30/06/2018

The World Loses Tree Cover The Size Of Bangladesh In 2017

SBS - Reuters

A new report says the world lost tree cover equivalent to the size of Bangladesh or Italy in 2017.
Image by Global Forest Watch
 An independent forest monitoring network said much of the tree cover was lost as forests were cleared using fire to make way for farms from the Amazon to the Congo Basin.
Tree cover loss, mostly in the tropics, totalled 294,000 square kilometres last year, just short of a record 297,000 square kilometres in 2016, according to Global Forest Watch.
The group is run by the US-based World Resources Institute (WRI).
Frances Seymour from the WRI said the rate of tree coverage being lost is startling.
“Tropical forests were lost at a rate equivalent to 40 football (soccer) fields per minute” in 2017, he told a news conference at a June 27-28 Oslo Tropical Forest Forum of 500 experts.
Global Forest Watch has mapped the loss of tree coverage. Supplied
The loss in tree coverage is comparable to the land size of Bangladesh or Italy, WRI said in its report.
"In total, the tropics experienced 15.8 million hectares of tree cover loss in 2017, an area the size of Bangladesh," the report stated.
Norwegian Environment Minister Ola Elvestuen said the pace of forest losses was “catastrophic” and threatened efforts to slow global warming. Trees soak up carbon dioxide from the air as they grow and release it when they burn or rot.
“Forest destruction is driving climate change,” he said. Norway has invested about $2.8 billion to safeguard tropical forests in the past decade - more than any other rich nation.
Brazil, Democratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia, Madagascar and Malaysia suffered the biggest losses in 2017, Global Forest Watch said, based on satellite data back to 2001.
The study omits, however, how far tree plantings or new growth offset the losses.
“Vast areas continue to be cleared for soy, beef, palm oil and other globally traded commodities. Much of this clearing is illegal,” Seymour said.
Brazil alone lost 45,000 sq km of tree cover, down 16 percent from a record in 2016. Fires raged in the southern Amazon region of Brazil.
Justin Adams, of the the Nature Conservancy environmental group, said only three percent of public finance for slowing climate change went to natural solutions like forests.
Well-managed forests can be a source of jobs and economic growth, he said.
Tree cover, however, is just one measure of the state of the world’s forests.
The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization says the loss of forests worldwide slowed to just a net 33,000 sq kms a year from 2010-15, with annual losses of 76,000 sq kms offset by annual gains of 43,000.
Among differences, the FAO says that a forest where trees are deliberately felled to make way for new plantings is still a forest. Global Forest Watch registers the felling as tree cover loss.
Anssi Pekkarinen, a senior forestry officer of the FAO, said that the FAO method of identifying the underlying land use “gives a much more comprehensive picture on the world’s forests.”

Links

A Warming World Creates Desperate People

New York Times - Lauren Markham*

Maggie Chiang

Last year I traveled to southern Guatemala, the source of one of the largest migrations of unauthorized immigrants to the United States in recent years. It’s clear why people are leaving: Guatemala is a country rife with political conflict, endemic racism against indigenous people, poverty and, increasingly, gang violence.
But there’s another, lesser-known dimension to this migration. Drought and rising temperatures in Guatemala are making it harder for people to make a living or even survive, thus compounding the already tenuous political situation for the 16.6 million people who live there.
In the town of Jumaytepeque, which is in Central America’s dry corridor, a group of farmers took me to see their coffee crops. Coffee was responsible for the majority of the community’s income but had been decimated by a plague known as coffee rust, or la roya. Plagues like these aren’t necessarily caused by climate change, but it exacerbates them, and roya is now infecting plants at higher elevations as those heights become warmer. Making matters worse, stress from the drought has made these plants more vulnerable to the plague.
“We can’t make a living purely off coffee anymore,” one young farmer told me in the dappled shade of his coffee plantation, pointing to the limp, yellow roya-pocked leaves all around us. Young people like him, he explained, either move to the cities and try to make a go of it amid the gang violence, “or they go north,” he said, to the United States.
Long before the unconscionable family-separation catastrophe at our southern border, President Trump had made the battle against illegal immigrants the rallying cry of his campaign and administration. He wants to lock up more immigrants — including toddlers — as a deterrent while casting all new unauthorized immigrants as potential, if not probable, violent criminals. Simultaneously, the president’s team has taken on the environment, doing nearly everything it can to walk back decades of regulation intended to protect our air, water and land. Last June, Mr. Trump pulled out of the Paris climate accord. Meanwhile, Scott Pruitt, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, is doggedly eviscerating the agency he runs.
