18/02/2022

(USA Washington Post) Facing The Effects Of Climate Change, Skiers Want To Save Their Snow — And Their Sport

Washington Post - Denise Hruby

‘If we don’t start taking action now, then when are we going to?’

Article Audio

10min 44sec

Windmills power part of the Lachtal ski resort in the eastern stretches of the Austrian Alps.
Windmills power part of the Lachtal ski resort in the eastern stretches of the Austrian Alps. (Denise Hruby for The Washington Post)




OBERWÖLZ, Austria — At the Lachtal ski resort, high in the eastern Alps of Austria, skiers immediately pull out their phones after sliding off the chairlift — not to take selfies, but rather to snap pictures of the windmills that have become part of the mountainous vista.

When the first windmills were built here in 2002, at about 7,290 feet, many tourists saw the massive blades as an eyesore. But as the wind park grew and expanded, so did skiers’ environmental conscience. Today, locals and tourists are proud to ski among the backdrop.

“When I ride up with them and eavesdrop, they’re usually impressed,” says Rudolf Wiesnegger, who maintains the wind park and adjacent solar panels. “They comment that it’s great for the environment,” he says.

There are few places where climate change is as tangible as in the Alps; Europe’s largest mountain range has been warming at twice the global average.

Snow has become scarcer, and glaciers are receding dramatically. Skiers see it when they ride down slopes sprayed with artificial snow, and they are increasingly concerned that their favorite sport helps damage the very environment they’re seeking.

Skiers and spectators have been flabbergasted by this year’s Winter Olympics in Beijing. Just as the LED snowflakes that sparkled during the Opening Ceremonies weren’t real, the snow that skiers and snowboarders are competing on isn’t natural, either.

The Alpine competitions are held in the brown mountains around Zhangjiakou, on white bands of snow entirely created with machines that need massive amounts of water and electricity.

“It’s just crazy,” says Cécile Burton, a French-British national who grew up skiing but switched to snowboarding when she moved to the village of Morzine, a popular ski destination in the French Alps.

Burton heads Montagne Verte, or Green Mountain, an association trying to make skiing more sustainable. She is among those who have begun to counteract the sport’s impact on the planet. In making their favorite sport more sustainable, an increasing number of skiers are hoping to secure its future.

“We’re definitely seeing that people worry about this, that they are aware that ski holidays are not very sustainable — but [they] can be,” the 30-year-old says.

A windmill in the eastern Alps of Austria. (Denise Hruby for The Washington Post)


Counterproductive’ Winter Olympics

The Winter Olympics, once a flagship ad for winter sports, have an increasingly negative reputation among skiers (and not just because the Games’ leaders ignore hosts’ human rights records).

Conditions during the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver and four years later in Sochi, Russia, were “too warm for even advanced snowmaking technology,” so snow had to be trucked or flown in from elsewhere.

Zhangjiakou, where the climate is so dry it basically never snows, might be the worst advertising for winter sports thus far, says Peter Zellmann, head of the institute for leisure and tourism research in Austria.

Instead of inspiring amateur athletes, “holding Olympic Games the way this is happening in China is counterproductive and has a negative impact on [winter] tourism,” Zellmann says.

And yet it might be a glimpse into the future.

Previous host cities already belong to the fastest-warming locations worldwide, and if greenhouse gas emissions aren’t dramatically reduced, 20 of the 21 destinations that have previously hosted the Winter Olympics wouldn’t be able to do so by the end of the century, according to recent research, led by the department of geography and environmental management at the University of Waterloo in Canada.

The only exception would be Sapporo in Japan.

“In terms of the climate, it’s complete madness,” says Laura Gantenbein, a 28-year-old who saw the images of Zhangjiakou on TV in her home in Switzerland, where she grew up skiing and snowboarding. Hefty ticket prices already keep the budding lawyer from hitting the slopes as frequently as she used to, but increasingly, she says, she’s also worried about the impact on the environment.

Even in the mountainous Engadin valley, birthplace of Gantenbein’s mother and of Alpine winter sports, she now finds that snow cannons are ubiquitous. “And all that does make you think: Is that still ok?” she says.

The industry is feeling that pressure, too, says Robert Steiger, who researches winter tourism at the department of public finance at the University of Innsbruck in the Austrian Alps. Though skiers aren’t yet dropping their favorite sport, “it’s going to be a big topic in the future,” Steiger says.

