990 levels. But the target has yet to be approved and may be weakened to help it pass into law.

    Cook said: “It is difficult to see how a fair, science-based deal can be achieved [at] Copenhagen if developed countries so utterly fail to do what is necessary to prevent a catastrophe for poor people and for the planet. Japan should be condemned for its failure of leadership and ambition.”

    Japan argues its target is ambitious given that its economy is already relatively energy and carbon efficient. It already has made a long-term pledge to cut emissions 60-80% by 2050.

    Kim Carstensen of WWF said: “It is true that Japan’s energy efficiency improved in the 1980s, during the oil crisis. Unfortunately, since 1990 most of the sector’s energy efficiency either stagnated or declined.”

    Hidefumi Kurasaka, professor of environmental policies at Chiba University, Japan, said: “The target is not strong enough to convince developing nations to sign up for a new climate change pact. Japan’s population is falling, so that means it has an advantage over the United States. The fact that Japan can commit to only an 8% cut from 1990 levels, even as its population falls, will lead to doubts over its seriousness to fight climate change.”

  • China launches green power revolution to catch up on west

     

    “Similarly, by 2020 the total installed capacity for solar power will be at least three times that of the original target [3GW],” Zhang said in an interview in London. China generates only 120 megawatts of its electricity from solar power, so the goal represents a 75-fold expansion in just over a decade.

    “We are now formulating a plan for development of renewable energy. We can be sure we will exceed the 15% target. We will at least reach 18%. Personally I think we could reach the target of having renewables provide 20% of total energy consumption.”

    That matches the European goal, and would represent a direct challenge to Europe’s claims to world leadership in the field, despite China’s relative poverty. Some experts have cast doubt on whether Britain will be able to reach 20%. On another front, China has the ambitious plan of installing 100m energy-efficient lightbulbs this year alone.

    Beijing seeks to achieve these goals by directing a significant share of China’s $590bn economic stimulus package to low-carbon investment. Of that total, more than $30bn will be spent directly on environmental projects and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

    But the indirect green share in the stimulus, in the form of investment in carbon-efficient transport and electricity transmission systems, would be far larger.

    HSBC Global Research estimated the total green share could be over a third of the total package.

    China also believes the price reforms that will take place in its economic recovery programme will lead to more efficient use of resources and an increased demand for renewable energy.

    “Due to the impact of global financial crisis, people are all talking about green and sustainable development,” Zhang added. “Enterprises and government at all levels are showing more enthusiasm for the development of solar for power generation, and the Chinese government is now considering rolling out more stimulus policies for the development of solar power.”

    He said the government would also plough money into the expansion of solar heating systems. He said the country was already a world leader, with 130m square metres of solar heating arrays already installed, and was planning to invest more. The US goal for solar heating by 2020 is 200m square metres.

    Zhang was speaking in London on a day China came under increased pressure from Washington to do more cut its emissions.

    David Sandalow, the US assistant secretary of energy, said the continuation of business as usual in China would result in a 2.7C rise in temperatures even if every other country slashed greenhouse gas emissions by 80%.

    “China can and will need to do much more if the world is going to have any hope of containing climate change,” said Sandalow, who is in Beijing as part of a senior negotiating team aiming to find common ground ahead of the crucial Copenhagen summit at the end of this year.

    “No effective deal will be possible without the US and China, which together account for almost half of the planet’s carbon emissions.”

    Zhang said China was pursuing “a constructive and a positive role” in negotiations aimed at agreeing a deal in Copenhagen. As part of that agreement, he said developing countries would have to pursue “a sustainable development path”, and said Beijing was open to the idea of limits on the carbon intensity of its economy (the emissions per unit of output).

    “We have taken note of some expert suggestions on carbon intensity with a view to have some quantified targets in this regard. We are carrying out a serious study of those suggestions,” Zhang said.

    Zhang told the all-party parliamentary China group in Westminster yesterday that Beijing’s stimulus package was already showing signs of re-energising the Chinese economy. He said it grew by 6.1% in the first quarter of this year, and growth in the second quarter would be stronger than the first. He predicted that China would meet its target of 8% growth this year.

     

  • The Amazon is dying

     

     

    Cattle ranching is the biggest cause of deforestation, not only in the Amazon, but worldwide. The report reveals that the Brazilian government is a silent partner in these crimes by providing loans to and holding shares in the three biggest players – Bertin, JBS and Marfrig – that are driving expansion into the Amazon rainforest.

    Greenpeace is now about to enter into negotiations with many of the companies that have either found their supply chain and products contaminated with Amazon leather and beef or who are buying from companies implicated in Amazon deforestation – big brands such as Adidas, Clarks, Nike, Timberland and most of the major UK supermarkets. Meanwhile, back in Brazil, the federal prosecutor in Para state has announced legal action against farms and slaughterhouses that have acted outside of the law. It has sent warning letters to Brazilian companies buying and profiting from the destruction. Bertin and JBS are in the firing line – companies part-owned by the Brazilian government.

    While this is a positive step, it’s clear that we can’t bring about real change and win an end to Amazon destruction for cattle without real action from the government and from big corporations in Europe and the US, who are providing the markets.

    Another, worrying example of the widening chasm between rhetoric and reality is a new bill that has just passed through the Brazilian senate. If Lula gives his consent, it will legalise claims to at least 67m hectares of Amazonian land — an area the size of Norway and Germany put together – that is currently held illegally. A second bill, before the Brazilian congress, proposes to more than double the percentage of Amazon rainforest that can be cleared legally within a property. If passed, the effect of both these bills will be to legalise increased deforestation of the Amazon rainforest.

    Lula’s decision to fund the cattle ranching industry with public money makes no sense when its expansion threatens the very deforestation reduction targets that Lula champions. The laws now waiting for his approval will represent a free ride for illegal loggers and cattle ranchers. It is clear that Brazil now faces a choice about what sort of world leader it wants to be – part of the problem or part of the solution.

    Protecting Brazil’s rainforest is a critical part of the battle to tackle climate change and must be part of a global deal to protect forests at the climate change talks in Copenhagen at the end of the year. But while world leaders are making speeches, we are losing vast tracts of rainforest. We must also tackle the dirty industries that are driving deforestation if we are to protect the Amazon and the climate for future generations.

  • Another dry omen: Indian Ocean Dipole shifts the wrong way

    From the Land
    IN ANOTHER sign that more dry weather may be on the way, the Bureau of Meteorology reports that the eastern Indian Ocean is cooling.

    It follows yesterday’s forecast of a return to El Nino conditions later this year.

    The Bureau says that when the waters off Western Australia heat up, evaporation pumps moisture into winds, creating north-western cloud belts that blow from the Kimberley, over Central Australia and into NSW and Victoria, where it falls as rain.

    “You clearly see the clouds on satellite images, looking like a slash of paint across Australia,” Andrew Watkins, a senior climatologist with the National Climate Centre, said yesterday.

    When the eastern Indian Ocean is warmer than the sea off Africa, climatologists give a negative balance rating to a system dubbed the Indian Ocean dipole.

    That is good news for NSW and Victorian farmers seeking rain.

    But when the reverse happens, and the eastern Indian Ocean becomes relatively cooler, evaporation off WA falters and the dipole is rated as positive.

    Yesterday the eastern Indian Ocean’s cooling forced climatologists to rate the dipole balance as plus .6.

    “Plus .4 is where we start thinking something is going on,” said Dr Watkins, adding it was “starting to get significant.

    “Over the past month we have been starting to see the imbalance rise.”

    Such imbalances often signalled drier winters and springs in south-eastern Australia. “Whether [the trend] will be sustained, we don’t know,” Dr Watkins said.