14/01/2020

(AU) Explainer: What Are The Underlying Causes Of Australia's Shocking Bushfire Season?

The Guardian

Despite the political smokescreen, scientists are in no doubt that global heating has contributed to Australia’s fire emergency
Smoke from Australia’s unprecedented bushfires as seen from the International Space Station on January 4. Photograph: NASA Earth Observatory Handout/EPA
As Australia’s unprecedented bushfire season continues to unfold, competing arguments have been made about the principal causes of the human and environmental tragedy – particularly around the role of climate change.
The prime minister, Scott Morrison, has acknowledged that climate change has had an influence on the fires and has defended his government’s climate record.
But Morrison has also said that “job-destroying, economy-destroying, economy-wrecking targets and goals” on climate change “won’t change the fact that there have been bushfires or anything like that in Australia”.
Backbench MP Craig Kelly denied any link between climate change and bushfires in a combative interview on British TV.
Conservative media have concentrated on other factors, such as the amount of hazard reduction burning carried out, or the activities of arsonists – a claim shown to have been inflated and misrepresented.
Bushfire experts say that in normal years hazard reduction is a way to control the behaviour of fires, but the changing climate is making it harder to carry out prescribed burns and, according to fire chiefs, it is not a “panacea” for extreme bushfires.
Here is what we know about the long-term influences on the bushfire catastrophe.

Why has this bushfire season been so devastating?
Extreme heat and dryness are two important influencers of fire and, on both measures, 2019 was remarkable for Australia.
Australia experienced its hottest year on record in 2019, with average temperatures 1.52C above the 1961-1990 average. Our second hottest year was 2013, followed by 2005, 2018 and 2017.
New South Wales – one state hard hit by the bushfires – broke its record by a greater margin, with temperatures 1.95C above average, beating the previous record year, 2018, by 0.27C.
At a very basic level, rising levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere change the earth’s radiation balance, allowing less heat to escape.
Australia also had its driest ever year in 2019, with rainfall 40% lower than average, based on records going back to 1900. NSW also had its driest year.
A visualisation from Prof Nerilie Abram, a climate scientist at the Australian National University, examines hot and dry years in Australia since 1910 and how they correlate with major bushfires.

An animated history of average maximum temperatures and rainfall in Australia since 1910.

Fire authorities and the Bureau of Meteorology look at the risk of bushfires using the forest fire danger index, a combined measure of temperature, humidity, wind speed and the dryness, but not the amount, of fuel on the ground.
Australia’s 2019 spring months of September, October and November were the worst on a record going back to 1950 for bushfire risk.

What about ‘natural’ weather patterns?
There have been two other meteorological patterns that helped generate the extreme conditions Australia has been experiencing, and both these “modes of variability” were in “phases” that made conditions worse.
The Indian Ocean dipole was in a “positive phase”, meaning the Indian Ocean off Australia’s north west was cooler than normal and the west of the ocean was warmer.
Positive dipole events draw moisture away from Australia and tend to deliver less rainfall.
But there is evidence that the extra greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are also impacting the dipole and another phenomenon, known as the southern annular mode (SAM).
A 2009 study found that positive dipole events “precondition” the south of the country for dangerous bushfire seasons and that these events were becoming more common.
A 2018 study in the journal Nature Communications found the number of extreme positive dipole events goes up as climate heating continues.
At 1.5C of global warming, the frequency of extreme positive dipole events doubles compared with the pre-industrial period.
The southern annular mode was in a “negative phase” as the bushfires took hold in November and December. This phase was generated by a sudden warming event in the stratosphere above Antarctica.
This caused westerly winds to track further north, blowing hot air across the continent into fire-prone areas, further fanning flames.
Abram’s own research has found that the SAM is being pushed towards more positive phases which, when they occur in Australia’s winter, tend to dry the continent.
Prof Matt England, of the UNSW Climate Change Research Centre, said: “These modes of variability are not changing in a way that’s good for south-east Australia.
“We know with certainty that we are stacking the dice for the chances of these extreme drought years because of the changes in the modes.”

What has happened to Australia’s fire weather?
Scientists have already detected a trend towards more dangerous fire weather in Australia.
A 2017 study of 67 years of FFDI data found a “clear trend toward more dangerous conditions during spring and summer in southern Australia, including increased frequency and magnitude of extremes, as well as indicating an earlier start to the fire season”.
That trend continued in 2019, which was the riskiest year for bushfires on a record going back to 1950.

