04/10/2020

(AU) 'Criminally Irresponsible': Climate Experts Slam Narrabri Coal Seam Gas Approval

SBS NITV - Rae Johnston

The science community is lending its voice and expertise to the fight against the recently approved Santos Narrabri gas project, slamming the approval of 850 new coal seam gas wells.

Coal seam gas infrastructure at Narrabri. (AAP)

A former president of the Australian Conservation Foundation has labelled the decision to approve a $3.6 billion coal seam gas project on Gomeroi Country in the west of New South Wales as "criminally irresponsible".

Professor Ian Lowe from Griffith University said "every credible assessment of our energy future shows that we will be using less gas, not more," slamming the decision to invest further in gas when "there are cleaner and less expensive alternatives."

Prof Lowe is not alone, with leading scientists and environmental experts speaking out about the probable devastating impact of energy company Santos's project, set to be located in Narrabri and consisting of 850 new coal seam gas wells with a lifespan of 25 years.

23,000 submissions were made to the NSW Government's Independent Planning Commission (IPC) on the coal seam gas field, which will be spread out over 95,000 hectares. 98 per cent of the submissions were in opposition to the project, which was approved by the IPC on Wednesday.

Experts are calling the approval for the project "hugely concerning", dismissing claims it will make gas cheaper.

Immediate environmental impacts


Associate Professor Gavin Mudd from the School of Engineering at RMIT University said approving the Narribi project "locks in major groundwater risks for decades to come."

"Experience shows that the environmental assessment and approval of coal seam gas projects to date always underestimates groundwater impacts," said Prof Mudd. "There are better alternatives, such as renewable energy, which do not carry the same risks, especially for climate change."

The case against gas: price and jobs


Dr Hugh Saddler, Honorary Associate Professor in the Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University, said the new gas supply from Narrabri would do nothing to lower the cost of gas for consumers, "because it will have higher production costs than existing gas fields."

"For the same reason, if used to generate electricity, it will do nothing to bring down wholesale electricity prices, and, in any case, will not be needed," said Dr Saddler.

Dr Saddler points to the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO), who created a 2020 Integrated Systems Plan (ISP) for Australia's energy future showing "under all plausible future scenarios" the level of total annual gas generation will be less than what we generate now.

Professor Colin Butler, an Honorary Professor at the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health at the Australian National University, described the justification of extracting fossil fuels to create jobs as "hollow".

"Climate change will destroy jobs. Job-intensive, energy-harnessing alternatives should instead be promoted," he said.

The case against gas: emissions


Melissa Haswell, a Professor of Practice in Environmental Wellbeing at the University of Sydney, said emissions from gas are "routinely significantly underestimated."

"There is an ongoing dialogue amongst those who favour gas that shifting from coal to gas as an energy source is good for the climate," said Prof Haswell. "This has been repeatedly shown to be an unhelpful diversion from the urgency of reducing all fossil fuel mining and burning."

"The approval of the Narrabri development in the face of substantial risk to climate, the environment, water, health and community wellbeing is a clear demonstration of how influences favouring gas are simultaneously hindering transitions to truly low emission, cheaper renewable energies and reliable storage in the energy market," said Prof Haswell.

Prof Haswell described the Narrabri development, and plans for a gas replacement for the ageing Liddell coal plant, as "major steps away" from the AEMO's Integrated Systems Plan, which details a way to transition from fossil fuels to wind, solar and storage - with 96 per cent replacement by 2040.

"This plan is the only vision Australia has to make a decent contribution to Greenhouse Gas emissions abatement, and to our chances for clean, safe, healthy and affordable domestic energy system," said Prof Haswell.

"Greenhouse gas emissions have risen, largely due to gas mining, for some time now - and these developments show that current politicians on both sides respect no upper boundary to Australia's contribution to intensifying global warming and human suffering."

 Professor Colin Butler, an Honorary Professor at the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health at the Australian National University, said gas is claimed as a lower-emitting 'transitional fuel' when compared to coal.

"But the advantage is much reduced, and in some cases completely eliminated, once fugitive emissions of methane are considered," said Prof Butler.

Australia's carbon debt 


"To open up new gas and new coal when it's clear that the only path to a decent healthy future is rapid, unhindered transition from fossil fuels to renewable energies, shows no regard for current and future wellbeing," said Prof Haswell.

