11/06/2020

BBC Climate Change Videos


CO2 - or carbon dioxide - is at the heart of the world's changing climate. Reality Check's Chris Morris explains why.
Motion graphics by Jacqueline Galvin.
------

The coronavirus crisis has seen many changes to life as we know it.
The number of cars on our roads has reduced dramatically, planes are grounded and many of us are working from home for the first time.
It has resulted in cleaner rivers and better air quality, and global CO2 emissions are predicted to be their lowest in a decade.
Could changes we have been forced to make during the pandemic become long-term environmental solutions?


The 10 years to the end of 2019 have been confirmed as the warmest decade on record by three global agencies.
This year, climate change has been linked to Australian bushfires, torrential rains in Indonesia and record-breaking temperatures in Europe - but just what is climate change?
The BBC's global science correspondent Rebecca Morelle explains.
Produced and edited by Larissa Kennelly Graphics by Terry Saunders

Forest area has been increasing in some parts of the world, but deforestation is continuing at speed in others.
Can the trees we are planting make up for those that are being cut down?
Reality Check's Jack Goodman takes a look.
Motion graphics by Jacqueline Galvin Produced by Sarah Glatte

Activists are warning that the world is now facing a "double crisis" because of the coronavirus pandemic and climate change.
Many campaigners have had to cancel or postpone their work because of lockdowns worldwide.
However, some say now is a big opportunity to spread their message in a different way.
Video journalist: Olivia Le Poidevin

Thousands of species could go extinct over the next decade according to a 2019 UN report.
Biodiversity is decreasing at a faster rate than ever, BBC Reality Check investigates why.
Posted by at No comments :
Labels:

Climate Change, Biodiversity Loss And Other Global Ills Share Root Causes

The Conversation -  | 

The Cendrawasih, commonly known as the Bird of Paradise, is facing extinction. Getty Images

Authors
The modern world seems to lurch from one crisis to another.

What if that is because the crises have shared underlying causes, and therefore tackling them as if they were independent events is doomed to fail?

The issues of climate change and biodiversity are deeply intertwined.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity, the international treaties charged with solving two of the biggest problems of the 21st century, were both due to hold make-or-break meetings in 2020.

COVID-19 – yet another crisis with strong connections to the other two – has forced the meetings to be postponed. The only positive result is that the delay provides an opportunity to better coordinate actions, in order to lead to better outcomes.

To mark World Environment Day on 5 June, the Commonwealth Academies released a statement on climate change, biodiversity and sustainable energy. The statement stressed the grave risks to people and nature of allowing the global climate to warm at its current rate and draws attention to the accelerating rate of biodiversity loss. It proposes that a rapid transition to predominantly renewable energy sources can help alleviate both issues. The statement calls for urgent leadership.

This article explains the logic behind that statement, linking three apparently different issues. By identifying the connections we reveal the opportunities for coordinated action and the pitfalls of continuing to pursue independent agendas.

Rapid species extinction

The world is in the throes of a “sixth extinction crisis” – an accelerating loss of species at a rate far more rapid than the evolution of new species. Such a loss was last seen sixty million years ago, when Earth collided with an asteroid. The result is the unravelling of the ecosystems which we depend on for our well-being.

For the past few centuries, the main cause of declining biological diversity has been habitat loss – the relentless replacement of natural ecosystems by croplands, cities and managed forest, to meet human demands for food, timber and raw materials. That process continues.

Apart from driving our co-inhabitants of the planet to extinction, land use change is the most important cause of climate change after the burning of fossil fuels. Human encroachment on nature is also the root cause of the emergence of novel zoonotic diseases such as COVID-19. So if we could stop deforestation, we would help solve three problems at the same time.

Climate change

But as we move into the middle part of the 21st century, the biggest future threat to plants and animals is climate change. Despite the undertaking by most of the countries of the world in Paris in 2015 to stabilise the global climate at safe levels by mid-century, the climate continues to warm at an accelerating rate.

As a result the climate comfort zones of millions of species are moving faster than they can keep up. Our main strategy thus far for conserving biodiversity – the creation of protected areas – is increasingly irrelevant.