The Lachtal ski resort in Austria. (Denise Hruby for The Washington Post)


Solar, wind and the world’s shortest subway

If you visit the ski resort of Morzine, you can stay in hotels that have installed solar panels and dine in restaurants that serve local produce rather than over-harvested fish — all thanks to help and nudging from Montagne Verte, the sustainable skiing association.

On a cable-car ride to Matterhorn, the iconic Swiss mountain shaped like a jagged tooth, you’ll find solar panels reflecting off the base station. And if you turn on a television in See, a municipality in Austria’s narrow Paznaun valley, you’ll learn that the hydropower plant along its mountain brooks generates enough electricity to run the cable cars and produce snow.

The excess of about 9.5 gigawatt hours, enough for more than 200 households, is fed into the grid.

Not just ski resorts, but the International Ski Federation (FIS) is taking a different tone, too. Just three years ago, Gian Franco Kaspar, then head of the FIS, said “there is no evidence” for “so-called climate change” in a Tagesanzeiger interview.

But the group’s new president, Johan Eliasch, a Swedish British billionaire, told The Washington Post that skiing needs to “act in harmony with nature and not against it,” and that he feels “a personal responsibility to reduce the impact of our activities on the climates.” Aside from buying a rainforest to protect it from logging, Eliasch also pledged that the FIS will cut its emissions by half by 2030.

The key will be to no longer chase wintry conditions across the globe, and for the race schedule to be optimized.

At least one site — Zermatt in Switzerland — will now begin to accommodate year-round training for all ski teams, and next season, Eliasch says, races will also be held by regional blocks to decrease travel.

That would address the single biggest source of emissions caused by the world’s 135 million skiers: Depending on the mode and distance to the destination, traveling accounts for up to 86 percent of emissions from a ski holiday, according to a report published in the journal Mountain Research and Development.

The Lachtal ski resort. (Denise Hruby for The Washington Post/FTWP) 


Some destinations have begun tackling that problem through electric buses or bicycles.

Skiers in Serfaus, Austria, can board the world’s shortest subway on one of four stops through the 1,100-resident village. And the Swiss village of Saas-Fee was already car-free when Wham filmed the music video for “Last Christmas” there in 1984.

Generally, however, visitors still get to both destinations by car and park in one of thousands of designated spots. Emissions from traveling to Morzine had Montagne Verte pondering, too. Most of its tourists are young Brits who fly to nearby Geneva, with round-trip fares going for less than $100.

To get people to opt for the pricier but environment-friendly railroad, Morzine now offers train travelers discounts for ski lessons, drinks and dinner — and, next year, even for expensive lift tickets.

That, however, addresses only the extra costs of train travel, not the nuisance of having to swap trains several times.

Looking at the rail network, Burton and her colleagues realized that a direct connection from Lille, a major hub for the Eurostar, would be possible. Next year, Montagne Verte plans to charter a train and fill it with 500 skiers.

“You want to go to the mountains on a ski holiday? Well, make sure it’s still there in 25 years. Start changing the way you do things,” Burton says.

With a successful pilot run, Montagne Verte hopes to convince the national train services of France to create a direct connection. It’s an uphill battle, Burton admits, especially given the vast subsidies granted to fossil-fuel-burning industries like airlines.

Tauernwind boasts a total of 10 windmills, each with a rotor diameter of 367 feet. (Denise Hruby for The Washington Post)

 Power in numbers

 It’s these bigger-picture policies on which local efforts often hit a wall, says Jeremy Jones, who founded Protect Our Winters (POW), a U.S.-based association trying to get politicians to take action.

Jones, a former professional snowboarder, became engaged in climate action after a 2005 trip to Prince Rupert, Canada, where locals showed him a small ski area that had been forced to stop operating.

He started switching to more efficient lightbulbs and saving water but soon realized that the sweeping changes necessary to reach climate goals had to come from politicians.

To get them to act, POW aims to “unify the outdoor state” — or the roughly 50 million Americans who ski, hike, surf or take part in similar activities. That potential voter base, Jones says, is 10 times larger than the National Rifle Association’s active members.

“There are a lot of politicians that are afraid to cross the NRA because they are afraid they’ll lose their job, that they will not get reelected,” says Jones, now 52 and a father of two.