Professor Samantha Hepburn, the research director of the law school at Deakin University in Melbourne and the Director of the Centre for Energy and Natural Resource Law (CENRL), said the approval of the Narrabri gas project represents "a significant step backwards."

Prof Hepburn said Australia is "already emitting too much carbon", and Narrabri's approval will only make things worse, possibly resulting in Australia becoming a "global carbon debtor".

"A completely unnecessary and irresponsible status, given our enormous capacity to generate and store renewable energy," said Prof Hepburn.

What about the Paris agreement?


In 2016 Australia signed the Paris Agreement, along with more than 170 other countries, promising to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 26 per cent - when compared to 2005 levels - by 2030.

Prof Haswell said the Paris Agreement was "just a starting point", and that Australia's minimal target was not meant to remain unchanged.

"The Agreement required parties to ramp up emission reductions at each Annual Conference of Parties gatherings," said Prof Haswell.

"Instead, it was very clearly stated at the 2018 United Nations Climate Change Conference meetings that the US and Australian governments had no intention of "keeping their gas and oil in the ground".

Prof Haswell said the two latest mining approvals, along with "so many" developments in the pipeline, will drive greenhouse gas emission up, showing "little regard for global responsibility."

The role of finance


Professor Peter Newman, the John Curtin Distinguished Professor of Sustainability at Curtin University said the project would "never get built if the finance community continue to recognise their role in ensuring the Net Zero by 2050 transition is enabled, not dinosaur projects like these."

"Governments are approving such projects as they don't have proper tools to include Net Zero assessments," said Prof Newman, "but finance is still required and can simply say no."

Climate wars


Peter Sainsbury, a Professor in the School of Medicine at the University of Notre Dame and Past President of both the Public Health Association of Australia and the Climate and Health Alliance, said both the approval of the Narrabri gas project - and Queensland's recent approval of a new coal mine with a lifespan of 80 years - shows there are no "climate wars" in Australia.

"People keep talking about Australia's political climate wars. What climate wars? There are no climate wars in Australia," Prof Sainsbury said.

"The Coalition and Labor are in total agreement - let's keep digging up coal and gas, let's keep burning it and exporting it. Let's turn global warming into global roasting and let's keep ruining people's health and killing people with air pollution and climate change."

Prof Butler said both the Narrabri and Gallile approvals show governments on both sides "continue to chase a mirage of fossil fuel-driven prosperity."

"Within 50 years, if current trends continue, pervasive global poverty, or even the collapse of civilisation could occur," said Prof Butler. "It is thus imperative that all high-income countries urgently reduce their greenhouse gas emissions."

"I long for a time when national leaders will consider the long term future, instead of the next few months."

Prof Haswell said the Narrabri coal seam gas project is "new and fully avoidable", showing "the nation demonstrates no intention to alter its politically-driven fossil fuel ambitions".

Prof Sainsbury said there is "no chance" of Australia adopting an environmentally sustainable climate change policy that protects people's livelihoods and health unless one of the major parties completely changes its climate policies.

"Or, we dump both of them in the dustbin of history."

Links

Starting Gun Fired On Global Hunt For Hundreds Of Billions To Fund Nature Protection

ReutersMegan Rowling

Protecting and restoring biodiversity will take $A996 billion a year in extra funding through to 2030, officials say - a challenge during a pandemic downturn

ARCHIVE PHOTO: A giant tree is pictured at the Sumatra Tiger Rescue Centre jungle near Bandar Lampung, the southern tip of Sumatra island, February 25, 2013. REUTERS/Beawiharta

BARCELONA - Protecting the planet's plants, animals and ecosystems, and repairing the damage done to them by humans will take about $A996 billion a year in extra funding over the next decade, requiring a huge boost in investment by governments and business, officials said on Monday.

The call came as Britain and Canada joined a coalition of countries that have promised to protect 30% of their land and seas by 2030 to stem "catastrophic" biodiversity loss.

The two nations also signed up to a separate pledge, uniting 70 countries and the European Union, to reverse the loss of biodiversity by 2030 through a green recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, tackling pollution and deforestation, and boosting financing to safeguard the planet, among other commitments.

Elizabeth Maruma Mrema, executive secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity, told an online U.N. financing forum the success of a new global plan for biodiversity, due to be agreed at a summit in China next May, would rely on raising additional resources.

