EcoRadio

Author: admin

  • International protest against old growth logging launched

    A group called the Rainforest Portal has called for international protest against the Forest Stewardship Council, a group which promotes the sustainable logging of old growth forests. The Forest Stewardship Council certifies timber taken from old growth forests in a careful manner as being ‘carbon positive’. A number of global organisations, including the World Bank, promote the certification and encourage developing countries to implement the practice. Rainforest Portal has tagged the group as ‘forest liars’ and is encouraging supporters to lobby government to ban the practice and discredit the certification.

    Background story

  • Water pricing an important conservation tool

    The Australian Conservation Foundation has welcomed the suggestion by Treasury Secretary Ken Henry that water pricing should reflect water scarcity.

    “Pricing is a critical part of managing demand for water,” said ACF’s Sustainable Australia Program Manager Monica Richter.

    “Any pricing regime should take account of social and environmental concerns.

    “A block tariff – where the more you use, the more you pay – would do this, while a flat tariff would not.

    “Pricing is one of the tools governments can use to reward people who do conserve water.

    “Water restrictions remain another important tool in managing the use of this precious resource,” she said.

  • Climate change ‘5pc threat to economy

    From News Limited 

    NEW modelling suggests climate change would knock five per cent off Australia’s economic output by 2100 if nothing is done to reduce greenhouse gases.

    Early findings of the modelling being produced jointly by CSIRO and ABARE forecast a rise in Australia’s average temperature of 3.5 degrees celsius under the same scenario.

    Climate scientists suggest temperature rises above two degrees celsius can trigger dangerous climate change.

    The results were presented by Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics chief economist Don Gunasekera at the economic research agency’s Outlook 2008 conference in Canberra.

    Dr Gunasekera said the project had not yet modelled the impact of mitigation and adaptation measures, such as emissions trading schemes.

    ”(Firstly) the idea for us was basically to get a snapshot of what the world would look like if don’t do anything,” Dr Gunasekera told the conference.

    The Global Integrated Assessment Model (GIAM) shows Australia’s economic output would fall 0.6 per cent by 2050 below the level it would be without climate change, and five per cent by 2100.

    Globally, economic output would plunge 11.4 per cent by 2100.

    GIAM shows the world’s concentration of greenhouse gases hitting an alarming 1,200 parts per million by 2100 without any action being taken.

    The forecast is at the upper end of scenarios mapped by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

    Most global warming strategy aims at keeping concentrations below 550ppm to avoid catastrophic developments.

    The modelling showed the 1,200ppm level would increase the global average temperature by 3.4 degrees celsius above 2000 levels, and 3.5 degrees celsius in Australia.

    Among major nations, only India and Russia had higher forecasts.

    However, IPCC scenarios have shown temperature rises of up to 6.5 degrees under a 1,200ppm scenario.

    Dr Gunasekera said in pre-2050 years the GIAM modelling had been broadly consistent with IPCC predictions on temperatures and carbon concentrations.

    He said when completed, GIAM would become a useful tool for climate change policy analysis.

    "Such a framework will eventually allow us to assess the costs and benefits of climate change response policies in a more effective manner,” he said.

    The federal Treasury is also conducting economic modelling on climate change which is expected to be completed mid-year.

  • Arctic forest fires add to climate chaos

    Montana State University released details of an interesting four year study on the effects of global warming on the world’s Arctic tundra, summarised by lead author, post-doctoral researcher Philip Higuera.

    The study found that arctic tundra are far more susceptible to fires than previously thought, an important finding, given the potential for tundra fires to release organic carbon – which could add significantly to the amount of greenhouse gases already blamed for global warming.

    The ancient sediment cores taken in the study, showed the shrub tundra burned as frequently as modern boreal forests in Alaska – every 140 years on average, but with some fires spaced only 30 years apart.

    Higuera’s research is important because other evidence indicates that as the climate has warmed in the past 50 to 100 years, shrubs have expanded across the world’s tundra regions.

    “There is evidence of increasing shrub biomass in modern tundra ecosystems, and we expect temperatures to continue to increase and overall moisture levels to decrease. Combine these two factors and it suggests a greater potential for fires,” Higuera said. “The sediment cores indicate that it’s happened before.”

    These findings are significant because the world’s high latitude tundra and boreal forest ecosystems contain roughly 30 percent of the planet’s total soil carbon, the report said. Currently, much of the carbon is locked in permafrost. But a warming climate could cause the permafrost to melt and release its carbon stores into the atmosphere where it would contribute to the greenhouse effect.

    “Vegetation change through an increase in shrub biomass and more frequent burning will change a great deal of the carbon cycle in these high latitudes,” Higuera said. “We don’t fully understand the implications, except that it’s reasonable to expect that carbon that was previously locked up could enter the atmosphere.”

    The importance of this study and further research that it will encourage is summed up in the introduction:

    “Tundra and boreal ecosystems store one third of the world’s soil carbon . The fate of this vast carbon stock has become a major concern to global-change scientists because its release to the atmosphere could exacerbate CO2–related climate change . “

    The approach taken by the researchers, using the paleoecological approach circumvented the limiting factor of lack of fire history studies and short observational records. It offers the only way to obtain long-term empirical records of fire and vegetation change relevant for understanding tundra fire regimes under future climate and vegetation scenarios.

    As the Arctic warms and the tundra biomass expands perhaps allowing new vegetation, the risk to the world of fires in this region will become more important and critical to global climate change.

    As Higuera’s paper: “Fires in Ancient Shrub Tundra: Implications of Paleorecords for Arctic Environmental Change” is available online at the following link, it makes interesting reading. http://www.plosone.org/doi/pone.0001744 in the open-access journal PLoS One www.plosone.org

  • Labor backs dirty coal

    Protecting electricity generators from the costs of emissions trading would cripple Australia’s efforts to control global warming, according to Greens NSW MP John Kaye.