The single most important thing we can do to save nature (and ourselves) in the 21st century is to cap global warming at no more than 1.5℃. In other words, the fate of nature is being decided by the outcome of climate negotiations, not biodiversity discussions.

There are also examples where an action taken to address one of the crises makes things worse for another. For instance, there is great enthusiasm for planting forests to soak up carbon dioxide. Many of the targeted areas – which need to be huge to make a useful difference – are not places that formerly supported forests.

As South Africa learned the hard way, when we afforest ancient, species-rich grasslands with monocultures of alien trees, the rivers dry up and biodiversity is lost. There are potentially similar problems with simply replacing fossil fuels with bio energy crops. The vast areas required will either displace food crops or further encroach on natural habitats.

Energy generation

Renewable energy – particularly solar and wind power – offer far more sustainable futures. They are not without impacts on biodiversity, but the magnitude of those impacts is much less than the effects of climate change, driven by fossil fuels and land use change.

The remarkable worldwide reduction in atmospheric pollutants and the resurgence of nature while travel and economic activity were suspended under COVID-19 restrictions give us a glimpse of what we have lost and what we stand to gain.

Those effects will be short-lived, but they do show that when the world perceives a problem to be urgent and critically important, it can very quickly take actions previously said to be completely impossible. That is the lesson we need to apply to the much more life-threatening, and just as urgent, challenges of climate change and biodiversity loss.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

Why Hydrogen, Why Now? Because Climate, Economy And Finance Say So.

Forbes - David Hart

Hydrogen energy is seeing unprecedented support, not only from long-time enthusiasts like Japan and Korea, but from upstarts like Australia and Chile. 

Germany has just announced a plan to spend €7bn on hydrogen as part of an economic stimulus package. 

The IEA–born in the oil crises–is publicly suggesting we need more hydrogen in the energy system, and the World Economic Forum helped seed the Hydrogen Council, now 81 hydrogen-supporting members including oil and gas companies and carmakers, trading companies and banks. 

European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans sees hydrogen as essential to Europe’s Green Deal.

European Commission vice-president in charge for European Green Deal, Frans Timmermans, speaks during a press conference on Green and Just recovery at the European Commission headquarters in Brussel on May 28, 2020. Photo by Aris Oikonomou / AFP via Getty Images

Why hydrogen? Simply, it can do things electrons cannot. As a molecule, it can be used as a convertible ‘currency’ between renewable energy, chemical feedstock, transport fuel, residential and industrial heat. It is an excellent clean energy store for long periods and large energy needs. It sits alongside and in partnership with electricity as a consummate carbon-free energy vector.

Hydrogen has enormous promise, but needs to be scaled up dramatically to have an impact. Its detractors dismiss it as inefficient and difficult to handle. Battery vehicles seem to be conquering transport, while wind and solar feed our grids. All of the signals scream ‘hype cycle’. Or do they? Three powerful drivers seem to be combining to push hydrogen forward.

Firstly, the concept of ‘net zero’ carbon emissions is gaining pace. National governments and energy companies alike are proclaiming it their goal. And models show that without hydrogen, net zero is almost impossible to achieve. Hydrogen is needed to help decarbonise heat, and shipping, and long-haul trucking, and fertiliser, and heavy industries like steel.

Secondly, our energy and transport systems are on the brink of upheaval, bringing dramatic economic pain. The growth of renewables is accelerating, cost is dropping, vehicles are becoming electric and maybe autonomous. Traditional industries are facing existential threats, and hundreds of thousands of discarded jobs. Hydrogen can help them reinvent themselves, create employment and drive economic growth, while still meeting the climate imperative.

Thirdly, COVID-19 has brutally exposed the inherent fragility and endemic risk in our economies. Supply chains are stationary, oil prices have gone negative, and fiscal rules have been rewritten. The risk from climate change is seen as many times worse. Major company shareholders, like pension funds, are scrutinising corporate ESG reports for their willingness to limit social upheaval and exposure to carbon emissions.

