28/02/2021

(AU) Australia Accused Of 'Shamefully' Holding Back Global Action On Climate Change

The Guardian -  | 

United Nations calls on all countries to have ‘concrete plans to phase out fossil fuels as fast as possible’

Australian prime minister Scott Morrison is being urged to commit to a more ambitious carbon emissions reduction target. Photograph: Lukas Coch/AAP
Australia has been accused of “shamefully doing nothing” and weighing down global action after a UN analysis found national pledges to cut greenhouses gas emissions over the next decade have barely begun to do what is necessary to tackle the climate crisis.

The assessment of emissions reduction plans submitted to the UN by the end of last year found if all were fulfilled they would cut global CO2 by only 1% by 2030, compared with 2010 levels.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has advised a 45% cut is needed over this time to limit global heating to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

While some major economies such as Britain and the EU offered substantially increased short-term commitments late last year, others made only incremental shifts and some, including Australia, re-submitted the same targets put forward at the Paris climate conference in 2015.

Further pledges are expected this year, including from the two biggest emitters, China and the US.

Australia pumped out an extra six months' worth of emissions than previously recorded.  Read more...

Scott Morrison has said his government does not intend to change its 2030 target – a 26-28% cut, compared with 2005 levels – despite rising pressure for all countries to commit to doing more before a major climate conference in Glasgow in November.

Patricia Espinosa, the executive secretary of UN Climate Change, called on all countries, including those that submitted their commitments last year, to reflect on the new assessment and lift their ambition.

“We need concrete plans to phase out fossil fuels as fast as possible,” she said.

Mohamed Adow, director of the thinktank Power Shift Africa, said it was staggering how far countries were from dealing with the crisis given the rhetoric from leaders about the need to act.

He grouped Australia with Brazil, Japan, Mexico and New Zealand as countries that had “shamefully done nothing” in recent pledges. “This state of affairs cannot continue and we need to see things change dramatically,” he said.

Tasneem Essop, the executive director of the global Climate Action Network, said: “With their woefully weak climate targets, big emitters like Japan, Australia and Brazil are weighing down overall global ambition when in fact they should be leading.”

Greenpeace International’s executive director, Jennifer Morgan, said the US and China must make commitments before a leaders’ climate summit hosted by Joe Biden in April that would “give us cause for hope”, and called on Australia and Brazil to rein in fossil fuel and industrial agriculture interests, respectively.

A spokesperson for the emissions reduction minister, Angus Taylor, said Australia’s emissions had fallen faster than many comparable countries.

Government data released on Friday found Australia’s emissions were down 4.4% in the year to September, in part due to the short-term impact of Covid-19 lockdowns and the drought, and 19% since 2005. But official projections in December suggested Australia was not on track to meet its 2030 target.

Bill Hare, the chief executive of Climate Analytics, said Australia was being called out for its “almost complete lack of action”. He said the Morrison government should set a science-based target for 2030, which meant an emissions cut of more than 60%.

Joe Biden's climate envoy admits US and Australia not on 'same page'.  Read more...

“As we get closer to Glasgow, we’ll see big players like the US and China stepping up, and Scott Morrison’s government finding itself isolated amid a growing threat of carbon border taxes and increasing diplomatic and public pressure,” he said.

The UN report clarifies the gap between the growing mass of countries promising to cut emissions to zero by mid-century, and the short-term commitments they have so far been put forward.

More than 100 countries including all G7 members have now pledged net zero emissions by 2050, and China has made that commitment for 2060, but short-term goals remain a work in progress.

Britain and the EU have set stronger 2030 targets – 68% and 55% compared with 1990 levels, respectively – the US has promised to announce a new target by April and it is expected Japan, China and South Korea will set short-term goals this year after each committing to net zero in late 2020.

The US and Britain have pledged to take global leadership roles in the lead-up to the Glasgow summit in pushing for stronger targets and immediate action plans.

Morrison has shifted his rhetoric as climate targets have been increased elsewhere, but resisted the push to commit to doing more and said only that he hoped Australia would reach net zero emissions as soon as possible, and “preferably by 2050”.

The suggestion he might go further and set a formal target has triggered outrage from some backbench government MPs from the National party.

Biden’s climate envoy, John Kerry, has acknowledged “differences” between the US and Australia in tackling the climate crisis while calling for a faster global exit from coal-fired power.

