Author: admin

  • Pest war depletes chemical stocks

    From the Land

    Supplies of farm chemicals are running tight as crop producers battle to control a spring flush of winter crop pests and diseases.

    Aerial spraying operators, who have pulled out all stops containing an unprecedented epidemic of stripe rust, have now joined the fight against the latest outbreaks of aphids in canola, ascochyta fungal disease in chickpeas, and a growing mice plague.

    Landmark’s State agricultural chemicals manager, Dave Wood, Dubbo, said while pesticide stocks were tight, suppliers had been able to meet demand by moving product to areas of greatest need.

    Some stocks had been moved to hot spots in the north from southern regions where the demand for chemical had been tempered by drier conditions.

    “As one area has started up and another eased off, we have just been moving stock from one area of the State to another to keep things going,” he said.

    “In some areas farmers haven’t had to spray twice, but if they had, supplies would have been extremely tight.”

    Mr Wood said some chemicals for aphid control had been particularly hard to source.

    “Products like pirimicarb and aphidex, which are the popular ones because they are softer on beneficial bugs, are extremely tight,” he said.

    “To date we have been able to source enough to keep our clients on the go, but we are still chasing stock all the time.”

  • Courts fiexw US to protect polar bears

    ENVIRONMENTAL groups and the Bush administration yesterday reached a partial court settlement that requires the Department of Interior to designate critical habitat for polar bears by June 30, 2010.

    The Department of Interior in May listed the polar bear as being threatened by global warming, but did not designate any critical habitat protection.

    The Centre for Biological Diversity, Greenpeace,and the Natural Resources Defence Council filed a lawsuit in an attempt to force the Government to do more for the bear’s long-term survival under the Endangered Species Act.

    “This agreement will provide an additional layer of protection,” said Kassie Siegel of the Centre for Biological Diversity.

    Conservationists yesterday called for better protection for the oceans’ nurseries following the release on Monday of the 2008 Red List, which shows dozens of marine species are threatened with extinction.

    International conservation group WWF said the list demonstrated how critical it was to afford greater protection to the oceans’ nurseries, such as the Coral Triangle, which spans Asia and parts of the South Pacific.

    The Coral Triangle boasts 75per cent of the world’s coral species and provides spawning grounds for globally valuable species such as reef fish and tuna.

    Lida Pet Soede, head of WWF’s Coral Triangle Program, said such areas were as valuable as South America’s Amazon and must be safeguarded.

    “Coastal development, destructive fishing and overfishing, unsustainable tourism and climate change are taking a heavy toll and, if left unchecked, will cause the collapse of the world’s most remarkable coral reef ecosystem,” Dr Pet Soede said.

    “The implications of loss of habitat and natural resources in the Coral Triangle are enormous in terms of the impact on ocean life globally and on regional livelihoods.

    “This nursery of the seas supports global populations of turtles and tuna, while 180 million people depend on its coasts and coastal resources for food security.”

    The annual Red List report, by the International Union for Conservation of Nature, said nearly 40 per cent of the 44,838 animal and plant species covered by the index were considered threatened. About 3000 of them were classified as critically endangered, meaning they face a very high probability of extinction.

    Among those considered critically endangered are leatherback and hawksbill turtles, and three other types of turtles listed as endangered or vulnerable. All are found in the Coral Triangle.

    Researchers were so concerned about the survival chances of 188 species of mammals that they were described as critically endangered, the highest ranking before extinct.

    Among them was the Iberian lynx which, with an estimated population of 84 to 143 adults left in the wild, is among the rarest animals in the world.

    “The huge demand for live reef fish amongst wealthy consumers in China and in Chinese communities around the world is a major contributor to the overfishing of these species,” said Geoffrey Muldoon, program leader for WWF’s live reef fish work in the Coral Triangle.

  • Danish island performs energy miracle

    Jorgen Tranberg looks a farmer to his roots: grubby blue overalls, crumpled T-shirt and crinkled, weather-beaten features. His laconic manner, blond hair and black clogs also reveal his Scandinavian origins. Jorgen farms at Norreskifte on Samso, a Danish island famed for its rich, sweet strawberries and delicately flavoured early potatoes. This place is steeped in history – the Vikings built ships and constructed canals here – while modern residents of Copenhagen own dozens of the island’s finer houses.