Today, according to global relief agencies, over 68 million people worldwide have been forced to flee their homes, often because of war, poverty and political persecution. As a writer, I focus largely on issues of forced migration. The hundreds of migrants I’ve interviewed in the past few years — whether from Gambia, Pakistan, El Salvador, Guatemala, Yemen or Eritrea — are most often leaving because of some acute political problem at home. But I’ve also noticed something else in my years of reporting. If you talk to these migrants long enough, you’ll hear about another, more subtle but still profound dimension to the problems they are leaving behind: environmental degradation or climate change.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees estimates that since 2008, 22.5 million people have been displaced by climate-related or extreme weather events. This includes tragedies like the widespread famine in Darfur, monsoons and flooding in Bangladesh and the catastrophic hurricane in Puerto Rico. The more out of whack our climate becomes, the more people up and leave their homes. As our world heats up and sea levels rise, the problem of forced migration around the world is projected to become far worse.
And in refusing to take climate change or responsibility for our planet seriously, the Trump administration is encouraging the conditions that will increase unauthorized migrations to the United States and elsewhere.
Outside a youth refugee facility in Sicily, a group of teenagers from Gambia who had crossed the Mediterranean from Libya told me that farming had become too difficult to sustain in their country as the semiarid Sahel region spreads ever wider across the continent, drying up people’s land. In Yemen, years of water scarcity helped lead to the country’s brutal conflict.
El Salvador, one of the world’s most murderous countries, is just now recovering from a devastating drought, which only heightens the stakes and scope of the violence. In my book about youth migration from El Salvador, “The Far Away Brothers,” I write about a family that ended up on the wrong side of a gang-protected man in town. The family’s teenage twin brothers left because there was a price on their heads, but the challenges persisted for those who remained behind. The family’s fields produced less and less. The tomatoes took on a pallid, sickly color; other crops failed to grow at all. The family couldn’t survive from farming anymore, so more of the children considered going north. They haven’t yet, but nearly every day, one of the daughters tell me, she considers making arrangements to leave.
Many things are exacerbating the effects of the drought in Central America, including pervasive deforestation and farmers overtaxing their land. But according to Climatelinks, a project of the United States Agency for International Development, the average temperature in El Salvador has risen 2.34 degrees Fahrenheit since the 1950s, and droughts have become longer and more intense. The sea has risen by three inches since the 1950s, and is projected to rise seven more by 2050. Between 2000 and 2009, 39 hurricanes hit El Salvador, compared with 15 in the 1980s. This, too, is predicted to get worse.
When reporting a story among migrants living in the shadows of a Kenyan slum, I asked a group of men why they left their homes in rural Ethiopia. They were farmers there, like many generations before them, but they told me they could no longer make a living off their crops or even adequately feed their families. The rains had changed — it wasn’t just that they had lessened but that they had become more erratic; no rain when the crops needed it to grow, and then, when it was time for harvest, it would rain suddenly and terribly, ruining the crops. The men had left for Kenya to find work and send money back to feed their families.
Like El Salvador, Gambia, Bangladesh and Guatemala, Ethiopia has been hit hard by climate change, though it is not even in the top 100 emitters of greenhouse gases. But the problem with climate change, of course, is that it is a problem that crosses borders.
The anti-immigrant rhetoric of the Trump administration has made for elaborate and bombastic theater — but with real, and sometimes deadly, human consequences (see again the children separated from their parents at the border). But Mr. Trump means what he says: He wants immigration from poor countries to stop. He sees the problems in those countries as theirs, not ours — never mind the centuries of catastrophic foreign intervention in places like El Salvador and the rest of the Americas, the Arab world and sub-Saharan Africa, or the growing menace of the changing climate.
If President Trump really wants to curb “illegal” migration to the United States for the long haul, he’d better get serious about climate change. The Trump administration can continue to eviscerate the E.P.A. and thumb its nose at global efforts to protect the climate. Or he can work responsibly to try to curb international migration by addressing the challenges of a warming planet.
He can’t have it both ways.

