09/03/2017

205 Records In 90 Days: 'Angry Summer Is The New Normal', Says Climate Council

Fairfax - Stephanie Peatling

Scientists have confirmed what anyone who lived through the past summer knows to be true - climate change is driving hotter and longer summers that are becoming "the new normal", according to scientists, with worse to come unless tough decisions are made.
The summer of 2016/17 produced not only Sydney's hottest summer on record, Canberra's hottest summer for daytime temperatures and Brisbane's hottest summer in terms of mean temperature, but Queensland's second hottest summer on record and the hottest summer temperatures on record for almost 45 per cent of NSW.
Dryer conditions are making inland Australia less habitable.  Photo: Mal Fairclough
Scientists have called it "the angry summer" as more than 205 records were broken in just 90 days, according to a new report from the Climate Council.
"We are into the latter half of the critical decade, and temperatures are continuing to increase and extreme weather events are worsening. Climate change is increasing the frequency, duration and intensity of heatwaves and warm spells. Hot days and heatwaves, like those experienced in the 2016/17 angry summer, are becoming the new normal, and even more extreme heat is on the way in future unless rapid and deep reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are achieved around the world," the report warned.

Australia's fossil-fueled summer
Eastern Australia experience an unprecedented heat wave this summer as evidence linking climate change with burning fossil fuels grows ever stronger. Courtesy ABC News24.

The reports authors, which include Professor Will Steffen, the inaugural director of the Australian National University's Climate Change Institute, warned that Australia will continue to warm up throughout the 21st century and experience increasingly severe impacts.

But it is not too late to stop the worst case predictions from coming true.
"Whether or not extreme heat becomes even worse during the second half of the century depends on whether the world, including Australia as one of the 15 largest emitters, can rapidly and deeply reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to a carbon-neutral global economy by mid-century," the report says.
Scientists are calling for a rapid uptake of renewable energy to drive down Australia's use of fossil fuels. Photo: Pacific Hydro Limited
If present rates of greenhouse gas emissions continue, large areas of Australia's interior would become uninhabitable while, in NSW, the current one-in-50 year extreme heat event would occur every five years.
But if greenhouse gas emissions are cut very rapidly and deeply then the rise in temperature increases could be minimised.
The summer of 2016/17 was the hottest summer on record in Sydney. Photo: Getty Images
The Climate Council is an independently crowd-funded organisation. It took over the work of the Climate Commission, the independent body set up in 2011 by the then Labor government, which was abolished by the Coalition after it came to office in 2013.
Despite Australia's commitment to decrease its production of greenhouse gas emissions at the Paris international climate change talks in 2015, our emissions rose by 0.8 per cent last year.

"This rise puts into serious doubt whether even Australia's very weak emissions reductions target of 26 to 28 per cent by 2030 can be achieved," the report warned.
"With Australia's emissions continuing to rise, it is clear that the federal government's current climate policy is failing. Australia needs to transition rapidly to cheap, clean, renewable energy to reduce our emissions as opposed to 'clean coal' plants."
The federal government said last month that coal-fired power stations could be eligible for funding from Australia's $10 billion green bank.
In what would represent a significant weakening of the country's environmental financing rules, Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg confirmed the government is considering issuing a new ministerial directive to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to put investment in so-called "clean coal" on the table.
Professor Steffen told a press conference on Wednesday morning that the government needed to realise that coal fired power stations were "20th century thinking".
"I hope we realise, like any big technological breakthrough, going to renewable energy and smart systems is the way of the 21st century...Rather than fighting this transition we need to support them [forms of renewable energy] and embrace them and make them work to our benefit."

