EcoRadio

Author: admin

  • Surf’s up for Cornwall’s wave hub

     

    The Wave Hub, which will be based 10 miles off the north coast of Cornwall, will feature a large grid-connected “socket” on the seabed that will allow up to four different marine energy devices to connect to it at any one time. As a result, marine energy companies will be able to field-test devices for a number of years without the need to gain additional planning consent.

    The Hub will be connected by an undersea cable to a new electricity sub-station on the site of a former power station.

    Work on the sub-station will start in January and is expected to take six months to complete. The Wave Hub device will then be deployed and the sub-sea cable laid next summer, when the device is expected to become operational.

    The announcement comes as the Wave Hub project announced that it has appointed Guy Lavender – formely a director for the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games – as general manager for the project.

    Stephen Peacock, executive director of enterprise and innovation at the South West Regional Development Agency, said he hopes the device will put the area at the forefront of marine energy development in the UK. “Our aim is to create an entirely new low carbon industry in the South West and hundreds of quality jobs, ” he said.

    The Wave Hub is being funded with £12.5m from the South West RDA, £20m from the European Regional Development Fund Convergence Programme and £9.5m from the UK government.

    The South West development authority expect investment in local marine energy programmes to reach £100m over the next two years.

    The Wave Hub project has been widely praised by the marine energy industry and three developers have already secured access to the berths – Fred Olsen Limited, Ocean Power Technologies and Orecon – with a number of developers reported to be in talks about using the fourth berth.

    However, the latest stage of the project comes as industry group the BWEA last week warned that the government is failing to adequately support the sector and recommended greater funding is needed to help developers get from the concept stage to full commercial scale generators.

    • This article was shared by our content partner BusinessGreen.com, part of the Guardian Environment Network

  • How 7.4% of Americans can block humanity’s efforts to save itself

  • The Nation‘s politics editor Chris Hayes: What Ails the Senate.
  • Washington Post columnist Steven Pearlstein: Want real reform? Let’s start with Congress.
  • Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein: Four ways to end the filibuster.
  • Washington Post column Harold Meyerson: The do-nothing Senate.
  • Annie Lowrey: How the Senate filibusters the world.
  • Jonathan Krasno and Gregory Robinson: Time to rein in the filibuster.
  • Benjamin Sarlin and Samuel P. Jacobs: Senate Stonewallers: Capitol Hill’s most ornery No Men.
  • Matt Yglesias: Can The Filibuster Be Reformed?
  • Kevin Drum: Reforming the Senate.

    •  

    Here’s one thing to add to the discussion. The Copenhagen climate talks are coming up. The Obama administration has been scrupulously careful not to promise anything in international negotiations that it can’t deliver—i.e., that it can’t get past the U.S. Senate.

    Senate ratification of an international treaty requires not just 60 but 67 votes. Say 34 senators rally to block such a treaty—senators from, oh, Wyoming, Vermont, North Dakota, Alaska, South Dakota, Delaware, Montana, Rhode Island, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Maine, Idaho, Nebraska, West Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, and Utah. Thus can representatives for 22,540,352 people—7.4% of the population—block the will of the other 281,519,372. Indeed, senators representing 7.4% of Americans can thwart the entire world’s efforts to address the climate crisis.

    Killing a treaty is easier than killing a clean energy bill. Why, killing a clean energy bill requires representatives for 25,289,049 people—fully 8.3% of the population!—to thwart the will of the remaining 278,770,675. (If you’re keeping score, the guilty parties here would be: Wyoming, Vermont, North Dakota, Alaska, South Dakota, Delaware, Montana, Rhode Island, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Maine, Idaho, Nebraska, West Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Kansas, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Iowa.)  For the record, 15 of those 21 states (71%) voted for Bush in 2004.

    Now of course it won’t be these precise coalitions of senators that kill the COP15 treaty and the clean energy bill. They’ll snag high-population senators like Cornyn and Hutchison from Texas. But the point remains: the Senate, already unrepresentative thanks to the disproportionate influence of rural, low-population states, has become, thanks to the routine use of filibusters and holds, grotesquely undemocratic.

    The country just can’t be governed this way. And consequently, the world community cannot coordinate to effectively meet the climate threat.

    • This article was shared by our content partner Grist, part of the Guardian Environment Network

  • Report assesses climate risks of sea level rise for Australia

     

    The report used recent research, as presented at the Copenhagen climate congress in March 2009, of projected sea-level rise from 75 centimetres to 190 centimetres relative to 1990, with 110-120 centimetres the mid-range of the projection. Based on this research 1.1 metres was selected as a plausible value for sea-level rise for the risk
    assessment in the report to 2100. It was noted that sea level is likely to continue to rise beyond 2100 and that sea-level rise projections will change as new research clarifies areas of uncertainty.

    The occurence and severity of extreme weather events will increase “events that now happen every 10 years would happen about every 10 days in 2100. The current 1-in-100 year event could occur several times a year.” says the report.