In Canberra this week, top diplomats from Italy and the UK emphasised the world needed to confront the climate crisis decisively after three decades of inadequate action.

Speaking at a climate ambition event at the Italian embassy on Wednesday, its ambassador to Australia, Francesca Tardioli, said each country had a “great responsibility” to implement concrete and lasting solutions.

“A lot has been achieved for sure, but not enough – not at all – to keep global warming within this threshold and now we have little time left,” she said. “Therefore, we need to act quickly and decisively and with new levels of ambition if we want to be successful.”

The British high commissioner, Vicki Treadell, told the same event the Glasgow summit would be “about making the tough decisions and carrying our people with us”.

The EU ambassador, Michael Pulch, said the bloc was encouraging all countries to raise their level of climate ambition, reflecting that global heating was a global problem that needed global responses.

He praised Australian states and territories for committing to net zero by 2050.

Australia’s environment minister, Sussan Ley, told the event the government’s commitment to the Paris agreement had not wavered and reiterated that it would “preferably” achieve net zero by 2050.

Links
at No comments:

World ‘Walking Blindfolded Into A Minefield’ Due To Climate Inaction

Sydney Morning Herald - Nick O'Malley

The United Nations has issued a stark warning that new emissions reductions targets promised by world leaders in December are nowhere near enough to limit an increase in global warming to 1.5 degrees and meet the goals of the Paris agreement.

The coal-fired Plant Scherer, one of the top carbon dioxide emitters in the US, stands in the distance in Juliette, Georgia. Credit: AP

“Today’s interim report from the UNFCCC is a red alert for our planet. It shows governments are nowhere close to the level of ambition needed,” said United Nations secretary-general Antonio Guterres.

“If this task was urgent before, it’s crucial now. This is a rare moment that cannot be lost. As we rebuild, we cannot revert to the old normal. The NDCs must reflect this reality, and major emitters, especially G20 nations, must lead the way.”

According to the new analysis of commitments made at the so-called Climate Ambitions summit in December, while most countries have incrementally increased ambition, the combined impact puts them on a path to achieve only a 1 per cent reduction in emissions by 2030 compared with 2010 levels.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says emissions reduction ranges to meet the 1.5 degree temperature goal should be about 45 per cent lower, and 25 per cent lower to avoid 2 degrees of warming.

Australia, which has maintained its commitment to reduce emissions by 26-28 per cent by 2030, was not invited to speak at the summit because its ambitions were viewed as being too low.

According to Climate Action Tracker, which conducts independent climate analysis, Australia is one of the nations that delivered a plan that failed to improve its 2015 target, along with Japan, South Korea, Russia, New Zealand and Switzerland. Brazil’s climate plan lacked any goals to cut emissions by 2030 or stem deforestation rates, the analysis showed.

Bill Hare, chief executive of the global non-profit group Climate Analytics, said Australia had been “called out” for its “almost complete lack of action”.

“As we get closer to Glasgow, we’ll see big players like the US and China stepping up and Scott Morrison’s government finding itself isolated amid a growing threat of carbon border taxes and increasing diplomatic and public pressure to submit a stronger target for 2030,” he said.

A spokesman for Energy and Emissions Reductions Minister Angus Taylor said the Secretary General did not reference Australia in his remarks or mention individual nations.

“As the Prime Minister has said, Australia’s policies, when it comes to reducing emissions, are set here in Australia, in Australia’s national interests.”

Patricia Espinosa, executive secretary of UN Climate Change, said, “This report shows that current levels of climate ambition are very far from putting us on a pathway that will meet our Paris agreement goals.

“I call on all parties – even those who have submitted [new commitments] – to reflect on this and increase ambition. At the moment it is like we are walking into a minefield blindfolded.

“What we need is much more radical and transformative than we have now. We need concrete plans to phase out fossil fuels as fast as possible.”

Links
at No comments:

(AU) Against The Odds, South Australia Is A Renewable Energy Powerhouse. How On Earth Did They Do It?

The Conversation -  | 

Shutterstock
Author
  •  is Research Associate, Flinders University
  •  is Matthew Flinders Distinguished Professor, Foundation Director, Southgate Institute for Health, Society & Equity, Flinders University     
Less than two decades ago, South Australia generated all its electricity from fossil fuels. Last year, renewables provided a whopping 60% of the state’s electricity supply.

The remarkable progress came as national climate policy was gripped by paralysis – so how did it happen?