Thierry Philipponnat, an EU expert on sustainable finance at Finance Watch and board member of France’s financial regulator, suggests that bank risk ratings for fossil fuels should be increased by up to an order of magnitude, to fairly reflect future threats. Investors and analysts increasingly see hydrogen as an option for long-term sustainable investment, and will reward company boards for pursuing it, where in the past they penalised.

Hydrogen is rarely an easy solution to any single problem. A lot must be done before it makes a meaningful energy - or climate - or economic - contribution. But the current conditions suggest an opportunity to be seized.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

10/06/2020

(AU) 'Mass Mortality Event' Devastates Sydney's Coastal Ecosystems

Sydney Morning Herald - Peter Hannam

Marine ecosystems along a stretch of Sydney's coastline from the Hawkesbury River down to Botany Bay and beyond have been devastated by a combination of drought, bushfire debris and severe storms in recent months.

Researchers for The Abyss Project, a commercial and scientific group of divers, say the coast and estuaries have suffered a "mass mortality event", potentially the worst in decades. Hard-hit aquatic species range from soldier crabs to urchins, soft sponges and coral-like bryozoa invertebrates.

Nathalie Simmonds (left), head of marine science at The Abyss Project, examines dead invertebrates with project co-founder Carl Fallon near an inshore Sydney Reef. They immediately returned them to where they had been located. Credit: Kate Geraghty

Carl Fallon, a co-founder of the 12-year old project that monitors aquatic health near Sydney, said it was "a once-in-a-generation event" to have a dry spell followed by fires and then storms from February onwards.

Invertebrate species down to as deep as eight metres appear to have heavily affected by a sequence of changed water quality and conditions.

Salinity in shallow estuaries rose as freshwater inflows dropped with the drought, and then the bushfires brought additional nitrogen and phosphorous - including from fire retardants - that spurred cyanobacteria growth. The big storms provided the final blow for much of the aquatic life, Mr Fallon said.

Deeper than about eight metres or in areas where waters more easily mix, such as much of Sydney Harbour, sea life continues largely unaffected, he said.

Carl Fallon, co-founder of The Abyss Project and Sea Dragon Diving Co., examines conditions near the inshore reef. Credit: Kate Geraghty

The Abyss Project's report, scheduled to be made public on Monday, estimated the loss of so-called foundational species would likely cause "feedback loops occurring throughout the entire ecosystem".

Some species are recovering faster than others, with potentially long-lasting impacts.

At places such as Monterey in Botany Bay, highly varied species previously found attached to nets and other submerged objects had begun to be replaced by an unidentified algal species.

"They are all completely gone except for this one algae that has literally covered everything," Mr Fallon said.

David Booth, a marine ecologist at University of Technology Sydney, said poor water quality and then coronavirus pandemic restrictions had limited the ability of scientists to examine the impact of "this chemical event".

To lose kelp from many areas and also urchins - normally "two opposing forces" - was very unusual, Dr Booth said. Kelp is typically resilient while urchins "are pretty good at hunkering down" but both were hammered.

Effects on fish may take a while to show up. For instance, some grazing species may fare better than others depending on the mix of plant species that return.

A photograph taken on the foreshore of Kurnell after the big storm event, showing mass piles of exoskeletons of invertebrates deposited on the shore. Credit:The Abyss Project

The Abyss Project's report noted that "climate change will see an increase in the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events", but also worse droughts and bushfires.

"[O]ur observational and scientific data will provide a baseline for future researchers to enable these coastal environments to be protected for future generations," it said.

Professor Booth said those increasing climate stresses in the future could "just decouple everything" in the marine ecosystems around Sydney and beyond.

In wake of the recent destruction of aquatic life, the Berejiklian government should revisit plans for a Sydney Marine Park, he said.

The government ditched the plan in September 2018 - six months out from last year's state elections - even before the public consultation period had closed after complaints from anglers and others.

"It shouldn't have dropped off the agenda," Professor Booth said, adding the originally proposed marine park comprised 17 “sanctuary zones” covering just 2.4 per cent of the waters around Sydney.