    In launching the report Climate Change Minister Senator Penny Wong said “The science tells us our climate is changing faster than first projected and the impacts are likely to be more severe as sea-level rises and extreme storms and floods become more frequent. These changes are already happening and we cannot afford to ignore the findings of this report.”

    Port facilities around Australia will be effected, as will Sydney and Brisbane airports. At least 11 power plants/substations are located within 500m of the coastline. The report details that there is a large number of facilities within 200 metres and 500 metres of the coastline, potentially at risk under a changing climate. This includes a large number of hospitals, police, fire and ambulance stations very close to the coast. In an extreme weather event the functionality of these services may be compromised, resulting in significantly greater impacts than might otherwise occur and could result in deaths.

    “Sea-level rise, more intense cyclones and ocean acidification will potentially increase the capital and operating costs of ports quite significantly by mid century,” Senator Wong said. “A number of airports are also located in low-lying areas in the coastal zone, and are at risk of inundation in the coming century.”

    The Torres Strait Islands, containing 17 Island communities with a total population of around 8,700 people, was assessed as extremely vulnerable to sea level rise. The report noted the IPCC finding that “Indigenous communities in the tropical north, home to about 87,000 Indigenous people, are also considered to be very vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Such communities often live in isolated areas that are poorly resourced, and tend to have greater health issues and lower incomes than other communities.”

    “Every day we delay action on climate change, we increase the cost,” Senator Wong said
    “This report shows the need to reduce the carbon pollution that is causing climate change, which is why we are determined to pass the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. It also shows that Australia must plan to adapt to the climate change we can’t avoid.”

    The Government is in negotiations with the Liberal and National Parties to pass legislation for its Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) to be reintroduced into the Senate in the coming week. This legislation will create a ‘carbon market’, with many free credits issued initially to major companies in carbon emission intensive industries, particularly coal and power industries.

    Greens Deputy Leader Christine Milne commented “Despite these dire warnings we have a government intent on increasing the burning and export of coal and the logging and burning of our native forests for decades to come, knowing full well that this will result in the climate change impacts the government says it is concerned about.”

    “The absurdity of the situation is that the government’s own emissions trading legislation to be debated in the Senate in the coming fortnight will do nothing to stop the outcomes outlined in today’s report.”

    “The government should take the report on notice and redesign its emissions trading legislation to adopt strong targets to tackle climate change and end billions of dollars of handouts to the big polluters,”
    Senator Milne said.

    The release of the report was accompanied by the announcement by Senator Wong of the creation of a seven-member Coasts and Climate Change Council to be chaired by Professor Tim Flannery. Other members include: Ms Sam Mostyn – expert in sustainability and risk management; Mr Ron Clarke – Mayor of Gold Coast; Ms Paddi Creevey – Mayor of Mandurah; Professor Barbara Norman – Foundation Chair, Professor of Urban Planning, at University of Canberra; Professor Bruce Thom – President, Australian Coastal Society; and Geoff Lake – President, Australian Local Government Association.

    The Council has been set the task of engaging with the community and stakeholders and advising the Government in the lead up to a Coastal Climate Change Forum, to be held in early 2010. This Forum will bring together all levels of government to develop a strategy for coastal adaptation.

     

    The report was a first pass national assessment – one of the key actions identified in the National Climate Change Adaptation Framework endorsed by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) in 2007.

    Sources:

  • Catastrophic Climate Change

    Make evacuation plans

    MARIAN WILK

    Video feedbac

    Use this form to:

    • Ask for technical assistance in playing the multimedia available on this site, or
    • Provide feedback to the multimedia producers.
     

     

    Video feedbackThank you.

    Your feedback was successfully sent.

    Catastrophic climate change

    Environment reporter Adam Morton looks at the perils of inaction on climate change.

    URGENT action to cope with the impact of rising sea levels needs to start now, including improving evacuation routes for coastal communities during extreme storms and flooding.

    As well, a sweeping federal parliamentary report calls for an overhaul of the building code to make homes more resilient and for the legal liability for future property losses to be sorted out.

    Warning that ”the time to act is now”, the bipartisan report brought down last night states that thousands of kilometres of coastline have been identified as at risk from the threat of rising sea levels and extreme weather events caused by climate change.

    The committee, led by Labor’s Jennie George and with the Liberal Mal Washer as co-chairman, wants the Government to take a far greater role in preparing coastal towns and cities to adapt to the impact of sea level rise.

    Their report recommends a new intergovernmental agreement on the coastal zone to be worked out between Canberra, the states and councils to set out actions and guidelines on the enormous coastal challenges from climate change.

    “The first clarion call from everybody was the need for national leadership,” Ms George told the Herald. “We have taken up that call”.

    Eighty per cent of Australians live in the coastal zone facing major pressures, says the report. The concentration of people and infrastructure makes Australia “particularly vulnerable to the coastal erosion and inundation that will accompany increases in sea level”.

