07/09/2015

Climate Criminal Tony Abbott Is The Best Marketing Possible For My New Book: Naomi Klein

New Matilda - Thom Mitchell

Canadian writer, activist, and film-maker, Naomi Klein has called out the Abbott government’s response to climate change as perhaps the worst in the world, describing the nation’s carbon reduction targets as “egregious” and our Prime Minister as the “best marketing” possible for her new book, ‘This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs The Climate’.

Environmentalist Dr Naomi Klein, pictured at the 2015 Festival Of Dangerous Ideas in Sydney.



Klein sat down with New Matilda at the Sydney Opera House this week ahead of her talk at The Festival of Dangerous Ideas yesterday. In the lead-up to the event, Klein described Abbott as 2015's 'hottest climate criminal'. She argues that Australia is a perfect example of the confluence of free market fundamentalism’s insatiable appetite for growth, and the realistic costs of tackling the “civilisational threat” posed by climate change.
Klein’s book is predicated on the argument that having failed to take any meaningful action for two full decades, the solutions to climate change must now involve a radical restructuring of global economies to provide the cash needed to cut out carbon, but it is couched in a vision of the climate crisis also acting as a catalyst for the progressive redistribution of wealth.
“The argument I make in the book is that the ideology, the world-view, that Joseph Stiglitz has called 'market fundamentalism' simply cannot accommodate what human beings need to do in the face of the climate crisis,” she said.
“This is an ideology that wages war on the regulation of corporations, wages war on the idea of collective action, is constantly trying to liberate corporations from the burden of taxation and that is just not compatible with what we need to do in the face of a civilisational crisis like climate change.”
She said that as neoliberalism grabbed hold of governments around the world through the 80s and onwards, at the same time our awareness of climate change began to grow, a fundamental conflict also emerged “between what our planet needs in order to continue to be a hospitable host to human life, and what our current economic system needs, which is short-term growth and putting profits above all else”.
“And talking about Tony Abbott, Australia seemed [a good place to bring the book’s message] because this is a government that shows perhaps more than any other government on earth what that conflict looks like, and what the costs of that conflict actually are."
Klein advocates a return to more mixed economies, “because of course, we do need to regulate corporations, we need to plan and manage our economies much more actively than we do now if we are going to get off fossil fuels, which are the basis of modern capitalism”.
“It takes money to do that [and] it has to come from somewhere: We have to tax those with the most in order to pay for this transition and what we see in Australia is the exact opposite.”
Instead of that, Klein said, “we see carbon taxes being repealed, we see mining taxes being repealed, we see essential services that are key to this transition being privatised, and we see a tax on the regulatory structure that is inadequate to this task and still is being rolled back to make way for more fossil fuel infrastructure.”
Since the Prime Minister declared that “coal is good for humanity” the Abbott government has become an even stronger advocate for an unfettered coal industry. And on the international stage it is widely seen, to quote former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, as an embarrassing “climate free-rider”.
The Abbott government recently announced at the Paris climate talks later this year Australia will commit to shaving 26 per cent off the nation’s carbon emissions by 2030. It’s around half of what the government’s independent advisory body, The Climate Change Authority, has recommended for the same timeframe.
The Climate Institute has compiled a list of comparable economies — including Klein’s native Canada, New Zealand, the United States and the European Union — and found that while they will reduce their emissions each year at an averaged rate of -2.5 per cent, Australia lingers firmly at the back of the pack with its commitment to reducing emissions by -1.6 per cent a year.


Klein, who is also a board member of climate advocacy group 350.org, said that developed nations need to be slashing carbon pollution by 8 to 10 per cent year on year to keep within the two degree rise in average global temperatures the governments of the world have agreed is ‘dangerous’.
While the movements pushing for stronger action on climate change are winning, Klein said, “the problem is this [movement] is also on a firm and unyielding, science-based, deadline” and even the most ambitious targets countries have announced fall short of the pace of change science tells us is needed.
“I just don’t really see how we could be further behind,” Klein said. “I come to this starting from the premise that we have been trying to respond to climate change without rocking the boat for 20 years and the record is abysmal, right?
“The whole record is one of market-based solutions, consumer solutions, green growth solutions, and emissions are up by more than 60 per cent.
“I mean, when I was on a TV show here debating a conservative, you know, he was saying ‘well your solutions are radical’. Right, and the truth is doing nothing is radical,” she said.
For better or worse, Klein argues, global warming will change everything.
Klein said the broader economic agenda of the Abbott government - which has promoted the regressive concentration of wealth into the coffers of the nation’s richest or foreign mining moguls like Gautam Adani, the Indian billionaire attempting to develop the nation’s largest ever coal mine - is driven by the same neoliberal ideology that shackles climate action.
“What the book is arguing is we don’t just need climate action, we need climate justice; we need to take action on climate change in ways that simultaneously fights inequality and improves quality of life for the vast majority of people,” Klein said.
“Some people are going to have to sacrifice because some people have way too much — I would include myself in that category. But the fact is that most people are going to have a better life than they have right now if we do this right, if we transition right.
“I feel like in many ways I owe Tony Abbott a debt of thanks because he is this book’s best marketer,” Klein said, but she added that the solutions would not be found by waiting on parliaments to affect change of their own accord.