*Lauren Markham is a freelance writer and the author of “The Far Away Brothers: Two Young Migrants and the Making of an American Life.”

Links

Climate Change Is A Top Spiritual Priority For These Religious Leaders

Washington PostJuliet Eilperin

Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople releases a falcon rehabilitated by Anima in Spetses, Greece. (Sean Hawkey)
Off the island of Spetses, the leader of 300 million Christians worldwide told a group of nearly 200 religious leaders, academics and activists that they needed to move beyond intellectualism when it came to the environment.
“What remains for us is to preach what we practice,” said Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople. “Now we must begin the long and difficult way from the mind to the heart . . . May God guide you in your service to his people and the care of his creation.”
The environment has defined 78-year-old Bartholomew’s tenure for more than a quarter-century: The gathering at sea this month was the ninth he has organized since the ­mid-1990s. This one focused on Attica, the peninsula surrounding Athens that juts out into the Aegean Sea, and Bartholomew brought together scientists and clergy to examine the state of bodies of water including the Danube and Amazon rivers, the Baltic and Adriatic seas, and the Arctic Ocean.
In November 1997, he had delivered an address in Santa Barbara, Calif., where he officially classified crimes against the natural world as sins.
“For humans to cause species to become extinct and to destroy the biological diversity of God’s creation; for humans to degrade the integrity of Earth by causing changes in its climate, by stripping the Earth of its natural forests, or destroying its wetlands; for humans to injure other humans with disease, for humans to contaminate the Earth’s waters, its land, its air, and its life, with poisonous substances,” he told a crowd that included ­then-Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt. “These are sins.”
Pope Francis has likewise drawn global attention to environmental activism: On the same day Bartholomew was concluding his conference in Greece, the pope brought the leaders of multinational energy and investment firms to the Vatican to discuss the path forward on climate change.
At a time when some political leaders have become more cautious about — or have outright rejected — policies aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions, several major faith leaders are making environmental care a top spiritual priority.
But they have also struggled to inspire some of their congregants to action.
“Even when there’s a will, there is not always a willingness to act,” said Ni­ger­ian Cardinal John Olorunfemi Onaiyekan, one of two cardinals who traveled to the patriarch’s conference. “The spirit is willing, but very often, the flesh is weak.”
Still, Onaiyekan and others who had journeyed to Greece for the three-day “Green Attica” conference emphasized that they would persist in raising the moral and ethical dimensions of climate change.
In Nigeria, Onaiyekan said in an interview that “there is a kind of ambiguity about climate change” because it is “a nation largely dependent on oil revenue.” But those living on the Niger Delta have experienced the damage associated with oil production firsthand, he said. It would be naive, he said, to expect oil companies and governments to shift their practices on their own.
“If you are waiting for them to change, you will wait till Jesus comes back again,” he said. “We feel the only area where we can actually make an impact is to constantly keep challenging our leaders to stop killing us. Stop killing your people.”
Francis — who issued the first papal encyclical focused solely on the environment, “Laudato Sì,” in 2015 — pressed this message during his private audience this month with executives from ExxonMobil, Eni, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, Equinor and Pemex.
Calling climate change “a challenge of epochal proportions,” the pope said that the private sector had taken modest steps toward incorporating climate risks into its business models and funding renewable energy.
“Progress has indeed been made,” he told the group as he wrapped up the two-day session. “But is it enough?”
Former energy secretary Ernest Moniz, who attended the meeting, said in an interview that participants discussed “the moral and ethical dimensions” of climate change, as well as ways to shift to a low-carbon path.
“Everybody was there trying to find a way to go forward,” Moniz said.
The patriarch, who resides in Istanbul, has spent years bringing together unlikely allies while also seeking to reorient the Orthodox Church. In 1989, his predecessor, Patriarch Dimitrios I, designated Sept. 1 as a day of prayer for the welfare of all creation, and Bartholomew has expanded upon this initiative.
Jane Lubchenco, who headed the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration during Barack Obama’s administration and served as the scientific co-chair of most of these conferences, said the patriarch had worked to “position the Orthodox Church as a very stewardship-focused religion.”
Back in 1995, she recalled, he convened a meeting on the meaning of the apocalypse in the modern world, to commemorate the 1,900th anniversary of the Book of Revelation. In that context, Lubchenco said, Bartholomew warned that the apocalypse could be underway if humans did not reassess their impact on the Earth.
This month’s gathering — which included stops on the islands of Spetses and Hydra — included similarly dire warnings from researchers. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, who directs the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, described the current changes arising from fossil-fuel burning as “disruption on a global scale.”
Without a sharp reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, Schellnhuber told the audience, large swaths of Nigeria, the Philippines and elsewhere “will become uninhabitable” because they will be too hot for humans to live in.
Some of the most fiery rhetoric came from Columbia University Earth Institute director Jeffrey Sachs, who spoke to the group in Greece before departing for the Vatican to participate in the papal climate conference. In an impassioned speech, Sachs charted the historic development of the global capitalist economy, arguing that its foundation upon the idea of “limited liability” has meant that corporations will not take responsibility for the economic damage they have caused.
“What we’ve proved is greed unleashed has no boundaries at all,” Sachs said. “That is the modern economy: Unleash the greed.”
The patriarch, who sat in the front row for the entirety of the conference, opened and closed the proceedings. Speaking in English, he framed conservation as a cause inextricably linked to both his faith and the broader cause of social justice.
“Any kind of alienation between human beings and nature is a distortion of Christian theology and anthropology,” he said.
Even small details of Bartholomew’s itinerary carried symbolic significance. His top environmental adviser, the Rev. John Chryssavgis, asked the conference hotels to avoid plastic straws and nixed a planned blessing for Hydra’s fishing fleet that was sponsored by an oil company.
With his free-flowing white beard and braided ponytail — high-ranking Orthodox officials eschew haircuts on the grounds that the practice smacks of vanity — the patriarch stirred an outpouring of affection as he visited two small islands during his tour. Church bells pealed as his yacht came into the islands’ harbors, and local residents thronged him as he made his way into town.
But it is unclear whether that reverence has translated into an embrace of his environmental mission, especially in the United States. The Rev. Terence Baz, an Orthodox priest in Clifton, N.J., said his parishioners are “blue-collar workers, mostly Republican.”
He added that many conservatives from the Episcopal Church and other Protestant sects have recently switched to the Orthodox Church in search of a more tradition-bound faith, “So there is a resistance against recognizing the reality of what is going to come.”
Chryssavgis said the patriarch has plans to “reach out to parishes in a more systematic fashion” on environmental issues through the church hierarchy but added that “it’s a real struggle.”
American religious conservatives such as E. Calvin Beisner, founder of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, wrote in an email that “many Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants” share his skepticism of the idea that burning fossil fuels will cause major environmental damage.
“The abundant, affordable, reliable energy generated from fossil fuels has been indispensable to lifting and keeping whole societies out of poverty,” he said, adding that these benefits “far outweigh their costs, whether to individuals, to specific nations or regions, or to the entire world.”
But as the hydrofoil cruised toward Athens, the bishop of Salisbury, Nick Holtam, said leaders such as Bartholomew and Francis can bolster policymakers’ convictions.
“Churches don’t look like campaigning organizations,” Holtam said, but when it comes to politicians, “they do need the legitimacy of people who will support them in doing hard things.”

Links

'We've Turned A Corner': Farmers Shift On Climate Change And Want A Say On Energy