What role is climate change playing in the risk of fire?
A study of Queensland’s historic 2018 bushfire season found the extreme temperatures that coincided with the fires were four times more likely because of human-caused climate change.
In advice issued in November 2019, Australia’s National Environmental Science Program was unambiguous.
“Human-caused climate change has resulted in more dangerous weather conditions for bushfires in recent decades for many regions of Australia.
“Observations show a trend towards more dangerous conditions during summer and an earlier start to the fire season, particularly in parts of southern and eastern Australia.
“These trends are very likely to increase into the future, with climate models showing more dangerous weather conditions for bushfires throughout Australia due to increasing greenhouse gas emissions.”
Despite such unequivocal statements, Scott Morrison has been irritated that interviewers have asked about his government’s record on climate change, saying it was “just ridiculous” to link “any one emissions reduction policy to any of these fires”.
Morrison’s argument that no emissions reduction policy can be tied to individual events is spurious, as the same argument could be put for any and all efforts to reduce emissions anywhere in the world, at any time.
Scientists also believe that 2019 was a “stand out” year in Australia for the formation of extreme bushfires that became “coupled” with the atmosphere, generating their own lightning and gusty, violent and unpredictable winds. Rainfall is replaced with blackened hail and embers that can be shot out over distances of 30km.
Another study has found that global heating will create more favourable conditions for these “pyroCB” storms to form in Australia.

What about the future?
Climate studies show that conditions in Australia for extreme bushfires will only get worse as more greenhouse gases are added to the atmosphere.
On Friday afternoon the president of the Australian Academy of Sciences, Prof John Shine, said Australia would need to further improve its climate modelling ability and understanding of fire behaviour to mitigate against the extreme events that would become more frequent and intense because of climate change.
“Australia must take stronger action as part of the worldwide commitment to limit global warming to 1.5° C above the long-term average to reduce the worst impacts of climate change,” he said.
England said: “We are loading the dice for more and more of these summers. But we have had knowledge of this for some time.
“What we have seen in Australia this year will just be a normal summer if we warmed the planet by 3C. And an extreme summer would be even worse than we’ve seen now.”
Abram said: “Even from my perspective, I am surprised by just how bad 1C of warming is looking.
“It’s worrying that we are talking about this as a new normal, because we are actually on an upward trajectory. Currently the pledges in the Paris agreement are not enough to limit us to 1.5C – we are looking more like 3C.”

Links

(AU) PM’s Popularity Takes A Dive, As Leading Scientists Fire Back Over Climate Pitch

New DailyCait Kelly

Scott Morrison in a sit down interview with the ABC on Sunday. Photo: YouTube
Leading scientists have demanded urgent action on the climate crisis as Prime Minister Scott Morrison defended his government’s policies during the worst bushfire season on record. 
Appearing on Insiders on Sunday morning, Mr Morrison said it was his “intention to meet and beat” Australia’s 2030 commitment to cut emissions 26 to 28 per cent on 2005 levels. And he left the door slightly ajar to cut more emissions if needed. 
It’s a small but significant step considering just weeks ago Mr Morrison said he saw no need to change his climate policies.
In another move to show it is helping the environment, the Morrison government will on Monday announce it is pledging $50 million to help protect wildlife and fauna impacted by bushfires.
Could it signal that the bushfire disaster has finally woken the government up to do more to acknowledge and fight manmade climate change?
Experts aren’t holding their breath. And now the polls indicate the PM has some work to do to persuade voters amid fury over Mr Morrison’s bushfire response.
The latest Newspoll figures show Mr Morrison’s approval rating has plunged and Labor leader Anthony Albanese is now the preferred leader.
Mr Albanese leads the Liberal leader 43 to 39 per cent, according to the survey results released on Sunday night.
Labor is in front 51-49 on a two-party-preferred basis in the poll conducted for The Australian, a significant turnaround from early December when results showed the coalition led 52-48.
Support for the Greens rose one point to 12 per cent, while One Nation lost ground, falling one point to four per cent.
Meanwhile, scientists say Mr Morrison’s mea culpa on his holiday and hint on climate policy shift are nowhere near the strong response needed to show the government is going to commit to any meaningful change in their climate response.
Lesley Hughes, a professor of biology at Macquarie University and a climate councillor at the Climate Council of Australia, said the government’s targets are so “weak” that it means little when the PM promises to meet or beat them.
“It’s like saying I want a 20 per cent pass rate on my exam. So we met those targets because they were so low,” Professor Hughes told The New Daily.
Meeting the 2030 Paris targets would rely heavily on including emissions reductions from the previous international agreement, the Kyoto protocol.
“The best analogy I’ve heard – and it’s not mine – but it’s like saying I got a really good mark on my kindergarten colouring test and I want to use those to pass my university test now,” Professor Hughes said.