Our research set out to answer this question. We analysed policy documents and interviewed major actors in South Australia’s energy transition, to determine why it worked when so many others fail.

We found governments need enough political power to push through changes despite opposition from established fossil fuel interests.

They must also watch the energy market closely to prevent and respond to major disruptions, such as a coal plant closing, and help displaced workers and their towns deal with the change.

South Australia shows how good public policy can enable dramatic emissions reduction, even in a privately owned electricity system. This provides important lessons for other governments in Australia and across the world.

South Australia is a world leader in renewables deployment. Pictured: artist impression of solar thermal plant proposed for the state. Solar Thermal Power Plant
Why is the energy transition so hard?

In decades past, fossil-fuel-dominated energy markets revolved around a few big, powerful players such as electricity generators and retailers. Overhauling such a system inevitably disrupts these incumbents and redistributes benefits, such as commercial returns, to newer entrants.

This can create powerful - and often vocal – losers, and lead to political problems for governments. The changes can also cause hardship for communities, which can be rallied to derail the transition.

The change is even harder in a privatised energy market, such as South Australia’s, where electricity generators and other players must stay profitable to survive.

In the renewables shift, fossil fuel businesses can quickly become commercially unviable and close. This risks supply shortages, as well as price increases like those after Victoria’s Hazelwood coal plant closed in 2017.

The obstacles help explain why a wealthy nation such as Australia, with extremely high per capita emissions and cheap, plentiful renewable resources, has struggled to embrace its clean energy potential. Even frontrunners in environmental policy, such as Germany, have struggled to make the switch.

Coal workers and their communities must be assisted during the renewables transition. Dan Himbrechts/AAP
How South Australia did it

South Australia is a dry state – extremely vulnerable to climate change – with abundant wind and solar resources. These factors gave it the motivation and means to transition to renewables.

The South Australian Labor government, elected in 2002, adopted a target for 26% renewables generation by 2020. At the time, wind energy was already a competitive supplier of new generation capacity in Europe, creating an established wind farm industry looking to invest.

Some of South Australia’s best onshore wind potential was located near transmission lines running 300 kilometres from Port Augusta to Adelaide. This greatly reduced the cost of connecting new wind generators to the grid.

South Australia benefited greatly from the federal renewable energy target, established by the Howard government in 2001 and expanded under the Rudd government.

The scheme meant the South Australian government didn’t need to offer its own incentives to meet its renewables target – it just had to be more attractive to private investors than other states.

This was a relatively easy task. Under the state Labor government, South Australia’s energy and environment policy was consistent and coordinated, in contrast to the weak and inconsistent policies federally, and in other states.

To attract renewable energy investors, the government made laws to help construct wind farms in rural zones away from towns and homes. New wind farms were regularly underwritten by state government supply contracts.

As the transition progressed, the state’s largest coal generator, at Port Augusta, was wound back and eventually closed. To help workers and the town adjust, the state government supported employment alternatives, including a A$6 million grant towards a solar-powered greenhouse employing 220 people.

The Labor government enjoyed a long incumbency, and the state was not heavily reliant on the export of fossil fuels. This helped give it the political leverage to push through change in the face of opposition from vested interests.

A state government grant helped establish a solar greenhouse. Sundrop Farms
It’s not easy being green

South Australia’s transition was not without controversy. Between 2014 and 2018, the state’s consumer electricity prices rose sharply.

While critics sought to blame the increasing renewables share, it was largely due to other factors. These include South Australia’s continued reliance on expensive gas-fired power and the closure of the Hazelwood coal-fired power station in neighbouring Victoria, which fed large amounts of power into South Australia.

And in late 2016, South Australia suffered a statewide blackout. Again, renewables were blamed, when the disaster was in fact due to storm damage and overly sensitive trip switches.

After a second, smaller blackout six months later, the then federal treasurer Scott Morrison brought a lump of coal into parliament and argued South Australia’s renewables transition was:
…switching off jobs, switching off lights and switching off air conditioners and forcing Australian families to boil in the dark as a result of their Dark Ages policies.
In 2018, Labor lost office to a Liberal party highly critical of the renewables transition in opposition. But by then, the transition was well advanced. In our view, specific legislation would have been required to halt it.

The state Liberal government has now firmly embraced the renewables transition, setting a target for 100% renewable electricity by 2030. By 2050, the government says, renewables could generate 500% of the state’s energy needs, with the surplus exported nationally and internationally.