The Guardian
National Farmers’ Federation head Fiona Simson says people on the land can’t ignore what is right before their eyes
Podcast: Why farmers are getting behind the science on climate change
Fiona Simson on climate change: ‘Farmers have come quite a long way in their attitude.’ Photograph: PR 
Out in the bush, far from the ritualised political jousting in Canberra, attitudes are changing. Regional Australia has turned the corner when it comes to acknowledging the reality of climate change, says the woman now charged with safeguarding the interests of farmers in Canberra.
Fiona Simson, a mixed farmer and grazier from the Liverpool plains in northern New South Wales, and the president of the National Farmers’ Federation, says people on the land can’t and won’t ignore what is right before their eyes. “We have been experiencing some wild climate variability,” Simson tells Guardian Australia’s politics podcast. “It’s in people’s face”.
“While we are a land of droughts and flooding rains, absolutely at the moment people are seeing enormous swings in what would be considered usually normal. They are getting all their rainfall at once, even though they end up with an annual rainfall that’s the same, it’s all at once, or it’s in so many tiny insignificant falls that it doesn’t make any difference to them.
“And the heat. We’ve had some record hot summers and some weird swings in seasons”.
Simson acknowledges there are “always going to be some outliers who are going to have some wild ideas” in farming or in any other sector of the Australian economy but she says “overwhelmingly, I think it’s got to the point where the science is very acceptable”.
The shift under way in the bush has filtered through to lobbyists lane in Canberra. Only a few years ago, when the then Labor government put a price on carbon, legislating a market mechanism to drive emissions reduction at least cost, the NFF rose in full battle cry against the heresy. But now, the NFF stands at the front of a phalanx of business groups trying to support the Turnbull government through the deeply fraught business of landing the national energy guarantee.
Simson isn’t trying to pretend black is white. She acknowledges the Neg looks a whole lot like the emissions trading scheme that her group shouted down only a couple of years ago. “I think the Neg for us is some sort of ETS potentially. It certainly talks about carbon and putting a value on that. There will be a price on that and there we go.”
People are really frustrated at the moment with the politics
Fiona Simson
She says it’s time to see the climate change-driven transition under way in the energy market as opportunity, rather than something to resist. “I think farm representation and farmers generally have come quite a long way in their attitude to climate, and climate change and climate variability and dealing with all of these things, and accepting some of the facts behind the science.”“We have turned quite a corner ourselves, and our approach now to this is quite different than it was in those days [when Labor pursued emissions trading], when the [previous NFF] leaders chose that path.”
She is supportive of the efforts of the agriculture minister, David Littleproud – a next-generation Queensland National – to reset the resting disposition for the Nationals on climate change and energy. Littleproud is happy to acknowledge that climate change is happening and he characterises the shift to renewables as “exciting”.
But the Nationals are lagging their communities on the issue. The party remains split on climate change and energy, and on the Neg. Some are trying to cook up a coal transition fund as the price of supporting the policy, but if that’s the price of entry, Labor federally and the Labor states might veto the framework before it can ever get off the ground.
Simson says dissenters need to get out of the road of a settlement. Consensus needs to be reached because the damage inflicted by the last decade of policy warfare is going to take time to unwind, and the key to unwinding the destruction is policy certainty. “I have some sympathy for [the Nationals] because I know that our sector has had some wide-ranging discussions to come to the agreement that we have.”
“But at the end of the day, that’s their job”.
She says politicians “need to stop picking winners. This is not about coal versus renewables ... it’s a bit like a farm, we are probably going to need a bit of everything. Surely, let the market decide is the best way rather than one politician thinking what’s going to be the technology of the future”.
Simson notes that Australian farmers love markets. They are entirely comfortable with competition. So the same rules should apply to the energy market. “For us it is very important that the policy be technology neutral, and let the market decide.”
She says politicians also need to understand that voters have had enough of the internal intrigues and the brinkmanship. “People are really frustrated at the moment with the politics, whether it is internal politics and infighting within the parties, or whether it is party against party. People are wanting now to have outcomes. People are facing skyrocketing energy prices. Some of my members are facing bills triple what they were a few years ago.”
So while there are still questions to answer about the detail of the policy framework, the Neg must be approached as opportunity. Simson says affordability, reliability, technology neutrality is fundamental, and the farm sector needs a tailored solution where emissions reduction can be built into the core of the business. “We think there are a lot of opportunities for small-scale energy generation and it’s already happening”.
“We would particularly like to take advantage of some of the heat generation that some of our intensive industries are using. For example, the pork industry has been amazing at capturing methane and then using that as energy generation – all the manure, the slurry going into the pits, having the methane captured and then driving a lot of the technology.”
“Things like that on farm are amazing opportunities.”
She says farms are often at the end of the power grid and are not well served by the status quo. She says the Neg framework could allow farmers to band together, and small communities to band together, to build their own energy infrastructure.
“We can work with this general framework. There is lot of opportunity”.

Links

29/06/2018

New Coal Doesn’t Stack Up – Just Look At Queensland’s Renewable Energy Numbers

The Conversation | 

As the name suggests, Windy Hill near Cairns gets its fair share of power-generating weather. Leonard Low/Flickr/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY
As the federal government aims to ink a deal with the states on the National Energy Guarantee in August, it appears still to be negotiating within its own ranks. Federal energy minister Josh Frydenberg has reportedly told his partyroom colleagues that he would welcome a new coal-fired power plant, while his former colleague (and now Queensland Resources Council chief executive) Ian Macfarlane urged the government to consider offering industry incentives for so-called “clean coal”.
Last month, it emerged that One Nation had asked for a new coal-fired power plant in north Queensland in return for supporting the government’s business tax reforms.
Is all this pro-coal jockeying actually necessary for our energy or economic future? Our analysis suggests that renewable energy is a much better choice, in terms of both costs and jobs.

Renewables and jobs
Virtually all new generation being constructed in Australia is solar photovoltaics (PV) and wind energy. New-build coal power is estimated to cost A$70-90 per megawatt-hour, increasing to more than A$140 per MWh with carbon capture and storage.
Solar PV and wind are now cheaper than new-build coal power plants, even without carbon capture and storage. Unsubsidised contracts for wind projects in Australia have recently been signed for less than A$55 per MWh, and PV electricity is being produced from very large-scale plants at A$30-50 per MWh around the world.
Worldwide, solar PV and wind generation now account for 60% of global net new power capacity, far exceeding the net rate of fossil fuel installation.
As the graph below shows, medium to large (at least 100 kilowatts) renewable energy projects have been growing strongly in Australia since 2017. Before that, there was a slowdown due to the policy uncertainty around the Renewable Energy Target, but wind and large scale solar are now being installed at record rates and are expected to grow further.
Left axis/block colours: renewable energy employment by generation type in Australia; right axis/dotted lines: installed wind and large-scale solar generation capacity. ABS/Clean Energy Council/Clean Energy Regulator, Author provided
As the graph also shows, this has been accompanied by a rapid increase in employment in the renewables sector, with roughly 4,000 people employed constructing and operating wind and solar farms in 2016-17. In contrast, employment in biomass (largely sugar cane bagasse and ethanol) and hydro generation have been relatively static.
Although employment figures are higher during project construction than operation, high employment numbers will continue as long as the growth of renewable projects continues. As the chart below shows, a total of 6,400MW of new wind and solar projects are set to be completed by 2020.
Renewable energy projects expected to be delivered before 2020. Clean Energy Regulator
The Queensland question
Australia’s newest coal-fired power plant was opened at Kogan Creek, Queensland in 2007. Many of the political voices calling for new coal have suggested that this investment should be made in Queensland. But what’s the real picture of energy development in that state?
There has been no new coal for more than a decade, but developers are queuing up to build renewable energy projects. Powerlink, which owns and maintains Queensland’s electricity network, reported in May that it has received 150 applications and enquiries to connect to the grid, totalling 30,000MW of prospective new generation – almost all of it for renewables. Its statement added:
A total of more than A$4.2 billion worth of projects are currently either under construction or financially committed, offering a combined employment injection of more than 3,500 construction jobs across regional Queensland and more than 2,000MW of power.
As the map below shows, 80% of these projects are in areas outside South East Queensland, meaning that the growth in renewable energy is set to offer a significant boost to regional employment.

