It was a spectacular signal of global intent on Friday when more than
170 governments signed up to the Paris deal. But it's just the start of a
long, hard road
UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon and actor Leonardo DiCaprio at the UN in New York on 22 April 2016. 'Now the gap between reality and the ambition of holding global warming below 2C needs addressing.' Photograph: UPI/Barcroft Media
The danger of gala events like the official signing
of the climate change treaty at the UN in New York on Friday, crowned
with a guest appearance from Leonardo DiCaprio and with 60 heads of
state in attendance, is the impression they create that the job is done.
It was certainly a spectacular demonstration of global intent to get
more than 170 signatures on the deal agreed in Paris in December at the
first time of asking; but what matters is making it legally binding. For
that, it must be not just signed but ratified by at least 55 countries,
and it must cover 55% of emissions. Nor does the Paris deal go far
enough. It was only a step on a long, hard road. The targets that each
country set themselves do not go nearly far enough. Now the gap between
reality and the ambition of holding global warming below 2C needs
addressing. In Churchillian rhetoric, this is not the end, nor the
beginning of the end, but it is the end of the beginning.
There are powerful reasons to pursue the Paris summit
objective. According to the Japan Meteorological Agency, each of the
past 11 months was warmer than the 20th-century average.
Nasa statistics showed that 2015 was even hotter than the previous
record-setting year of 2014. Yet despite the way the evidence is
stacking up, political leaders in polluting countries continue to argue
about whether and how fast they need to act. In the US, President Barack
Obama's climate plan has hit trouble in the supreme court, where the
regulation of emissions from coal-fired plants has been blocked. Hillary
Clinton, the likely Democratic candidate for the presidency, is pledged
to continue Mr Obama's commitment to tackling emissions, but her
probable rival, Donald Trump, is certainly not. The US and China are
committed to ratifying the climate change treaty, but for others, such
as India, it may be more complicated.
In the UK, 10 years after
David Cameron hugged that husky, his record is in tatters. Not only has
"the green crap" been whittled back by big cuts in subsidies and
incentives that have left solar power, onshore and even offshore wind
all less attractive, but policies to limit emissions have been
repeatedly portrayed as harmful to the economy. High energy costs have
been widely blamed for the crisis in British steel. Yet, while it is
true that energy prices are higher than elsewhere in Europe – partly
because of climate change programmes and partly because of the
fragmented nature of the privatised industry largely beyond government
control – they are mitigated by compensation. As fact-checkers point out,
for steel, actual energy costs amount to around just 1% of total
manufacturing costs. The double whammy of an uncompetitive currency and a
slump in global demand are the real problems that Tata and other
steelmakers are facing. Energy costs get the blame because that's where
the government might have real traction.
As divestment lobbies chalk up triumph after triumph, there are signs
of parallel trends. In the past few days, Norway's sovereign wealth
fund has pulled out of scores of companies for being over-reliant
on fossil fuel, and the Rockefeller Foundation has
divested from fossil fuel entirely. Yet governments still resist the
commitment to greening their economies that will turn the Paris deal
from an exercise in global cooperation to a watershed for global
warming.
As news broke that 93 per cent of the coral on the Great Barrier
Reef was suffering from some level of bleaching, the ABC was preparing
to broadcast the final episode of David Attenborough's ground breaking
documentary on the reef.
Ironically, the focus of the final episode is the survival of the reef.
A clip from the ABC TV series, David Attenborough's Great Barrier Reef, a plea to save the Reef.
Episode one focused on the builders on the reef, episode two is about
the creatures that visit the reef and episode three focuses on what is
likely to happen in the future.
In a rare move, at the conclusion
of the episode, Sir David makes an impassioned plea in a moving piece to
camera where he speaks of the imminent threat to the reef.
"The Great Barrier Reef is in grave danger," he says.