Instead, the anti-corporatisation campaigner who rose to global prominence after the publication of her first book in 2000, No Logo, promotes divestment, popular protest, non-violent direct action and a return to the collectivism capitalism forsook, including through taking back ownership of energy grids.
“The way I put it is that we will not solve this problem, we will not rise to this challenge, unless there is a massive ideological shift,” she said.
Klein argues that when leaders declare a crisis, as we saw during the Global Financial Crisis in 2008, we see that radical action is possible - the massive stimulus package of the Rudd government seems an apt example - but climate change had not received the ‘shock treatment’ that galvanises leaders to drop everything and act.
In Klein’s view, what is needed is a ‘people’s shock’ to force that action on leaders who are not serving the public interest but rather a zealous commitment to an unfair ideology characterised by the sorts of free trade agreements and ‘small government’ that are the hallmark of Abbott’s administration.
“The people [we’re] talking about are part of an ideological movement that shifted the values of our respective cultures really dramatically, and it was really a deliberate process," Klein said.
“As Margaret Thatcher said, the economics is the tool but the goal is to change hearts and minds; they set out to move from societies that had a real sense of the importance of the collective sphere to ones that valued individualism above all else.
“…People say ‘well that’s impossible’, but it isn’t impossible. They did it.
“They changed the cultures of our countries so successfully that even when they’re out of power, our opposition parties generally subscribe to versions of the same ideology."

5 Trillion Tons of Ice Lost Since 2002

Slate - Phil Plait

I’ve been writing about what global warming means to our planet and to us for a long time now. A critical concern for this is the loss of land ice in Antarctica and Greenland, for many reasons. One is that it's a bellwether for our poles, a preview of what it means as we turn up the global thermostat. Another is that it contributes to sea level rise, which has been moving upward for quite some time now.
But land ice loss is perhaps most important as a political trigger; the sheer amount of land ice being lost every year is immediate, here, now. And the numbers are staggering: Using data from the GRACE satellites launched in 2002, scientists measured that the Antarctic ice sheet is losing 134 billion metric tons per year, and Greenland is losing 287 billion tons per year.

ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica since 2002
Land ice lost from Greenland and Antarctica since 2002. The zero point is the average over 2002–2015.Graphs by NASA

I’m an astronomer. I deal with numbers this large all the time. But internalizing them is another issue altogether; after a while they just become, well, numbers.
Perhaps a change in perspective is called for. Those rates quoted are horrific, but what do they mean for the total ice lost from those two regions?
On Wednesday, NASA posted the graphs above on its climate change website, and that hammered home just what 420 billion tons of ice melting annually means when looking back into the recent past.
From 2002 to mid-November 2014—less than 13 years—the combined land ice loss from Antarctica and Greenland is more than 5 trillion tons.
Five. Trillion. Tons.
That’s beyond staggering; that’s almost incomprehensible. It’s a volume of about 5,700 cubic kilometers, a cube of ice nearly 18 kilometers—more than 11 miles—on a side. Place that cube on the ground, and the top of it would be above 90 percent of the Earth’s atmosphere, reaching twice the height of Mount Everest.

ice and Mt. Everest
Just to give you an idea. Photo illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker. Photos by Daniel Prudek/Thinkstock and StudioZ/Shutterstock.

Five trillion tons. Remember that the next time some climate change denier starts spouting the usual nonsense about sea ice increasing. That claim is very close to a bald-faced lie. First, arctic sea ice is declining rapidly. Second, arctic sea ice loss is so huge that it easily overwhelms any temporary gains in Antarctic sea ice. And third, sea ice is very different than land ice. Land ice loss isn’t getting replaced anywhere near the rate it’s being lost. Once it slides into the sea, it’s gone.
Except it isn’t really. It’s gone as ice. It’s still there as fresh water, making sea levels rise and potentially altering the currents of warm and cold water that further regulate our climate.
Whenever I make a post like this, I get emails, tweets, and comments from people who deny global warming is happening, and they point to fatally flawed “evidence”—cherry-picking data (like looking at small regions instead of global data), ignoring trends to look for small spikes in time, distracting people by using misleading examples of cooling or ice growth. It’s the same tired garbage all the time.
The reality is we’re warming up. The reality is we’re losing ice at both poles at tremendous rates. The reality is our climate is changing, our weather is changing, our lives are changing.
We need to recognize that, and we need our politicians to recognize that. The deniers rely on bad science and pathological interpretations. Despite recent baloney about it (is Rick Santorum ever right about anything?), in fact the overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree: Global warming is real and it’s our fault.
We need to elect politicians who understand that, and are willing to take action about it. Or else in the not too distant future, 5 trillions tons is going to seem like a drop in the bucket.