Existing and under-construction (solid) and planned (white) wind and solar farms in Queensland. Qld Dept of Resources, Mines & Energy
Tropical North Queensland, in particular, has plenty of sunshine and relatively little seasonal variation in its climate. While not as windy as South Australia, it has the advantage that it is generally windier at night than during the day, meaning that wind and solar energy would complement one another well.
Renewable energy projects that incorporate both solar and wind in the same precinct operate for a greater fraction of the time, thus reducing the relative transmission costs. This is improved still further by adding storage in the form of pumped hydro or batteries – as at the new renewables projects at Kidston and Kennedy.
Remember also that Queensland is linked to the other eastern states via the National Electricity Market (NEM). It makes sense to build wind farms across a range of climate zones from far north Queensland to South Australia because – to put it simply – the wider the coverage, the more likely it is that it will be windy somewhere on the grid at any given time.
This principle is reflected in our work on 100% renewable electricity for Australia. We used five years of climate data to determine the optimal location for wind and solar plants, so as to reliably meet the NEM’s total electricity demand. We found that the most cost-effective solution required building about 10 gigawatts (GW) of new wind and PV in far north Queensland, connected to the south with a high-voltage cable.

Jobs and growth
This kind of investment in northern Queensland has the potential to create thousands of jobs in the coming decades. An SKM report commissioned by the Clean Energy Council estimated that each 100MW of new renewable energy would create 96 direct local jobs, 285 state jobs, and 475 national jobs during the construction phase. During operation those figures would be 9 local jobs, 14 state jobs and 32 national jobs per 100MW of generation.
Spreading 10GW of construction over 20 years at 500MW per year would therefore deliver 480 ongoing local construction jobs and 900 ongoing local operation jobs once all are built, and total national direct employment of 2,400 and 3,200 in construction and operations, respectively.
But the job opportunities would not stop there. New grid infrastructure will also be needed, for transmission line upgrades and investments in storage such as batteries or pumped hydro. The new electricity infrastructure could also tempt energy-hungry industries to head north in search of cheaper operating costs.
One political party with a strong regional focus, Katter’s Australia Party, understands this. Bob Katter’s seat of Kennedy contains two large renewable energy projects. In late 2017, he and the federal shadow infrastructure minister Anthony Albanese took a tour of renewables projects across far north Queensland’s “triangle of power”.
Katter, never one to hold back, asked “how could any government conceive of the stupidity like another baseload coal-fired power station in North Queensland?” Judging by the numbers, it’s a very good question.

Links

Rising Seas: 'Florida Is About To Be Wiped Off The Map'

The GuardianElizabeth Rush*

Sea level rises are not some distant threat; for many Americans they are very real. In an extract from her chilling new book, Rising, Elizabeth Rush details how the US coastline will be radically transformed in the coming years
‘Take the six million people who live in south Florida today and divide them into two groups: those who live less than six and a half feet above the current high tide line, and everybody else.’ Photograph: Milkweed Editions
In 1890, just over six thousand people lived in the damp lowlands of south Florida. Since then the wetlands that covered half the state have been largely drained, strip malls have replaced Seminole camps, and the population has increased a thousandfold. Over roughly the same amount of time the number of black college degree holders in the United States also increased a thousandfold, as did the speed at which we fly, the combined carbon emissions of the Middle East, and the entire population of Thailand.
About 60 of the region’s more than 6 million residents have gathered in the Cox Science Building at the University of Miami on a sunny Saturday morning in 2016 to hear Harold Wanless, or Hal, chair of the geology department, speak about sea level rise. “Only 7% of the heat being trapped by greenhouse gases is stored in the atmosphere,” Hal begins. “Do you know where the other 93% lives?”

Sea level rise: Miami and Atlantic City fight to stay above water

A teenager, wrists lined in aquamarine beaded bracelets, rubs sleep from her eyes. Returns her head to its resting position in her palm. The man seated behind me roots around in his briefcase for a breakfast bar. No one raises a hand.
“In the ocean,” Hal continues. “That heat is expanding the ocean, which is contributing to sea level rise, and it is also, more importantly, creating the setting for something we really don’t want to have happen: rapid melt of ice.”
A woman wearing a sequined teal top opens her Five Star notebook and starts writing things down. The guy behind her shovels spoonfuls of passionfruit–flavored Chobani yogurt into his tiny mouth. Hal’s three sons are perched in the next row back. One has a ponytail, one is in a suit, and the third crosses and uncrosses his gray street sneakers. The one with the ponytail brought a water bottle; the other two sip Starbucks. And behind the rows and rows of sparsely occupied seats, at the very back of the amphitheater, an older woman with a gold brocade bear on her top paces back and forth.
A real estate developer interrupts Hal to ask: “Is someone recording this?”
“Yes.” The cameraman coughs. “Besides,” Hal adds, “I say the same damn thing at least five times a week.” Hal, who is in his early seventies and has been studying sea level rise for over 40 years, pulls at his Burt Reynolds moustache, readjusts his taupe corduroy suit, and continues. On the screen above his head clips from a documentary on climate change show glacial tongues of ice the size of Manhattan tumbling into the sea. “The big story in Greenland and Antarctica is that the warming ocean is working its way in, deep under the ice sheets, causing the ice to collapse faster than anyone predicted, which in turn will cause sea levels to rise faster than anyone predicted.”
‘Dig into geologic history and you discover this: when sea levels have risen in the past, they have usually not done so gradually, but rather in rapid surges.’ Photograph: Milkweed Editions 
According to Marco Rubio, the junior senator from Florida, rising sea levels are uncertain, their connection to human activity tenuous. And yet the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change expects roughly two feet of rise by century’s end. The United Nations predicts three feet. And the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimates an upper limit of six and a half feet.
Take the 6 million people who live in south Florida today and divide them into two groups: those who live less than six and a half feet above the current high tide line, and everybody else. The numbers slice nearly evenly. Heads or tails: call it in the air. If you live here, all you can do is hope that when you put down roots your choice was somehow prophetic.
But Hal says it doesn’t matter whether you live six feet above sea level or sixty-five, because he, like James Hansen, believes that all of these predictions are, to put it mildly, very, very low. “The rate of sea level rise is currently doubling every seven years, and if it were to continue in this manner, Ponzi scheme style, we would have 205 feet of sea level rise by 2095,” he says. “And while I don’t think we are going to get that much water by the end of the century, I do think we have to take seriously the possibility that we could have something like 15 feet by then.”
It’s a little after nine o’clock. Hal’s sons stop sipping their lattes and the oceanographic scientist behind me puts down his handful of M&M’s. If Hal Wanless is right, every single object I have seen over the past 72 hours – the periodic table of elements hanging above his left shoulder, the buffet currently loaded with refreshments, the smoothie stand at my seaside hotel, the beach umbrellas and oxygen bars, the Johnny Rockets and seashell shop, the lecture hall with its hundreds of mostly empty teal swivel chairs – will all be underwater in the not-so-distant future.