Links
  • Estuaries warming and acidifying because of climate change, study finds
  • The early warning system being developed to shore up Australia's beaches
  • NSW Proposed Marine Sites (pdf)
  • Extreme Weather Caused By Climate Change Has Damaged 45% Of Australia’s Coastal Habitat
  • Sydney's Marine Life Turning Troppo As Coral, Other Species Head South
  • New Study Finds Climate Change Threatens Marine Protected Areas
  • Climate Change Could Drive Coastal Food Webs To Collapse
    • Posted by at No comments :
    Labels: , , , , ,

    Temperate Insects As Vulnerable To Climate Change As Tropical Species

    Phys.org - Uppsala University

    Credit: CC0 Public Domain

    In previous research, it has been assumed that insects in temperate regions would cope well with or even benefit from a warmer climate.

    Not so, according to researchers from the Universities of Uppsala and Lund in Sweden and Oviedo, Spain, in a new study.

    The earlier models failed to take into account the fact that insects in temperate habitats are inactive for much of the year.

    The research group's study, published in the journal Scientific Reports, presents new knowledge about the potential effects of global warming on insect populations. The results show that insects may be more threatened by than previous estimates have indicated.

    "Insects in might be as threatened by climate change as those in the tropics," says Uppsala University professor Frank Johansson.

    The researchers found new, disturbing patterns in a modified analysis of a previously used dataset on insects' critical temperature limits and their survival. Their conclusion is that temperate insects might be just as sensitive to climate change as tropical ones.

    The previous studies showed that tropical insects are severely threatened by climate change since they already live very close to their optimal temperature and 'critical thermal maximum.' However, the scientists responsible for those previous studies also assumed that temperate insects live far below their own optimal and maximum temperatures, and might therefore benefit from climate change.

    The problem is that the earlier studies used mean annual temperatures for all their estimates. In so doing, they failed to consider that the vast majority of insects in temperate latitudes remain inactive in cold periods—that is, for much of the year.

    When more biological details about the various insect species, and only the months in which the species are active, are entered in the models, the new estimates show that in temperate insects' habitats, too, the temperatures are close to the insects' optimal and critical maximum.

    This is because the average temperature for the months when the insects are active clearly exceeds the mean year-round temperature. Temperate insects are thus as vulnerable as tropical species to temperature increases.

    When the temperature is close to ' optimal or critical upper limit, there is a great risk of their numbers declining. The decreases in would also affect humans, since many insect species provide ecosystem services, such as pollination of fruit, vegetables and other plants we eat.

    Links
    Posted by at No comments :
    Labels: ,

    (AU) Top Super Funds Increasingly Vote Down Climate Resolutions

    Sydney Morning Herald - Charlotte Grieve

    Eight major super funds have been criticised for voting against the majority of shareholder proposals on climate change at recent annual general meetings despite being members of an investor group pushing for companies to take action on climate risks.

    AMP, AustralianSuper and First State Super are among the funds singled out in a report by the Australian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) for voting down more than half the climate-related shareholder proposals over the past three years.

    "The issue here is – is there a difference between what funds are telling their members and what they’re actually doing? If they’re saying they’re active owners and their voting behaviour says something different, that is a real concern," ACCR's climate director Dan Gocher said.

    The Australian Centre for Corporate Responsibility's research found super fund support for climate proposals had fallen last year. Credit : Wolter Peeters, The Age

    The Investor Group on Climate Change represents institutional investors that collectively manage more than $2 trillion and chief executive Emma Herd said shareholder resolutions are just one tool, alongside divestment and board-level pressure, used to drive corporate action on climate change.

    Investors are increasingly using their voting power to put emissions reductions targets on the agenda at annual general meetings. Woodside Petroleum was hit with a record-breaking investor push in April to slash emissions and link executive pay to reduction targets. In the same month, more than 43 per cent of shareholders at oil and gas giant Santos's AGM defied the board in a vote to set harder targets on carbon reductions.

    Shareholder resolutions are non-binding in Australia, although chief executive of the Australian Council of Superannuation Investors Louise Davidson said directors take protest votes seriously. "If you see those big votes on the day, they do lead to changes in behaviour," she said.