Scott Morrison, holding a lump of coal in Parliament, said SA’s renewables policy took the state back to the Dark Ages. Lukas Coch/AAP
Leading the world

The South Australia experience shows a successful renewables transition requires that governments:
  • have enough political power to advance policies that disadvantage energy incumbents
  • monitor the energy market and respond proactively to disruptions
  • limit damage to displaced workers, businesses, consumers and communities.
It also highlights the importance of having transmission infrastructure near renewable resources before new generators are built.

As energy markets the world over grapple with making the clean energy transition, South Australia proves it can be done.

Links
at No comments:

27/02/2021

(AU) ‘Existential Threat To Our Survival’: See The 19 Australian Ecosystems Already Collapsing

The Conversation -  |  | Lesley Hughes | Michael Depledge

Shutterstock

xxx
Authors
  •  is Principal Research Scientist, University of Wollongong
  •  is Professor in Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life & Environmental Sciences, Deakin University
  •  is Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University
  • is Professor and Chair, Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter
In 1992, 1,700 scientists warned that human beings and the natural world were “on a collision course”. Seventeen years later, scientists described planetary boundaries within which humans and other life could have a “safe space to operate”.

These are environmental thresholds, such as the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and changes in land use. Crossing such boundaries was considered a risk that would cause environmental changes so profound, they genuinely posed an existential threat to humanity.

This grave reality is what our major research paper, published today, confronts.

In what may be the most comprehensive evaluation of the environmental state of play in Australia, we show major and iconic ecosystems are collapsing across the continent and into Antarctica. These systems sustain life, and evidence of their demise shows we’re exceeding planetary boundaries.

We found 19 Australian ecosystems met our criteria to be classified as “collapsing”. This includes the arid interior, savannas and mangroves of northern Australia, the Great Barrier Reef, Shark Bay, southern Australia’s kelp and alpine ash forests, tundra on Macquarie Island, and moss beds in Antarctica.

We define collapse as the state where ecosystems have changed in a substantial, negative way from their original state – such as species or habitat loss, or reduced vegetation or coral cover – and are unlikely to recover.

The Great Barrier Reef has suffered consecutive mass bleaching events, causing swathes of coral to die. Shutterstock

The good and bad news

Ecosystems consist of living and non-living components, and their interactions. They work like a super-complex engine: when some components are removed or stop working, knock-on consequences can lead to system failure.

Our study is based on measured data and observations, not modelling or predictions for the future. Encouragingly, not all ecosystems we examined have collapsed across their entire range. We still have, for instance, some intact reefs on the Great Barrier Reef, especially in deeper waters. And northern Australia has some of the most intact and least-modified stretches of savanna woodlands on Earth.

Still, collapses are happening, including in regions critical for growing food. This includes the Murray-Darling Basin, which covers around 14% of Australia’s landmass. Its rivers and other freshwater systems support more than 30% of Australia’s food production.

The effects of floods, fires, heatwaves and storms are felt equally in agricultural areas as in natural ecosystems. AAP Image/Dan Peled

The effects of floods, fires, heatwaves and storms do not stop at farm gates; they’re felt equally in agricultural areas and natural ecosystems.

We shouldn’t forget how towns ran out of drinking water during the recent drought.

Drinking water is also at risk when ecosystems collapse in our water catchments. In Victoria, for example, the degradation of giant Mountain Ash forests greatly reduces the amount of water flowing through the Thompson catchment, threatening nearly five million people’s drinking water in Melbourne. 

This is a dire wake-up call — not just a warning. Put bluntly, current changes across the continent, and their potential outcomes, pose an existential threat to our survival, and other life we share environments with.

A burnt pencil pine, one of the world’s oldest species. These ‘living fossils’ in Tasmania’s World Heritage Area are unlikely to recover after fire. Aimee Bliss, Author provided

In investigating patterns of collapse, we found most ecosystems experience multiple, concurrent pressures from both global climate change and regional human impacts (such as land clearing). Pressures are often additive and extreme.

Take the last 11 years in Western Australia as an example.

In the summer of 2010 and 2011, a heatwave spanning more than 300,000 square kilometres ravaged both marine and land ecosystems. The extreme heat devastated forests and woodlands, kelp forests, seagrass meadows and coral reefs. This catastrophe was followed by two cyclones.

