04/10/2018

Driest Ever September Deepens Australia's Drought

Reuters - Tom Westbrook

SYDNEY - Australia had its driest September on record last month, and though spring rains are forecast this week across parts of the continent’s east that has seen the worst drought in years, the season is predicted to offer little relief from the dry weather.
Tracks made by sheep can be seen in a drought-effected paddock on a farm located on the outskirts of the town of Coolah in central New South Wales, Australia, September 17, 2018. REUTERS/David Gray
The country’s east coast has recorded less than a fifth of its typical rainfall over the last three months to September and is barren, with winter crops failed and graziers buying in grain to feed their herds.
Wheat production has been cut to its lowest in a decade, the wool clip and wine crush are set to drop and the drought has already swung crop protection company Nufarm Ltd to an annual loss.
Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology said on Wednesday the year so far is the second-driest recorded in the country’s biggest river catchment, the Murray-Darling since records began in 1900, and last month was the driest September logged.
That’s pushed soil moisture, which can take months to replenish, “very much below average” across a vast swathe of the continent stretching from the outback Kimberley region in Western Australia to cropping and pastureland in the southeast.
Falls up to 25 mm (1 inch) are forecast in drought-wizened central New South Wales state on Thursday, with lighter rain predicted lasting until Saturday, the bureau said, though the coming three months are still forecast drier than average.
“For the grain side of things it’s too little too late and I’d imagine it’s probably the same for sheep areas,” said Matt Dalgleish, trading manager at agricultural consultant Mecardo.
“There might be some cattle producers, if they’ve still got stock, to get a little bit of growth in pasture but it’s probably not going to be enough to carry them through summer.”

Links

Young Women More Likely To Care About Climate Change: Study

FairfaxMary Ward

Young women are much more likely to care about climate change than young men, a small Australian study has found.
According to a survey of students aged 18-33 at Western Sydney University, young women are eight times more likely to believe processes of climate change will affect their lives than their male counterparts.
Young women are more likely to be concerned by climate change. Photo: Stocksy
Tonia Gray, associate professor at Western Sydney University's School of Education and a co-author of the study, said she believed the result was, in part, because women are more likely to possess a "legacy mindset".
"They are concerned for the next generation. They are thinking: What am I going to leave? How am I going to make the world a better place."
The results are in line with US and European studies, which have also shown women are more likely to believe in climate change than men. A 2005 University of Oregon analysis found countries with higher numbers of women in parliament were more likely to have ratified environmental treaties.
Globally, women are also more likely to be impacted by the effects of climate change than men. The UN estimates 80 per cent of the people displaced by climate change are women.
The group surveyed by Western Sydney University had, like all people born after February 1985, only ever lived in a world with rising monthly temperatures.
While all those surveyed said they had heard about climate change, only half were able to name a key event that had occurred in the previous year related to climate change.
When asked to describe their emotions towards climate change, "fear" was the most common response, with 47 per cent of survey participants choosing this emotion. In contrast, 17 per cent of respondents said they had "no emotion" about climate change, a response given by nearly twice as many surveyed men than women.
Just over half (51 per cent) of those surveyed thought they could not personally change the course of climate change, with women more optimistic about the impact of their individual contribution.
The young people surveyed cited climate scientists as the people they trusted most for information about climate change. Politicians were rated as the least reliable source of information on climate change, followed by social media.

Links

'This Drought Is Different': It's Drier And Hotter – And Getting Worse

The Guardian

On the land and in the towns they’re affected to varying degrees; some find it harder to cope. But they all agree something has changed
An olive grove on Sommariva station, owned by Karen McLennan and her son Michael McLennan. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian 
The Guardian
The new normal?
How climate change is
making droughts worse
In the first part of a new series, we take you through the current conditions, and then put them in context with other severe droughts in Australia’s history.
If you don’t fully appreciate the complexity of rural communities, farmer Peter Schmidt is not the sort of bloke you would be expecting in the Mulga Lands.
His place is 21,000 hectares – 52,000 acres in the old money – and his family have been there since his grandfather selected blocks in the 1890s.
The closest town is Wyandra, a blip on the highway on the way to Cunnamulla from Charleville – a drive that reveals the disused fences of smaller blocks long abandoned as unsustainable.
Schmidt though is still at his homestead at Alawoona, its sheds and outbuildings surrounded by a metre-high levee, standing like a bad joke in their sixth year of drought.
He put it in after the 2012 flood, which washed a foot of water through his house. Problem is, that flood heralded the start of the dry and it pretty much hasn’t rained since.
He jokes with station hand Joe that he cursed the place and might have to break the levee to bring on the rain.
But far from being a man of superstition, Schmidt is a rural scientist, with two masters degrees – one each in rural education and cattle behaviour. He has a softly spoken manner and a sense of humour born in the Mulga.
Scientist farmer Peter Schmidt with his partner Kathryn James on Alawoona, near Wyandra , Queensland. Monday 20 August 2018. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Alawoona station with homestead and levee, owned by Peter Schmidt and Kathryn James. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian
“We’re mad here, we are in the most unreliable area, the most unreliable climate in the most unreliable continent,” he says.
“Well, it’s unreliably reliable,” says his partner, Kathryn.

