07/11/2016

As Climate Disaster Looms, Malcolm Turnbull Needs To Stop Appeasing And Start Leading

The Guardian

Hazelwood’s closure should force both federal and state governments to acknowledge the future is here already

Malcolm Turnbull has long shed the leather jacket persona of his Q&A days, when he took pride in his then principled stand on climate change policy. Photograph: Leigh Winburn/AAP
As the Chicago Cubs finally won the baseball World Series, Twitter was awash with comments on things that had happened since 1908 – the last time the Cubs won. For example, since then there had been two world wars, the beginning and end of the Soviet Union and media had moved from a time when baseball wasn’t even broadcast on radio to when you could watch the game in HD on your phone on the other side of the world.
And also, in the time since, the planet has warmed by around 1.5C.
I throw in this little nugget of information because it’s always worth reminding ourselves that while the flotsam and jetsam of daily news and politics flies by, so too are the temperature records.
Nasa recently announced that September was the warmest September on record. There’s nothing too surprising about that – 11 of the past 12 months have been the warmest of each month. Only July did not set a record – it had to be content with being the third-warmest July on record.
The 12 months to September set a new high for the warmest 12-month period recorded (breaking the old record set in August) of 1.04C above the average of the 1951-1980. The same period in 1908 was 0.42C below the average.
So things have changed.
Back in 1908 there was also a US presidential election. There were no debates then but, ironically, the same number of questions on climate change were asked in this year’s debates as back then – zero.
We now have the prospect of a US president who either believes climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese, or at best believes it’s just a hoax perpetrated by some vague group because “it’s a money-making industry”. And yet this hardly rates a mention – lost amid an avalanche of stories about the emails of the other candidate.
Now we could get on a high horse, except Australia doesn’t fare much better. Climate change at least was the topic of one question in the leaders’ debate but it hardly dominated the election. And, like the US, we also have multiple politicians who fall at the first hurdle when it comes to intelligence by professing that climate change is a con.
Mostly here, the topic comes up as the cause of blame – such as renewable energy being cited as the cause for the blackout in South Australia or even again this week with the announcement of the Hazelwood power station closing.
As such, the discussion revolves around the negative aspect of the cost of policies that will reduce carbon emissions. It’s a framing that has the underlying foundation that not pursing policies to reduce carbon emissions is a credible alternative.
It is rather similar to businesses complaining of the cost of introducing domestic violence leave rather than worrying about the horrific fact that there is actually a need for such a type of leave.
As Gay Alcorn noted on Friday – the closure of the Hazelwood power station was inevitable – and yet the sense is that both state and federal governments were caught flat footed.
Unsurprisingly, the first reaction was to focus more on compensation packages for the workers. But there is a lack of any sense of governments accepting this is just the first of such closures and that plans and responses for them should be well in place by now.
As the Climate Council noted this week, Australia’s climate change policy is mired in a valley of uncertainty, where our emissions reductions target for 2030 are based on measures that have been yet to be brought into force.
We don’t have a gibbering fool like Trump for a leader who screams about China and international hoaxes on climate change but Turnbull has long shed the leather jacket persona of his Q&A days when he took pride in his then principled stand on climate change policy.
Now more likely we’ll hear him talk of the great future for coal and rush to blame renewable energy rather than to push it as a solution. No, he’s not the gibbering fool; he is just the appeaser of those fools within his government. And that is no less damaging.
It is not a strategy that can last, because while it might help to keep the issue off the political agenda, and keep his leadership somewhat more safe, the months keep passing and the temperature keeps rising.
Because of its size, age and dirtiness, Hazelwood carries with it greater significance than do other coal-fired power stations. Perhaps its closure – regardless of the reasons for it – will force both federal and state governments to acknowledge that the future is here already.

Links

The World Is Racing To Stop Climate Change. But The Math Still Doesn’t Add Up

Washington PostChris Mooney

The Paris Agreement is expected to come into force within the next few months. The Post's Chris Mooney explains where we go from here. (Daron Taylor/The Washington Post)

The entire globe is moving fast to stop climate change. The Paris climate agreement enters into legal force on Friday, and then shortly afterwards comes a first global meeting to start implementing it in Marrakech, Morocco. (Yes, there’s also a U.S. election in there somewhere that could, er, complicate things.)
But this flurry of activity nonetheless faces a grim mathematical reality, a new report from the United Nations Environment Programme finds. In essence, while the Paris agreement sets extremely ambitious temperature goals — holding the world’s warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, and striving for a 1.5 degree limit — current policies and promises alone have little chance of attaining them.
Moreover, because of the unforgiving nature of carbon math — once you emit a ton of carbon dioxide, you can’t get it back, and it accumulates steadily in the atmosphere — there is exceedingly little time to change course and increase ambitions.
“It’s just too little, and it’s not happening quickly enough,” said Jacqueline McGlade, UNEP’s chief scientist. “If we don’t see emissions peaking by 2020, then the chances of getting to 1.5 degrees is vanishingly small.”
Such is the upshot of UNEP’s latest installment of its “emissions gap” report, perhaps the definitive study of how much the world is currently emitting, and how much it can emit to remain on course to meet its goals. The difference between the two comprises the gap.
Here are the details (warning, this stuff gets complicated quickly).
Right now, due to causes ranging from deforestation to transportation, the world is emitting about 52.7 billion tons, or gigatons, of carbon dioxide equivalents per year as of 2014. That’s mostly just plain carbon dioxide, but it also includes emissions of methane, nitrous oxide, and other greenhouse gases that are converted into units comparable to carbon dioxide. If you leave those out, the pure carbon dioxide emissions are about 36 billion tons per year.
However, to hold global warming below 2 degrees (at least with good odds), the world can emit no more than 1,000 gigatons of carbon dioxide from the year 2011 onwards — the famous carbon budget. And given that it’s 2016 already, that number has already shrunken a good bit, by about 150 gigatons. And of course, the carbon budget is even narrower to hold warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
This is the logic behind the inescapable emissions “gap”: If we want to hold global warming to 1.5 C, we need to be emitting only 38.8 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalents by the year 2030. For 2 degrees C, there’s only slightly more leeway — 41.8 gigatons.
The promises countries have made under the Paris agreement don’t remotely get there — at best, they’d have us at about 53.4 billion tons in 2030. The emissions gap is therefore between 12 and 14 gigatons per year if you want to keep the planet at 2 degrees, and between 15 and 17 gigatons per year for 1.5 degrees, says UNEP.
“When you think that one gigaton is the equivalent of taking all European vehicles off the road for one year, and the gap is between 12 and 14 gigatons, you see what the scale of the problem is,” explains McGlade.
Thus, we’re way off course with very little time to turn things around. The world’s current promises, says UNEP, would allow the planet to warm by about 3 degrees C above pre-industrial levels.
And by the way: even these numbers for keeping warming below 1.5 or 2 degrees tend to assume something that many scientists think is dubious. They tend to rely on the assumption that we’ll bust through our carbon budgets but somehow get a second chance later in the century, once we create technologies that can somehow withdraw carbon dioxide out of the air again. These scenarios often have the world removing net amounts carbon dioxide from the atmosphere after 2050, rather than putting more there. It’s far from clear that will actually happen, at least at the scale that would be required.
Granted, McGlade underscores that this doesn’t mean there is no hope — it just means that the world has to do massively more, and it has to do it quickly. Every year, we bank more carbon emissions in the atmosphere. Every year we fail to bend the curve sharply downwards, it becomes that much harder to get on the right course.
This is why, McGlade asserts, emissions have to peak and start to decline by 2020 — just four short years from now — or else the 1.5 degree target could be gone.
The Marrakech meeting beginning next week won’t be the place to raise global ambitions under the Paris process — at the earliest, it appears that may happen in 2018. But McGlade says in the meantime, there are other actions that can shrink the emissions gap, including moves by sub-national players like major corporations, cities, and large scale land users in the agricultural and forestry sectors. Precious gigatons can be won back in this way, potentially narrowing the gap.
“Cities don’t have to wait, companies don’t have to wait, society doesn’t have to wait,” says McGlade.

Links

Stratosphere Shrinks As Record Breaking Temperatures Continue Because Of Climate Change

Fairfax

Those warning of climate change impacts have been likened to Chicken Littles, scuttling around, warning the sky is falling.
That worry, it turns out, is based on fact too. Cooling in the stratosphere is causing it to shrink, lowering that layer by "a number of kilometres", NASA noted recently.

The state of our climate in 2016
Australia is already experiencing an increase in extreme conditions from climate change - and it's projected to get worse.

