15/05/2021

(AU The Guardian) Australia Stands Alone In Not Having A Significant Climate Plan, Says UK Expert

The Guardian

Nigel Topping says the Morrison government will face ‘a certain amount of pressure’ at the G7 meeting in Cornwall in June

A leading climate expert says Australia is alone among major countries in having no significant climate plan. Photograph: Dan Peled/AAP

A leading UK climate official says Australia is alone among major countries in that neither its national government nor opposition have a significant climate plan, and frustrating local business leaders.

Nigel Topping, the UN’s “high-level champion” whose role involves global outreach to drive global ambition ahead of the Cop26 climate conference in Glasgow in November, said he had not seen another country in which no major political party had a plan to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The Morrison government would face “a certain amount of pressure” to lift its ambition on climate at the G7 meeting in England next month, where Australia is one of four invited guest nations.

All G7 members have targets to cut emissions by at least 40% below 2005 levels by 2030 and reach net zero emissions no later than 2050.

Topping said on Thursday night that in discussions with Australians there had been a strong sense that state governments and the private sector were committed to the race to net zero campaign, but that business leaders had bemoaned there was “neither a plan nor a counter plan” at a federal level.

“I have heard a couple of times people saying that no one’s got a plan,” he said. “I have picked up from several business voices that there is some frustration over the lack of that.”

Speaking at an early webinar hosted by the Australia Institute, Topping said the international community was pleased the Morrison government had recently begun talking about a target of net zero emissions by 2050 “somewhat tentatively”, but it was not a “signal which matches the ambition and expectations of other wealthy developed countries”.

The Morrison government has not joined more than 100 countries in setting a formal mid-century net zero emissions goal, and has resisted pressure from the US, Britain and the European Union to increase its 2030 target.

Scott Morrison told a recent climate summit hosted by the US president, Joe Biden, that the country wanted to reach net zero “as soon as we possibly can”.

The prime minister said his government supported a “technology, not taxes’’ approach.

While other developed countries have committed tens of billions to drive action, the federal budget this week included little spending on addressing the climate crisis.

The government’s 2030 emissions target – a minimum 26% cut compared with 2005 – has not been increased since it was set six years ago, and analysts have found it “insufficient” given what is required. Scientists have recommended at least a 50% cut.

Climate pledges compared: 2030 emissions reduction targets relative to 2005 levels
Showing the minimum pledge value if there is a range

Guardian graphic | Source: Investor Group on Climate Change


Labor has backed a 2050 net zero emissions goal, but dropped its 2030 target after losing the 2019 election.

It said it would release a roadmap to get to net zero before the next election.

In his budget reply on Thursday night opposition leader Anthony Albanese said positive action on the climate crisis would “create jobs, lower energy prices and lower emissions”, and promised a $100m energy apprenticeship plan.

Topping said Australia would be accepted “with open arms and civilly, as a friend” at the G7 in Cornwall, but would face “a certain amount of pressure given that everybody else has made very clear that they are getting to net zero by 2050”.

Australia is one of four guest nations at the G7 along with India, South Korea and South Africa.

He said the US had a target of at least a 50% cut by 2030, the EU 55% and Britain 68% (the latter two compared with 1990 levels). Germany has promised to reach net zero by 2045.

“We know that’s what the leading developed countries need to do to implement the Paris agreement, so I’m sure there will be a lot of polite pressure on the side to join that group,” Topping said.

He said there would also be pressure “to move away from the rhetoric that you can have a plan without a target which, of course, any business person knows is just silly”.

“If you have a plan without a target actually you’re just loosey-goosey,” he said.

“A plan starts with a clear target.

"If you’re going to try to run a marathon you know the mile times that you’ve got to keep clocking up.

"If you can’t put those up in practice, and if you can’t get the first three miles out in time, then you’re behind in the race and you may never catch up.

“This is not about doing the right thing, or the green thing, or the ethical thing or the responsible thing. It is about all those things, but fundamentally this is an issue of corporate and national competitiveness.”

Pressure on Australia to do more on climate has been growing. Last month the Biden administration said Australia needed to cut emissions faster, and the UK, France and the UN last year refused Morrison a speaking slot at a global climate ambition summit after he did not offer any new policies.

Topping said Australia was well placed to succeed in the race to a zero emissions economy given its abundant clean natural resources. The transition elsewhere was going “exponentially fast”, with targets that appeared aggressive two years ago now looking conservative.

He cited the recently announced Glasgow financial alliance for net zero, under which 160 banks and firms with more than US$70tn in assets pledged to cut their emissions and ensure their investment portfolios aligned with climate science.

Moody’s Investors Service said the evident acceleration to reduce emissions to net zero would increase credit risks and the cost of doing business for major emitters.

“The countries that are on the front foot are able to manage and ensure it’s a transition that leads to jobs growth as well as economic growth,” Topping said. “I’m just sort of sensing a bit of confusion and frustration among people I’ve spoken to in Australia that you don’t have that clarity.”

Links

(The Conversation) How Climate Change Is Erasing The World’s Oldest Rock Art

The Conversation |  |  |  | 

This Warty Pig is part of a panel dated to more than 45,500 years in age. Basran Burhan/Griffith University, Author provided

Authors
In caves on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi, ancient peoples marked the walls with red and mulberry hand stencils, and painted images of large native mammals or imaginary human-animal creatures.

These are the oldest cave art sites yet known — or at least the oldest attributed to our species. One painting of a Sulawesi warty pig was recently dated as at least 45,500 years old.

Since the 1950s, archaeologists have observed these paintings appear to be blistering and peeling off the cave walls. Yet, little had been done to understand why.

So our research, published today, explored the mechanisms of decay affecting ancient rock art panels at 11 sites in Sulawesi’s Maros-Pangkep region. We found the deterioration may have gotten worse in recent decades, a trend likely to continue with accelerating climate change.

These Pleistocene (“ice aged”) cave paintings of Indonesia have only begun to tell us about the lives of the earliest people who lived in Australasia. The art is disappearing just as we’re beginning to understand its significance.

Australasia’s rock art

Rock art gives us a glimpse into the ancient cultural worlds of the artists and the animals they may have hunted or interacted with. Even rare clues into early people’s beliefs in the supernatural have been preserved.

Climate change could erase ancient Indonesian cave art.

We think humans have been creating art of some kind in Australasia — which includes northern Australia, Papua New Guinea and Indonesia — for a very long time. Used pigments are among the earliest evidence people were living in Australia more than 60,000 years ago.

Tens of thousands of distinctive rock art sites are scattered across Australasia, with Aboriginal people creating many styles of rock art across Australia.

Until as recently as 2014, scholars thought the earliest cave art was in Europe — for example, in the Chauvet Cave in France or El Castillo in Spain, which are 30,000 to 40,000 years old. We now know people were painting inside caves and rockshelters in Indonesia at the same time and even earlier.

Hand stencils in one of the study sites at Leang Sakapao cave. Linda Siagian, Author provided
 
Ongoing surveys throughout Australasia turn up new rock art sites every year. To date, more than 300 painted sites have been documented in the limestone karsts of Maros-Pangkep, in southern Sulawesi.

Cave paintings in Sulawesi and Borneo are some of the earliest evidence we have that people were living on these islands.

Tragically, at almost every new site we find in this region, the rock art is in an advanced stage of decay.

Big impacts from small crystals

To investigate why these prehistoric artworks are deteriorating, we studied some of the oldest known rock art from the Maros-Pangkep region, scientifically dated to between at least 20,000 and 40,000 years old.

Expanding and contracting salt crystals are causing rock art to flake off the cave walls. Linda Siagian, Author provided

Given these artworks have survived over such a vast period, we wanted to understand why the painted limestone cave surfaces now appear to be eroding so rapidly.

We used a combination of scientific techniques, including using high-powered microscopes, chemical analyses and crystal identification to tackle the problem. This revealed that salts growing both on top of and behind ancient rock art can cause it to flake away.

Salts are deposited on rock surfaces via the water they’re absorbed in. When the water solution evaporates, salt crystals form. The salt crystals then swell and shrink as the environment heats and cools, generating stress in the rock.

In some cases, the result is the stone surface crumbling into a powder. In other instances, salt crystals form columns under the hard outer shell of the old limestone, lifting the art panel and separating it from the rest of the rock, obliterating the art.

On hot days, geological salts can grow to more than three times their initial size. On one panel, for example, a flake half the size of a hand peeled off in under five months.

Climate extremes under global warming

Australasia has an incredibly active atmosphere, fed by intense sea currents, seasonal trade winds and a reservoir of warm ocean water. Yet, some of its rock art has so far managed to survive tens of thousands of years through major episodes of climate variation, from the cold of the last ice age to the start of the current monsoon.

Limestone karsts of Maros and Pangkep Regencies, in South Sulawesi, Indonesia. Shutterstock

In contrast, famous European cave art sites such as Altamira in Spain and Lascaux in France are found in deep caves, in more stable (temperate) climates, so threats to rock art are different and generally weathering is less aggressive.

But now greenhouse gases are magnifying climatic extremes. In fact, global warming can be up to three times higher in the tropics, and the wet-dry phases of the monsoon have become stronger in recent decades, along with more numerous La Niña and El Niño events.

The net effect is that temperatures are higher, there are more hot days in a row, droughts are lasting longer, and other extreme weather such as storms (and the flooding they cause) are more severe and frequent.

What’s more, monsoonal rains are now captured in rice fields and aquaculture ponds. This promotes the growth of art-destroying salt crystals by raising humidity across the region and especially in nearby caves, prolonging the shrink and swell cycles of salts.

Makassar’s culture heritage department, Balai Pelestarian Cagar Budaya, undertaking rock art monitoring in Maros-Pangkep. Rustan Lebe/Griffith University, Author provided

What happens now?

Apart from the direct threats associated with industrial development — such as blasting away archaeological sites for mining and limestone quarrying — our research makes it clear global warming is the biggest threat to the preservation of the trpoics’ ancient rock art.

There’s a pressing need for further research, monitoring and conservation work in Maros-Pangkep and across Australasia, where cultural heritage sites are under threat from the destructive impacts of climate change.

In particular, we urgently need to document the remaining rock art in great detail (such as with 3D scanning) and uncover more sites before this art disappears forever.

If humans are ultimately causing this problem, we can take steps to correct it. Most importantly, we need to act now to stop global temperature increases and drastically cut emissions. Minimising the impacts of climate change will help preserve the incredible artworks Australasia’s earliest people left to us.

Links

(USA New Yorker) It’s Time To Kick Gas

The New Yorker

And do it as quickly as possible

Natural gas—which is primarily made of methane—leaks unburned at every stage from fracking to combustion. Photograph by Ed Kashi / VII / Redux

Author
Bill McKibben is a founder of the grassroots climate campaign 350.org and a contributing writer to The New Yorker. He writes The Climate Crisis, The New Yorker’s newsletter on the environment.
We’re used to the idea that CO2—one carbon atom, two oxygen atoms—is a dangerous molecule. Indeed, driving down carbon-dioxide emissions has become the way that many leaders and journalists describe our task.

But CH4—one carbon atom combined with four hydrogen atoms, otherwise known as methane—is carbon dioxide’s evil twin. It traps heat roughly eighty times more efficiently than carbon dioxide does, which explains why the fact that it’s spiking in the atmosphere scares scientists so much.

Despite the pandemic lockdown, 2020 saw the largest single increase in methane in the atmosphere since we started taking measurements, in the nineteen-eighties. It’s a jump that, last month, a scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration called “fairly surprising and disturbing.”

If there’s any good news, it’s that the spike in methane doesn’t—yet—seem to be coming in large percentages from the runaway melt of methane-ice formations beneath the polar oceans or those in tundra soils. That would be a nightmare scenario because there wouldn’t be anything we could do about it—it’s global heating on automatic. For the moment, most of the increase seems to be from sources we can control: rice paddies, livestock, and, especially, the rapid rise in drilling and fracking for gas.

Two decades ago, people thought that natural gas, though a fossil fuel, might help slow climate change because, when you burn it in a power station, it produces less carbon than burning coal does. Now we understand that natural gas—which is primarily made of methane—leaks unburned at every stage from fracking to combustion, whether in a power plant or on top of your stove, in sufficient quantities to make it an enormous climate danger.

The Trump Administration abandoned any effort even to reduce that leakage, an absurd gift to the fossil-fuel industry that the Biden Administration is preparing to take away. But plugging leaks isn’t enough: we’ve got to stop producing natural gas as quickly as possible, and replace it with renewables that generate neither carbon nor methane. As I wrote last month, that’s now entirely possible; sun and wind power have become so cheap so fast that they’re more economical than gas, and batteries are coming down the same kind of cost curve, so nightfall is no longer the problem it once was.

But there are other reasons to kick gas. A report from Australia’s Climate Council, released last week, finds that the health impact of having a gas cooktop in your home is roughly equivalent to having a cigarette smoker puffing away in the corner, and accounts for about twelve per cent of childhood asthma. “It’s odourless, it’s invisible, it’s a bit of silent enemy,” the C.E.O. of Asthma Australia said. “People might feel differently if they understood that their gas appliances were emitting a range of toxic substances.”

That is why the gas industry has lobbied so hard to prevent that perception. In at least fourteen U.S. states, the industry lobby is pushing bills that would prevent local governments from restricting the use of gas; a particular threat comes from the new appliances—chiefly air-source heat pumps and water heaters, and induction cooktops—that are now widely available and increasingly cheap. (Even the Wall Street Journal, whose opinion pages unfailingly defend the oil-and-gas industry, admitted in a review that induction cooking is “safer and faster than gas.”)

Indeed, leaked documents obtained last week by E&E News show that fifteen big gas utilities have mounted a Consortium to Combat Electrification. “None of these companies want to write their own obituary,” Deborah Gordon, a former petroleum engineer now at the Rocky Mountain Institute, an energy think tank, said. “If you’re going to bend this curve, and we bend it quickly, there are going to be casualties. Some will transform, some will consolidate, some will go away.”

At the moment, however, they’re still very much here, and they might as well call the effort a Consortium to Promote Asthma and Melt the Poles. But, if we can kick gas quickly, there’s some hope that lies in the structure of that CH4 molecule: it only lasts about ten years in the atmosphere, as opposed to a century for carbon dioxide.

This means that, if we can somehow reduce emissions dramatically, it will fade fast, buying us a little time to take on carbon. “If we can make a big enough cut in methane in the next decade, we’ll see public-health benefits within the decade, and climate benefits within two decades,” Drew Shindell, an earth scientist at Duke University who has worked extensively on methane, told the Times.

But it had better happen fast. Here’s Euan Nisbet, a climate scientist at Royal Holloway, University of London, reacting to last month’s news of spiking methane levels: “I knew it was bad, but I didn’t know it was this bad. This breaks my heart.”

Passing the Mic

Christina Conklin, an artist, writer, and researcher, and Marina Psaros, a sustainability expert, will publish “The Atlas of Disappearing Places: Our Coasts and Oceans in the Climate Crisis” in July. With maps and text, it explores port cities and coastlines that may be obliterated by rising seas—Shanghai, Houston, New York, the Cook Islands, and Bến Tre, in Vietnam. I spoke with Conklin, who lives next to the Pacific, in Half Moon Bay, California. (Our conversation has been edited.)

Bill McKibben: Humans built many of their most important settlements along the ocean for obvious reasons, but how should we be thinking about that now?

Christina Conklin: The hard truth is that seas are going to rise for centuries to come—it could be at least three feet this century and much more after that. This is difficult to absorb, but we need to have realistic, civic conversations about moving to higher ground in the coming decades. Water always finds its level, so we will need to rebuild over time, finding ways to fairly relocate vulnerable communities away from flood zones.

Strengthening storms and rising seas may be the easier climate challenges to address: all we need to do is move out of the way. Actually, changing ocean chemistry and warming waters are far more critical in my view, because they are altering the living system of the ocean itself, which is the foundation and source of life on earth.

The fact is, our current addiction to fossil fuels is causing ocean acidification, deoxygenation, and warming that is throwing many marine ecosystems into crisis. Half the stories in “The Atlas of Disappearing Places” cover these impacts on food webs, feedback loops, and basic biological processes. I illustrated it with ink-on-seaweed maps to convey the scope and scale of the issues.

Bill McKibben: What’s a place that really illustrates our troubles?

Christina Conklin: The Cook Islands is a good example. It is a tiny island nation in the South Pacific that voted in 2017 to designate its territorial waters as the world’s largest marine protected area. The commitment reflected Cook Islanders’ values and heritage as an indigenous, seagoing people, and also allowed for sustainable development.

Around the same time, a few powerful people invited seabed-mining companies to “explore” the possibility of scraping manganese nodules off the seafloor in these waters, potentially destroying the ecosystem—and the Prime Minister gave in to pressure for quick profit. [Last year, the government said that it would allow mining to offset the loss of tourism business during the pandemic.] This sort of conflict between local communities and extractive industries is often out of sight, but every choice we make has an environmental impact somewhere.

We each have the responsibility—the response-ability—to imagine and build healthy societies. Each of the book’s twenty chapters envisions a “future history” from the year 2050, showing things that we can do to change the story from one of heedless consumption to one of resilient, regenerative culture.

Bill McKibben: And what’s a place that gives you some sense of how humans are, well, rising to the rising sea level, and figuring out some possibilities?

Christina Conklin: I think often of Leo Manston, a six-year-old boy who spoke at a county-council meeting in Kent, England, in 2019, and asked them to consider including children on their climate-change committee. His mom, Laura, was new to climate activism, having recently learned how dire the climate crisis is, at an Extinction Rebellion march, in London.

I so admire the determination, joy, courage, and creativity of Extinction Rebellion’s nonviolent-resistance methods. We can learn a lot from them about how to work for change, individually and collectively.

That said, the British government is making poor planning decisions regarding sea-level rise and is kicking the can on carbon emissions, so my story about rising seas in the Thames estuary is largely a cautionary tale. But perhaps it will help people wake up to the disastrous floods that will eventually happen if more is not done to face the planetary emergency of intersecting crises we now face. As you know, we have only a few years to change our path.

Climate School


The Texas Observer
carries a fine profile of the environmental-justice pioneer Robert Bullard, describing a 1979 study of his that found landfills and waste dumps mostly situated in Houston’s communities of color. “To this day, low-income communities of color are significantly more likely than white residents to live near hazardous waste and air pollution,” the magazine reports.

António Guterres, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, called on all international lending agencies to stop funding big fossil-fuel infrastructure projects. “We can no longer afford big fossil fuel infrastructure anywhere,” he said. “Such investments simply deepen our predicament.”

If someone tells you that a small ball of fungi will help your lawn sequester a ton of carbon dioxide every year, it’s possible that their claims should be investigated closely, at least according to reporting from Zahra Hirji for BuzzFeed News.

As noted above, gas causes lots of asthma and premature deaths. New studies show that biomass burning does the same. In fact, setting fire to biomass, gas, and wood now cause more premature deaths in the U.S. than burning coal.

News broke Saturday of a cyberattack shutting down the Colonial Pipeline system, which carries gasoline and jet fuel from Texas up the East Coast. The independent journalist Robbie Jaeger has been following up on the story of last year’s gasoline spill from the pipeline in North Carolina— which the company originally pegged at sixty-three thousand gallons, but turned out to be at least 1.2 million gallons. Reviewing documents, Jaeger found that the company only inspected less than half the length of the pipeline the year before the accident, even though much of the pipe is forty years old.

Naomi Klein offers up a remarkable piece of reporting and thinking from the Sierra-foothills town of Chico, California, where residents displaced by forest fires in recent years are now being evicted from encampments in which they’re trying to keep their lives going. Her article provides a sharp warning of what it will mean to live on a planet with ever more climate refugees.

Scoreboard


 The veteran energy analyst (and Seattle resident) Dave Roberts argues that Washington State now has the most progressive climate policy in America. “Spoiler: the one weird trick is electing Democrats,” he writes. Meanwhile, Kate Aronoff points out that BP may have figured out a way to play both sides of the carbon-pricing policy that Washington Governor Jay Inslee is expected to sign into law.

Legislation has been introduced in the New York State Assembly that would place a moratorium on cryptocurrency mining in the state while its effects on energy use are investigated. Grist has a detailed account of a once defunct power plant on Seneca Lake that’s now burning gas to mine bitcoin and was featured in a New Yorker story by Elizabeth Kolbert.

Amsterdam has become the first city to start banning fossil-fuel advertisements, beginning in its subway system. “Advertisements that portray fossil fuels as normal and aggravate climate disruption have no place in a city or country that has complied to Paris,” the campaign coördinator Femke Sleegers said.

Writing in CleanTechnica, the energy analyst Michael Barnard makes the case that small, modular nuclear reactors may not be the lifesaver that advocates have been hoping for. He writes that they “won’t achieve economies of manufacturing scale, won’t be faster to construct, forego efficiency of vertical scaling, won’t be cheaper, aren’t suitable for remote or brownfield coal sites, still face very large security costs, will still be costly and slow to decommission, and still require liability insurance caps.”

Research from Oxford Brookes University, in England, indicates that vertical-axis wind turbines—look at the picture!—may be more efficient than the giant sweeping blades that we’ve grown accustomed to, primarily because they don’t rob one another of wind and can be spaced more closely together.

The Green Party seems likely to share power in Germany—or even control the country outright—after elections this fall, new polling suggests. “The timing would make this a continental game-changer,” the Guardian notes in an editorial. “Germany’s Greens have the potential to become the leading force in a rehabilitation of progressive politics in Europe.”

Last week, I mentioned the frightening news that the Amazon forest has flipped from a carbon sink to a carbon source. New data indicate that the same thing has happened to Canada’s vast boreal forest. Barry Saxifrage outlines the numbers in a revealing report for the National Observer, adding, “It’s bad news for Canada’s plans to use forest ‘offsets’ to green-light extra fossil fuel burning.”

Warming Up


 Seth Bernard is one of my all-time favorite songwriters. Also a ripping guitarist, he’s helped build a community of musician-activists across his native Michigan, who work on issues environmental and social. Now he’s offered up “The Time Has Come,” a climate anthem that he’s releasing to aid local climate campaigners. Here’s the chorus:
We never give up,
keep showing up.
In love we trust;
the Earth loves us.
Links