    But Samso has recently undergone a remarkable transformation, one that has given it an unexpected global importance and international technological standing. Although members of a tightly knit, deeply conservative community, Samsingers – with Jorgen in the vanguard – have launched a renewable-energy revolution on this windswept scrap of Scandinavia. Solar, biomass, wind and wood-chip power generators have sprouted up across the island, while traditional fossil-fuel plants have been closed and dismantled. Nor was it hard to bring about these changes. ‘For me, it has been a piece of cake,’ says Jorgen. Nevertheless, the consequences have been dramatic.

    Ten years ago, islanders drew nearly all their energy from oil and petrol brought in by tankers and from coal-powered electricity transmitted to the island through a mainland cable link. Today that traffic in energy has been reversed. Samsingers now export millions of kilowatt hours of electricity from renewable energy sources to the rest of Denmark. In doing so, islanders have cut their carbon footprint by a staggering 140 per cent. And what Samso can do today, the rest of the world can achieve in the near future, it is claimed.

    Last year, carbon dioxide reached a record figure of 384 parts per million – a rise of around 35 per cent on levels that existed before the Industrial Revolution. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has warned that such changes could soon have a dramatic impact on the world’s weather patterns. Already, Arctic sea ice is dwindling alarmingly and scientists say the world has only a few years left to make serious carbon-output cuts before irreversible, devastating climate change ensues. Samso suggests one route for avoiding such a fate.

    Everywhere you travel on the island you see signs of change. There are dozens of wind turbines of various sizes dotted across the landscape, houses have solar-panelled roofs, while a long line of giant turbines off the island’s southern tip swirl in the wind. Towns are linked to district heating systems that pump hot water to homes. These are either powered by rows of solar panels covering entire fields, or by generators which burn straw from local farms, or timber chips cut from the island’s woods.

    None of these enterprises has been imposed by outsiders or been funded by major energy companies. Each plant is owned either by a collective of local people or by an individual islander. The Samso revolution has been an exercise in self-determination – a process in which islanders have decided to demonstrate what can be done to alleviate climate damage while still maintaining a comfortable lifestyle.

    Consider Jorgen. As he wanders round his cowsheds, he scarcely looks like an energy entrepreneur. Yet the 47-year-old farmer is a true power broker. Apart from his fields of pumpkins and potatoes, as well as his 150 cows, he has erected a giant 1 megawatt (mw) wind turbine that looms down on his 120-hectare dairy farm. Four other great machines stand beside it, swirling in Samso’s relentless winds. Each device is owned either by a neighbouring farmer or by a collective of locals. In addition, Jorgen has bought a half share in an even bigger, 2.3mw generator, one of the 10 devices that guard the south coast of Samso and now help to supply a sizeable chunk of Denmark’s electricity.

    The people of Samso were once the producers of more than 45,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide every year – about 11 tonnes a head. Through projects like these, they have cut that figure to -15,000. (That strange minus figure comes from the fact that Samsingers export their excess wind power to mainland Denmark, where it replaces electricity that would otherwise be generated using coal or gas.) It is a remarkable transformation, wrought mainly by Samsingers themselves, albeit with the aid of some national and European Union funds and some generous, guaranteed fixed prices that Denmark provides for wind-derived electricity. The latter ensures turbines pay for themselves over a six- or seven-year period. After that, owners can expect to rake in some tidy profits.

    ‘It has been a very good investment,’ admits Jorgen. ‘It has made my bank manager very happy. But none of us is in it just for the money. We are doing it because it is fun and it makes us feel good.’ Nor do his efforts stop with his turbines. Jorgen recently redesigned his cowshed so it requires little straw for bedding for his cattle. Each animal now has its own natty mattress. Instead, most of the straw from Jorgen’s fields is sold to his local district heating plant, further increasing his revenue and limiting carbon dioxide production. (Carbon dioxide is absorbed as crops grow in fields. When their stalks – straw – are burned, that carbon dioxide is released, but only as a gas that has been recycled within a single growing season. By contrast, oil, coal and gas are the remains of plants that are millions of years old and so, when burned, release carbon dioxide that had been sequestered aeons ago.)