A record-breaking, marine heatwave in late 2019 dealt a further blow. And another marine heatwave is predicted for this April.

These 19 ecosystems are collapsing: read about each

What to do about it?

Our brains trust comprises 38 experts from 21 universities, CSIRO and the federal Department of Agriculture Water and Environment. Beyond quantifying and reporting more doom and gloom, we asked the question: what can be done?

We devised a simple but tractable scheme called the 3As:
  • Awareness of what is important
  • Anticipation of what is coming down the line
  • Action to stop the pressures or deal with impacts.
In our paper, we identify positive actions to help protect or restore ecosystems. Many are already happening. In some cases, ecosystems might be better left to recover by themselves, such as coral after a cyclone.

In other cases, active human intervention will be required – for example, placing artificial nesting boxes for Carnaby’s black cockatoos in areas where old trees have been removed.

Artificial nesting boxes for birds such as the Carnaby’s black cockatoo are important interventions. Shutterstock

“Future-ready” actions are also vital. This includes reinstating cultural burning practices, which have multiple values and benefits for Aboriginal communities and can help minimise the risk and strength of bushfires.

It might also include replanting banks along the Murray River with species better suited to warmer conditions.

Some actions may be small and localised, but have substantial positive benefits.

For example, billions of migrating Bogong moths, the main summer food for critically endangered mountain pygmy possums, have not arrived in their typical numbers in Australian alpine regions in recent years. This was further exacerbated by the 2019-20 fires. Brilliantly, Zoos Victoria anticipated this pressure and developed supplementary food — Bogong bikkies.

Other more challenging, global or large-scale actions must address the root cause of environmental threats, such as human population growth and per-capita consumption of environmental resources.

We must rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero, remove or suppress invasive species such as feral cats and buffel grass, and stop widespread land clearing and other forms of habitat destruction.

Mountain pygmy possums were saved from potential catastrophe after Zoos Victoria developed alternative food for them. AAP Image/Department of Sustainability and Environment /Tim Arch

Our lives depend on it

The multiple ecosystem collapses we have documented in Australia are a harbinger for environments globally.

The simplicity of the 3As is to show people can do something positive, either at the local level of a landcare group, or at the level of government departments and conservation agencies.

Our lives and those of our children, as well as our economies, societies and cultures, depend on it.

We simply cannot afford any further delay. 

Links
at No comments:

(USA) ‘Mutual Suicide’: US Issues Stark Warning On Climate Change

Al Jazeera

‘Our heads in the sand at our own peril,’ US envoy for climate warns, as leaders discuss security implications of global warming.

Russia, India and China said climate change should be tackled in other global forums, not at the UN Security Council. [File: Charles Platiau/Reuters]

The United States has warned inaction by world powers on climate change is tantamount to a “mutual suicide pact” after countries such as China, India, and Russia expressed scepticism on the global security threat it posed.

John Kerry, the US special presidential envoy for climate, told the UN Security Council on Tuesday that the Pentagon has described the climate crisis as “a threat multiplier”.

“But even though climate change has been repeatedly called ‘an existential threat’, we honestly have yet as a world to respond with the urgency required,” said Kerry.

He called the climate situation “indisputably a Security Council issue” after some nations said it had no place for discussion at the UN body.

“In fact, it is among the most complex and compelling security issues that I think we’ve ever faced.”

Failing to address climate change is “marching forward to what is almost tantamount to a mutual suicide pact”, said Kerry. “We bury our heads in the sand at our own peril. It’s urgent to treat the climate crisis as the urgent security threat that it is.”

The stance by the administration of President Joe Biden comes in stark contrast to that of former US leader Donald Trump, who pulled out of the landmark 2015 Paris climate agreement and ignored climate policy during his four years in power.

Experts believe the world must reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050 or sooner to ensure long-term warming is held to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (34.7 degrees Fahrenheit) and avoid triggering catastrophic climate tipping points.

The world has already warmed 1.2C (2.2F) since the mid-19th century and the goal now is to prevent an additional 0.3C (0.5F) of warming.

Paris Climate Agreement

‘Serious doubts’

Russia, India and China said climate change should be tackled in other global forums, not at the UN’s main grouping on imminent world threats.

Russia was particularly vocal in its opposition to the discussions.

“We agree that climate change issues can exacerbate conflict. But are they really the root cause of these conflicts? There are serious doubts about this,” said Moscow’s ambassador to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia.