It would also require the reduction or redirection of $A711 billion per year that today causes harm to nature, she noted. That includes incentives and subsidies that support intensive agriculture, forestry and fishing.

Monday's forum yielded few concrete pledges of new money.

Germany said it would increase its 500-million euro ($A830 million) annual investment in protecting biodiversity in low- and middle-income countries, without specifying by how much.

It will also partner with businesses, foundations and other governments on a "Legacy Landscapes Fund" for biodiversity work in poorer nations. Through next year, it has budgeted about 115 million euros for the fund, and called on others to join.

Britain said it would increase its spending on forest protection and other nature-based solutions as part of the £11.6 billion ($A21.2  billion) in international climate finance it has promised to provide from 2021-2025.

British officials said they would also make the issue a priority when they host the 2021 U.N. climate summit.

"There is no pathway to net-zero emissions without ramping up our efforts to protect and restore nature on an unprecedented scale," Zac Goldsmith, Britain's minister of state for Pacific and the environment, told the forum.

"Nature-based solutions could provide around a third of the cost-effective solutions we need by 2030, and yet they attract just 3% of global climate investment," he noted.

Several U.S.-based philanthropic foundations also indicated they would put more financial muscle behind nature-protection efforts, but did not announce specific amounts of new money.

And major companies, including Unilever, BNP Paribas and investment management firm Mirova, reiterated commitments to invest their own money or channel clients' assets into projects to restore land and coral reefs and preserve wildlife.

Animal Advertising

On Friday, luxury brand Cartier joined The Lion's Share Fund, which aims to raise more than $100 ($A143 million) per year by 2025 to halt biodiversity loss and protect habitats.

The fund does that by asking brands to contribute 0.5% of their media spend on each advertisement featuring an animal.

Launched in 2018, the U.N.-led fund has helped a national reserve in Mozambique eliminate elephant poaching by improving radio systems for law enforcement officers.

It has also co-financed the purchase of land for endangered orangutans, elephants and tigers in North Sumatra in Indonesia, and is creating an all-female team of forest rangers and the island's first rhino sanctuary there.

As well, the fund has made grants in nine countries to support communities dependent on wildlife-based tourism but now struggling with downturns due to the pandemic, it said in a statement.

Despite such initiatives, the sums being spent and promised so far globally to deal with biodiversity loss fall far short of the hundreds of billions needed each year to make substantial progress by 2030, campaigners said.

According to a report released this month, the global flow of funds for biodiversity protection in 2019 amounted to $124 ($A176.45) - $143 billion ($A203.4), against an estimated annual need of $722 ($A1,027.3) - $967 ($A1,376) billion to halt global biodiversity decline by 2030.

Georg Schwede, European representative of the Campaign for Nature, a partnership of conservation groups, said Monday's forum was the first in a series to try to galvanise momentum for more funding ahead of the U.N. biodiversity summit next May.

"The only way to come up with an ambitious deal for nature in Kunming is if the Global South gets a very, very clear signal that the developed world is coming up with the financing," he told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

But raising funds for nature and climate protection may be challenging with many parts of the world in economic downturn as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, analysts have warned.

Jennifer Morris, chief executive officer of The Nature Conservancy, a U.S.-based nonprofit that worked on the financing report, said governments could pave the way with the right policies, regulations and incentives.

"For too long, we have woefully under-valued and under-invested in nature," she said in a statement.

Note: $1USD=$1.42299AUD

Links

Africa's Great Green Wall Is A Conservation — And World — Wonder

HowStuffWorks

Senegalese women plant the seeds that will grow into trees as part of Africa's Great Green Wall project. Great Green Wall

Africa is on its way to completing the next world wonder — a nearly 5,000-mile (8,047-kilometer) belt of greenery and conservation initiatives covering the continent's entire width.

This lofty goal, the Great Green Wall, is not a PR stunt. It's an African-led movement designed to breathe life into the continent's degraded landscapes across the Sahel, which is the vast semi-arid region of Africa separating the Sahara Desert to the north and tropical savannas to the south, according to Euro News.

This area is experiencing a slew of ecological crises due to overgrazing, drought and poor farming practices. At the same time, desertification here is on the rise.

The Sahara Desert is expanding, with one study, published in the May 2018 issue of the Journal of Climate, showing it has grown 10 percent since 1920.