"The twin
perils brought by climate change, an increase in the temperature of the
ocean and its acidity, if they continue to rise at the present rate the
reefs will be gone within decades and that would be a global
catastrophe."
David Attenborough.
He speaks of the ecological result of a disappearing reef but more
importantly the moral and ethical problem faced by humans who have
brought the problem to the reef.
"There's surely another reason why we should protect the reefs," he says.
David Attenborough with Anthony Geffen.
"They are among the planet's richest, most complex and most beautiful ecosystems.
"Do
we really care so little about the earth on which we live that we don't
want to protect one of the world's greatest wonders from the
consequences of our behaviour?"
David Attenborough with reef tanks.
After three hours of some of the most stunning cinematography
exploring the reef and its inhabitants, it is an emotive plea from one
of the world's greatest naturalists.
Series producer Anthony
Geffen who has worked on 11 of Sir David's documentaries, said Sir David
wanted to use the series to make a very personal statement.
Do we really care so little about the earth? David Attenborough
"He is very concerned about the reef and you can see that in the very
personalised piece to camera he does at the end," Geffen says.
"He doesn't do that very often and he devised this end very much as a personal statement, a very powerful personal statement."
David Attenborough's Great Barrier Reef Photo: James Penlidis
Even the genesis of the award winning team of nature documentary
makers coming to Queensland to explore the reef was of Sir David's
volition.
"After we finished filming our last documentary, I asked
him where he wanted to go next, if there was one place in the world he
could film where would it be," Geffen says.
"He didn't miss a beat and said the Great Barrier Reef."
Sir
David first visited the reef nearly 60 years ago, filming some of the
earliest scenes of people diving the reef. It had a profound impact on
his life.
"He told me that out of everywhere he has been, out of
everywhere he has made documentaries, the reef is still the most
beautiful thing he has ever seen," Geffen says.
"That explains a lot about the beauty of the reef when the world's greatest naturalist gives that opinion."
Sir
David, Geffen and their team of filmmakers and scientists are not the
first to make a documentary exploring the reef, but they have certainly
gone to enormous lengths in theirs.
Using a specialised submersible called the Triton, Sir David was able to film deeper on the reef than anyone has before.
The
series has introduced us to fascinating species of fish and
crustaceans, sharks and rays and a variety of whales that interacted
with the film crew.
But now they explore what the future holds for the jewel in Queensland's crown.
"If
you just look at the time between when David last dived there in the
1980s and when he went out for this series, half the reef as he would
have known it has disappeared," Geffen says.
"Even if you take that as a parameter that is pretty devastating.
"And as we all know, coral bleaching has been a huge issue recently."
But episode three isn't all doom and gloom.
Using
modern technology and innovative scanning techniques, Sir David
explores the history of the reef and what it has gone through in the
past.
"We were about to look back in time looking at these amazing scans to look at what happened to the reef before," Geffen says.
"We
look in the whole context. The last episode isn't just a disaster
prediction. It is trying to give people some context in how long it has
been around, how it has survived before, etc.
"But it's really
important for people to have an understanding of what is happening
because it literally is a case that it could be gone in another few
decades."
Accompanying the documentary series, there is an
interactive website that allows people to explore the reef themselves
and gain an understanding of the ecology of the reef system and the
threats it faces.
There is also a virtual reality component,
currently housed in the Sydney Museum, where people can virtually dive
in the Triton with Sir David and explore the reef just like he did.
"We
know that not everyone is watching television and we know that young
people just don't always have time to sit down and watch TV," Geffen
says.
"Hopefully these two elements will give people a different way to engage with the reef and learn about it."
The final episode of David Attenborough's Great Barrier Reef aired on ABC at 7.30pm Sunday night.
The companion website is available at www.attenboroughsreef.com.
CSIRO's RV Investigator: Light on the horizon for CSIRO's climate research program? Photo: Pete Harmsen
CSIRO is expected to offer an alternative to deep cuts of its
climate science program as soon as this week in a bid to defuse
criticism as a Senate committee prepares to widen its inquiry to include
chairman David Thodey.
Mr Thodey is scheduled to address the
committee in Canberra on Wednesday. Unusually, the chairman has asked
the session be held in camera and that he not be joined by CSIRO
management, Fairfax Media has been told.
Speculation of a
resolution was fanned by Environment Minister Greg Hunt last week
breaking his silence on the cuts, which originally targeted as many as
110 of the 140 staff in the key Oceans & Atmosphere division.
David Thodey, chairman of the CSIRO, will be questioned by a Senate committee this week. Photo: Peter Braig
"We have sought to broker an outcome that will protect and enhance climate science in Australia," Mr Hunt told ABC's Lateline.
Fairfax Media understands efforts to shift climate modellers and
monitoring researchers left remaining after the cuts to the Bureau of
Meteorology foundered over a lack of funds. The bureau, whose chief Rob
Vertessy retires this week, has been struggling to maintain funding of
its own for its water programs and demanded CSIRO funds to accompany any
staff transfers.
The CSIRO board was not happy with the bureau's
proposal either, concerned that the export of top staff for climate
research will set a precedent for future dismantling of the agency,
according to a senior scientist who declined to be named.
Another Senate commitee grilling to come this week for Larry Marshall CSIRO CEO (right), with his deputy Craig Roy (centre) and chief financial officer Hazel Bennett. Photo: Andrew Meares
Instead, senior CSIRO staff now expect the agency to pare back
the planned cuts and offer a "face-saving" alternative of a special
climate unit, possibly headquartered in Hobart.
To reassure
remaining scientists that they have a future with the organisation,
management will introduce a lower revenue target compared with other
parts of CSIRO to show its commitment to so-called public good science
that does not always attract paying customers.
A dedicated climate
unit, supposedly modelled on the UK's world-leading Hadley Centre, was
promoted by Chief Scientist Alan Finkel and leading climate scientists
as one way to salvage climate capability amid the turmoil.
CSIRO
announced on February 4 a plan to axe a total of 350 staff before
re-hiring a similar number in other areas. CSIRO's staff association
estimates the full toll will swell to 450 of the 5000-plus employees.
The
bureau is understood to have drawn up a list of as many as 50 CSIRO
staff it needed to maintain critical research in its weather and
longer-term climate prediction, and to support its Cape Grim monitoring
site on Tasmania's north-west coast.
These staff would now remain
with CSIRO if this centre eventuates, although it remains unclear how
many other researchers will be saved.
CSIRO declined to rule out
the possibility of a new centre, although a spokeswoman indicated the
agency would be maintaining key capabilities.
"CSIRO is the best
organisation in the nation to map the path to prosperity,
sustainability, and societal benefit," a CSIRO spokeswoman said. "Our
climate science is an important part of this."
A spokesman for
Science Minister Christopher Pyne said consultation was continuing "to
ensure CSIRO's climate research will continue to be world class".
The
agency would "ensure Australia has access to state of the art climate
models to understand our changing climate and inform adaptation and
mitigation decisions", the spokesman said.
Tasmanian Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson, who heads the committee, warned that a new centre alone would not be enough.
"This
whole farce of a process has so damaged CSIRO's reputation and culture,
and so devalued the work of climate scientists and other public good
research that CSIRO risks losing key personnel across the board, above
and beyond proposed staff cuts," Senator Whish-Wilson said.
Labor's
shadow industry minister Kim Carr said that as the Fair Work Commission
had ordered more consultation between management and staff, the entire
move to cut staff should be put on hold.
"There's still time to
halt these cuts," Senator Carr said, noting that the government is
effectively entering a caretaker mode as a July 2 election looms. "They
can still be reversed and it should be done now."
Fairfax Media also sought comment from Mr Thodey.
Ocean and atmosphere executives are scheduled to address staff on Tuesday afternoon.