Our burning of fossil fuels and emissions of other greenhouse gases mean more of the earth's heat that would have been radiated back to space – warming the stratosphere on the way – is being trapped at lower levels of the atmosphere.
"It's like when you insulate your roof – your house warms but your attic will get a bit cooler," says Steven Sherwood, a climate scientist at the University of NSW. Those "attic" temperatures have cooled 2-3 degrees since the 1960s.
To be sure, the shrinking stratosphere is only partly climate-change related, with the emergence of ozone holes the other main factor. Still, "it's all about the human impact on the climate system", Professor Sherwood says.
That impact has lately been on full display as rising background temperatures – with an El Nino boost – drove 2014, 2015, and now 2016 to record-breaking warmth.
As the Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO stated recently, Australia can expect more severe heatwaves, extreme fire weather and intense rain events as the planet warms further.
Our coral reefs are particularly threatened, with widespread mortality of the northern Great Barrier Reef after a severe oceanic heatwave, seen as a sign of what's to come.
Last December, almost 200 nations decided to act to curb rising greenhouse gas emissions. The Paris climate agreement aims to keep global temperatures increases to no more than 2 degrees – or about 1 degree more than has already occurred in the past century.
The Paris climate agreement, which came into force on November 4, is just the first step. Photo: AP
The Paris accord came into force on Friday, which is a record pace for such a global deal. There's a chance the Turnbull government will announce Australia's ratification – joining the 94 nations to have done so – at the follow-up climate summit that begins on Monday in Marrakech, Morocco.
Marrakech, Morocco, will host COP22, the follow-up summit to Paris from November 7. 
The 12-day gathering will likely focus on how national ambitions can be raised to close the so-called emissions gap. According to the United Nations, the Paris emission-reduction pledges fall at least 25 per cent short of what's needed by 2030.Australia's promise to cut 2005-level carbon pollution 26-28 per cent by 2030 will also come under scrutiny in Morocco with a range of questions already lodgedabout the nation's rising trajectory. (That assumes a shock Donald Trump victory in Tuesday's US presidential elections hasn't diverted all attention stateside.)
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull addressing the Paris climate summit last year. Photo: AP
The Turnbull government will argue Australia's 2030 goal is one of the most ambitious efforts in terms of per capita emissions.Even so, a lack of action over the past couple of decades and the dominance of coal in the electricity sector mean Australia is still on course to remain the third-worst polluter among G20 nations by 2030.
Renewable energy investment has now topped spending on new fossil fuel power plants. Photo: Rohan Thomson
The global emissions reduction goals will depend in large part on the acceleration of the take-up of renewable energy.The world added half a million new solar panels each day last year, a pace that will quicken to 30,000 an hour - or more than 700,000 panels a day - over the next five years, the International Energy Agency said recently. New wind turbines will go up at the rate 2.5 an hour.
The agency lifted its overall forecast for clean energy by 2021 to account for 28 per cent of electricity by then. Australia's Renewable Energy Target is aiming for about a 23 per cent share for hydro, wind, solar and other renewables by 2020 - a goal possibly out of reach as shifting policies and patchy political support continue to rattle investor confidence.The Turnbull government's seriousness in tackling climate change, though, won't be tested until its planned policy review in 2017, which may include lifting its 2030 target made a year ago in Paris.
According to the Environment Department, Australia's commitments requires the elimination of 900 million tonnes of CO₂-equivalent emissions between 2020 and 2030. (Emissions rose 1.1 per cent in 2015 to 535.7 million tonnes.)
However, most of the planned abatement has little if any policy backing to achieve it. (See chart below).
For instance, improving energy efficiency is supposed to deliver about a third of the planned savings.
Despite phenomenal returns on investment,that were recognised last week when the Baird government committed NSW to net-zero emissions by 2050 the government has so far earmarked just $18m for a national energy productivity plan.
The Abbott government shuttered the successful Energy Efficiency Opportunities despite costing an estimated minus-$95 for every tonne of CO2 abated.
The Emissions Reduction Fund and its related safeguard mechanism – which may morph into a carbon price – is supposed to account for an even larger chunk of savings.
The existing ERF, which may splurge the bulk of its remaining $800 million at an auction next week, has a dubious record.
A recent report by The Green Institute found about $1 billion of the $1.7 billion ERF money spent so far had gone into conserving mulga-dominated areas of south-west Queensland and western NSW on land that might not have been cleared anyway.
Moreover, about a quarter of the land sector abatement has a "permanence" of just 25 years.
That sort of performance is hardly like to impress those nations meeting in Marrakech to press for carbon neutrality – if not negative emissions – by mid-century.
Without that transition, it's likely we won't avoid that sky falling further – and many other anticipated climate-linked calamities from global warming.

Links