The ambitious Great Green Wall, which will be Earth's largest living structure once complete, is designed to save the Sahel from ecological implosion.

"The objective is to address poverty and land degradation in the Sahel," International Union for Conservation of Nature program officer Chris Magero says in an email. "The Great Green Wall provides an amalgamate approach to addressing these multiple issues while ensuring that sustainable land management stays at the center of these discussions."

What Is the Great Green Wall?

The Great Green Wall, a project spearheaded by the African Union in 2007, was initially designed to build a string of trees across the continent to curb desertification, helping Sahel communities survive and thrive. But, there were some issues early on.

First and foremost, the science behind tree-planting as the sole solution wasn't fully there, according to Smithsonian. Many of the first-planted trees died, which is when leaders acknowledged it was time to change course. The Great Green Wall team analyzed indigenous land-use techniques and adapted their methodology accordingly.

From here, the project evolved from a wall of trees to more of a continent-wide movement, where Africans combat land degradation, desertification and drought based on proven indigenous practices. In some cases that's tree planting, which the Great Green Wall largely hires locals to do.

For other land stretches, it's indigenous adaptions for agriculture or simply growing grass. In other cases, it's a mix of all of the above. This "regreening" is truly transformational, for both the land and local people.


Growing a World Wonder

African Nations Join Forces

The Great Green Wall is roughly 15 percent complete, with millions of trees planted and aspirations to "restore 100 million hectares (247 million acres) of currently degraded land, sequester 250 million tons of carbon, and create 10 million jobs in rural areas" by 2030, according to the Great Green Wall website. Another equally impressive outcome? The Pan-African comradery and leadership.

The initiative started out with 11 countries, but now has over 20, making it a truly Pan-African program. Each country created its own national action plan for implementation, which ensures each nation has ownership, instead of being told what to do by outsiders.

This puts power and potential for progress back in the hands of those most affected. So far, "350,000 jobs have been created and more than $90 million generated in revenue across the Great Green Wall countries," Magero says.

But Magero notes that some countries have seen more success than others. Some of the best Great Green Wall outcomes have been in Nigeria, Senegal, Burkina Faso and Ethiopia. Burkina Faso has 17 million new trees, while 12 million acres (4.8 million hectares) of degraded land in Nigeria are now restored, with Senegal and Ethiopia seeing similar success.


The Great Green Wall Trailer (video)

The Great Green Wall is about development; it’s about sustainable, climate-smart development, at all levels. Each of the 30 countries developed national action plans, That is the biggest achievement, because now they own it. It’s about ownership, and that has been the failure of development aid, because people were never identified with it. But this time they identify. This is our thing.

Elvis Paul Tangam, African Union Commissioner for the Sahara and Sahel Great Green Wall Initiative

The Great Green Wall Has Its Challenges

With a total project that's triple the size of the Great Barrier Reef, the Great Green Wall's roadblocks were inevitable. "The Great Green Wall is a huge commitment by the countries, which comes along with challenges," Magero says. "As much as there is a shared commitment by the countries, the goals vary from country to country fringing the edges of a coordinated approach to implementation."

Like many conservation projects before it, investment is another hindrance. Countries like Senegal spend $200 million per year on planting and eco-care, but other nations can't afford similar investments. Plus, Time reports only half of the $8 billion pledged for the project has come through.

"Within most of the countries, investments in drylands remain a challenge based on the misconception that drylands are wastelands," Magero says. "This view is rapidly changing as drylands continue to be recognized for their richness in biodiversity; productivity, especially of livestock; and provision of other ecosystem services including water."


According to its latest status report, the program needs to restore 20.26 million acres (8.2 million hectares) of land every year, plus a $4.3 billion annual financial investment, for the hopeful 2030 completion. This goal is lofty, especially given the Great Green Wall has restored roughly 49 million acres (20 million hectares) of land from 2007 to 2018. But leaders remain optimistic.

"The Great Green Wall is yielding immediate benefits for the local communities and long-term ecosystem benefits at the international level," the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification executive secretary Ibrahim Thiaw said in a press release.

"It shows that when countries dare to dream, work together and make the right choices, we can prosper and live in harmony with nature. And where innovative ideas emerge, positive, dramatic change that benefits both the local and international communities will happen."

Links