“We need to make it so that politicians view climate in that same manner, where when they take a bad vote on climate, a pro vote for fossil fuels, they will lose their job in the next election,” he says.

Windmills in the eastern Alps. (Denise Hruby for The Washington Post) 

 Ski idols like Mike Douglas, known as the godfather of freestyle skiing — now an Olympic discipline — have joined POW, as have younger, emerging talents, like the teenage skier Kai Jones and snowboarder Bea Kim, who hopes to compete in the next Winter Olympics.

In the last national election cycle, POW’s nonpartisan “pledge to vote” campaign reached 30,000 people, many of them nonvoters or considered unlikely to vote.

“If we don’t start taking action now, then when are we going to?” Kim says.

In the 2018 election in Montana, POW pushed for climate coverage in local papers and helped 800 voters register.

Democrat Jon Tester — who says the impact of climate change on his own farm is “starting to scare the hell out of me” and who campaigned for an energy transition that would create high-paying jobs — secured reelection with 50.3 percent of the vote.

Across the Alps, too, politicians are increasingly addressing climate change, Steiger says — especially in areas like Tyrol, an Austrian province where every fourth job depends on the winter tourism industry. Last year, the state government ordered all ski resorts to become climate-neutral by 2035.

“The political will is there,” Steiger says, “just how it’s put into action remains to be seen.”

At Lachtal, for one, that means that the wind farm is going to be extended within the next five years, and the 2-megawatt solar panels will be increased to about 10 megawatts.

Four years from now, the Winter Olympics will return to Cortina d’Ampezzo, in the Italian Alps, which already hosted the Games in 1956. Back then, winter temperatures remained low, skiing conditions were excellent and the Olympic flag was framed by snow-covered mountains.

Much will have changed in 2026, when Kim, the POW snowboarder, hopes to compete. Until then, Kim, now 15 years old, wants to help “convince people to go outside and just to see how magical it is,” she says.Hopefully, they’ll — out of their own conscious — start trying to protect it.”

Links

(AU ABC) Big Oil All Talk, No Action On Climate Change? Researchers Say They'Ve Got The Proof

ABC Science - Nick Kilvert

Some oil companies have engaged in climate change disinformation campaigns.(Getty Images: Anton Petrus)

Key Points
  • Researchers looked at how four big oil companies performed against their clean energy claims
  • They found that none of them were producing clean energy on a scale that indicates a move away from fossil fuels
  • Clean energy investment targets were often not being met
The world's highest-polluting oil companies are promising big but delivering very little on climate change, according to damning new research published today.

Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell and BP are failing to meet green energy investment pledges and lack consistent transparency in their reporting of investments, the researchers say in science journal PLOS ONE.

They say fossil fuel production was maintained or increased by Chevron, Shell and BP between 2009 and 2020, despite committing to, or in Chevron's case "aspiring to", net-zero emissions by 2050 or before.

To reach these conclusions, researchers from Tohoku and Kyoto University looked at the activities of Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell and BP between 2009 and 2020.

They focused on these four because they're the highest greenhouse-gas-emitting investor-owned energy companies globally.

Specifically, the researchers tallied the frequency that climate change and clean energy-related keywords were referred to in those companies' annual reports during that 2009-2020 period, and what each company pledged to do to decarbonise and invest in clean energy.

They then compared that to each companies' actions during the same period — their investments and profits from fossil fuels, and investments in clean energy.


Clean energy generation in megawatts by each company between 2009 and 2020.(Supplied: PLOS ONE/Li, Trencher, Asuka)


Neither of the American companies — ExxonMobil and Chevron — disclosed the size of their clean energy investments for any years during the period, "despite claims of increasing investments for low-carbon energy and technologies", the researchers said in the paper.

European companies Shell and BP disclosed sporadically, and the researchers took data for all four companies from external sources where it wasn't disclosed.

The researchers concluded that accusations of greenwashing against these companies "appear well founded".

No indication of shifting away from fossil fuels

Between 2009 and 2020, none of the four companies generated renewable energy on a scale that would "indicate a shift away from fossil fuels", despite all showing a significant increase in references to "climate change", "transition", "emissions" and "low carbon energy" in their annual reporting.

According to the research, ExxonMobil generated no electricity from clean energy sources between 2009 and 2020. Chevron generated just 65.5 megawatts.