“The connection between the climate and conflicts can be looked at with regard to only certain countries and regions, talking about this in general terms and in a global context has no justification,” he added.

While Russia was committed to action against climate change, “this should be done within the framework of the mechanisms where it is dealt with by professionals”.

China’s special climate envoy Xie Zhenhua acknowledged climate change was linked to insecurity but overall issued a similar line to Russia.

“International climate cooperation should be advanced with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change,” he said, in a long speech that touted China’s recent commitments, including its aim to achieve its carbon emissions peak before 2030 and achieve neutrality by 2060.

India’s environment minister, Prakash Javdekar, dismissed the idea of climate change as a driver of conflict.

Forest fires have ravaged many areas on the planet in recent years. [Patrick Record/AP]

‘Tree-hugging tofu munchers’

However, the planet’s warming temperatures were deemed inextricably linked to global security by most countries, including the United Kingdom, France and Germany.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson urged fellow leaders to take immediate action on the climate crisis or face worsening global instability.

“Whether you like it or not it is a matter of when, not if, your country and your people will have to deal with the security impacts of climate change,” said Johnson.

“I know that there are people around the world who will say that this is … green stuff from a bunch of tree-hugging tofu munchers and not suited to international diplomacy and international politics. I couldn’t disagree more profoundly.”

Johnson pointed to the 16 million people displaced by weather-related disasters each year, some becoming easy prey to armed groups, farmers losing another wheat harvest because of drought and switching to growing opium poppies, and girls forced to drop out of school to search for water becoming prey to human traffickers. He also cited the impacts of changing sea levels and wildfires.

Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta stressed the effect of climate and security on Africa, which he lamented “unfortunately will suffer the worst consequences of climate change despite being the least responsible for global greenhouse gases”.

He said the drought-stricken Horn of Africa, drying of the Lake Chad basin, shrinking of the Sahel and savannah grasslands “and worsening economic vulnerabilities have set in motion political, demographic, migratory dynamics that increase the threat of insurgency and violent extremism”.


Climate Disasters 2020

‘Last best hope’

The UK has committed into law a target of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and will host the COP26 climate summit in November in the Scottish city of Glasgow.

Kerry called the Glasgow conference “literally our last best hope to get on track and get this right”.

The United States is hosting its own summit on April 22 where it is expected to announce its renewed carbon-reduction commitments after years of disengagement under Trump.

French President Emmanuel Macron, meanwhile, pleaded for “effective multilateralism” in the effort to limit warming, and voiced support for a German idea of appointing a special UN envoy for climate security.

Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas also called for regular reporting by the UN secretary-general on the security implications of climate change.

Renowned British broadcaster and naturalist David Attenborough, in a video message played before the UNSC meeting, warned “if we continue on our current path, we will face the collapse of everything that bring us our security including food, water, habitable temperatures”.

“We have left the stable and secure climatic period that gave birth to our civilization,” he said. “There is no going back.”

But Attenborough added: “If we act fast enough we can reach a new stable state,” and the UN conference in November “may be our last opportunity to make this step change”.

Bangladesh Water Crisis

Links
at No comments:

(AU) Indigenous Expertise Is Reducing Bushfires In Northern Australia. It’s Time To Consider Similar Approaches For Other Disasters

The Conversation -  |  |  

Waanyi Garawa Rangers (Jimmy Morrison), Author provided

Authors
  •  is Senior Ecological Economist, Charles Darwin University
  •  is Research Fellow Bushfires, Charles Darwin University
  •  is Fire Coordinator for the Tiwi Islands, Indigenous Knowledge     
Northern Australia is by far the most fire-prone region of Australia, with enormous bushfires occurring annually across thousands of square kilometres.

Many of these vast, flammable landscapes have precious few barriers to slow down a fire. Infrastructure and resources are limited, and people are widely dispersed across the region. 

Fire risk reduction in the recent past included very local prescribed burning operations. The overall effect was small, with huge greenhouse gas emissions from out-of-control savanna wildfires.

So, what might a better approach look like?

Our team at the Charles Darwin University’s Darwin Centre for Bushfire Research has been working with Indigenous land managers, conservation, research and government organisations in northern Australia for the last 25 years to find more effective ways to manage wildfires.

These collaborations have led to a new approach, blending modern scientific knowledge with traditional Indigenous land management practices to reduce bushfire risk.