    Samso’s transformation owes its origin to a 1997 experiment by the Danish government. Four islands, Laeso, Samso, Aero and Mon, as well as the region of Thyholm in Jutland, were each asked to compete in putting up the most convincing plan to cut their carbon outputs and boost their renewable-energy generation. Samso won.

    Although it lies at the heart of Denmark, the nation’s fractured geography also ensures the island is one of its most awkward places to reach, surrounded as it is by the Kattegat, an inlet of the North Sea. To get to Samso from Copenhagen, you have to travel by train for a couple of hours to Kalundborg and then take one of the twice daily ferries to Samso. A total of 4,100 people live here, working on farms or in hotels and restaurants. The place is isolated and compact and ideal for an experiment in community politics and energy engineering – particularly as it is low-lying and windswept. Flags never droop on Samso.

    The job of setting up the Samso experiment fell to Soren Harmensen, a former environmental studies teacher, with thinning greyish hair and an infectious enthusiasm for all things renewable. Outside his project’s headquarters, at the Samso Energiakademi – a stylish, barn-like building designed to cut energy consumption to an absolute minimum – there is an old, rusting petrol pump parked on the front steps. A label on it says, simply: ‘No fuel. So what now, my love?’ Step inside and you will find no shortage of answers to that question.

    Soren is a proselytiser and proud of his island’s success. However, achieving it was not an easy matter. It took endless meetings to get things started. Every time there was a community issue at stake, he would arrive and preach his sermon about renewable energy and its value to the island. Slowly, the idea took hold and eventually public meetings were held purely to discuss his energy schemes. Even then, the process was erratic, with individual islanders’ self-interest triggering conflicts. One Samsinger, the owner of a cement factory, proposed a nuclear plant be built on the island instead of wind turbines. He would then secure the concrete contract for the reactor, he reasoned. The plan was quietly vetoed.

    ‘We are not hippies,’ says Soren. ‘We just want to change how we use our energy without harming the planet or without giving up the good life.’

    Eventually the first projects were launched, a couple of turbines on the west coast, and a district heating plant. ‘Nothing was achieved without talk and a great deal of community involvement,’ says Soren, a message he has since carried round the planet. ‘I visited Shropshire recently,’ he says. ‘A wind-farm project there was causing a huge fuss, in particular among the three villages nearest the proposed site. The planners would soothe the objections of one village, only for the other two to get angry – so local officials would turn to them. Then the first village started to object all over again. The solution was simple, of course. Give each village a turbine, I told them. The prospect of cheap electricity would have changed everyone’s minds.’ Needless to say, this did not happen.

    On another visit – this time to Islay, off the west coast of Scotland – Soren found similar problems. ‘I was asked to attend a public meeting to debate the idea of turning the island into a renewable energy centre like Samso. But nearly all the speakers droned on about ideals and about climate change in general. But what people really want is to be involved themselves and to do something that can make a difference to the world. That point was entirely lost.

    ‘Later I found that a local Islay distillery was installing a new set of boilers. Why not use the excess water to heat local homes, I suggested. That would be far too much bother, I was told. Yet that was just the kind of scheme that could kick-start a renewable-energy revolution.’

    Of course, there is something irritating about this Scandinavian certainty. Not every community is as cohesive as Samso’s, for one thing. And it should also be noted that the island’s transformation has come at a price: roughly 420m kroner – about £40m – that includes money from the Danish government, the EU, local businessmen and individual members of collectives. Thus the Samso revolution cost around £10,000 per islander, although a good chunk has come from each person’s own pockets. Nevertheless, if you multiply that sum by 60m – the population of Great Britain – you get a figure of around £600bn as the cost of bringing a similar revolution to Britain. It is utterly impractical, of course – a point happily acknowledged by Soren.

    ‘This is a pilot project to show the world what can be done. We are not suggesting everyone makes the sweeping changes that we have. People should cherry pick from what we have done in order to make modest, but still meaningful carbon emission cuts. The crucial point is that we have shown that if you want to change how we generate energy, you have to start at the community level and not impose technology on people. For example, Shell heard about what we were doing and asked to be involved – but only on condition they ended up owning the turbines. We told them to go away. We are a nation of farmers, of course. We believe in self-sufficiency.’