‘Dry eight years in a row’
Schmidt first started thinking about climate change after seeing a program on the astronaut Neil Armstrong who, before he went to space, thought the earth’s atmosphere was like the peel of an orange. In the pictures of space, Schmidt could see that the thickness of the atmosphere was more like an onion skin, and it stayed with him.
Alawoona, near Wyandra, Queensland.
Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian
“I kept that in the back of my mind and then you hear things like there’s a million new cars put on the road every year in Australia belching out exhaust fumes – and these coal-fired things – something has to happen in that very confined space of the atmosphere. I think it’s happening.”
It is the middle of winter when we drop in, and though the fine day stretches over the place like a shroud, there is a chilly wind that blows through the mulga. Schmidt welcomes us into a small closed kitchen as he loads some old gidgee (Acacia cambagei or stinking wattle) into the wood stove and offers us a coffee.
Schmidt has lived through many droughts but it’s the big ones he remembers – 1958, 1965, 1983. While southern Australia suffered through the Millennium drought during the noughties, up in the Mulga Lands, Schmidt says it was “dry for eight years in a row”.
Every one is different but this time Schmidt has noticed one change from previous droughts has been the higher temperature.
“The essential thing was there were two or three periods there where the temperature was above 40C for 15 days in a row and it just sapped all the moisture out of the soil,” Schmidt says. “That’s the difference between this drought and the others.”
He had 100mm on the backblocks of his place last November, 59mm in March and very little since then.

It doesn’t stop with one rainfall
Drought has long been a part of the Australian climate and features in Indigenous stories and history. Indigenous agricultural and land management practices, documented by historians such as Bruce Pascoe and Bill Gammage, consider drought as a subjective notion – that is, it’s a state of mind. This is replicated among today’s landholders, reflected back in comments like these: “the only thing we know about drought is that it will end”. That is, it is a period that needs to be managed, like any other.
Donkeys guard sheep against attacks from wild dogs on Andrew and Louise Martin’s station, Macfarlane, near Tambo, Queensland. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian 
Then there is the scientific definition of drought. According to the Bureau of Meterology, drought is serious or severe rainfall deficiency – essentially a period of prolonged dryness.
By this measure, south-west Queensland has experienced almost seven years of dry times. Yet when Guardian Australia visited the region, locals were keen to reject some commonly held assumptions. Drought is not uniform. Parts of Queensland have been in drought for seven years but it does not mean those communities have not had any rain. Drought doesn’t stop with one rainfall. Even in NSW, which is 100% drought-declared, some areas are not strictly in drought. Each region responds differently to drought and has different assets and challenges. All of the community is affected by drought, not just farmers. Businesses, shops and social events can close down as people hunker down and stop spending. Not every farmer is male – businesses are mostly partnerships – and not every farmer is on her last legs.
Many farmers have taken advantage of rain when it does come, by making hay and stockpiling other fodder. Many are careful to protect their pastures and therefore their soil by selling or locking up livestock and feeding – a practice known as drought lotting – in dry times. Others over-graze and accelerate land degradation. This explains why driving through the countryside you can see one side of a fence is as bare as a board and the other with foot-high pasture. And yet, no matter how much you prepare, it is hard to manage for seven lean years with a business, bills to pay and an average farm debt. Land management is key.
Andrew and Louise Martin on Macfarlane station. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian
“It’s so much easier to be a good manager in a wet year,” Augathella farmer Rachelle Cameron says. “There is grass everywhere and no stress.”

