Category: General news

Managing director of Ebono Institute and major sponsor of The Generator, Geoff Ebbs, is running against Kevin Rudd in the seat of Griffith at the next Federal election. By the expression on their faces in this candid shot it looks like a pretty dull campaign. Read on

  • China’s carbon emissions will peak between 2030 and 2040, says minister

     

    Thinktanks, research groups and academics in China have variously estimated that the emissions peak could come between 2020 or 2050, but the government has yet to announce a target.

    Wan narrowed the range considerably by predicting that the peak would definitely come between 2030 and 2040.

    “There are some uncertainties here, so it is difficult to say whether it will be in the beginning, the end or the middle, but I can say for sure it will be within that range,” he said. “As the minister of science and technology I would say the sooner the better.”

    The precise timing, he said, would depend on uncertain factors such as the pace of China’s economic growth, rate of urbanisation and level of scientific development. But he added that the earlier date in the range would be possible if China continued to invest in renewable energy, improved energy efficiency, commercialised carbon capture technology and changed consumer behaviour.

    Wan, a non-Communist member of the state council, said China has proved its ability to meet and often exceed its targets in the current five-year plan to improve energy efficiency by about 20%. His ministry has already exceeded by 30% its goal during this period of investing 10bn yuan to reduce emissions and deal with the consequences of climate change.

    Jim Watson, of the Tyndall Centre at the University of Sussex, said: “I think this range makes it difficult for China to make a full contribution to keeping the rise in global temperatures below two degrees. That would be more compatible with a peak within 2020 to 2030. But it is very significant that the minister is willing to talk of a peak, even a range, at this stage.”

    Environmental groups gave a cautious welcome to the figure, but said China could be more ambitious if rich nations provide technology and finance. “This is a good thing. This is the first time that a ministerial-level official has confirmed the peak range,” said Yang Ailun of Greenpeace. “If China really makes climate change a priority, they could peak by 2030. And if they get support from developed countries, they could do it even faster.”

    An agreement to transfer technology and money from rich to poor nations is one of China’s main goals at the Copenhagen conference. China is keen to get international help to reduce the price of silicon processing for solar panels and to develop ultra-efficient coal gasification plants.It is already collaborating with the UK on a project to capture carbon dioxide. In future, Wan said the country will explore the potential for storage or conversion to algae biofuels.

    “Seventy per cent of our electricity comes from coal,” the minister said. “If we can capture all the CO2 from this, imagine how much emissions we could save. But it is not something we can do in the short term.”

    But most of China’s future emissions savings will come from improved efficiency of power plants, buildings and transport and from nuclear, solar and other forms of renewable energy.

    Last week, the government in Beijing announced its first carbon intensity target, which would slow the increase of emissions relative to economic growth by 40%-45% between 2005 and 2020. Even with this measure, the country’s output of carbon dioxide is expect to increase by about 90% if the economy grows by 8%.

    Although the carbon intensity target is lower than China achieved over the previous 15 years, Wan said it posed an “arduous task” because the government has already picked most of the low-hanging fruit when it came to upgrading inefficient power stations.

    Wan said the priority at Copenhagen would be to establish a framework for transferring funds and money, rather than getting hung up on figures.

    “If we can achieve this goal, that is good enough,” he said. “Copenhagen is very important to all governments and politicians. It’s an important turning point, but it is also just the start of human efforts to tackle climate change. It is not the end.”

  • Signs of change in the Himalayas as Copenhagen summit begins

    Signs of change in the Himalayas as Copenhagen summit begins

    On a 1,000-mile journey from the Himalayas to the Bay of Bengal, the Guardian finds clear evidence of the terrible threat that global warming now poses to the millions who rely on water from the roof of the world

    Gallery: A climate change journey from the mountains to the sea

     

    John Vidal on the threat global warming poses to millions in Asia Link to this video

    Way above us in the Himalayan cloud are jagged, snowbound peaks – Annapurna, Damodar, Gangapurna, Dhalguri. Below us is the Thulagi glacier, a river of ancient ice snaking steeply down the Marshyangdi valley from near the top of Mount Manasulu.

    The small plane banks and skims a lonely pass and we find what we have been looking for: at Thulagi’s snout is a milk-blue lake marked on few maps. It has doubled in size in just a few years and is held back only by a low wall of dead ice and earth. If Thulagi carries on melting at the present rate, nothing will stop billions of litres of water bursting through this natural dam and devastating villages, farmland and everything below.

    Thulagi is one of 20 steadily growing glacial lakes in Nepal which mountain communities and scientists fear will inevitably rupture if the growth in greenhouse gas emissions is not stemmed by world leaders at the Copenhagen climate summit. Average temperatures across Nepal have risen 1.6C in 50 years – twice the global average. But here on the roof of the world, in what is called the “third pole”, they are already nearly 4C above normal and on track to rise by as much as 8C by 2050.

    Temperature rises like this in the Himalayas would be a catastrophe. It is not just the future of a few mountain communities at stake but the lives of nearly one in four people in the world, all of whom rely on the Himalayas for water. Nepalese rivers alone provide water for 700 million people in India and Bangladesh. “If there is less snow in the Himalayas, or the monsoon rains weaken, or the glaciers melt with climate change, then all south Asian farming, industry, water supplies and cities will suffer,” said Nepalese climate specialist Ngamindra Dahal.

    On a 1,000-mile journey from the world’s greatest water source in the Himalayas, down rivers and then by train through Nepal, India and Bangladesh to the Bay of Bengal, we saw evidence of profound changes in weather patterns right across south Asia. Wherever we went we were told of significant temperature increases, and found governments slowly waking up to the threat of climate change and communities having to respond in any way they could to erratic rains and more serious droughts, floods and storms.

    The starting point was Jomsom, a small town in the Kali Gandaki valley, 2,300 metres high and at the heart of the Annapurna range. This remote town, which saw its first ever car last year, has experienced no snowfall this winter. The temperature soared way above normal to 27C, and only fell to 13C, against a usual -4C, while the snowline has risen above 5,000 metres. The Gandaki river, fed by 1,200 glaciers, flows to the Ganges and on to Bangladesh.

    “The temperature is higher, so there’s less snow, and less meltwater in spring to plant crops. People have no need to come down from the mountains in winter. They can grow chillies and peppers now,” said Sunil Pant, a Nepalese MP. “But now they cannot grow wheat or staple foods.”

    It’s the same story even in the Everest valley region, 400 miles to the east of Jomsom, where the snowfall is becoming increasingly unpredictable. Already, some communities believe they are a living under a death sentence, according to Lucky Sherpa, the MP for the region. “They say they are not sure there will be a tomorrow,” she said. “The snow used to come up to your waist in winter. Now children do not know what snow is. We have more flies and mosquitoes, more skin diseases. Communities are adapting by switching crops, but diseases are moving up the mountains, the tea and apple crops are being hurt and wells are drying up.”

    Two hundred miles away in Nepal’s capital, Kathmandu, Simon Lucas, a climate change officer at the UK Department for International Development, confirmed that river flows in winter have seriously declined. “The trends are clearer in Nepal than in other countries,” he said. “People cannot plant their crops in the spring because the winter snows are not so heavy. They have always relied on snow and glacier melt”.

    Britain last week earmarked £50m for Nepal to adapt to climate change, mainly through investing in its forests, but climate scientists say it faces ever more erratic, intense and unpredictable rainfall. We found the evidence for that when we headed south towards Nepal’s border with Bihar state in India. Here the problem is not too little water but far too much; last year, following torrential monsoon rains, Nepal’s greatest river, the Khosi, broke though two kilometres of embankment and flooded hundreds of square kilometres of farmland. Nearly 1,500 people died and 3 million people were displaced. Fifty thousand people in Nepal and many more in India lost their homes, and the river changed its course by more than 150km.

    The Khosi is known as “the river of sorrow” because it often floods, but the scale of what happened last August shocked both Indian and Nepalese governments. When the waters finally receded, people found vast areas of farmland covered by a 6ft-deep sea of sand brought down in suspension from the mountains. Seven months on, the embankment has been repaired but people are devastated and everyone is frightened that this kind of flood will become more common.

    “It’s impossible to cultivate anything”, said Ashma Khatoum, a farmer. “There are no toilets, or clean drinking water. I don’t believe we will ever get back to normal again.”

    We crossed the Indian border and went straight from severe flood to deep drought. Bihar, one of India’s poorest states, is experiencing one of its worst droughts in a generation. This year it has had only 15-30% of its usual rains. Most of the state has been declared a drought zone and 63 million people are expected go hungry next year.

    “Climate change is definitely happening,” said Vyas Ji, principal secretary in the department of disaster management in the Bihar state capital, Patna. “We used to have droughts every four or five years and floods every two to three years. Now it’s very erratic. Even the flood-prone districts are facing drought. Rainfall used to be predictable, limited and beneficial to farmers. Now it is unpredictable, heavier and harmful. Now there is no winter. Farmers are confused. This was a rice cultivating state but the seedlings get destroyed.”

    We headed south again, to Kolkata, one of India’s great cities, which last week was warned again by international scientists that it was acutely vulnerable to sea level rises. Here temperatures have risen significantly and there are more cases of dengue fever and malaria, said the city mayor, Bikash Bhattacharya. “Copenhagen is the last chance that the poor have. If we do not succeed and we go on with business as usual, then the world’s poor people will have a very hard time.”

    “Climate change is not the future. It is now. Tens of thousands of Indians are already in a critical situation,” said Sugata Hazra, director of Jadavpur University’s school of oceanography in Kolkata. His researchers have recorded sea levels in the Bay of Bengal rising far faster than the global average, and more cyclones hammering the coast. The result is the inundation of islands from higher tides and surges.

    “The rate of relative sea level rise in the Sagar Islands [in the Indian Sundarbans] is 3.14mm per year, which is substantially more than the global average of 1-2mm per year. It is up to 5.2mm in some places. By 2020 at least 70,000 people will have been made homeless.”

    Anurag Danda, head of WWF’s Sundarbans delta programme, appealed to politicians in Copenhagen for help. “For the people of the Sundarbans, climate change has arrived. The Maldives gets the attention, but there are many other people facing disaster.”

    From Kolkata we headed to the Bangladeshi border. There, India is building a 15ft fence to keep its neighbours out. For the moment those wanting to leave are mainly young men seeking work in the booming Indian economy, but in future, say analysts, it could be climate refugees.

    Bangladesh is by far the most densely populated large country in the world and, being entirely on a low-lying delta, it is one of the most vulnerable. It stands to lose 20% of its land to sea level rise in the next 80 years and is already experiencing more frequent and more intense cyclones. In the last seven years, four of the most powerful storms ever recorded have slammed its coasts.

    Climate change, on top of all its other problems, means Bangladesh faces even deeper problems, said Kim Streatfield, director of the Centre for health and population research at ICDDR, an international research institution in Dhaka. He fears the combination of climate change and an expected 50m-100m population rise in the next 50 years will devastate the country unless action is taken. “Increasing salinity in the water will have a major effect on food production,” he said. “In addition, the water table is dropping two to three metres a year, and one in four wells can be dry in the dry season.”

    Our south Asian climate odyssey from source to sea ended south of Chittagong, on the Bay of Bengal. There, where the waters of the Kali Gandaki, the Ganges and Nepal’s many other rivers reach the ocean, communities are experiencing higher tides and more flooding, as well as the loss of farmland and fishing.

    “The sea water now comes right into our houses. We would all like to move, but there is nowhere to go,” said Geeta Das, a teacher in Bolihut village, near Chittagong. Her home has been partly washed away and her bed is now just a foot from where the waters reached a few weeks ago. “We panic when it is cloudy and it is about to rain. We fear we will lose our children.”

