01/08/2018

'Something Missing': Final National Energy Paper Omits Modelling Data

Fairfax - Peter Hannam

The final report from the Energy Security Board on the Turnbull government's signature energy policy does not contain detailed modelling the states were awaiting, an absence that could further complicate approval on the plan.
The states and territories, which must provide unanimous support for the National Energy Guarantee for it to proceed on Wednesday were sent an extended version of the board's final detailed design paper.
Australia's energy policy debate is heading to a climax. Photo: Nick Moir
The 61-page document does contain more detail on the guarantee's workings, including the role of different sources of energy if the plan were to be implemented after 2020.
Coal-powered generation is expected to continue to account for more than 60 per cent of all generation in 2029-30. There is no futher closure of coal-fired power stations, except for AGL's Liddell plant in NSW, up until 2029.
Some Queensland black coal generation is projected to withdraw "in line with key contracting and technical milestones" around 2029-30.
The chapter of modelling - not made public before today - does not, however, detail the assumptions that underpinned the work done for the board by ACIL Allen, the consultants.
Dylan McConnell, an energy expert at the University of Melbourne, said many analysts had hoped to see the precise assumptions used to support the board's arguments, including that the guarantee would save households an average of $550 per year over the first decade.
"Definitely, there's something missing," Mr McConnell said. "[The report] is not the actual modelling."
He contrasted the partial disclosure with the Gillard government's Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, or carbon tax, when the full modelling from two separate consultancies was made public before the policy was voted on.
"The Climate Change Authority always released its modelling," he said, adding that the same was true for the Warburton review into the Renewable Energy Target.
Federal Labor is among those that has called for the full release of the modelling.

Links
at No comments:

Australia Faces Surge In Heatwave Deaths, Major Study Warns

SBS - AAP

Australian governments are being urged to do more to help cities adapt to warmer temperatures amid warnings about a future rise in heatwave-related deaths.
File photo Source: AAP
Australia could face a dramatic surge in heatwave-related deaths if governments don't do more to help communities adapt to climate change, a major international study warns.
Tropical and subtropical areas across South East Asia and South America are likely to face the steepest rise in heat-related deaths if measures aren't put in place to help people live with warmer temperatures in the coming decades.
A team of international researchers based their findings on various scientific models, which predicted that under the most extreme scenarios there would be a 471 per cent rise in deaths as a result of heatwaves in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne between 2031 and 2080 compared with the four decades to 2010.
Lead author Yuming Guo, an associate professor of environmental epidemiology and biostatistics at Monash University, says the findings are a warning to governments to introduce adaptation strategies such as better urban planning and public education campaigns.
"If the Australian government cannot put effort into reducing the impacts of heatwaves, more people will die because of heatwaves in the future," Assoc Prof Guo said as the study was published in the journal PLOS Medicine on Wednesday.
"The current heatwave in the northern hemisphere is serious and many people are concerned about their health.
"That highlights how important our study is in providing evidence for governments to do something, particularly in Australia where the government has cut off a lot of funding for climate change research."
Firefighters and volunteers try to extinguish flames during a wildfire at the village of Kineta, near Athens, on July 24, 2018. Source: Getty
Much of Europe, parts of Asia and North America have spent the past few weeks sweltering through heatwave conditions.
Canada and Japan have each recorded at least 30 heat-related deaths as temperatures soared during July.
Previous studies have warned of a future increase in the number and severity of heatwaves as a result of climate change, but the research by Assoc Prof Guo and his team is the first to look at the potential impact heatwaves may have on death rates around the world.
How record heat wreaked havoc on four continents
The researchers describe heatwaves as a critical public health problem because they can cause heatstroke and cramps, as well as induce the onset of conditions including cardiovascular disease, respiratory diseases and diabetes.
The models used to estimate future heatwave-related deaths included data on future greenhouse gas emissions, population growth, and hypothetical changes governments could introduce to help communities cope with warmer temperatures.
They then applied that data to estimate links between heatwaves and deaths in 412 communities across 20 countries.
They found that if governments don't introduce any measures to help communities adapt, heatwave-related deaths are expected to rise most in tropical and sub-tropical countries, with Colombia, the Philippines and Brazil facing the biggest increases.
If adaptations are made, mortality rates are still expected to rise in most countries but at a smaller rate.

Links
at No comments:

Supreme Court Says Kids Can Sue Trump Over Climate Change

Mother Jones - Rowan Walrath

The high court called the breadth of the lawsuit “striking.”

Youth plaintiffs, attorneys, and staff from Our Children's Trust at the federal courthouse in Eugene after a hearing in the Juliana v. United States climate change lawsuit in June. Robin Loznak via ZUMA Wire
The Supreme Court has rejected the Trump administration’s effort to stop a climate change lawsuit spearheaded by 21 youth plaintiffs. The plaintiffs, all between 11 and 22 years old, argue that the United States government has violated their constitutional rights by allowing fossil fuel production to continue—despite knowing its effects on the planet.
In a brief order, the high court denied the federal government’s application for a stay, calling it “premature.” The order comes on the heels of a July 20 decision by the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals that also refused to throw out the lawsuit.
According to a press release from Our Children’s Trust and Earth Guardians, two organizations behind the lawsuit, Juliana v. the United States accuses the federal government of “creating a national energy system that causes climate change, is depriving them of their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property and [failing] to protect essential public trust resources.”
Julia Olson, executive director and chief legal counsel of Our Children’s Trust, praised the Supreme Court’s order, saying, “We look forward to presenting the scientific evidence of the harms and dangers these children face as a result of the actions their government has taken to cause the climate crisis.”
The Supreme Court also took note of the sheer ambition of the young plaintiffs’ case. “The breadth of respondents’ claims is striking, however, and the justiciability of those claims presents substantial grounds for difference of opinion,” the court noted in the unsigned order.
In April, Mother Jones spoke to Phil Gregory, lead co-counsel for the plaintiffs and some of the youthful climate activists who brought the case. “That the plaintiffs are young is a big part of their legal argument,” my colleague Amy Thomson wrote at the time. “As the government continues to neglect the consequences of climate change, they say, their future selves—and their future children—will suffer.”
The case’s origins date back to the Obama administration, when Julia Olson, an attorney from Eugene, Ore., gathered a group of young climate advocates and additional attorneys to file the suit against the government in 2015. Trump’s team inherited this case and made an attempt to stop it last year.
Over the summer, the US legal team asked the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit to review a 2016 decision that allowed the case to move forward, known as “a petition for writ of mandamus.” The Trump administration argued that preparation for trial—which could uncover scores of documents and communications related to fossil fuel companies—would be an unreasonable burden for the government.
In response, the courts agreed to hear the oral arguments. In March, they denied the petition, which paved the way for a trial date. Gregory told Mother Jones that he expected the Trump administration to make another attempt to stop the case, saying, “The federal government is scared to put climate science before a federal court.”
Juliana v. the United States is scheduled to be tried in the US District Court in Oregon on October 29.
Read the Supreme Court’s order here:


Links
at No comments: