08/12/2015

'We're Sinking Here': Climate Change Laps At Front Door Of Torres Strait Islands

The Guardian - Saila Huusko on Saibai Island

Rising sea levels, coastal erosion, extreme weather and destructive king tides have put the low-lying archipelago on the front line of climate change. As Australia negotiates with other countries at the Paris talks, some of its own people need practical help now, before it’s too late

‘I will live here, I will die here’: the Torres Strait Islanders being overrun by the sea – video

Mebai Warusam sits under his stilt-supported house, facing the Pacific Ocean’s turquoise waters lapping 50 metres from his front gate. At 91, born and raised on the island of Saibai in the Torres Strait, he is an elder visitors and locals turn to for knowledge.
A few years ago, he says, researchers from down south travelled to Saibai. “They said, ‘If water comes right through this island, what you will do?’ I said, ‘I will never move from this island.’” “I will jump on my boat, tie that rope on a wongai tree. I will live here; I will die here.”
Patimah Waia, a teacher, underlines the point. “People are now realising that global warming [is happening] and water is rising and Saibai is low … some people, even though they realise its global warming that causes the water to rise, are so much in love with the place that they don’t want to leave.”
Saibai is one of more than 200 islands and coral cays that make up the Torres Strait, the archipelago straddling the waters between the northernmost tip of mainland Australia and Papua New Guinea. Eighteen of the strait’s islands are inhabited. For most of the island communities here, the impact of climate change is a daily reality. Coastal erosion, rising sea levels, worsening yearly floods, frightening king tides and drought are all regular occurrences.
As Australia negotiates new global climate targets with the world’s decision-makers in Paris, many in the Torres Strait hope for increased attention to the culturally and environmentally unique islands slowly sinking in Australia’s backyard. Saibai and the rest of the Torres Strait islands are officially part of Queensland.
The community has built seawalls in Saibai to keep the sea at bay during the rainy season. Photograph: Saila Huusko


A climate report published by the Torres Strait regional authority, the local Indigenous body, found sea levels in the region rose by 6mm each year from 1993 to 2010, compared with a global average of 3.22mm. The same report said the mean rate of sea level rise since the middle of the 19th century has been higher than the mean rate in the previous two millennia. For the seafaring Torres Strait islanders, the rise can mean profound lifestyle changes.
“Our word for home is the same as an island,” says Joseph Elu, chairman of the Torres Strait regional authority. “If that is lost, people will have nothing left. The weather patterns have changed. We usually get storms this time of the year but we haven’t had one yet.”
When the storms do come, so do the tides. For low-lying islands such as Saibai and Boigu in the far north of the strait, this means annual floods and inundation.
The low-lying island of Saibai is inundated by tides every year. However, locals say the tides have become more destructive in recent years. Photograph: Saila Huusko


People here are no strangers to unexpected weather events. In the years after the second world war, a water spout inundated Saibai, drowning crops and filling wells with salt water. Fearing a repeat, in 1947 several families from the island relocated to Cape York on the Australian mainland and established villages, known today as Bamaga and Seisia.
Elu says his family was among those who left Saibai. Now extreme weather has become commonplace, he says. “What happened there on the one instance that water spout came down is now happening twice or three times a year in the full moon high tide months of December, January and February.”
Normally, rain mitigates the impact of seawater inundation by washing the soil of salt, enabling crops to grow. But this year the drought that has also hit much of Queensland has brought water restrictions to including Saibai and Boigu – and fears for what might happen if it doesn’t rain soon.
The demand for resources on Saibai, particularly fresh water, is heightened by pressure from the coastal villages in adjacent Papua New Guinea, says John Rainbird, a climate specialist at the Torres Strait regional authority.
Under a treaty, communities from the two countries trade and interact with each other daily. Now the villages in Papua New Guinea have run low on water and villagers regularly come over to Saibai seeking basic services.
For community leaders such as Keri Akiba, the increased pressure stokes fears. “I’m really worried. Sometimes I’m sitting, just thinking that in 20 to 50 years all this place will be under water, the way it’s going,” he says. “It will be under the water most of the time, and then the sicknesses and diseases that will obviously come out of that.”
Rainbird was one of the architects of the Torres Strait’s climate strategy. The focus is on planning and resilience. Of course, planning is made harder by the fact nobody knows for sure just how fast the changes will happen. But one thing is sure, he says. “Anywhere that you have a problem, climate change will only make that problem worse.”
Keri Akiba, a community leader on Saibai Island. Photograph: Saila Huusko


The Torres Strait, says Rainbird, is on the front line of climate change in Australia. Now is the time to prepare. “In 30 years’ time, the Gold Coast, Sydney and Melbourne will all be dealing with sea level impact in some way, competing for limited government resources,” Rainbird says. “We need to get in early while we can.”
The Torres Strait’s population pales in comparison with the coastal areas in Australia’s south.Government statistics show about 8,700 people live in the Torres Strait, while more than 40,000 Torres Strait islanders live in other parts of Australia. Initially climate change will affect only a few hundred islanders, in particular on the low-lying islands of Saibai, Boigu, Masig, Warraber and Iama.
Do Torres Strait islanders feel they have been forgotten? Elu smiles at the question, pointing out there is a book calling the Torres Strait islands the “forgotten isles”. Elu says the previous government dedicated funds to helping Pacific island nations such as Kiribati deal with the threat of rising sea levels, as Torres Strait islanders looked on. “Islands are sinking here,” he says.
Within the Torres Strait, some feel they’ve been left to fend for themselves. Explaining the impact of sea level rise on Poruma Island, councillor Phillemon Mosby says despite media and government interest, little has been done to tackle the changes. “Does anybody out there know about us, does anybody care?”
On the central coral cay islands of which Poruma is one, the issue is erosion rather than of salt water inundation. Large chunks of the island get swept away by tides. In some cases, the sand migrates elsewhere on the island and builds new plateaus.
In remote areas, climate adaptation and building resilient communities is expensive, and although Indigenous people have traditional ways of recording and adapting to changes in weather, the competition for limited funds is fierce. Although $26m has been set aside for building seawalls on Saibai, it is estimated that will barely cover more than half the front part of the island. On mud islands such as Saibai, water also comes in from the wetlands in the middle and the back, leaving the islanders with a narrow strip of land between the ocean and the swamp.
A seawall built by the Torres Strait regional authority protects the Saibai cemetery from tidal inundation. Photograph: Saila Huusko 





Many locals also recognise that putting up seawalls is only a temporary solution. “You don’t want to scare the hell out of people but it’s also important that people are informed,” says Rainbird.
Mosby says: “When we hear warnings of tsunami and all that, people do get stressed about it. Mentally it is affecting our people.”
Being informed also means discussing the worst-case scenarios, including leaving the islands. But Saibai leader Keri Akiba says leaving is not an option his community is willing to consider. Leaving the island behind would mean abandoning culture, heritage and relatives buried here.
Akiba adds: “I hope the perpetrator governments that have got the coal power houses would decrease them so that the low-lying areas, the islands like Saibai, or even in the Pacific that we’ve seen in the news, get a little bit more time to enjoy their heritage and where they were born.”

Links

NASA's Earth Minute: Usual Suspects

NASA Climate Change

Before the Industrial Revolution, Earth’s climate changed due to natural events such as volcanic activity and solar energy variations. These natural events still contribute to climate change today, but their impact is very small compared to the growing levels of greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere by humans burning fossil fuels. NASA’s ongoing Earth science missions, research and computer models help us better understand the long-term global changes occurring today through both natural and manmade causes.

Greg Hunt In Paris: A Delusional Revolutionary Fighting Truth Instead Of Carbon

New Matilda - Thom Mitchell

Greg Hunt at an OECD talk in Paris. (IMAGE: Thom Mitchell)

Our Minister for the Environment seems to have come down with a bad case of amnesia at the Paris climate talks. Thom Mitchell reports from Paris.
Yesterday was an awkward day for Environment Minister Greg Hunt, who faced tough questioning at the United Nations climate summit in Paris, an event which aims to secure a legally binding international agreement to limit the rise in average global temperatures to less than two degrees.
Appearing on a panel at a side event run by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Hunt faced tough questions over his approval of the massive Carmichael coal mine in Queensland, his successful campaign to slash the Renewable Energy Target, and the Coalition’s cornerstone policy for reducing carbon emissions.
His answers were awkward, duplicitous, and downright delusional.

The Non-Sequitur: Greg Hunt, Anti-Colonialist
Greg Hunt, as seen by Greg Hunt. (IMAGE: JR Ferrer Paris)

The Minister became quite animated at one point in the discussion when a young student from Oxford University asked him if approving a mine which will help release more carbon than New Zealand’s annual emissions wasn’t somewhat against the spirit of the negotiations Hunt was in town to attend.
In defence of his approval the Minister pointed out it is not the government’s project, but that of an Indian billionaire. “I thought we were over the neo-colonial moment where the wealthy decide what happens to the poor,” he said, presumably alluding to the much vaunted moral case for exporting coal to impoverished countries.
Hunt said he hoped the questioner would agree that “the poorest countries should be able to decide their own energy future” and argued that his decision was justified because he is “not a neo-colonialist”.
“As an Environment Minister,” he said, “you act as a judge against certain determined criteria, [and]anything else would be a breach of the law”.
“That law doesn’t deal with greenhouse gas emissions, it deals with a set of issues around national environmental standards,” he said.
It’s an interesting defence, considering Hunt’s bungling of the original approval led government solicitors to concede earlier this year that the minister had failed in his responsibility to properly apply national environmental law. Of course, as we reported last month, he has since reinstated the project with a fresh green tick.

The Paradox: Minister for (Cutting) Renewables
A climate protester in Paris. (IMAGE: Thom Mitchell)

Hunt found himself on firmer ground when he was asked by an OECD policy analyst about the “mixed signals” his government is sending when it comes to Australia’s transition towards a cleaner economy. Approving huge coal mines, slashing the Renewable Energy Target (RET). What’s a voting public meant to think?
The crash in renewable energy investment, which we explored in some depth here, was not the government’s fault, Hunt said. He reframed the situation quite heroically.
Bypassing more than 12 months of bitter opposition to cutting the RET from Labor and the Greens, Hunt boasted his government had secured ‘bipartisan support’, thus saving the industry. He omitted to explain that this took place after the government squeezed the agreement out of Labor by setting up the standoff in the first place. As Hunt et al tried to cut the target, the uncertainty caused havoc in the industry. Labor was eventually forced to agree to a new, lower target in order to provide some certainty for investors.
It was slashed by around 20 per cent, from 41,000 to 33,000 gigawatt hours.
Hunt also didn’t mention the fact that under Coalition rule Australia has slid from being the fourth most attractive place to invest in renewables to the tenth, or that investment in clean energy tanked by nearly 90 per cent in 2014 in the midst of a global boom.
He didn’t mention former Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s admission, at a time Hunt was also the Environment Minister, that he wanted to “R-E-D-U-C-E, the number of [wind turbines]that we are going to get in the future”.
Here, instead, is how he spun it:
“Within Australia I think it’s very clear that we had a pause in renewable energy investment in renewables, largely because of a disastrous phantom credit scheme which created credits for renewable energy that didn’t exist, and then at the same time there was also a reduction in our overall energy consumption.
“So, you had new renewable energy being put into a system which had a reduction in overall capacity and a surplus of phantom credits. We had an expectation that it would be at about 27,000 gigawatt hours, [and]that was lifted to 33,000 with bipartisan support.
“That’s actually created the impetus for a genuine kick-start, and only a few days ago I approved a new 200 megawatt wind farm in north Queensland.”
Good on you, Greg.

The Three Word Slogan: ‘Tax? What Tax?’
Paolo Frankl at a conference in June. (IMAGE: UNIDO, Flickr)

In the Turnbull era of innovation it’s out with the old and in with the new and Hunt’s finally found confidence enough in his government’s policies to stop dancing on the grave of Labor’s.
In a discussion about carbon pricing – which, as I’ve noted, there’s quite an appetite for in Paris at the moment – the Minister forgot to mention even once that he had done away with the Carbon Tax. Which is a shame, because it’s quite a world-beating achievement considering we’re thought to be the only country in the world to have removed a price on carbon.
It might have had something to do with the fact that another globally significant voice – in this case Paolo Frankl, the Director of Renewable Energy at the International Energy Agency – had some pretty nice things to say about pricing carbon.
Frankl was asked if a country can achieve the economy-wide emissions reductions needed to tackle climate change without a negative price signal on carbon. Of course the government’s ‘reverse action’ process – which uses taxpayer money to buy emissions from polluting companies that promise to abate theirs at the lowest cost – does not send a price signal to the economy as a whole, but only to those companies that choose to participate.
“It can, but it would be not very useful,” Frankl said. “I mean, if you look at Brazil and Australia, that’s exactly what they’re doing now, but in addition to that, there should be a carbon price which would give an additional signal,” he said.
The government may create a legitimate signal, it should be said, when the policy comes up for review in 2017 and the option of tightening a baseline on emissions currently allowed to go on unperturbed is revisited.
On the sidelines of the event, Frankl told New Matilda that “there’s something that the Minister at one point hinted at which I think would deserve some attention”. “He said the reverse auction was ‘a very cost effective market mechanism where we very cost effectively reduced emissions’ and then he said two thirds of this came from land management, okay.
“Now, I have two problems with that. One is that maybe some of these things should have happened anyway, and it’s a failure that they did not happen. Second, if you only go this way you will have the cost effective solutions but you may not produce the necessary technology revolution that you need to be on a two-degrees path.
“Someone else may do that for Australia, of course, the Chinese may do it, but if you apply this worldwide you’ll never get there. And this is why I spoke about hybrid approaches, because market approaches [of the sort the government’s deploying]can work extremely well for mature technologies but they don’t if you have to trigger massive transformation.
“I’m just saying that buying abatement is not enough. Here we have a long-term objective which will only come through a massive technology transformation and just buying the cheapest option will not work.
If you want to encourage specific technologies, he said, you need to devise ways specifically to encourage them. The government would no doubt argue that it’s doing that through the Renewable Energy Target, which it strangled then trashed. Or the Australian Renewable Energy Agency or Clean Energy Finance Corporation, bodies that support technology development for, and the bankrolling of, renewables in Australia.
The Minister for the Environment didn’t mention, either, that this week Foreign Minister Julie Bishop confirmed that even after Abbott’s demise it’s still government policy to abolish them.
C’est la vie, eh?

Links