Links

Australia Must Put A Price On Carbon, Say Institutional Investors

The Guardian

The Investor Group on Climate Change has urged the government to take concreted steps to unlock new investment. Photograph: Hamish Blair/Getty Images

The Turnbull government needs to put a price on carbon to unlock new investment in the electricity sector and drive an orderly transition to low-emissions power sources, according to the Investor Group on Climate Change.
The group, which represents major institutional investors in Australia and New Zealand, has used its submission to the Finkel review to argue that the government's oft-repeated concerns about network reliability, energy affordability and emissions reductions will be addressed if concrete steps are taken to unlock new investment.
The investor group has joined a host of other organisations in arguing that the government needs to put a price on carbon and adopt a technology-neutral approach in planning new energy infrastructure to ensure the grid is up to the task of supplying reliable base load power and producing emissions reductions consistent with Australia's Paris commitments.
It warns that policy and regulatory uncertainty is now the key barrier to investment in Australia's electricity sector "across all energy sources and technology types".
The advocacy comes as the Climate Council will on Wednesday release a new report arguing that the heat Australia experienced this past summer demonstrated the energy grid was unable to cope with escalating extreme weather.
"Climate change is worsening the impacts from heatwaves and hot weather and is putting a strain on critical infrastructure," the new report says.
"This summer alone has shown the vulnerability of the electricity grid to heatwaves, with power outages during peak times in South Australia during a severe February heatwave, while New South Wales narrowly avoided widespread outages several days later."
The report notes that in just 90 days, more than 205 records were broken around Australia this summer, with the state-wide mean temperature the hottest for NSW since records began, with temperatures 2.57C above average, and Brisbane and Canberra recording their hottest summers on record.
The report argues that the only viable approach to slowing and eventually halting the increasing trend of heat-related extreme weather is to "rapidly increase the uptake of renewable energy and to phase out all forms of coal-fired power plants, as well as phasing out other fossil fuels".
On Tuesday the National Farmers' Federation reversed its once vociferous opposition to carbon pricing, using its submission to the Finkel review to call for a market-based mechanism to secure clean and affordable energy.
The NFF's stance mirrors calls for consideration of a market mechanism from Energy Networks Australia, the retailer EnergyAustralia, the electricity provider AGL, the Climate Change Authority, the Business Council of Australia and the CSIRO.
The renewed activism around carbon pricing or a market mechanism to reduce pollution and drive efficient investment decisions in the national electricity market stands at odds with the Turnbull government's decision to rule out such measures last December.
The energy and environment minister, Josh Frydenberg, initially signalled the government would look at the desirability of an emissions intensity trading scheme for the electricity sector as part of its scheduled review of its Direct Action climate policy – but he reversed his position after key government conservatives voiced their objections.
The man conducting the energy review, the chief scientist, Alan Finkel, gave implicit support for an emissions intensity scheme in his preliminary report, saying it would integrate best "with the electricity market's pricing and risk management framework" and "had the lowest economic costs and the lowest impact on electricity prices".
The Clean Energy Finance Corporation has also used its submission to the Finkel review to argue Australia needs "a stable bankable policy framework … to promote investor confidence and capital availability and reduce risk".
The CEFC has floated a range of potential policy options to drive the decarbonisation of the electricity sector, "including pricing mechanisms such as carbon pricing or an emissions intensity target; 'technology-pull' policies such as a renewable energy target, a low-emissions target, or reverse auctions with contracts for difference; or regulatory interventions such as regulated closures or absolute baselines".
It has also repeated previous arguments that new investment in coal-fired capacity would be unlikely to be financed by Australian or international capital markets because of the risk of stranded assets.
"Further, there is arguably no longer a social licence for new coal-fired power stations in Australia," the submission says.
The CEFC notes there are now several proposals in the market for new gas-fired generators in Australia but it says proponents are finding it "challenging" to find long-term domestic gas supply agreements to support new investment.
Senior executives from AGL Energy told a Senate committee on Tuesday the main issue causing problems with reliable energy supply in South Australia was "dysfunction" in the gas market – not too many windfarms making the grid unreliable.
Richard Wrightson, AGL's general manager of wholesale markets, told Tuesday's hearing the problem was so dire the company was contemplating building its own LNG hub in Queensland to help secure reliable supply downstream.