How? By reducing fuel load through a patchy mosaic of small, low intensity, burns early in the fire season that cut the risk of late dry season fires when greenhouse gas emissions are much greater.
        
Reducing fuel load through a patchy mosaic of small, low intensity, burns early in the fire season cuts the risk of late dry season fires when greenhouse gas emissions are much greater. Waanyi Garawa Rangers (Jimmy Morrison), Author provided

By collaborating with Indigenous ranger groups, this experience shows Australia can develop economically sustainable long-term solutions to manage bushfire risks — and shows what might be possible for other natural hazards such as cyclones and floods.

Such collaborations deliver benefits such as:
When done well, a collaborative approach to emergency management can create opportunities on country, enhance cultural and learning opportunities for Indigenous peoples and deliver environmental benefits for everyone. 
Northern Australia is by far the most fire-prone region of Australia, with enormous bushfires occurring annually in some places. AAP Image/Dave Hunt 

Making fire management economically sustainable: a case study

Indigenous fire management skills and traditions have long been practised in Australia but part of the challenge, as one study put it, is “finding the economic means to reinstate this type of prescribed strategic management.” In other words, how do we pay for it?

After Australia ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2007, there was renewed focus on reducing wildfires in Australia’s tropical savannas due to their significant role in creating greenhouse gas emissions.

In collaboration with Indigenous land managers and others, our collective efforts helped to develop what’s known as the savanna burning methodology. This system incentivises management of fire in the north.

Under this method, Indigenous land managers in tropical savannas can earn income for managing fire on their land to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is done through a tightly controlled system in which their emissions savings are measured in terms of carbon credit units.

Self-acquired funds from the system go far to support Indigenous rangers to develop and improve skills so they can continue improving fire management across the north. Waanyi Garawa Rangers (Jimmy Morrison), Author provided

Global and local benefits

This approach has allowed a new carbon economy to bloom in remote northern Australia. As one study put it:
Since the development of the first savanna-burning methodology determination in 2012, 25% of the entire 1.2 million km2 eligible northern savannas region is now under formally registered savanna-burning projects, currently generating [more than] A$30m per year.
These self-acquired funds go far to support Indigenous rangers to develop and improve skills so they can continue improving fire management across the north.

As Dean Yibarbuk, fire ecologist and senior traditional owner in West Arnhem Land has said:
This fire management program has been successful on so many levels: culturally, economically and environmentally. Through reinstating traditional burning practices, new generations of landowners have been trained in traditional and western fire management, hundreds of thousands of tonnes of greenhouse gas have been abated, and the landscape is being managed in the right way.
A consistent and reliable flow of funds from carbon contracts, as well as other government and philanthropic sources, further offers many other socio-economic benefits. It has been instrumental in allowing art centres, weed and feral animal control businesses, rock art conservation projects, and bi-cultural schools to flourish.

Investing money to save money

This system shows what’s possible with the right engagement and policy levers. Perhaps one day a similar approach could help reduce risk from other kinds of natural disasters, all while building community resilience. 

Indigenous land managers in certain areas can earn income for managing fire on their land to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. AAP Image/Dave Hunt

In the future, could we have similar systems where flood mitigation projects or cyclone risk reduction projects are made economically viable for local communities?

This would reduce reliance on emergency services. It also makes it less likely cultural protocols are breached when non-local emergency personnel are sent in. For example, tree removal is a common cyclone risk reduction practice but it’s important to know which trees are culturally significant in a community, and why you need to leave them alone.

For these approaches to work, genuine and ongoing engagement with Indigenous peoples and dispersed remote communities is essential.

As a start to this engagement, we brought together Indigenous leaders, government representatives, and emergency management agency personnel from across the north for a meeting at Charles Darwin University late last year, supported by the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre.

Many of the key personnel in these groups were meeting for the very first time, despite having worked for years on trying to address the same problems.

With appropriate funding, we could make such gatherings regular events so it’s easier for these stakeholders to work together. Long term collaborations can reduce disaster risk for northern Australian communities who live there permanently, build their resilience, and cut significant costs for Australian governments.

Resources to cover training, transport, and logistics are crucial to implement such an integrated approach.

Long term solutions cost money. But by drawing on local Indigenous knowledge and expertise on disaster risk reduction, we can make huge savings in the long term.'

Links
at No comments: