Missing Senate votes: Mick Keelty says lax WA standards to blame for lost ballots

Updated 13 minutes ago

An inquiry into Western Australia’s missing Senate votes has found significant failures in the handling, movement and storage of ballot papers.

The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) asked the former commissioner of the Australian Federal Police, Mick Keelty, to conduct the inquiry after more than 1,300 ballot papers disappeared.

The bungle has left the Senate result up the air, with the AEC asking the High Court to order a fresh election in the New Year.

Mr Keelty found no evidence of any deliberate attempt to destroy or steal the ballot papers, but said the lax systems in WA made it difficult to reach a conclusive finding.

Mr Keelty has recommended the AEC introduce tamper-tracing materials for transferring and storing ballot papers.

He also recommends CCTV and alarms at the warehouses where ballot papers are stored.

Read Mr Keelty’s report into the missing WA Senate votes.

Topics: government-and-politics, elections, federal-elections, perth-6000, wa

MIT researchers report that with the loss of sea ice the Arctic Ocean is becoming more of a carbon sink and that the amount of carbon taken up by the Arctic is increasing by 1 megaton each year.

Click to enlarge. Courtesy: NOAA.

By Jennifer Chu, MIT News

For the past three decades, as the climate has warmed, the massive plates of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean have shrunk: In 2007, scientists observed nearly 50 percent less summer ice than had been seen in 1980.

Dramatic changes in ice cover have, in turn, altered the Arctic ecosystem — particularly in summer months, when ice recedes and sunlight penetrates surface waters, spurring life to grow. Satellite images have captured large blooms of phytoplankton in Arctic regions that were once relatively unproductive. When these organisms die, a small portion of their carbon sinks to the deep ocean, creating a sink, or reservoir, of carbon.

Now researchers at MIT have found that with the loss of sea ice, the Arctic Ocean is becoming more of a carbon sink. The team modeled changes in Arctic sea ice, temperatures, currents, and flow of carbon from 1996 to 2007, and found that the amount of carbon taken up by the Arctic increased by 1 megaton each year.

But the group also observed a somewhat paradoxical effect: A few Arctic regions where waters were warmest were actually less able to store carbon. Instead, these regions — such as the Barents Sea, near Greenland — were a carbon source, emitting carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.

While the Arctic Ocean as a whole remains a carbon sink, MIT principal research scientist Stephanie Dutkiewicz says places like the Barents Sea paint a more complex picture of how the Arctic is changing with global warming.

“People have suggested that the Arctic is having higher productivity, and therefore higher uptake of carbon,” Dutkiewicz says. “What’s nice about this study is, it says that’s not the whole story. We’ve begun to pull apart the actual bits and pieces that are going on.”

A paper by Dutkiewicz and co-authors Mick Follows and Christopher Hill of MIT, Manfredi Manizza of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, and Dimitris Menemenlis of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory is published in the journal Global Biogeochemical Cycles.

The ocean’s carbon cycle

The cycling of carbon in the oceans is relatively straightforward: As organisms like phytoplankton grow in surface waters, they absorb sunlight and carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Through photosynthesis, carbon dioxide builds cell walls and other structures; when organisms die, some portion of the plankton sink as organic carbon to the deep ocean. Over time, bacteria eat away at the detritus, converting it back into carbon dioxide that, when stirred up by ocean currents, can escape into the atmosphere. The MIT group developed a model to trace the flow of carbon in the Arctic, looking at conditions in which carbon was either stored or released from the ocean. To do this, the researchers combined three models: a physical model that integrates temperature and salinity data, along with the direction of currents in a region; a sea ice model that estimates ice growth and shrinkage from year to year; and a biogeochemistry model, which simulates the flow of nutrients and carbon, given the parameters of the other two models. The researchers modeled the changing Arctic between 1996 and 2007 and found that the ocean stored, on average, about 58 megatons of carbon each year — a figure that increased by an average of 1 megaton annually over this time period. These numbers, Dutkiewicz says, are not surprising, as the Arctic has long been known to be a carbon sink. The group’s results confirm a widely held theory: With less sea ice, more organisms grow, eventually creating a bigger carbon sink.

A new counterbalance

However, one finding from the group muddies this seemingly linear relationship. Manizza found a discrepancy between 2005 and 2007, the most severe periods of sea ice shrinkage. While the Arctic lost more ice cover in 2007 than in 2005, less carbon was taken up by the ocean in 2007 — an unexpected finding, in light of the theory that less sea ice leads to more carbon stored. Manizza traced the discrepancy to the Greenland and Barents seas, regions of the Arctic Ocean that take in warmer waters from the Atlantic. (In warmer environments, carbon is less soluble in seawater.) Manizza observed this scenario in the Barents Sea in 2007, when warmer temperatures caused more carbon dioxide to be released than stored. The results point to a subtle balance: An ocean’s carbon flow depends on both water temperature and biological activity. In warmer waters, carbon is more likely to be expelled into the atmosphere; in waters with more biological growth — for example, due to less sea ice — carbon is more likely to be stored in ocean organisms. In short, while the Arctic Ocean as a whole seems to be storing more carbon than in previous years, the increase in the carbon sink may not be as large as scientists had previously thought.“The Arctic is special in that it’s certainly a place where we see changes happening faster than anywhere else,” Dutkiewicz says. “Because of that, there are bigger changes in the sea ice and biology, and therefore possibly to the carbon sink.”Manizza adds that while the remoteness of the Arctic makes it difficult for scientists to obtain accurate measurements, more data from this region “can both inform us about the change
in the polar area and make our models highly reliable
for policymaking decisions.” This research was supported by the National Science Foundation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Abstract