Links

Half Of World’s Ocean To Face Multiple ‘Climate Stressors’ By 2030, Study Warns

Carbon BriefRoz Pidcock

Climate change is altering the world's watery expanses in a number of ways, with serious knock-on effects for the ocean's plants and animals, according to new research.
Shoal of spade fish in the Atlantic. Credit: leofrancini/iStock/Getty Images
The study finds that with just 15 more years of current emissions, over half of the world's ocean will be exposed to more than one source of stress, affecting everything from the tiniest plants to the mightiest whales. By 2050, that figure rises to around 86% of the ocean, say the authors.
The paper, published today in the journal Nature Communications, finds that if all countries stick to their pledges to cut emissions, as part of the Paris Agreement, this would relieve the pressure by giving organisms an extra 20 years to adapt or migrate.
But for Arctic species, there may be no refuge from climate change, the paper warns, regardless of how quickly we act to cut emissions.

'Stress factor'
The oceans are essential for human existence, the paper begins, providing a primary source of protein for one in seven of the global population.
But through our own activities, humanity is putting a strain on the ocean's ability to perform that function, in four main ways.
First, warmer water is more inclined to stratify into layers, restricting access to nutrients for plants living on the surface. At the same time, excess CO2 absorbed by the ocean is making it more acidic, with consequences for marine life that build shells or skeletons.
Thirdly, warmer water reduces the amount of oxygen in the top layer of the ocean, the study explains. Finally, all of these things affect the process by which marine plants produce food to live and grow, known as primary production.
Dr Stephanie Henson, a specialist in biogeochemical oceanography at the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton, who is the lead author on the paper, tells Carbon Brief:
"Primary production is the base of the food web so the ultimate food source for everything in the oceans. If that food source is declining, that will obviously put stress on the marine ecosystems as well."
The study looks at how those four types of stressors interact in the future to give an overall "stress factor".
A calanoid copepod, a type of zooplankton. Species of warm-water copepod in the North Atlantic have shifted northward in recent decades. Credit: Proyecto Agua.
Defining stress
First, the team need to define what kind of conditions in the oceans count as normal and what is likely to move marine life into stress mode. Henson explains:
"Ecosystems are adapted to the natural range of variability that they experience. This means that organisms living in a particular part of the ocean are able to survive the normal range of winter-to-summer temperatures."
The scientists used those bounds of the natural summer-winter cycle to define what was tolerable for a particular region. Henson continues:
"Then we looked at where conditions under climate change went outside that boundary of normal conditions – and stayed there until the end of the century. That gave us our definition of when things became unusual."
But it gets more complicated, the paper explains. The four different stress factors rarely occur in isolation, sometimes overlapping to amplify the overall impact on marine life.
A lowering of pH and oxygen concentration can make corals and crustaceans more sensitive to rising temperatures, for example. Sometimes stressors can interact in unexpected ways to trigger a positive effect – all of which makes studying this topic in field or lab studies extremely challenging, the paper notes.
Today's study is a new attempt to streamline research in a lot of different areas, says Dr Scott Doney, department chair in marine chemistry at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, who wasn't involved in the research. He tells Carbon Brief:
"The study is novel because it brings together several different science threads to create a unified picture of ocean climate change."
Time of emergence
The team ran 12 different climate models to try to pinpoint when the "signal" of each of the four stressors – temperature, pH, oxygen and primary production – was likely to emerge from the background "noise" of natural variability, marking the shift to stressful conditions.
The results show that pH is the fastest of the four stress factors to escalate. In fact, the team found 99% of the open ocean already is experiencing stress from water getting more acidic.
The maps below from the paper shows how each of the four stress factors pan out across the world. The red colour spread across panel c shows how widespread exposure to stress from acidifying oceans is already.
Similarly, rising temperatures are already causing stress to organisms in the subtropics and the Arctic, the paper explains. You can see this in panel a in the graphs below. On average, the world's oceans will tip into temperature-related stress by about 2034, assuming emissions continue to track as high as they are now.
For primary production, that point is reached later in the century, around 2052 (panel b). For oxygen, it is later still, in 2070 (panel d). Henson tells Carbon Brief:
"Ocean acidification happens very quickly, the oceans warm up relatively quickly while primary production and oxygen take longer to affect ecosystems."
Multi-model average for the year when stress exceeds natural variability for (a) sea surface temperature (b) primary production, (c) pH and (d)oxygen content assuming a 'business-as-usual' scenario (RCP8.5). Henson et al., (2017)
Pace of change
Whether or not organisms will be able to cope with the effects of climate change depends to some extent on the speed of the change. As the paper explains:
"The more rapidly the system is pushed out of its natural range of variability, the less time the organisms will have to adapt or acclimate to the new conditions or migrate to more suitable areas."
Another factor is whether more than one rapidly-developing stressor occur together. The Arctic appears to be a "hotspot of change", says the paper, experiencing very rapid changes in pH, sea surface temperature and oxygen all at once.
For everywhere else, the changes are slower. But by 2030, 55% of the world's oceans will encounter a "mosaic" of stressors, rising to 86% in 2050. By 2100, nearly two-thirds of the ocean (62%) will be stressed by all four factors together, the study finds. Henson tells Carbon Brief:
"If organisms are negatively affected by climate change, that effect is going to continue all the way up the food chain, up from phytoplankton at the base, through fish and into animals like dolphins and whales, seabirds and so one." The impacts of stressed oceans will be particularly important for coastal developing nations, which depend heavily on the oceans for protein sources. Henson adds:
"There are areas around the Indian Ocean, for example, that will be quite rapidly affected. So there is the possibility that fishing countries along those borders will suffer."
The team looked at an alternative scenario in which all nations signed up to the Paris Agreement succeed in their pledges to reduce their emissions.
For those well-versed in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's emissions scenarios, this approximately corresponds to RCP4.5, implying warming by the end of the century of between 2.6-3.1C.
This level of mitigation would mean the pace of climate change in the oceans is much slower, says Henson. She tells Carbon Brief:
"What the mitigation scenario shows us is that it allows an extra 20 years or so for organisms to adapt and acclimate to conditions."
Mitigation would mean that only 34% of the ocean becomes exposed to multiple stressors within the next 15 years, compared with 55% under a "business-as-usual" scenario. By 2100, 30% of the ocean is affected by all four stressors in the mitigation scenario, compared to 62% under "business as-usual".
The exception to the rule is the Arctic, where mitigation does little to slow the emergence of multiple drivers, the paper notes.