    There are about 711,000 addresses within three kilometres of the coast and less than six metres above sea level but government in the coastal zone is described as ”complex and fragmented”.

    The committee accepts the United Nations’ scientific findings that sea levels will rise about 80 centimetres globally by 2100, but it says this could be an underestimation if greenhouse gas emissions are not slowed and the polar ice caps melt. It notes each centimetre of sea level rise could push the shoreline back a metre or more.

    Sea level rise will also cause a disproportionately large increase in the frequency of flooding and erosion that will come with high tides and storm surges.

    More than 200,000 buildings on the NSW coast are likely to be vulnerable. Queensland is most at risk, but every state and territory faces huge challenges, from Darwin Harbour to Fremantle.

    Among the committee’s recommendations is for the Surf Life Saving network to be brought into the emergency planning system to deal with the impact of increasing storm hazards.

    The report also recommends the Australian Emergency Management Committee examine an improved early warning system for coastal areas in the event of extreme seas, storm surges, major erosion or flooding.

    During its 18 months of work, the committee heard pleas from the Torres Strait, where thousands of people face the prospect of losing their homes. It recommends a study into the vulnerability of the area by the CSIRO, the Department of Climate Change and the Queensland Government.

    It also wants more research on tropical diseases migrating south, especially dengue fever.

    Ms George said one of the most vexed issues before the committee was insurance coverage for home owners close to the beachfront. The report recommends the Productivity Commission begin an inquiry into the impact of climate change on insurance, including gaps that already exist.

    Evidence before the committee revealed insurers were already unwilling to cover so-called ”saltwater risks” that included the erosion of beachfront properties or flooding by sea water.

    The committee also wants the commission to examine a prohibition on the occupation of land that is extremely vulnerable to sea rise hazards.

    The committee will deliver its report to the Climate Change Minister, Penny Wong, and the Environment Minister, Peter Garrett. It recognises the Government has already begun a series of studies and actions to adapt to climate change. Senator Wong is expected to deliver the first major assessment of the vulnerability of Australia’s coast to sea level rise next month.

    But the committee found serious gaps in the planning guidelines, the law, insurance and emergency planning that needed to be addressed.

    One of its main recommendations is that the Federal Government consider adopting a nationally consistent benchmark on projected sea level rise as states and local governments struggle to work out their response

  • Populate and Perish

     

    Costello liked to say it was an incentive. His theory gained traction last week with the release of Australian Bureau of Statistics figures pointing to a population boom. A record 293,600 babies were born last year, up 4per cent or 11,400 babies on the previous record. The fertility rate is now at its highest since the ’70s and close to the figure needed to maintain population by birth alone.

    Demographers believe two factors are at play – women have heard the message about not waiting to have children; and economic security, which includes payments like the baby bonus.

    There is also talk of a trend back towards larger families.

    These figures come as the Treasury forecasts rapid population expansion – a 60per cent rise to more than 35million over the next 40years. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd thinks a “big Australia” is a great thing, so long as the population is planned for.

    The head of the Treasury, Ken Henry, is more circumspect. He sees a continent stretched to its natural limits and wonders if a near doubling of the population can be managed. There are already signs the country is not coping – the Murray-Darling river system is struggling and drinking and water supplies are becoming a huge planning problem.

    The big cities are already struggling to cope with moving people around. Public transport is not good enough to get people out of their cars and off the roads. Too little thought is given to where people live and work.

    Overdevelopment is the last vestige of nimbyism; people may support immigration and bigger families but they don’t want those extra medium- or high-density developments in their neighbourhood.

    All of these topics of conversation need to be funnelled into a larger debate about population and the consequences for lifestyle and the environment.

    This wide-ranging debate is largely missing from the national political stage. Neither Rudd nor Malcolm Turnbull blanched when the Treasury’s population forecasts came out. But they were of great concern to one person.

    Labor backbencher Kelvin Thomson has been increasingly vocal about the ramifications of a larger population. He is a thoughtful man and his interest stems from his time as environment spokesman during Labor’s long period in opposition, when climate change and emissions trading were not mainstream issues.

    He believes the environment simply cannot sustain more and more people. Now that Labor is in government Thomson has proved to be a bit of an oddity – a backbencher prepared to speak his mind.

    He has already called for greater immigration checks, scrapping the fringe benefits tax on company cars and criticised the pension increase for not being generous enough.

    Last week Thomson went further, saying the population should be stabilised at 26million by 2050 – 9million people less than the current forecasts. He proposed stopping uncapped migration from New Zealand and cutting total immigration (although increasing the number of refugees).

    The baby bonus and family payments are also in his sights.

    Thomson thinks the bonus should be done away with and family payments made only to those families with one or two children. The money saved could be spent on education and foreign aid.

    These are not the sort of the ideas that would appeal to the last treasurer.

    But they are the kind of ideas that need to be discussed.

    Source: theage.com.au