    A neighbour, Madhuri Das, said: “We do not need scientists or anyone to tell us things are changing. We know the sea level is rising. We have always lived here. The floods are more frequent and we now fear the sea. Ten years ago, the sea water never came to the village. We cannot afford to raise our houses except on mud, which gets washed away. We can’t use the toilets, and diseases are now more common. Our water is no longer sweet.”

    Nurun Nahar, a Bolihut fisherman, gave up his trade when catches declined precipitously three years ago. His experiences speak for the 700m people who depend on Nepal and the Himalayas for their lives: “We are poor so we cannot do much to adapt on our own to what we can see is taking place. But we do not want to depend on nature any more. We see so many changes happening. All we want is a secure life. We are resilient but we must look to the rich to help us make this world a better place.”

    For news and analysis of the UN climate talks in Copenhagen sign up for the Guardian’s environment email newsletter Greenlight

  • Our chance to protect the world’s forests.

     

    The Wilderness Society has been at the forefront promoting the role nature can play in safeguarding our climate.

    Find out more about the role we’ll be playing in Copenhagen »

    25% of greenhouse gas emissions are caused by logging and degrading forests and bushland – so protecting forests makes climate sense.

    Stopping deforestation is, in principle, cheap and simple – don’t cut them down.

    But it gets more complex when countries are asked to regulate the problem. Finding a solution to these issues is one of the strongest hopes for the Copenhagen summit.

    Our special Copenhagen page has the latest from our Climate Change Campaigner Gemma Tillack via daily blogs from the climate summit, and you’ll be able to get the latest climate tweets on our Twitter page.

    Get the latest at our special Copenhagen page »

    Thanks for your support – stay tuned in the coming days for more updates.

    The team at the Wilderness Society

    The Wilderness Society Inc
    57E Brisbane St, Hobart, TAS, 7000
    Phone: (03) 6270 1701
    Fax:     (03) 6231 6533
    info@wilderness.org.au


    Membership, donations, gifts in Wills

    Freecall 1800 030 641
    members@wilderness.org.au
    ABN: 62 007 508 349
    Read our Privacy Policy

    The Wilderness Society
  • Copenhagen: the african dimension

     

    Any concerted effort to tackle climate change in Africa must focus primarily on poverty reduction and the UN’s millennium development goals (MDGs), the internationally agreed effort to halve extreme poverty and hunger and reduce major diseases by 2015. Any attempt to “seal the deal” – as the secretary-general puts it – must therefore also involve a development deal for African nations and other developing regions.

    However, finalising such a deal isn’t just about responding to Africa’s vulnerabilities. It also means that we must assess how African countries can contribute to the solution.

    First, we must remember that climate change is not a problem of Africa’s making: according to estimates, the continent has contributed only 3.8% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. Further, Africa’s potential to help tackle climate change is both largely unrecognised and unrealised. For instance, thanks to the forest cover and rich topsoil found in many countries in Africa, the region represents a major carbon storehouse. African forests take in 20% of the carbon absorbed by trees across the world.

    It is now widely recognised that global temperatures should not increase more than two degrees Celsius as compared with pre-industrial levels. The world will not be able to achieve that goal without reducing emissions from land use and leveraging the untapped capacity of ecosystems to store carbon. Africa has a central role to play in that process.

    The climate deal that replaces the Kyoto protocol in 2012 could result in important additional funds for developing countries. These funds could represent a primary source of development financing for the continent. Climate change management thus offers a number of “win-win” opportunities for African countries to both reduce the adverse effects of climate change and address some of their deep-rooted development concerns such as access to energy, food security and the prevention of crises and conflicts.

    While these key issues should serve as the core pillars of Africa’s engagement in the negotiations, the next question is how to transform these opportunities into concrete actions and results.

    Africa will require urgent support for the formulation of climate change strategies as well as upfront financing to take highly effective measures for adaptation and mitigation.