Summers ‘so scorchingly hot’
Four hours north of Wyandra, Louise and Andrew (Marto) Martin are sheep growers on the Mitchell Grass plains near Tambo, 860kms north-west of Brisbane. Looking out over the high grass, it doesn’t look too bad, certainly not the desert landscape pictures that metropolitan audiences are used to in drought. Macfarlane station is on an ancient inland sea – the Martin’s fossil collection contains ammonites and Huon pine, spat out of the black soil plains that expand and contract depending on the water content.
Both Martins work the farm, while Andrew is also mayor of the Blackall-Tambo region. This year they got a bit of autumn rain and made 200 bales of hay. They reduced their stocking rate to match the season, as much as is possible with lambing ewes. They’re not in favour of what Marto calls “agrarian socialism”, believing that subsidies create dependency.
“The best way of dealing with drought is accepting you are going to have one,” Andrew says.
Andrew Martin drives along an exclusion fence on Macfarlane station. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian 
He takes the longer view on climate, which he describes as always changing, while Louise echoes Schmidt’s experience that higher temperatures have been a feature of the latest drought.
“It’s quite unusual to get over 40C here but this last summer and the last couple of summers have been so scorchingly hot,” she says. “You can see the water being sucked out of the dams, sucked out of the soil, sucked out of my life and you can’t plan for that.
“The way to plan for drought is you just have to make a decision and if you haven’t got enough grass, you sell [stock].”

‘Policy adverse to diversification’
Karen and Bill McLennan and their son Michael are in the Mulga Lands on the highway to Roma, just outside Charleville. Their diversification plan was an olive plantation – Sommariva Olives – made into oil, soap, tapenades and other products. They are trying to stay agile, in the government’s words, to drought-proof. Bill and Karen also work in the panel-beating business in Charleville through the week; they spread themselves thin in an effort to survive the climate and the conditions.
Karen McLennan and her son Michael McLennan. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian
Karen describes the good times, when the grass is above their knees, but looking out from their back deck off the olive shed, it is all mulga and red dirt. The olives get enough water to yield a crop every second year. She describes a life that is filled with work, in the panel shop, in the olive shed, in the mulga. The olives were to be the retirement plan, but their oil won awards and it has increased the cashflow in dry times.
“You do get a bit sick of it, she says. “You often say, I want to get out. I have had enough, I just want to get out. But you can’t really sell when it’s this dry, you have to wait for the rain, and then hopefully, if you want to get out, you get out then when it looks nice. But probably everyone else thinks the same way so the market will be flooded.”
They find government policies frustrating, the rhetoric encouraging farmers to diversify while erecting hurdles, or as Michael says, “government policy is actually adverse to diversification, it’s crazy”.
Sommariva station, a cattle and olive business outside Charleville, Queensland. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

The entrance to Sommariva station. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian
Karen applied for some assistance to restructure their finances and was knocked back on account of their income from the panel-beating shop.
“Like my husband says, when we are in drought, this whole area is in drought,” she says. “Our business in town struggles as well, because people can’t spend money in town. We get hit there as well as out here.”
Pressure has increased on the family after the bank revalued their properties and stock as a result of the downturn in conditions, which changes the interest payments.
Like all the farmers we speak to, they appreciate the city’s donations, though they have not received anything. Hay is tricky, given once you start feeding cattle, you have to keep going. One or two bales will not last long.
One of the big movements in farming practice over recent years is towards grazing practices that respond to climate rather than keeping a set number of stock no matter what the climate. There are a number of farmers now who sell down stock and close down for dry periods but this requires a certain equity level. For the McLennans, it is not an option.
It’s easy to say you need to destock going into a drought – but you can’t
Michael McLennan
“It’s easy to say you need to destock going into a drought, but you can’t,” Michael says. “The cost of getting into one of these places, you have to keep producing because if you don’t, how do you meet your loans? What is your income? In drought, costs go up, but cattle prices go down because no one else can buy for the next year.”
North west of the McLennans, Doug and Rachelle Cameron live on the old station of Nive Downs, originally over 738 square miles with its own post office and general store. It was split up in the 1960s and the couple have been on 34,000 acres north of Augathella since 2004.
Conditions were pretty good for the first few years, then it flooded before sliding into drought. They have cut their herd down from 1,300 to 900 and are preparing for the possibility they will not get their usual summer rain. In a normal year, the Cameron family gets 19 inches of annual rainfall on Nive Downs, yet near the end of August they have only had six. Talk turns to what normal is.
“The new norm seems to be drier and hotter over the years we have been here, with our average summer temperatures,” Rachelle says. “I wouldn’t say [climate change] is not happening. It seems to be all or nothing in the country.”
Doug and Rachelle Cameron and their children Stirling, 11, Ella, 8, and Grace, 6. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian
The Camerons are trying to increase cash flow by diversifying into production of their Nive Beef jerky. Doug hit on it after a cattle price crash due to the 2011 temporary live export ban. At a roadhouse on the way back from the saleyards, he saw a 25g packet of beef jerky for $5 after he just sold cattle for $50 a head.Doug was sick of being a price taker. “It didn’t matter what I did to the cattle – we could have the best genetics, the best everything – but outside influences just crushed us. I thought maybe we can make something out of the jerky and set the price.”
Around Augathella, they grow their haystack in summer and cattle eat it down in winter. By autumn, they know whether they will have enough feed to get through the winter, and for the past five years it has never been enough, so they have sold off cattle.
“This year is worse than every other year. We are missing all that growth, lately it’s been late rain, with a [short] eight-week window to grow before it cools out. You are not getting bulk feed through and that’s what hurt us in the community.”
Doug and Rachelle Cameron and their children Stirling, Ella and Grace at a feeding point on their property, Nive Downs. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian
Farmers are not the only ones to suffer in drought. Dave* lost his job on a big cotton farm in a small northern NSW town when the drought started to bite. There was not enough water and the farmer cut back his cropping program. Like many farm workers, a cottage was part of his package. So when he lost his job, Dave and wife Margie* also lost their house.
There was no redundancy package because the employer was not large enough. Dave was reeling from the job loss but Margie got active. The couple, in their late 50s, were carrying a bit of debt from the last drought when they were left unpaid for contracting work. So while looking for a new home, Margie also contacted their bank to apply for hardship provisions which the bank duly provided. But when a good friend gave them some money to tide them over, the bank dropped the hardship provision.
Margie applied to Centrelink for Newstart, but given the couple have had various micro businesses, the application process was arduous to prove they had no hidden assets. She also contacted high profile drought charities who told her because they were not farmers, they could not help. Sixteen weeks after losing their job and home, they were still waiting for Newstart.
The only assistance they have received is from the Country Womens Association, which pays up to $3000 for household expenses such as fuel, power, insurance and the like. Another city based charity arrived with groceries, lining up donated goods like a supermarket at a local hall.
“The government needs to look after people who become unemployed with the drought,” Margie said. “There is no focus on contractors, the small businesses, it’s hard to get Centrelink assistance and those people end up leaving town.”
The dry weather also places pressure on regular social events such as picnic races, campdrafts and other gatherings, which are important economically and socially. At a time when people need to keep an eye on others, the usual events can disappear from a town calendar, having a material effect on the state of mind of its inhabitants.

‘Women get depressed as much as the next man’
Christine McDougall is the director for mental health, alcohol and other drugs for the South West Hospital and Health Service under the Queensland government. Based in Roma, her patch is one of the largest health services in the state, covering 320,000 square kilometres, but there are only 29,000 people scattered across that vast “corner country”. McDougall has been a mental health nurse since 1974 but she says it makes her cry to drive around Charleville and Cunnamulla and see the effect on the community, first of the floods of 2012, which wrecked the soil and land, and now the latest drought.There are no mental health beds in the south west, and people are transported by the Royal Flying Doctors Service if necessary. The service aims to keep people in their own community, using local hospitals and providing full support as much as possible, via telehealth consultations and regular visits by clinicians.
Service director of mental health at Queensland’s South West Hospital and Health Service, Christine McDougall, at her clinic in Roma, Queensland. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Links