Of the four, BP generated the most with around 2,000 megawatts, or "the equivalent of around two large gas-fired power-plants", the researchers said.

In energy equivalent terms, this pales in comparison to the 2 million or more barrels per day each company produced on average during the study period.

Youtube Between 2010 and 2018, more than 98 per cent of Shell's investments were in oil and gas

It's also at odds with the image these companies are trying to project to the public, the researchers said.

"Over the study period that we looked at — 12 years — there's been a big increase in green rhetoric," said study co-author Gregory Trencher from Kyoto University.

"If that was reflected in actions, we would expect in the same period, to see a big surge in green activity.
This is despite the websites of BP and Chevron stating that they support the goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement; Shell's website says the company's net-zero aim supports the Paris Agreement; and ExxonMobil says it is "advancing effective solutions to address climate change".

Among the Paris Agreement's goals are to limit warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius, and to pursue efforts to keep it below 1.5C.

We're currently on track to hit 1.5C in the early 2030s.

BP, Shell say change is happening

The two European companies — BP and Shell — had the most ambitious clean energy pledges of the four, which the researchers still described as "highly conservative".

"Even with these very conservative indicators, [we] don't see much action, especially in the US," Dr Trencher said.
"[With] BP and Shell, it's really only in the last two years that we see meaningful action occurring, but that's obviously far from sufficient, and there are still contradictions."

Both BP and Shell met their targets of investing more than 1 per cent of capital expenditure on clean energy for multiple years throughout the study period.

But they failed to meet other targets. Shell's investment of $0.9 billion on clean energy in 2020, for instance, fell short of its pledge of $1 billion-$2 billion annually between 2018-2020.

The companies' investment data from 2018 and 2019 was not published, according to the researchers.

A spokesperson for BP said that because the study was between the years 2009-2020, it didn't take recent "developments and [their] progress fully into account".

"In 2020, BP set out our new net-zero ambition, aims and strategy, and in 2021 completed the largest transformation of the company in our history to deliver these," the spokesperson said.

In 2020, BP's new chief executive officer Michael Looney claimed the company could get to net zero.

He laid out a raft of measures, which included reducing future production by 40 per cent, or about 1 million barrels, of oil a day, and selling off about $25 billion in fossil fuel assets by 2025.

A Shell spokesperson also said they had taken big steps recently that wouldn't have been captured by the study.

"Shell's target is to become a net-zero emissions energy business by 2050, in step with society," they said.

A comparison of capital expenditure on "low-carbon" investments by each company as a percentage of total capital expenditure. (Supplied: PLOS ONE/Li, Trencher, Asuka)

"Our short-, medium- and long-term intensity and absolute targets are consistent with the more ambitious 1.5C goal of the Paris Agreement."

If both BP and Shell are to reach their net-zero emissions by 2050, Dr Trencher said it would be "an amazing challenge" given their continued interests in fossil fuels.
Chevron, ExxonMobil dragging the chain

Investment in "clean energy" by the two American companies — Chevron and ExxonMobil — made up less than a quarter of a per cent of their total capital expenditure.

But the researchers urged caution even over these modest figures.

"We can have one company claiming that it's invested, you know, X amount of dollars in clean energy, but we don't really know what's meant by clean energy," Dr Trencher said.
"There's no industry accepted definition of this."
Chevron has expanded its gas interest in Australia, including at Wheatstone and its troubled CCS facility Gorgon. (Chevron)


ExxonMobil has made no secret that it lacks interest in some renewable technologies, said study lead author Mei Li from Tohoku University.

"ExxonMobil is the only major [oil company] to refuse to invest in solar and wind. It's quite a surprising thing for me," Dr Li said.

Attempting to derail climate action

According to ExxonMobil's website, the company is "working to be part of the solution".

"ExxonMobil scientists have been involved in the forefront of climate research for four decades, understanding and working with the world's leading experts on climate," the website states.

But ExxonMobil has also been accused of funding climate sceptic organisations, and promoting climate disinformation.

Back in 2006, the Royal Society slammed the company for promoting "inaccurate and misleading" climate information.

ExxonMobil said it would stop funding such groups in 2007 after pressure from activists, but was accused of the same thing again in 2009.

Last year the City of New York filed a lawsuit against ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, and the American Petroleum Institute for "systematically and intentionally deceiving" New Yorkers about the impact their products have on climate change.