    Jesper Kjems was a freelance journalist based in Copenhagen when he and his wife came to Samso for a holiday four years ago. They fell in love with the island and moved in a few months later, although neither had jobs. Jesper started playing in a local band and met Soren Harmensen, its bassist, who sold him the Samso energy dream. Today Jesper is official spokesman for the Samso project.

    Outside the town of Nordby, he showed me round its district heating project. A field has been covered with solar panels mounted to face the sun. Cold water is pumped in at one end to emerge, even on a gloomy day, as seriously hot water – around 70C – which is then piped to local houses for heating and washing. On particularly dark, sunless days, the plant switches mode: wood chips are scooped by robot crane into a furnace which heats the plant’s water instead. The entire system is completely automated. ‘There are some living creatures involved, however,’ adds Jesper. ‘A flock of sheep is sent into the field every few days to nibble the grass before it grows long enough to prevent the sun’s rays hitting the panels.’

    Everywhere you go, you find renewable- energy enthusiasts like Jesper. Crucially, most of them are recent recruits to the cause. Nor do planning rows concerning the sight of ‘eyesore’ wind turbines affect Samsingers as they do Britons. ‘No one minds wind turbines on Samso for the simple reason that we all own a share of one,’ says electrician Brian Kjar.

    And that is the real lesson from Samso. What has happened here is a social not a technological revolution. Indeed, it was a specific requirement of the scheme, when established, that only existing, off-the-shelf renewable technology be used. The real changes have been those in attitude. Brian’s house near the southern town of Orby reveals the consequences. He has his own wind turbine, which he bought second-hand for £16,000 – about a fifth of its original price. This produces more electricity than his household needs, so he uses the excess to heat water that he keeps in a huge insulated tank that he also built himself. On Samso’s occasional windless days, this provides heating for his home when the 70ft turbine outside his house is not moving.

    ‘Everyone knows someone who is interested in renewable energy today,’ he adds. ‘Something like this starts with a few people. It just needs time to spread. That is the real lesson of Samso.’

  • NASA damns coal

    “This is the first paper in the scientific literature that explicitly melds the two vital issues of global peak oil production and human-induced climate change,” Kharecha said. “We’re illustrating the types of action needed to get to target carbon dioxide levels.”

    Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that concerns climate scientists because it can remain in the atmosphere for many centuries and studies have indicated that humans have already caused those levels to rise for decades by burning fossils fuels. Also, carbon dioxide accounts for more than half of all human-caused greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

    Previously published research shows that a dangerous level of global warming will occur if carbon dioxide in the atmosphere exceeds a concentration of about 450 parts per million. That’s equivalent to about a 61 percent increase from the pre-industrial level of 280 parts per million, but only 17 percent more than the current level of 385 parts per million. The carbon dioxide cap is related to a global temperature rise of about 1.8°F above the 2000 global temperature, at or beyond which point the disintegration of the West Antarctic ice sheet and Arctic sea ice could set in motion feedbacks and lead to accelerated melting.

    To better understand the possible trajectory of future carbon dioxide, Kharecha and Hansen devised five carbon dioxide emissions scenarios that span the years 1850-2100. Each scenario reflects a different estimate for the global production peak of fossil fuels, the timing of which depends on reserve size, recoverability and technology.

    “Even if we assume high-end estimates and unconstrained emissions from conventional oil and gas, we find that these fuels alone are not abundant enough to take carbon dioxide above 450 parts per million,” Kharecha said.

    The first scenario estimates carbon dioxide levels if emissions from fossil fuels are unconstrained and follow along “business as usual,” growing by two percent annually until half of each reservoir has been recovered, after which emissions begin to decline by two percent annually.

    The second scenario considers a situation in which emissions from coal are reduced first by developed countries starting in 2013 and then by developing countries a decade later, leading to a global phase out by 2050 of the emissions from burning coal that reach the atmosphere. The reduction of emissions to the atmosphere in this case can come from reducing coal consumption or from capturing and sequestering the carbon dioxide before it reaches the atmosphere.

    The remaining three scenarios include the above-mentioned phase out of coal, but consider different scenarios for oil use and supply. One case considers a delay in the oil peak by about 21 years to 2037. Another considers the implications of fewer-than-expected additions to proven reserves due to overestimated reserves, or the addition of a price on emissions that makes the fuel too expensive to extract. The final scenario looks at emissions from oil fields that peak at different times, extending the peak into a plateau that lasts from 2020-2040.

    Graphs of CO2 levels

    Image above: Atmospheric carbon dioxide changes over time for the study’s five fossil fuel scenarios: business-as-usual (a), coal phase-out (b) and oil use and supply (c-e). Credit: NASA/Kharecha and Hansen. > Larger image

    Next, the team used a simplified mathematical model, called the Bern carbon cycle model, to convert carbon dioxide emissions from each scenario into estimates of future carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere.

    The unconstrained “business as usual” scenario resulted in a level of atmospheric carbon dioxide that more than doubled the preindustrial level and from about 2035 onward levels exceed the 450 parts per million threshold of this study. Even when low-end estimates of reserves were assumed, the threshold was exceeded from about 2050 onwards. However, the other four scenarios resulted in carbon dioxide levels that peaked in various years but all fell below the prescribed cap of 450 parts per million by about 2080 at the latest, with levels in two of the scenarios always staying below the threshold.

    The researchers suggest that the results illustrated by each scenario have clear implications for reducing carbon dioxide emissions from coal, as well as “unconventional” fuels such as methane hydrates and tar sands, all of which contain much more fossil carbon than conventional oil and gas.

    “Because coal is much more plentiful than oil and gas, reducing coal emissions is absolutely essential to avoid ‘dangerous’ climate change brought about by atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration exceeding 450 parts per million,” Kharecha said. “The most important mitigation strategy we recommend — a phase-out of carbon dioxide emissions from coal within the next few decades — is feasible using current or near-term technologies.”

  • September 28 is Earth Overshoot Day

     

    What is Overshoot?

    Just like any company, nature has a budget — it can only produce so many resources and absorb so much waste every year. The problem is, our demand for nature’s services is exceeding what it can provide.

    In 2008, humanity used about 40% more in one year than nature can regenerate that same year. That means it takes over a year and three months for the Earth to regenerate what humanity is using in one year. This problem — using resources faster than they can regenerate and creating waste faster than it can be absorbed — is called ecological overshoot.

    We currently maintain this overshoot by liquidating the planet’s natural resources. For example we can cut trees faster than they re-grow, and catch fish at a rate faster than they repopulate. While this can be done for a short while, overshoot ultimately leads to the depletion of resources on which our economy depends.

    In fact, overshoot is at the root of the most pressing environmental problems we face today: climate change, declining biodiversity, shrinking forests, fisheries collapse and several of the factors contributing to soaring world food prices.

    Why is Earth Overshoot Day Earlier Than Last Year

    Earth Overshoot day (also known as Ecological Debt Day) was a concept devised by Global Footprint Network partner, nef (the new economics foundation). Each year, Global Footprint Network calculates humanity’s Ecological Footprint (it’s demand on cropland, pasture, forests and fisheries), and compares this with global biocapacity, the ability of these ecosystems to generate resources and absorb waste. Ecological Footprint accounting can be used to determine the exact date we, as a global community, begin living beyond the means of what the planet can regenerate in a calendar year.

    Humanity first went into overshoot in 1986; before that time the global community consumed resources and produced carbon dioxide at a rate consistent with what the planet could produce and reabsorb. By 1996, however, humanity was using 15 percent more resources in a year than the planet could supply, with Earth Overshoot Day falling in November. This year, more than two decades since we first went into overshoot, because we are now demanding resources at a rate of 40 percent faster than the planet can produce them, Earth Overshoot Day has moved forward to September 23.

    How is Earth Overshoot Day Calculated?

    [ world biocapacity / world Ecological Footprint ] x 365 = Ecological Debt Day

    Put simply, Earth Overshoot Day shows the day on which our total Ecological Footprint (measured in global hectares) is equal to the biocapacity (also measured in global hectares) that nature can regenerate in that year. For the rest of the year, we are accumulating debt by depleting our natural capital and letting waste accumulate.