Storm Warning For The Fossil-Fuel Industry

Project Syndicate - 

A spate of extreme weather events this year will no doubt intensify the political pressure on fossil-fuel firms in the coming years. How oil and gas companies manage their growing political challenges will be just as important for their valuation as their day-to-day operations are now.
Glenn Hunt/Getty Images
LONDON – This has been a year of extreme weather events, from the “Beast from the East” that froze much of the United Kingdom in March to Hurricane Florence on the US East Coast and Typhoon Mangkhut in the Philippines. Scientists generally hesitate to say that any particular natural disaster is the result of climate change, but the overall intensity of storms certainly appears to be linked to the accumulation of human-generated greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere.
But in the minds of many, assigning blame need not wait for full scientific certainty. There are tens of millions of people whose lives have been severely affected by natural disasters, and perhaps billions who have noticed changing weather patterns in recent years. Like a growing share of politicians and most of the media, many of these people are becoming convinced that our reliance on fossil fuels is one of the underlying causes.
The fossil-fuel industry is a legitimate target for criticism, given that its products account for the bulk of annual GHG emissions. “Big Oil” firms, in particular, have been hit by a number of actions relating to their role in climate change. In addition to protests at their sites in recent years, they have faced shareholder resolutions demanding a shift toward renewable energy sources, divestment campaigns, and a growing number of , particularly in the United States.
Yet, if anything, the political siege of the fossil-fuel industry has only just begun. Even if extreme weather events do not turn out to be as frightening as climate scientists predict, the public will most likely increasingly direct its ire at the industry whenever there is a major hurricane, flood, typhoon, heat wave, or freezing spell.
Moreover, as awareness of climate change spreads, politicians and the public will need a simple and easy target to blame. To be sure, one could point the finger at the billions of consumers who drive gasoline-powered cars and rely on fossil fuels to heat and light their homes. But any politician hoping to win an election would be foolish to blame the voters.
In practice, this means that fossil-fuel firms – particularly those headquartered in OECD countries – will have to navigate an intensely contested operating environment in the coming years. In terms of shareholder value, managing social and political challenges will be no less important than finding and producing hydrocarbons.
Nowadays, much of the shareholder activism against the industry focuses on the extent to which firms’ hydrocarbon reserves ultimately may prove commercially nonviable as the world shifts away from fossil fuels. But in the near term, the political backlash against the industry will pose a bigger threat to valuations than will “stranded assets.”
That backlash could come in a variety of forms. Divestment campaigns are likely to gain steam and attract larger shareholders. Climate-related lawsuits could begin to extend further beyond the US, ultimately leading to multi-billion-dollar damage awards, as in the cases against Big Tobacco. Protest movements to disrupt on-shore operations could become routine. And governments could decide to impose moratoriums on new hydrocarbon development, or to levy punitive taxes on fossil-fuel firms. In fact, the government of New Zealand recently banned all future offshore oil and gas exploration – a move that other countries ultimately may follow.
Why should anyone shed tears for Big Oil and its investors? After all, many of the political pressures described here are helpful for tackling climate change, which requires reducing our reliance on fossil fuels and accelerating the shift to renewable energies.
Still, an unthinking backlash against fossil-fuel firms could also have some perverse effects. Politicians may use it to deflect attention from the slow pace of national energy policy reform. In most countries, such reform is urgently needed to meet climate targets. Also, even in a scenario in which the average global temperature increase is kept within 2° Celsius of pre-industrial levels (the upper limit under the 2015 Paris climate agreement), fossil fuels will still need to be produced. Like a giant supertanker, the global energy system cannot be turned around on a dime. The shift away from fossil fuels will take many years, during which oil, gas, and coal will remain in demand.
In light of these realities, one risk of the intensified political backlash against fossil-fuel firms is that the industry could be pushed into the shadows. Instead of shrinking in size or focusing on a transition to renewables, the industry might shift production to private rather than publicly listed firms. Or production could migrate to less transparent firms in non-OECD countries.
In either case, these corporate entities will be less susceptible to pressure from progressive activists and socially focused investors. Less scrupulous producers will be happy to keep exploring and extracting with abandon, because they will feel even less obliged than the distrusted bosses of Big Oil and Big Coal to demonstrate that they are helping to reduce GHG emissions. As the movement to tackle climate change continues to shape its strategy for the years ahead, this is one risk that it must keep in mind.

*Daniel Litvin is Managing Director of Critical Resource, a consultancy that advises resource firms on sustainability and “license to operate” risk, and the author of Empires of Profit: Commerce, Conquest, and Corporate Responsibility