'One way street'
The study makes the implicit assumption that organisms will suffer with prolonged exposure to conditions outside of their natural ranges. But some studies have shown species appearing to thrive in environments that are less than optimal, the paper notes.
Across most of the global ocean, however, the implications for marine life will be similar:
"When the environment changes sufficiently that new conditions, or a new combination of conditions, emerge and persist, the organisms must adapt, migrate to more favourable areas, or face extinction."
Marine creatures that already encounter big swings in natural variability may show the greatest resilience to change, the study suggests. Others may be able to migrate to new habitats. For example, a species of warm-water copepod in the North Atlantic has shifted northward in recent decades. But, as the paper notes, this tactic won't work for all species:
"Polar species are also particularly vulnerable as they cannot shift their geographical range northward in response to emerging drivers and so must either adapt to changing conditions or go extinct."
Human societies will need to adjust so that livelihoods are protected, as well as marine biodiversity. Doney tells Carbon Brief:
"The next steps are to develop better informed strategies for protecting and managing marine ecosystems (for example, fisheries, coral reefs, marine mammals and seabirds) in light of climate stressors."
Henson agrees, telling Carbon Brief that while her research defines the changes we're likely to see in the oceans, scientists don't yet understand what the ultimate effect on the marine ecosystem will be. She says:
"The marine ecosystem is so complex and there are so many different organisms. It's interesting to think, does that mean some will be winners and some will be losers in the future ocean? Right now, we just haven't got the information to know how that will play out."
As the paper notes, climate change is "essentially a one-way street", meaning that whatever changes occur in the marine environment, they are "unlikely to be reversed".

Links