Elizabeth Rush. Photograph: Stephanie Ewens
One of the few stories I remember from the Bible vividly depicts the natural and social world in crisis. It is the apocalyptic narrative par excellence – Noah’s flood. When I look it up again, however, I am surprised to find that it does not start with a rainstorm or an ark, but earlier, with unprecedented population growth and God’s scorn. It begins: “When human beings began to increase in number on the earth.” I read this line and think about the 6,000 inhabitants of south Florida turning into 6 million in 120 short years. “The LORD saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become.” I think about the exponential increase in M&M’s, Chobani yogurt cups and grande lattes consumed over that same span of time. The dizzying supply chains, cheap labor and indestructible plastic. “So God said to Noah, ‘I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them.’” And then the rain began.
I do not believe in a vengeful God – if God exists at all – so I do not think of the flood as punishment for human sin. What interests me most is what happens to the story when I remove it from its religious framework: Noah’s flood is one of the most fully developed accounts of environmental change in ancient history. It tries to make sense of a cataclysmic earthbound event that happened long ago, before written language, before the domestication of horses, before the first Egyptian mummies and the rise of civilization in Crete. An event for which the teller clearly held humans responsible.

Dig into geologic history and you discover this: when sea levels have risen in the past, they have usually not done so gradually, but rather in rapid surges, jumping as much as 50 feet over a short three centuries. Scientists call these events “meltwater pulses” because the near-biblical rise in the height of the ocean is directly correlated to the melting of ice and the process of deglaciation, the very events featured in the documentary footage Hal has got running on a screen above his head.
 Photograph: Milkweed Editions
He shows us a clip of the largest glacial calving event ever recorded. It starts with a chunk of ice the size of Miami’s tallest building tumbling, head over tail, off the tip of the Greenland Ice Sheet. Then the Southeast Financial Center goes, displaying its cool blue underbelly. It is a coltish thing, smooth and oddly muscular. The ground between the two turns to arctic ice dust and the ocean roils up. Next, chunks of ice the size of the Marquis Residences crash away; then the Wells Fargo Center falls, and with it goes 900 Biscayne Bay. Suddenly everything between the Brickell neighborhood and Park West is gone.
The clip begins again and I watch in awe as a section of the Jakobshavn Glacier half the size of all Miami falls into the sea.
“Greenland is currently calving chunks of ice so massive they produce earthquakes up to six and seven on the Richter scale,” Hal says as the city of ice breaks apart. “There was not much noticeable ice melt before the nineties. But now it accelerates every year, exceeding all predictions. It will likely cause a pulse of meltwater into the oceans.”
In medicine, a pulse is something regular – a predictable throb of blood through veins, produced by a beating heart. It is so reliable, so steady, so definite that lack of a pulse is sometimes considered synonymous with death. A healthy adult will have a resting heart rate of 60 to 100 beats per minute, every day, until they don’t. But a meltwater pulse is the opposite. It is an anomaly. The exception to the 15,000-year rule.
From 1900 to 2000 the glacier on the screen retreated inward eight miles. From 2001 to 2010 it pulled back nine more; over a single decade the Jakobshavn glacier lost more ice than it had during the previous century. And then there is this film clip, recorded over 70 minutes, in which the glacier retreats a full mile across a calving face three miles wide. “This is why I believe we are witnessing the beginning of the largest meltwater pulse in modern human history,” Hal says.
As the ice sheets above Hal’s head fall away and the snacks on the buffet disappear, topography is transformed from a backwater physical science into the single most important factor determining the longevity of the Sunshine State. The man seated next to me leans over. “If what he says is even half true,” he whispers, “Florida is about to be wiped off the map.”

*Elizabeth Rush is the author of Rising: Dispatches from the New American Shore and Still Lifes from a Vanishing City: Essays and Photographs from Yangon, Myanmar. Her work explores how humans adapt to changes enacted upon them by forces seemingly beyond their control, from ecological transformation to political revolution.

Links

Study Of Reefs Reveals Benefits Of Keeping Global Warming In Check

FairfaxPeter Hannam

Keeping global temperature increases to the lower end of the Paris climate accord would make a dramatic difference to the severity of coral bleaching by mid-century, according to research to be presented to the UN's World Heritage Committee.
The study, conducted by scientists including Australians, found only four of the 29 World Heritage reefs are projected to experience severe bleaching twice a decade from heat stress by the second half of this century if warming can be kept to 1.5 degree, compared with pre-industrial levels.