Links

Which Cities Will Sink Into The Sea First? Maybe Not The Ones You Expect

The Guardian*

The Earth isn’t solid – which makes it hard to predict how the submerging of our coastlines will unfold
Cape Denison, east Antarctica. ‘If the Antarctic ice melts before the Greenland ice sheet, the whole of North America’s eastern coast will go under water first.’ Photograph: Pauline Askin/Reuters 
Better scientific understanding of global warming makes the discussion about its geopolitical consequences increasingly urgent.
Put simply, there are going to be winners and losers: hotter places and colder places; wetter places and drier places; and, yes, places that disappear under the sea.
 But the reality is a bit more complicated.
In particular, are sea levels going up or down? The answer seems clear when you consider that Antarctica has lost 3 trillion tonnes of ice in the last 25 years.
Yet to understand what is going on we first have to recognise that the Earth isn’t solid. It started life as a ball of hot liquid about 4.5bn years ago and our planet has been cooling ever since.
Right at the centre of the Earth is a solid core of metal made of iron and nickel at a temperature of approximately 5,000C.
But this core is surrounded by an approximately 2,000km-thick ocean of molten metal, again mostly iron and nickel. Surrounding this is a layer of rock called the mantle that is between 500C to 900C, and at these red-hot temperatures the rock behaves like a solid over short periods of time (seconds, hours, and days) but like a liquid over longer time periods (months to years) – so the rock flows, even though it is not molten.
On top of the fluid mantle floats the crust, which is like the skin of the Earth. It is a relatively thin layer of cool rock that is between 30 to 100km thick and contains all the mountains, forests, rivers, seas, continents – our world.
Since the crust is floating on the fluid mantle, if you increase its weight by, for instance, building up kilometres of ice on top of it, then it sinks further into the mantle. This is what has happened to the landmasses of Antarctica and Greenland, which are both covered in 2km to 3km of thick ice.
If global warming were to cause all that ice to melt, then the sea level of the oceans would rise by more than 50 metres, submerging all the coastal cities of the world and making hundreds of millions of people homeless.
This seems obvious. What is less obvious is how it might unfold.
If the whole ice sheet covering Antarctica melts, the release of its weight will destress the rocks below, which, because they float on the mantle, will bob up. This is called post-glacial rebound.
The position with Greenland is similar: the crust below it is being weighed down by the 3 million trillion litres of water held in the ice sheet, and if that ice sheet all melts then parts of the North American tectonic landmass will rise up.
If the resulting increase in the height of the continent is bigger than the sea level rise, then major flooding may be avoided. Working out which scenario is more likely is vitally important for future generations, because one of these results will start to play out if global warming intensifies.
What we know is this: the global mean sea level has risen 20cm since the beginning of the 20th century. Some of this has been owing to the water thermally expanding as the oceans have got hotter – since hotter liquids take up more volume (this is how liquid thermometers work).
Some of the rise in sea level has been due to the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets melting, and some due to other glaciers melting.
The rising sea levels are global: they affect everyone with a coastline, from tiny Pacific islands that would be entirely submerged to a huge country such as Bangladesh, for which a one-metre rise in sea levels would result in nearly a fifth of the country being submerged and 30 million people being displaced.
 But while rising sea levels affect everyone, the post-glacial rebound affects only the coasts connected to parts of the Earth’s crust weighed down by the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.
It is hard to overestimate the importance of this issue, and we badly need more data and scientific understanding of these liquid processes.
A limited number of specialised satellites, such as CryoSat, GRACE and ICESat-2 – just launched by Nasa – are being used to monitor ice thickness and to develop models of post-glacial rebound. What the science predicts is that if the ice melts first in the northern hemisphere, then Greenland may bounce up higher than the average sea level, as will parts of North America, and so sea levels there may initially go down.
If the opposite happens, and the Antarctic ice melts before the Greenland ice sheet, then it is the southern tectonic plates that will bounce up first and the whole of North America’s eastern coast will go under water first. The big unknowns are how quick the ice will go in each location, and how fast the post-glacial rebound will be.
We need to get a better understanding of these processes fast, because if we don’t it may be too late to avert catastrophe. These issues don’t dominate news agendas but they should.
Recently the French environment minister resigned, citing the president’s lack of progress and urgency on climate change issues. In doing so, he voiced the concern of the whole scientific community about world leaders – we need a step change in governmental action.
But there’s the rub: not all governments feel urgent about it. And why? Perhaps it’s because, as the issue of post-glacial rebound shows, there will be winners and losers from global warming. For instance, countries such as Russia will be less affected by sea level rises, and may benefit from a more temperate climate.
In contrast, the US may not only suffer from new drought zones, but its low-lying eastern coast is threatened by the accelerating loss of Antarctic ice.
As the 21st century continues and the ice continues to melt, it will become clearer which countries have a greater incentive to mitigate climate change, and the resulting geopolitics has the potential to drive division and conflict.

*Mark Miodownik is the author of Liquid: The Delightful and Dangerous Substances That Flow Through Our Lives, which is short-listed for the Royal Society Book prize

Links