On top of the targets being criticised as too low, the UN reported last year that Australia was not even on track to meet them. 
“There has been no improvement in Australia’s climate policy since 2017 and emission levels for 2030 are projected to be well above the target,” the report found.
Central to the government’s climate plan is the Emissions Reduction Fund, which was allocated an additional $2 billion to purchase about 100 million tonnes of emissions from businesses between 2021 and 2030.
Protesters at the “Sydney is Choking” rally in December demand more action. Photo:  AAP
While the framework of the ERF has been praised, the OECD said in a 2019 report it would need to be scaled up to meet the Paris targets. 
Australia is part of a growing cohort of G20 countries that are falling short. This will have dire consequences for our environment and economy, Professor Hughes said. 
“If we do meet our 26 per cent reduction, it is not enough if you multiply that on a global scale to stop us from getting to three per cent warming,” she said.
“This fire season has been with just one degree of warming.  Just imagine three times – what that means. That’s what we’re talking about.”

Coal: Australia’s king
Opposition leader Anthony Albanese has said the government is “refusing to act” on climate change, but he has also backed coal exports.
Jobs, especially the 37,800 that the coal industry creates, have now been pinned against real action on climate change. 
On Insiders, Mr Morrison said he would not put jobs at risk or apply a tax to meet our emissions goals. 
“What I’m saying is we want to reduce emissions and do the best job we possibly can and get better and better and better at it,” he said.
“I want to do that within a balanced policy which recognises Australia’s broader national economic interest and social interest.”
But Professor Mark Howden, director of the Climate Change Institute at the Australian National University, said ending coal was inevitable – and it would lead to job creation. They just won’t be the same type of jobs.
“At a global level, achievement of the Paris targets is not compatible with large scale coal-fired power,” Professor Howden said.
Coal is the king of Australia’s economy; the industry is valued at $46 billion. Most of it is burnt overseas but including the emissions of exported fossil fuels pushes Australia’s share of global emissions up to 3.3 per cent, making our country one of the highest per-capita carbon emitters. 
We’re selling it off to China and India in rapid rates. But long-term our big-buyers are looking to rely on their own mines.
Australia’s coal exports are adding to our international carbon emissions. Photo: Getty
“I think the writing is on the wall for the coal industry,” Professor Howden said.
“Globally the demand for coal will drop, it’ll be harder for coal activities to continue, to insure new coal companies – that’s not an ideology.”
But most importantly, transitioning to a clean future can mean more, not fewer jobs, he said. 
“Whether it’s renewables or gearing up our systems to be more energy-efficient, there are lots of high-quality jobs if we do it sensibly,” Professor Howden said.
“There’s huge amounts of money to be made in new energy sectors. Locking ourselves into the way things have been done in the past does not look like a good proposition.”
Making sure communities don’t suffer in the transition is paramount, he said. 
“We do need to look after those workers and their families. Unless we’re careful those people could suffer,” Professor Howden said.
But if we don’t make the change, he said, other people will suffer. For proof just look at the people left homeless by the bushfires tearing through communities across NSW and Victoria.
“The people on the South Coast, businesses who won’t get customers, lives that will be lost, homes destroyed,” Professor Howden said.
“They’re also costs. We need a much more transparent debate.”

Links

(AU) Reading The Smoke Signals From Morrison On Climate Change

Sydney Morning HeraldDavid Crowe

Australians have heard so many messages about so many climate change policies over so many years that they may shrug off the latest talk from Scott Morrison about his solution to the problem.
The Prime Minister spoke on Sunday about doing “better and better and better” at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and to “evolve our policy” over time, while also promising to adapt more to a changing climate.
But he did not outline any substantive change in policy and his office made it clear that he was not signalling a more ambitious target for 2030, the deadline for the government’s 26 per cent cut to emissions.
It is easy to dismiss this as meaningless but it is also worth remembering that Morrison can be as cagey with his language as John Howard. A small shift in his words can prepare for bigger changes to come.

Scott Morrison sat down with David Speers for an interview on his response to the Australian bushfire crisis.

This was a considered interview with David Speers on the ABC on Sunday morning. Morrison’s remarks were thoroughly workshopped, totally prepared and carefully calibrated. On the whole, Morrison achieved his goal.
The effect was to give Morrison more room to move in response to a bushfire crisis that has changed the climate change debate. Anxious about cities shrouded in smoke, more Australians are likely to want more action. Morrison has to respond to this reality.
Morrison’s language on climate change has been extraordinarily passive for too long. On Sunday he was more direct. He promised action on climate in a way that offered a way forward for the “modern Liberals” in his party room without declaring war on the climate change deniers. He accepted the science and the need for "resilience" and adaptation.
This should be encouraging for anyone who wants the Coalition party room to move on from the climate wars of the past decade. Many of the Liberals and some of the Nationals accept the science. It is wrong to brand them all as sceptics or deniers.
The key word on Sunday – “evolve” – can be used by Liberals to argue for policy change with Morrison's blessing. Whether these moderate voices will push hard for change, and whether they are successful, is difficult to tell.
What happened on Sunday was an adjustment in political positioning, but it is easier to change the marketing than change the product. It is likely to take until the next election to judge whether the government stands for greater action on climate change. Morrison has shifted his language. Whether he shifts his policies is yet to be seen.

Links