    The day of the year on which humanity enters into overshoot and begins adding to our ecological debt is calculated by calculating the ratio of global available biocapacity to global Ecological Footprint and multiplying by 365. From this, we find the number of days of demand that the biosphere could supply, and the number of days we operate in overshoot.

    This ratio shows that in 2008, in just 267 days, we demanded the biosphere’s entire capacity for the year. The 267th day of the year is September 23.

    If you have further questions about the Ecological Footprint and overshoot calculations, there are a number of resources available through our website to learn more: See the Living Planet Report and the Earth Overshoot Day Media Backgrounder for definitions, data and further information about overshoot. You can also read our methodology paper for a more technical overview of our calculation methods, and visit our glossary page for definitions of terms. If you have further inquiries about Earth Overshoot Day, please contact Nicole Freeling.

  • Warmer Arctic releases methane

    Scientists aboard a research ship that has sailed the entire length of Russia’s northern coast have discovered intense concentrations of methane – sometimes at up to 100 times background levels – over several areas covering thousands of square miles of the Siberian continental shelf.

    In the past few days, the researchers have seen areas of sea foaming with gas bubbling up through “methane chimneys” rising from the sea floor. They believe that the sub-sea layer of permafrost, which has acted like a “lid” to prevent the gas from escaping, has melted away to allow methane to rise from underground deposits formed before the last ice age.

    They have warned that this is likely to be linked with the rapid warming that the region has experienced in recent years.

    Methane is about 20 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and many scientists fear that its release could accelerate global warming in a giant positive feedback where more atmospheric methane causes higher temperatures, leading to further permafrost melting and the release of yet more methane.

    The amount of methane stored beneath the Arctic is calculated to be greater than the total amount of carbon locked up in global coal reserves so there is intense interest in the stability of these deposits as the region warms at a faster rate than other places on earth.

    Orjan Gustafsson of Stockholm University in Sweden, one of the leaders of the expedition, described the scale of the methane emissions in an email exchange sent from the Russian research ship Jacob Smirnitskyi.

    “We had a hectic finishing of the sampling programme yesterday and this past night,” said Dr Gustafsson. “An extensive area of intense methane release was found. At earlier sites we had found elevated levels of dissolved methane. Yesterday, for the first time, we documented a field where the release was so intense that the methane did not have time to dissolve into the seawater but was rising as methane bubbles to the sea surface. These ‘methane chimneys’ were documented on echo sounder and with seismic [instruments].”

    At some locations, methane concentrations reached 100 times background levels. These anomalies have been seen in the East Siberian Sea and the Laptev Sea, covering several tens of thousands of square kilometres, amounting to millions of tons of methane, said Dr Gustafsson. “This may be of the same magnitude as presently estimated from the global ocean,” he said. “Nobody knows how many more such areas exist on the extensive East Siberian continental shelves.

    “The conventional thought has been that the permafrost ‘lid’ on the sub-sea sediments on the Siberian shelf should cap and hold the massive reservoirs of shallow methane deposits in place. The growing evidence for release of methane in this inaccessible region may suggest that the permafrost lid is starting to get perforated and thus leak methane… The permafrost now has small holes. We have found elevated levels of methane above the water surface and even more in the water just below. It is obvious that the source is the seabed.”

    The preliminary findings of the International Siberian Shelf Study 2008, being prepared for publication by the American Geophysical Union, are being overseen by Igor Semiletov of the Far-Eastern branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Since 1994, he has led about 10 expeditions in the Laptev Sea but during the 1990s he did not detect any elevated levels of methane. However, since 2003 he reported a rising number of methane “hotspots”, which have now been confirmed using more sensitive instruments on board the Jacob Smirnitskyi.

    Dr Semiletov has suggested several possible reasons why methane is now being released from the Arctic, including the rising volume of relatively warmer water being discharged from Siberia’s rivers due to the melting of the permafrost on the land.

    The Arctic region as a whole has seen a 4C rise in average temperatures over recent decades and a dramatic decline in the area of the Arctic Ocean covered by summer sea ice. Many scientists fear that the loss of sea ice could accelerate the warming trend because open ocean soaks up more heat from the sun than the reflective surface of an ice-covered sea.