The rapid recent decline of Arctic Ocean sea ice area increases the flux of solar radiation available for primary production and the area of open water for air-sea gas exchange. We use a regional physical-biogeochemical model of the Arctic Ocean, forced by the National Centers for Environmental Prediction/National Center for Atmospheric Research atmospheric reanalysis, to evaluate the mean present-day CO₂ sink and its temporal evolution. During the 1996–2007 period, the model suggests that the Arctic average sea surface temperature warmed by 0.04°C a⁻¹, that sea ice area decreased by ∼0.1 × 106 km2 a⁻¹, and that the biological drawdown of dissolved inorganic carbon increased. The simulated 1996–2007 time-mean Arctic Ocean CO₂ sink is 58 ± 6 Tg C a⁻¹. The increase in ice-free ocean area and consequent carbon drawdown during this period enhances the CO2 sink by ∼1.4 Tg C a⁻¹, consistent with estimates based on extrapolations of sparse data. A regional analysis suggests that during the 1996–2007 period, the shelf regions of the Laptev, East Siberian, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas experienced an increase in the efficiency of their biological pump due to decreased sea ice area, especially during the 2004–2007 period, consistent with independently published estimates of primary production. In contrast, the CO₂ sink in the Barents Sea is reduced during the 2004–2007 period due to a dominant control by warming and decreasing solubility. Thus, the effect of decreasing sea ice area and increasing sea surface temperature partially cancel, though the former is dominant.

Citation

“Changes in the Arctic Ocean CO2 sink (1996–2007): A regional model analysis” by M. Manizza, M. J. Follows, S. Dutkiewicz, D. Menemenlis, C. N. Hill R. M. Key published in Global Biogeochemical Cycles

DOI: 10.1002/2012GB004491

By Jennifer Chu

For the past three decades, as the climate has warmed, the massive plates of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean have shrunk: in 2007, scientists observed nearly 50 percent less summer ice than had been seen in 1980.

While the Arctic Ocean as a whole seems to be storing more carbon than in previous years, the increase in carbon sink capacity may not be as large as scientists predicted. Photo credit: NASA’s Aqua satellite shows the receding Arctic sea ice, Sept. 3, 2010.

Dramatic changes in ice cover have, in turn, altered the Arctic ecosystem—particularly in summer months, when ice recedes and sunlight penetrates surface waters, spurring life to grow. Satellite images have captured large blooms of phytoplankton in Arctic regions that were once relatively unproductive. When these organisms die, a small portion of their carbon sinks to the deep ocean, creating a sink, or reservoir, of carbon.

Now researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology  (MIT) have found that with the loss of sea ice, the Arctic Ocean is becoming more of a carbon sink. The team modeled changes in Arctic sea ice, temperatures, currents and flow of carbon from 1996 to 2007, and found that the amount of carbon taken up by the Arctic increased by one megaton each year.

But the group also observed a somewhat paradoxical effect: A few Arctic regions where waters were warmest were actually less able to store carbon. Instead, these regions—such as the Barents Sea, near Greenland—were a carbon source, emitting carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.

While the Arctic Ocean as a whole remains a carbon sink, MIT principal research scientist Stephanie Dutkiewicz says places like the Barents Sea paint a more complex picture of how the Arctic is changing with global warming.

“People have suggested that the Arctic is having higher productivity, and therefore higher uptake of carbon,” Dutkiewicz says. “What’s nice about this study is, it says that’s not the whole story. We’ve begun to pull apart the actual bits and pieces that are going on.”

A paper by Dutkiewicz and co-authors Mick Follows and Christopher Hill of MIT, Manfredi Manizza of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, and Dimitris Menemenlis of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory is published in the journal Global Biogeochemical Cycles.

The Ocean’s Carbon Cycle

The cycling of carbon in the oceans is relatively straightforward: as organisms like phytoplankton grow in surface waters, they absorb sunlight and carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Through photosynthesis, carbon dioxide builds cell walls and other structures; when organisms die, some portion of the plankton sink as organic carbon to the deep ocean. Over time, bacteria eat away at the detritus, converting it back into carbon dioxide that, when stirred up by ocean currents, can escape into the atmosphere.

The MIT group developed a model to trace the flow of carbon in the Arctic, looking at conditions in which carbon was either stored or released from the ocean. To do this, the researchers combined three models: a physical model that integrates temperature and salinity data, along with the direction of currents in a region; a sea ice model that estimates ice growth and shrinkage from year to year; and a biogeochemistry model, which simulates the flow of nutrients and carbon, given the parameters of the other two models.