Similar lawsuits have previously failed.

Oil companies are accused of 'greenwashing' while continuing with business as usual. (AP: Nabil al-Jurani)

And ExxonMobil has been reticent to address climate change in its annual reporting, according to the researchers.

"Only in 2018 did ExxonMobil recognise, indirectly and weakly, the link between fossil fuels and climate change in its annual report," they said.

"This position did not carry over into the 2020 version."

A range of questions were put to ExxonMobil, including whether they still fund climate sceptic groups, but a response wasn't received by deadline.

But it's not just ExxonMobil that has attempted to derail climate action. It's an industry-wide practice, according to Polly Hemming from independent think tank The Australia Institute, based in Canberra.

She said there were plenty of examples in Australia where companies had campaigned against climate action.

Woodside ran a campaign against an EPA proposal for offsetting all emissions on new large projects. (Supplied)

"[In 2019] the Western Australian [Environmental Protection Agency] suggested that all high-carbon activities would be completely offset," she said.

"Woodside [Energy] in The West Australian newspaper ran a scare campaign and within a week it was ditched."

A concerted effort by the industry has held back action on climate change in Australia, according to Ms Hemming.

"I would say [fossil fuel lobbyists] have been behind the last 10 years of delay on climate change [in Australia].
The fossil fuel industry's assertions that they can continue to produce oil and gas with zero net emissions — described by Ms Hemming as "a complete fantasy" — allows governments to continue supporting the industry, she said.

"Our own government's net-zero plan — there's a sentence in there that says that gas and coal production will continue.

"No fossil fuel company is proposing to offset all their emissions. Even if they were, there wouldn't be enough offsets in the world to do that.

"It might work on paper, but in reality, the physics don't work."

In response to questions from the ABC regarding today's research, a spokesperson for Chevron said it was difficult to respond without first seeing the report, but the company was committed to reaching net-zero in 2050 on its scope 1 and scope 2 emissions — that's emissions from its owned or controlled sources, and indirect emissions from the generation of energy it has purchased.

Scope 3 emissions are those produced by burning the fuel by consumers, such as in vehicles.

"Chevron is focused on lowering the carbon intensity of our operations and seeking to grow lower carbon businesses along with our traditional business lines," the spokesperson said.

"Globally, the corporation is planning $10 billion in lower carbon investments by 2028.

"In Australia, we are working to advance a lower carbon future using our unique capabilities, assets, and expertise."

Links

(AU SMH) Origin Energy To Bring Forward Closure Of Australia’s Largest Coal-Fired Power Plan

Sydney Morning HeraldNick Toscano | Mike Foley

Origin Energy has brought forward plans to close Australia’s largest coal-burning power station to 2025, seven years earlier than scheduled, as the rollout of clean energy across the country accelerates.

The power and gas supplier has notified authorities it intends to shut down the 2880-megawatt Eraring generator at Lake Macquarie in NSW after the required notice period of three and a half years, saying “rapidly changing” energy market conditions have hammered the plant’s viability.

Origin’s giant Eraring power station is the largest coal-fired generator in Australia. Credit: Nick Moir

Eraring was originally intended to close in 2032.

“Origin has today submitted notice to the Australian Energy Market Operator for the potential early retirement of Eraring Power Station in August 2025,” chief executive Frank Calabria said.

“Origin’s proposed exit from coal-fired generation reflects the continuing, rapid transition of the National Energy Market as we move to cleaner sources of energy.”

The influx of large-scale wind and solar farms coupled with an ongoing boom in the uptake of rooftop solar panels have been radically reshaping the industry and slashing daytime wholesale prices to levels at which the dominant sources of power – coal and gas – struggle to compete and have been forced to regularly operate at a loss.

Glasgow summit
Origin’s early exit from coal follows similar moves by other major power utilities.

EnergyAustralia last year announced it would shut Victoria’s Yallourn coal-fired power plant in 2028, four years earlier than planned, while AGL, the largest Australian power company, has pledged to bring forward the closure dates of its coal assets in Victoria and NSW by several years.

“Australia’s energy market today is very different to the one when Eraring was brought online in the early 1980s,” Mr Calabria said.

“The reality is the economics of coal-fired power stations are being put under increasing, unsustainable pressure by cleaner and lower cost generation, including solar, wind and batteries.”