    Commenting on a story on page 5 of today’s Sydney Morning Herald, Dr Kaye said: "The Iemma government is calling in favours in Canberra to kneecap the national emissions trading scheme in order to prop up its privatisation of the electricity industry.

    "Treasurer Costa, a self-admitted climate sceptic, has joined with the generator lobby to pressure the Rudd government into issuing free emissions permits to the large generators.

    "The threat of a properly functioning trading scheme is driving away potential investors in the generators, pushing down the sale price and making the sell-off look even more silly.

    "In NSW the electricity industry emits more than 58 million tonnes of carbon dioxide each year, accounting for 37% of the state greenhouse gas emissions.

    "Issuing free permits to power stations would not only be a multi-billion dollar a year gift to the owners but it would make a mockery of the trading scheme.

    "There would be no incentives to reduce emissions. The renewable energy industry would be stranded in unfair competition with the coal-burning giants.

    "Treasurer Costa and his allies in the electricity lobby are playing for high stakes.

    "If the carbon price rises to $65 a tonne as estimated by the European Union, the annual value of emissions permits for NSW generators could be $3.4 billion.

    "The Iemma government is arguing for a massive subsidy to the coal-fired power station to prop up their faltering sell-off scheme.

    "Treasurer Costa is attempting to disguise the dangers of handing over 37% of the state’s emissions to the private sector.

    "Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Climate Change Minister Penny Wong should ignore their self-serving Labor colleagues in NSW and create a consistent and rigorous trading scheme," Dr Kaye said.

  • International protest against logging kicks off

    Outrageous support by big environmental groups for first-time industrial logging of primary and old-growth rainforest wildernesses based upon vague claims that FSC certification makes it sustainable, well-managed and now even "carbon positive" is a big lie and must end

    By Rainforest Portal, a project of Ecological Internet – March 5, 2008

    Certified logging causes climate change Caption: Ancient rainforest timbers belong in primary rainforest canopies, not consumer products  (link) Many of the world’s largest environmental groups continue to support Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) "certified" industrial logging of the world’s last primary and old-growth forests. They have fallen for, and now espouse, the big lie that first time logging of ancient forests containing centuries old trees can be done in an ecologically well-managed and sustainable manner. This is not a minor policy difference: whether and when old-growth logging ends will critically determine the likelihood of the Earth’s climate, species, ecosystems and human livelihoods being maintained.

    Claims that FSC certified old-growth logging protects biodiversity and ecosystems have increasingly been called into question on the basis of ecological science, lax certifying organizations’ conflicts of interest and a litany of questionable certifications. Outrageously now the "forests liars" — FSC with the endorsement of the World Bank and member NGOs — claim certified logging of primary forests has carbon benefits and deserves to be compensated in the carbon market. Despite no mention of carbon balances in FSC rules, logging companies and carbon offset projects are claiming FSC certification makes them "carbon positive".

    Selective first time old-growth logging permanently changes forest composition, structure and dynamics. Individual trees being exploited in primary stands are often hundreds of years old. Is killing centuries old trees compatible with "sustainable" exploitation of forests? Nearly all rainforest canopy species are dispersed by large birds and mammals which disappear after logged forests are made accessible to hunters. After the adults of such tree species are harvested, there are few juveniles to take their places. These high value hardwoods grow very slowing, taking many decades or even centuries to mature, yet economics require 20-30 year harvest cycles. Given this lack of regeneration, most rainforest tree species cannot be sustainably managed.

    Ancient forest logging always entails a net carbon loss. Timber harvest lowers forest biomass as the largest trees with the most carbon are harvested. Thirty percent or more of the carbon quickly returns to the atmosphere as limbs, branches, roots, leaves and bark decompose at the felling site. More is lost as sawdust during milling. Finally the finished product, often containing less than 50% of the original carbon, is incorporated into construction, furniture, etc. for undetermined periods, but eventually even this carbon returns to the atmosphere. If left undisturbed the forest could become a net carbon sink as it recovers the biomass lost in the harvest operation, yet, this is rarely the case. Fragmented, open canopied, dry forests as the result of selective logging are also much more likely to burn releasing huge amounts of carbon. Once logged primary forests’ future carbon removal and storage is permanently diminished and will never recover.

    Ancient rainforest logging and other industrial development that destroy and diminish primary forests is a planetary social and ecological disease that destroys biodiversity, causes climate change and contributes greatly to the chances of the Earth’s ecological collapse. Global ecological sustainability depends critically upon strictly protecting all remaining relatively natural ecosystems, particularly primary forests,which hold and continue to remove vast amounts of carbon that otherwise would be in the atmosphere. Those suggesting otherwise, and falsely suggesting they are protecting ancient forests by advocating for them to be cut down, are dangerous charlatans and will not be tolerated any longer. Solving climate change depends critically upon protecting and restoring expansive natural terrestrial ecosystems free from all industrial activity.

    We must continue pressuring all forest liars; including big NGOs, governments, companies and consumers supporting ill-gotten certified timber, that are contributing to destruction of the world’s last ancient forests. Please join us in calling upon Greenpeace, WWF, Rainforest Action Network, NRDC, Forest Ethics, Friends of the Earth and Rainforest Alliance to immediately end their support for first time logging of primary and old-growth forests. These groups must withdraw from FSC, commit to working to end ancient forest logging as a keystone response to the biodiversity and climate change crises, and support local sustainable community development based upon standing and intact forests. And let them know that should they fail to do so, that protest will continue until they are either shamed into changing their policies or loss of membership puts them out of business.