The researchers modeled the changing Arctic between 1996 and 2007 and found that the ocean stored, on average, about 58 megatons of carbon each year—a figure that increased by an average of one megaton annually over this time period.

These numbers, Dutkiewicz says, are not surprising, as the Arctic has long been known to be a carbon sink. The group’s results confirm a widely held theory: with less sea ice, more organisms grow, eventually creating a bigger carbon sink.

A New Counterbalance

However, one finding from the group muddies this seemingly linear relationship. Manizza found a discrepancy between 2005 and 2007, the most severe periods of sea ice shrinkage. While the Arctic lost more ice cover in 2007 than in 2005, less carbon was taken up by the ocean in 2007—an unexpected finding, in light of the theory that less sea ice leads to more carbon stored.

Manizza traced the discrepancy to the Greenland and Barents seas, regions of the Arctic Ocean that take in warmer waters from the Atlantic (in warmer environments, carbon is less soluble in seawater). Manizza observed this scenario in the Barents Sea in 2007, when warmer temperatures caused more carbon dioxide to be released than stored.

The results point to a subtle balance: an ocean’s carbon flow depends on both water temperature and biological activity. In warmer waters, carbon is more likely to be expelled into the atmosphere; in waters with more biological growth—for example, due to less sea ice—carbon is more likely to be stored in ocean organisms.

In short, while the Arctic Ocean as a whole seems to be storing more carbon than in previous years, the increase in the carbon sink may not be as large as scientists had previously thought.

“The Arctic is special in that it’s certainly a place where we see changes happening faster than anywhere else,” Dutkiewicz says. “Because of that, there are bigger changes in the sea ice and biology, and therefore possibly to the carbon sink.”

Manizza adds that while the remoteness of the Arctic makes it difficult for scientists to obtain accurate measurements, more data from this region “can both inform us about the change in the polar area and make our models highly reliable for policymaking decisions.”

This research was supported by the National Science Foundation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Visit EcoWatch’s WATER and CLIMATE CHANGE pages for more related news on this topic.

Australia vs Big Tobacco

Oliver MacColl – Avaaz.org

To Me

Today at 9:50 AM

Dear friends across Australia,

The laws that protect Australians are under threat. Our anti-smoking laws, the best in the world, could be trampled by Big Tobacco as a US-led trade treaty threatens to put corporations above people. And it’s all being written in secret. Send a message now to call on Minister Robb to not sign onto laws we didn’t vote for:

Australia has the strongest anti-smoking laws in the world. They’re so successful that other countries want to do the same. But Big Tobacco isn’t happy about this — and the Australian government is about to agree to a deal that lets them trample all over us whenever they want.  

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a US-driven trade pact that that could let companies sue us to get rid of whichever of our hard-fought protections they don’t like. The whole deal is being negotiated in secret, and this weekend Trade Minister Robb is set to agree to rules none of us had a say in. 

But opposition is building in Australia and other countries. The ALP and The Greens have just joined together to demand transparency. Abbott’s team is on the ropes from the Indonesian spying scandal, let’s use this crucial opportunity to stall the talks and stand up for our health — send a message to Minister Robb now!

http://www.avaaz.org/en/selling_out_australias_democracy/?bBYMjdb&v=32100

Tobacco giant Philip Morris is suing the government this year for billions of dollars after Australian anti-smoking rules threatened their bottom line. They did it through a loophole that the TPP would turn into floodgates, giving legal rights to foreign corporations to challenge any Australian law they claim would harm their profits in secret international tribunals closed to the public.

And tobacco could be just the start. Leaked TPP drafts read like a corporate wish-list that bends our rules in favour of companies, where everything from medicine to software could end up more expensive for Australian consumers. It’s SO secretive that only a few people in each treaty country have seen the whole thing — even our lawmakers can’t see the text we’re signing up to, and it’s up to us to stop this secretive treaty before the corporate crackdown.

We’ve known all along that there’s a lot at stake, but have had to rely on leaked snippets like the chapter Wikileaks just published to understand exactly how much. Let’s not stand for this kind of secrecy undermining our democracy — send a message now to shine a light on the secret treaty:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/selling_out_australias_democracy/?bBYMjdb&v=32100

It can be easy to feel small in the face of big forces, and big interests, driving our governments. But people, not money, are the true source of their power. Last year 750,000 people sent a message to TPP negotiators to stop this deal. Now’s the critical moment for us to speak up. Let’s join together, once again, and bring our power to stop this unprecedented threat to our democracies.

With hope,

Oliver, Jamie, David, Emily, Allison, Nadia, Alex and the entire Avaaz team

SOURCES

Australians may pay the price in Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agreement (Sydney Morning Herald)
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australians-may-pay-the-price-in-transpacific-…

Secret TPP Negotiations Resume in Salt Lake City (Electronic Frontier Foundation)
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/secret-tpp-negotiations-resume-salt-lake-city

Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (Wikileaks)
http://wikileaks.org/tpp/#QQG6

The Trans-Pacific Partnership treaty is the complete opposite of ‘free trade’ (The Guardian)
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/19/trans-pacific-partnership-corporate-