Because electricity production is a dominant source of Australia’s emissions, reducing output from coal plants would help sharply reduce the national carbon footprint.

However, concerns have been building across the industry that unexpectedly early shutdowns of coal-fired generators could threaten the reliability of the nation’s power market and cause price volatility in the future.

Federal Energy Minister Angus Taylor said Origin’s decision was “bitterly disappointing”. Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

Federal Energy Minister Angus Taylor condemned Origin’s decision on Thursday, describing it as “bitterly disappointing” and warning the closure of Eraring, which accounts for 20 per cent of NSW generation output, would leave a “considerable gap” in reliable generation.

“This decision is bitterly disappointing for all energy users – from households to small businesses to heavy industry – who rely on affordable, reliable energy to prosper,” he said.

“It is also bitterly disappointing for the 400 workers and communities in the Lake Macquarie region.”

The Morrison government argues fossil fuels are vital to ensuring affordable and reliable power as the clean-energy transition accelerates, and is pushing ahead with a plan to build a Commonwealth-owned gas-fired generator at Kurri Kurri in NSW.

Mr Taylor said on-demand, reliable power including coal, gas and pumped hydro was crucial to supporting renewable energy during times when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining.

He called on private energy companies to “step up” and increase investment in projects to replace Eraring.
“The reality is the economics of coal-fired power stations are being put under increasing, unsustainable pressure by cleaner and lower cost generation, including solar, wind and batteries.”
Origin chief Frank Calabria
“Closure without like-for-like replacement puts affordability and reliability at risk,” he said. “They owe this to their customers as providers of an essential service.”

Origin is planning to build a 700-megawatt battery at the site of Eraring as part of its “replacement plan”.

Mr Calabria on Thursday said firm commitments across the wider energy industry to build out more on-demand energy capacity in the market in coming years, along with new transmission infrastructure that can better-enable the flow of energy from one part of the east coast to another, would “more than compensate” for Eraring’s exit.

“We will continue to assess the market over time, and this will help inform any final decisions on the timing for closure of all four units,” he said.
What's a 'just transition' and can you switch to green energy without sacking coal workers?

AEMO, the market operator, agrees.

“Planned additional transmission capacity – including the announced battery - will give the state access to enough electricity generation to meet the Energy Security Target at the time Eraring closes,” AEMO chief executive Daniel Westerman said.

While coal still makes up most of the nation’s power, the rollout of renewables is squeezing it further out of the market.

In the three months to December 31, black coal fell to its lowest seasonal average share since the east-coast electricity market was created in 1998, while gas recorded its lowest since 2003.

Renewable energy, meanwhile, accounted for a record-high average of 34.9 per cent of generation, beating the previous record of 31 per cent.

Origin on Thursday vowed it would consult with Eraring’s workforce about the timing of any potential retirement, and provide a “generous support package during any transition period”.

“This will include re-skilling, career support and redeployment into new roles, where possible,” the company said.

“Origin intends to engage with governments and the local community to determine the most appropriate transition planning for any eventual closure.”

Links

(AU The Conversation) World-First Research Confirms Australia’s Forests Became Catastrophic Fire Risk After British Invasion

The Conversation | 

Andrew Brownbill/AAP

Authors
  •  is Assistant Professor in Physical Geography, University of Nottingham
  •  is Associate Professor in Biogeography, The University of Melbourne
  •  is Fellow in Natural History, Australian National University     
 revealing the catastrophic risk created by non-Indigenous bushfire management approaches.

Contemporary approaches to forest management in Australia are based on suppression – extinguishing bushfires once they’ve started, or seeking to prevent them through hazard-reduction burning.

This differs from the approach of Indigenous Australians who’ve developed sophisticated relationships with fire over tens of thousands of years.

They minimise bushfire risk through frequent low-intensity burning – in contrast to the current scenario of random, high-intensity fires.

Our research, released today, provides what we believe is the first quantitative evidence that forests and woodlands across southeast Australia contained fewer shrubs and more grass before colonisation. This suggests Indigenous fire management holds the key to a safer, more sustainable future on our flammable continent.

Indigenous Australians have developed sophisticated relationships with fire over tens of thousands of years. Pictured: Fire Lines, 2019. Archival waxed inkjet Print 100cm x 125cm. © Alan McFetridge. www.alan-mcfetridge.com

Not just a climate story

Globally, climate change is causing catastrophic fire weather more often. In Australia, long-term drought and high temperatures were blamed for the Black Summer bushfires in the summer of 2019-20. This event burned 18 million hectares, an area almost twice the size of England.

The unusually high fire extent in forests prompted several important questions. Could these massive fires be explained by climate change alone? Or was the way we manage forests also affecting fire behaviour?

Recent catastrophic fires in Australia and North America prompted renewed scrutiny of how the disruption and exclusion of First Nations’ burning practices has affected forest fuel loads.

Fuel load refers to the amount of flammable organic matter in vegetation such as leaves, twigs, branches and trunks. Large fuel loads in the shrubby layers of vegetation enable flames to more easily reach tree canopies, causing intense and dangerous “crown” fires.

Long before British invasion of southeast Australia in 1788, Indigenous people managed Australia’s flammable vegetation with “cultural burning” practices. These involved frequent, low-intensity fires which led to a fine-grained vegetation mosaic comprising grassy areas and scattered trees.

Landscapes managed in this way were less prone to destructive fires.

Cultural burning in Djabugay Country. Australian Museum

But under colonial rule, Aboriginal people were dispossessed of their lands and often prevented from carrying out many important practices. The colonisers suppressed Indigenous cultural burning – sometimes to protect fences – causing the land to become overgrown with shrubs.

Colonial vegetation management involved clear-cutting and intense intentional burning to create land on the plains for agriculture. Forests in rugged and less desirable terrain were left unmanaged or exploited through logging.

A fire-fighting mentality came to dominate fire management in Australia, in which fires are seen as a threat to be prevented, or stopped once they start. This thinking underlies mainstream fire and land management to this day.

Current mainstream fire management focuses on suppression techniques. Sean Davey/AAP


Uncovering past landscapes


Our research set out to examine vegetation change at 52 sites across much of Australia’s southeast before and after colonisation in 1788. A large proportion of these are in forested areas of Victoria and New South Wales.

Scientists can develop a picture of past vegetation by extracting tiny fossilised grains of pollen from ancient sediment in wetlands and lake beds. Different plants produce pollen grains with different shapes, so by analysing them we can reconstruct past vegetation landscapes.

We also calibrated the amount of pollen to vegetation cover, to determine the past proportions of trees, shrubs, and grasses and herbs.

We did this using new modelling techniques that allow the conversion of pollen grain counts to plant cover across the landscape. These models have been widely applied in Europe, but our work represents a first in Australia.

We could then quantify vegetation changes before and after British invasion. We found forests in the southeast are now much denser, and more flammable, than before 1788.

Researchers preparing a platform for extracting lake sediment cores. Photo by Haidee Cadd.

We found grass and herb vegetation dominated the pre-colonial period, accounting for about half the vegetation across all sites. Trees and shrubs covered about 15% and 34% of the landscape, respectively.

After British invasion, shrubbiness in forests and woodlands in southeast Australia increased by up to 48% (with an average increase of 12%). Shrubs replaced grassy areas, while tree cover has remained stable overall.

Considering the vast area covered by our analysis, the shrub increase represents a massive accumulation of fuel loads.

The transition from pre- to post-colonial fuel structure in southeastern Australian forests, according to results presented in our recent publication in Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment (Mariani et al., 2022).

More than 200 years of neglect

In 1770, natural history artist Sydney Parkinson described the landscape along Australia’s east coast as “free from underwood […] like a gentleman’s park”.

In 2011, historian Bill Gammage published a controversial book titled The Biggest Estate on Earth. It contained several paintings of early colonial Australia in which the landscapes resembled a savanna, with large gaps between trees and a grassy understorey.

Nowadays, many such areas are dense forest. Our research is the first region-wide analysis that gives scientific credence to these historical accounts of a landscape very different to what we see today.

Painting by Eugen von Guerard, Crater of Mt Eccles (Budj Bim National Park), Victoria (1858). Sourced from Gammage, 2011, The Biggest Estate on Earth.

The disposession of Indigenous Australians by British invaders has had a deep social and ecological impact. This includes neglect of the bush, the direct result of denying Aboriginal Australians the right to exercise their duty of care over Country, using fire.

Australia’s forests need fire, deployed by capable Indigenous hands. Without it, increased fuel loads, coupled with climate change, will create conditions for bushfires bigger and more ferocious than we’ve ever seen before.

Link