Fish swim past a coral formation on Queensland’s Great Barrier Reef – one of the World Heritage reefs at risk. Photo: Bloomberg
That projection, in an update report to the First Global Scientific Assessment of the World Heritage reefs,  compares with an assessment last year that projected 25 of those 29 sites – including the Great Barrier Reef – would suffer severe bleaching twice a decade by 2040 if global greenhouse gas emissions were allowed to increase under business-as-usual conditions.
"Coral reefs are one of the more sensitive ecosystems and so the impacts [of climate change] are unveiled earliest," said Scott Heron, lead author of the report, and an oceanographer with Coral Reef Watch, run by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "Action on greenhouse gas emissions ... is critical at this stage."
Corals suffering sustained heat stress typically expel algae known as zooxanthellae, losing their main source of energy and colour.
Unprecedented back-to-back coral bleaching in the summers of 2015-16 and 2016-17 triggered the deaths of about half the corals on the Great Barrier Reef alone.
Of the World Heritage-listed natural coral reef properties, 15 were exposed to repeated severe heat stress between 1985-2013, while 25 of the 29 suffered bleaching in the subsequent three years, according to the assessment published last year.
The Turnbull government's handling of the Great Barrier Reef's health has lately been controversial following a decision to direct $444 million of reef research funding in the budget for the year ending this month to the little known privately funded Reef Foundation.
Keeping global warming to under 1.5 degrees, though, will be a difficult task given the roughly 1-degree increase so far and the timelag effect of the carbon pollution already emitted. Dr Heron's report notes the low-emissions scenario modelled implies pollution peaks during the 2010-2020 decade.
Even a low-carbon track, however, won't be enough to spare the Phoenix Islands Protected Area in Kiribati, which will be among the four sites likely to suffer severe coral bleach twice a decade by 2038, the report said. The other three are protected sites off Cocos Islands, the Galapagos Islands and Panama.
Dr Heron, who is a researcher at James Cook University and supported by the Australian Marine Conservation Society, will release his report at this week's World Heritage Committee meeting in Bahrain.
He is also planning to unveil a new Climate Vulnerability Index assessment tool to highlight the climate action needed to save all of the 1000-plus culture and natural World Heritage-listed sites world.
"There's not really the capacity within the World Heritage process to address [climate change]," said Dr Heron. "These are the best of the best places to protect."
Climate change impacts "have the potential to overwhelm any efforts that we put into local management", he said.
Separately, Hilde Heiner, President of the Marshall Islands, will on Thursday announce the first online political leaders summit to drum up support for lifting the emissions goals pledged at the 2015 Paris climate accord.
The summit is due to be held after the expected release in October of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's  special report on the impacts of a temperature increase of 1.5 degrees.

Links

28/06/2018

A More Resilient World: The Role Of Population And Family Planning In Sustainable Development

Environmental Change and Security Program

Girls in Jigjiga, Jila Alu Kebele on their way to fetch water from the nearby water point, April 2016. Courtesy of UNICEF Ethiopia/Tesfaye
“Community mobilization, local capacity-building, and innovation are the cornerstones of successful development. And that for us includes resilience,” said Franklin Moore, Africare’s Chief of Programs, at a Wilson Center event on family planning and sustainable development.
As rapid population growth intersects with challenges like food insecurity and water scarcity, communities in developing countries need not only the capacity to absorb short-term shocks, they also need transformative capacity to address long-term challenges.
Tailored education campaigns can engender lasting change, said Moore. In the Sahel region, Africare’s “husband schools” teach men about the health and nutrition benefits of child-spacing.
Such efforts help communities “make some transitions and behavioral shifts and to adopt new innovations,” said Moore. “Transformative capacity is where we find the innovations and institutional reform, behavior shift, and cultural change.”

Securing Water to Ensure Stability
Water security means “providing water for a multiplicity of users to support life on this planet and to support human activities,” said Eric Viala, Director of the Sustainable Water Partnership. Water is essential for life, but also for public health, energy production, and agriculture.
 Each person in the developed world uses enough water to fill an Olympic swimming pool every year, said Viala—and as the world’s population grows, so will the total demand for water.
The ongoing water crisis in Pakistan, where the population is predicted to reach 300 million by 2050, “has brought the population issue also on to the table,” said Zeba Sathar of the Population Council, who spoke from Islamabad via Skype.
This conversation—“between people who work on water issues, food issues, and population issues [has been] largely absent,” she said. It is “the shortage of water that’s bringing home the crisis of both water shortages and, of course, population growth and unmet need.”



Changing Farms to Feed Families
“Seventy percent of water we use on this planet goes to food production,” said Viala. “If you don’t have the water to produce food, you can’t eat.” Severe droughts can lead to hunger, even famine; while too much water—floods—can swamp farmland.
Families in many developing countries depend on subsistence farming for both food and livelihoods. As families grow, “that family farm…will have to be divided—so if they are struggling with the plot of land they have now, they’re cutting it in half,” said Jason Bremner of Family Planning 2020. Due to population growth, “the hectares per family farm has declined over time,” he said, threatening food security and economic development.
To help communities adapt, Africare works with farmers to plant drought-resistant cowpea as well as forage sorghum, which can be used to feed livestock in times of drought.
Through its community-led food security and distribution groups, Africare provides information not only on farming, but also on nutrition, health, and family planning, which helps members to both “make changes that relate to child-spacing and changes in agricultural practices that increase the nutritious food they are producing both for mothers and pregnant women,” said Moore.

Seeking Shelter From the Storm
As population grows, so does the number of people affected by extreme weather—particularly in the most vulnerable parts of the world, including coastal areas, arid regions, and flood zones. For example, Nigeria—the most populous African country—is growing rapidly.
“There are 200 million today, and there are going to be around 400 million by 2050,”said Bremner. The severe drought in the Lake Chad region, combined with the ongoing violence from Boko Haram, has contributed to the country’s millions of internally displaced people, said Bremner, pushing some to leave the country: Nigeria was the largest origin country for migrants to Italy in 2016, he said.
In Pakistan, severe flooding in 2010 destroyed homes and livelihoods, forcing many residents along the Indus River to seek safety or employment elsewhere.
A unique study conducted by the Population Council found that women affected by the flooding not only increased female employment, but also increased access to family planning and maternal health care, due to the presence of international relief organizations.
 Women were “able to absorb new changes in behavior,” which manifested in “a sharp uptick in contraceptive use” and “greater involvement in economic work,” said Sathar.
 
Integrated Approaches for Interlinked Challenges
“Most leaders understand that population growth has a major impact on stability,” said Viala. The African Union, for example, has seen success “linking the reduction in fertility, and favorable birth spacing patterns, with a demographic dividend…with positive development outcomes,” said Sathar.
To build more resilient communities, “it is really critical that we understand these interlinked challenges and we find new ways of doing business, as business as usual—standard family planning programs, our standard efforts of reaching communities with water and environmental issues—are going to be further stressed,” said Bremner. “Until we find different ways of doing business, then we will continue to see interconnectedness as innovation, instead of interconnectedness as being the way of doing business.”