    Because of the sheer impact and magnitude of climate change on the continent, African leaders at national and sub-national levels (regions, provinces and municipalities) must not only co-ordinate their responses to its effects but also ensure that they are in line with existing development plans.

    With over 70% of greenhouse gas emissions influenced by local behaviours and investment choices, sub-national authorities, which are often responsible for making key decisions on the ground, will be essential actors in this process.

    African policymakers are aware of the need to co-ordinate climate strategies, as exemplified by a recent declaration, signed by 30 African ministers, which speaks of “a consolidated framework to ensure coordination and coherence …of climate change initiatives and sustainable development plans in Africa at all levels.” As such, one of the immediate priorities will be the creation of a fund that would build the capacities of developing countries in preparing such low-carbon and climate-resilient strategies.

    In addition, a range of resources – from grants and loans to fiscal measures and market-based instruments – will be needed for successful mitigation and adaptation on the ground. Additional aid is also urgently required to complement the new adaptation fund of the UN framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC), which is helping vulnerable countries to meet the costs of adaptation.

    Market-based instruments are essential. If properly reformed, the clean development mechanism (CDM) and other carbon market schemes could play a significant role in funding a broad portfolio of renewable energy and energy-efficient options in Africa. These could represent more than 180 gigawatts of additional power generation. That is more than twice the region’s total existing capacity.

    Biocarbon, the carbon sequestered and stored in the world’s trees, plants, soil and oceans, offers similarly attractive investment options that could significantly contribute to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.

    The stakes and options are clear. If world leaders seal the deal – and ensure that it is a deal for development – the result could be a huge new boost in the fight for human development and environmental sustainability in Africa.

  • RBS: where the public money has gone.

    RBS: where the public money has gone

    Ecologist

    1st December, 2009

    Treasury accused of writing a ‘blank cheque’ with taxpayers’ money for bank to make environmentally-damaging investments

    The full extent of unsustainable investments made by the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) were revealed this week in a report published by a coalition of organisations.

    Since being bailed out by the taxpayer in October 2008, RBS has financed a host of environmentally-damaging projects, including open cast mining in Bangladesh, tar sands exploration in Canada and a heavily criticised mining company in India.

    The coalition of groups, including Platform and the World Development Movement said the investments paid for by the taxpayer put the UK to ‘shame’.

    ‘We’re paying for some of the most damaging mining and fossil fuel projects around the world,’ said Julian Oram, head of policy at the World Development Movement.

    Sustainable investments

    The report, ‘Royal Bank of Sustainability‘, has called on the body set up to manage the public investments in RBS, UK Financial Investments (UKFI), to re-focus the bank towards sustainable investments both within the UK and the rest of the world.

    RBS should also sign up to the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), says the report, enabling UKFI to assess the climate risk of every investment the bank makes.

    ‘RBS could be a global leader in low carbon financing,’ said People & Planet director Ian Leggett.

    ‘But to build that business two things need to happen. First, social and environmental criteria have to be a key part of RBS’s investment decisions.

    ‘Second, RBS needs to stop funding unconventional and controversial fossil projects immediately,’ he said.

    An RBS spokesperson said they fully supported the transition towards a low carbon economy but continued to lend to all sectors of business.

    ‘Over recent years we have been a leading arranger of finance to the renewable energy sector and take our responsibility to play our part in this seriously.

    ‘As a leading corporate and commercial bank, RBS has customers in almost all sectors of business. We only provide finance to projects which meet the environmental and social standards specified by the Equator Principles.’

    Unsustainable investments made by RBS in the past year include:

    • Bangladesh – open cast coal mine

    RBS subsidiary, ABN Amro Bank NV has a 4.75% share of GCM Resources, the UK company pushing for an open cast mine in Bangladesh. There has been fervent local opposition as it would displace approximately 40, 000 people and impact on access to clean water for approximately 100, 000 people.