NASA: Sea Levels Rise By 3 Inches (8cm) Since 1992

NASA

Global sea level has risen about 3 millimeters (0.1 inch) a year since Topex/Poseidon began its precise measurement of sea surface height in 1993 and was followed by Jason-1 in 2001. Credit: University of Colorado

Seas around the world have risen an average of nearly 3 inches (8 centimeters) since 1992, with some locations rising more than 9 inches (25 centimeters) due to natural variation, according to the latest satellite measurements from NASA and its partners. An intensive research effort now underway, aided by NASA observations and analysis, points to an unavoidable rise of several feet in the future.
The question scientists are grappling with is how quickly will seas rise?
"Given what we know now about how the ocean expands as it warms and how ice sheets and glaciers are adding water to the seas, it's pretty certain we are locked into at least 3 feet [0.9 meter] of sea level rise, and probably more," said Steve Nerem of the University of Colorado, Boulder, and lead of the Sea Level Change Team. "But we don't know whether it will happen within a century or somewhat longer."



Team scientists will discuss a new visualization based on 23 years of sea level data — the entire record of available satellite data — which reveals changes are anything but uniform around the globe. The record is based on data from three consecutive satellite missions; the first a collaboration between NASA and the French space agency, Centre National d'Études Spatiales (CNES), launched in 1992. The fourth in the series will be Jason-3, led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) with participation by NASA, CNES and the European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT).
In 2013, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued an assessment based on a consensus of international researchers that stated global sea levels would likely rise from 1 to 3 feet (0.3 to 0.9 meter) by the end of the century. According to Nerem, new research available since this report suggests the higher end of that range is more likely, and the question remains how that range might shift upward.



The data reveal the height of the sea surface is not rising uniformly everywhere. Regional differences in sea level rise are dominated by the effects of ocean currents and natural cycles such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. But, as these natural cycles wax and wane, they can have major impacts on local coastlines.
"Sea level along the west coast of the United States has actually fallen over the past 20 years because long-term natural cycles there are hiding the impact of global warming," said Josh Willis, an oceanographer at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. "However, there are signs this pattern is changing. We can expect accelerated rates of sea level rise along this coast over the next decade as the region recovers from its temporary sea level 'deficit.'"
Scientists estimate that about one-third of sea level rise is caused by expansion of warmer ocean water, one-third is due to ice loss from the massive Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets and the remaining third results from melting mountain glaciers. But the fate of the polar ice sheets could change that ratio and produce more rapid increases in the coming decades.



The Greenland ice sheet, covering 660,000 square miles (1.7 million square kilometers) — nearly the area of Alaska — shed an average of 303 gigatons of ice a year over the past decade, according to satellite measurements. The Antarctic ice sheet, covering 5.4 million square miles (14 million square kilometers) — larger than the United States and India combined — has lost an average of 118 gigatons a year.
"We've seen from the paleoclimate record that sea level rise of as much as 10 feet [3 meters] in a century or two is possible, if the ice sheets fall apart rapidly," said Tom Wagner, the cryosphere program scientist at NASA Headquarters in Washington. "We're seeing evidence that the ice sheets are waking up, but we need to understand them better before we can say we're in a new era of rapid ice loss."
Although Antarctica's contribution to sea level rise currently is much smaller than that of Greenland, recent research indicates this could change in the upcoming century. In 2014, two West Antarctica studies focused on the acceleration of the glaciers in the Amundsen Sea sector showed its collapse is underway.
East Antarctica's massive ice sheet remains the primary unknown in sea level rise projections. Though it appears to be stable, a recent study found under a major glacier two deep troughs that could draw warm ocean water to the base of the glacier, causing it to melt.
"The prevailing view among specialists has been that East Antarctica is stable, but we don't really know," said glaciologist Eric Rignot of the University of California Irvine and JPL. "Some of the signs we see in the satellite data right now are red flags that these glaciers might not be as stable as we once thought. There's always a lot of attention on the changes we see now, but as scientists our priority needs to be on what the changes could be tomorrow."
One of the keys to understanding future rates of ice loss is determining the role ocean currents and ocean temperatures play in melting the ice sheets from below their edges. A new, six-year NASA field campaign took to the waters around Greenland this summer to probe how warming ocean waters are triggering Greenland glacier degradation. The Oceans Melting Greenland (OMG) project is taking coastal ocean temperature measurements, observing glacial thinning at the ice's edge, and producing the first high-resolution maps of the seafloor, fjords and canyons in the continental shelf surrounding Greenland.

Related Stories

  • August 28, 2015 NASA's summer research on sea level rise in Greenland
  • August 28, 2015 Greenland campaign takes flight to measure ice sheet
  • August 28, 2015 NASA to study Arctic climate change ecosystem impacts
  • August 26, 2015 OMG mission maps Greenland's coastline