Links

Trump's Lasting Damage To The Environment

Deutsche Welle -  Dave Keating

A new report concludes that the damage already done by the Trump administration to the environment, and the US agency that regulates it, will result in 80,000 deaths each decade.

This week, it was announced that copper and cobalt mining will begin in the formerly protected federal US lands of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument of Utah. The mining is now possible after Donald Trump removed protection from 2.2 million acres of federal land in Utah - the largest elimination of protected areas in US history.
It is only a fraction of the protections Trump has removed from federal lands since taking office in January 2017 - part of a general campaign promise to dismantle American environmental law, which Trump says is stifling economic growth.
The promises were not only made in campaign stump speeches. They were also set in the official Republican Party Platform adopted at the party's convention in August 2016. "The environmental establishment has become a self-serving elite, stuck in the mindset of the 1970s," the platform stated. "Their approach is based on shoddy science, scare tactics, and centralized command-and-control regulation."
Now, 18 months into the Trump regime, experts have concluded that the changes already made to environmental law will cause damage that would be difficult for a future administration to undo, and could result in 80,000 extra health-related deaths in each of the next decades.
An analysis essay published in June by two Harvard University scientists, David Cutler and Francesca Dominici, looked specifically at the health impacts of changes to the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) policies on air pollutants and toxic chemicals. They came up with the 80,000 deaths figure by analyzing the EPA's own data. The deaths would result from increased diseases from bad air and water quality, and would be in addition to the deaths that would have resulted from those diseases anyway under the previous trajectory before Trump scrapped the protections.
"This sobering statistic captures only a small fraction of the cumulative public health damages associated with the full range of rollbacks and systemic actions proposed by the Trump Administration," they said. The EPA has responded by saying the essay is "not a scientific article, it's a political article".
According to an analysis by the New York Times using Harvard Law School's Environmental Regulation Rollback Tracker, which is keeping a running tally of the regulatory dismantling program, the Trump administration has so far initiated the reversal of 67 environmental laws.

Out, and on the way out
The EPA does not deny that it is dismantling US environmental regulations. Trump appointed Scott Pruitt, the agency's head, to do just that. As Oklahoma Attorney General, Pruitt was a fierce foe of the EPA and initiated several lawsuits against the agency to stop it putting into place environmental regulation. Pruitt, who has denied the existence of climate change in the past, believes the agency is a large bloated monster producing regulation for regulation's sake, stifling industry with red tape.
Last week, Pruitt moved to kill an Obama-era Clean Water Rule, watering it down in a way that environmentalists say make it completely toothless. The effort was launched last year but has had to overcome legal challenges. It is only the latest piece of regulation to be undone. According to the Regulation Rollback Tracker, 33 environmental rules have already been overturned outright, while 34 are in the process of being rolled back.
The most significant of these is the Obama-era Clean Power Plan. It sought to overcome Congressional inaction on climate change by giving the EPA the power to regulate carbon emissions by classifying it as a pollutant. With the plan rescinded, there will be no instrument for the US to lower emissions in line with its commitments under the Paris Agreement – which Trump has pledged to pull the US out of in 2020.
This week, Trump signed an executive order to revoke Obama-era protections for US oceans, coastlines and Great Lakes waters. The change will open these waters to energy extraction, fishing, trade and national security activities.
Also significant is the administration's move to scrap Obama-era emissions standards for cars. This could cause US automakers to fall behind in the clean vehicle innovation race with automakers in China and Europe, which both have such emissions standards.
Lukas Ross, a climate and energy campaigner with Friends of the Earth US, says the rollbacks at the EPA are part of a broader dismantling being undertaken across the administration.
"Trump filled his cabinet and government agencies with unqualified corporate cronies whose devastating impact on our environment cannot be understated," he told DW. "Appointees like Scott Pruitt at the EPA and Ryan Zinke at the Department of the Interior use their positions of power to hand our government over to the fossil fuel industry."
As well as rolling back policies that protect air and water, he highlighted decisions to open American national monuments for drilling and mining exploration.
"These attacks on environmental and public health protections will have a disastrous impact on generations of Americans," he said.
Out of the changes made so far, Ross says the opening up of public lands for drilling and mining and rolling back clean air and water protections would be the hardest moves to undo. "These changes will have real-world consequences that once done, cannot be undone," he said. "New pipelines and oil rigs can be shuttered by a different administration, but not the toxins and pollutants in our air, water and soil".

EPA in ruins
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt is embroiled in a corruption scandal
Even more difficult, experts say, would be restoring the EPA to its previous health under a new administration. The agency has been hit with mass resignations and firings since Pruitt took control and began cutting departments and programs.
The administration has sent intimidating memos asking for the names of climate change experts used by federal agencies, looking for environmental sympathizers within policymaking, and silencing EPA scientists.
The agency has been staffed with Trump loyalists, right down to the media relations office. After an initial EPA media blackout, new press office personnel have allegedly focused on intimidating reporters. Jahan Wilcox, an EPA spokesperson, reportedly told a reporter for the Atlantic earlier this month, "you have a great day, you're a piece of trash," when she requested comment on the fact that four top EPA officials had resigned in a week.
Pruitt himself is surrounded by one of the most extensive corruption scandals in US political history, accused of using agency resources for personal gain. Despite the ongoing scandal, President Trump has refused to call for Pruitt's resignation.
"Trump continues to support a fundamentally corrupt man as the head of the institution," says Ross. "Pruitt has wasted millions in taxpayer dollars on his lavish lifestyle instead of protecting our environment."
Pundits in the US doubt that Pruitt can stick it out at the agency much longer given the enormity of the accusations against him. But Ross warns that even if he were replaced by someone who cut back on the deregulation agenda, the damage has already been done. Even a future administration would have difficulty restoring the gutted agency to its previous health and staffing levels any time soon.
"A new administration would need a truly environment-focused agenda to reverse much of Pruitt's damage," he says.

Links