    • Wales – open cast coal mine

    RBS has taken part in loaning £115m to Hargreaves Services, the coal operator. Hargreaves has plans to extract 7m tonnes of coal by developing one of the largest open cast coal mines in the country at Tower Colliery, near the coal-mine-cum-protest-site Ffos-y-fran in Merthyr Tydfil, south Wales.

    This type of mining has been likened to a financial hit-and-run, bringing a few jobs for a couple of years and potentially leaving widespread asthma and other public health and environmental effects in the community for years to come.

    • India – Vedanta mining

    RBS was the lead financial adviser to Sterlite, which is 60% owned by Vedanta, in a recent takeover bid. The bank and its ABN Amro subsidiary gave letters of credit worth $100m (£60m) to Sterlite, which is India’s biggest copper producer.[i] Vedanta is very controversial and has an appalling record on human rights.

    •  Canada – tar sands

    Research from the Rainforest Action Network indicates that since Oct. 13, 2008 – when HM Treasury announced its recapitalisation of the Royal Bank of Scotland Group – RBS has extended at least $2.7 billion in debt/equity issuance underwritings to companies that own and/or are actively building tar sands extraction infrastructure and/or tar sands oil pipelines in Alberta, Canada.

    •  Uganda/ Democratic Republic of Congo – oil exploration

    In March 2009, RBS was part of a consortium of 14 banks that lent $1,890 million to the Irish company Tullow Oil – providing in the region of $100 million itself. The bank had already helped raise £402 million by placing shares for Tullow in January 2009.

    In early 2009, the company announced a major discovery of 400-1000 million barrels by Lake Albert in Uganda, just on the border with the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

    Tullow also holds oil exploration rights across the border in North Kivu in the DRC, which continues to be torn by strife after more than a decade of resource-driven civil war.

    The border area has seen some of the fiercest fighting take place as rival armies and militias have struggled for control. An additional 30,000 refugees were displaced in North Kivu during two weeks of fighting in March, adding to the existing 1.4 million internally displaced people in the region.

    Useful links

    Full report

  • Why do climate deniers hold sway in Australia

     

    Aussie scientists were among the first to warn about global warming. Back in 1988, they printed off posters showing the fin-shaped roof of the Sydney Opera House poking out of a blue sea.

    But Australia also has a history of climate denial. Twelve years ago at the Kyoto climate negotiations, other rich nations promised cuts in carbon emissions. But Australia won permission to increase its emissions by 8%. And even that wasn’t good enough for the prime minister John Howard, who eventually pulled out of the Kyoto protocol with George W Bush.

    Recently, the Labour prime minister Kevin Rudd rejoined Kyoto. But the sceptics are unrepentant. The Aussie geologist Ian Plimer is the latest international pin-up among climate sceptics.

    Why do the deniers hold such sway? For one thing, Australians have the highest per capita carbon emissions of any major developed country thanks to its sprawling suburbs and heavy coal use. According to figures submitted by Canberra to the UN, Australia’s emissions from burning fossil fuel have risen by 30% from 1990 to 2007 – more even than the US.

    Also, Australia is by some way the world’s largest exporter of coal, the world’s dirtiest fuel. They are the boys with the black stuff. Giant ports like Gladstone and Newcastle export ship out enough coal each year to put more than half a billion tonnes of carbon dioxide into the air. When the Chinese coal mines can’t keep up with domestic demand, they phone Digger.

    Australia’s industrialists have lobbied loudly against any limits on their carbon emissions. Last year, the Business Council of Australia called Rudd’s cap-and-trade climate plan a “company killer”, and declared war on the policy. Now they have seen off the leader of the opposition Liberal Party, Malcolm Turnbull, because he backed the Rudd plan.

    They will be pleased with themselves. But whatever happens in Copenhagen this month, Australia’s climate policy will still be in a mess. Either the world adopts tough emissions cuts – in which case demand for Australian coal will shrink and the country will face painful economic reforms to cut its soaring domestic emissions. Or the world fails to come up with tough emissions cuts – in which case, say its scientists, there is a real risk of the entire nation becoming uninhabitable.