    The ACCR report examines publicly available voting records of Australia's 50 largest super funds that control a total of $1.8 trillion in assets. It found overall support for climate resolutions in 2019 was down, with AMP, MTAA and Media Super all supporting less than 10 per cent of proposals through the year.

    "It's pathetic, really. It really suggests they are not paying attention. If they are just following advice, perhaps they should be looking at the quality of this advice," Mr Gocher said.

    Institutional investors often rely on advice from proxy firms to guide voting decisions and Mr Gocher said in some cases, the funds simply agree with board recommendations.

    "The super fund industry generally has gotten so big, so they need to be more accountable. For these funds that are controlling tens of billions of dollars to not have a view or express that view is poor."

    At BHP's annual meeting last year, AustralianSuper, Unisuper and Mercer were the only three funds to vote against a resolution that asked the mining giant to exit memberships of lobby groups considered to undermine the Paris Agreement goals, according to the report.

    AustralianSuper's environmental, social and governance director Andrew Gray said the fund had engaged with BHP on the proposal and decided involvement with industry groups such as the Minerals Council was necessary to encourage emissions reductions.

    VicSuper was among four funds that supported more than 70 per cent of all climate-related proposals last year, including demanding Rio Tinto release a plan to transition away from fossil fuels. It also pushed insurer QBE for greater transparency on climate risks.

     This is in contrast to First State Super, which voted against 67 per cent of resolutions last year, according to the ACCR report. First State Super and VicSuper will merge at the end of this month to become the second-largest super fund in the country with about $120 billion in funds under management.

    The two funds clashed over Origin Energy's disclosure of coal-related public health risks, with VicSuper voting for more disclosure and First State voting against.

    A spokesperson speaking on behalf of the two funds said the merged groups would use First State Super's responsible investment policy but recent changes meant there would be greater alignment on voting.

    "Whilst both funds had different voting and engagement policies and procedures in place, we share very similar objectives and are absolutely committed to the important role that responsible investment plays in helping shape better outcomes for all our stakeholder."

    Unisuper, another member of IGCC, voted against more than half the climate-related shareholder proposals between 2017 and 2019. It comes as its sustainable fund has been criticised for holding a major stake in Rio Tinto following outrage over the blasting of a 46,000-year-old Aboriginal rock shelter site in Western Australia.

    A UniSuper spokeswoman said it had been discussing climate change with Australian companies for the past decade and considered shareholder proposals where material risks associated with climate change were not disclosed.

    Ms Davidson said measuring the number of shareholder resolutions approved by super funds was not indicative of their commitment to climate change as some proposals lacked merit.

    "Shareholder resolutions are quite a blunt instrument and in our view sometimes failure to support a shareholder resolution is because the resolution itself isn't too good," Ms Davidson said. "I genuinely believe super funds are more focused now on climate change than they ever have before and that is leading to change at companies.

    "Sometimes it is slower than everyone would like but at the same time change is happening."

    An AMP spokeswoman said the wealth manager held more than 80 company engagement meetings in 2019 over ESG issues, many about climate change and that it abstained from voting on resolutions that advocate for constitutional changes at companies.

    "There is no doubt that shareholder concerns around climate change are on the rise, both in Australia and abroad. We look forward to continuing our constructive engagement with companies as to how, collectively, we can meet these expectations into the future," the spokeswoman said.

    Links
    Posted by at No comments :
    Labels: , ,

    09/06/2020

    (AU) More Than A Third Of NSW Rainforests Found To Have Been Hit By Australian Bushfires

    The Guardian - 

    The updated assessment also shows the fire ground includes more than 3.5m hectares of the state’s best koala habitat

    The report also maps the relative severity of the fires based on how much of the tree canopy appears to have burnt. Photograph: Rob Blakers

    More than a third of New South Wales rainforest was among 5.4m hectares hit by last season’s catastrophic bushfires, according to new state government data.

    The report, an updated assessment of the effect of the fires on wildlife and landscapes, said 293 threatened animal species and 680 threatened plant species have habitat in the state’s fire ground. The affected area includes more than 3.5m hectares of the state’s best koala habitat.

    Almost six months on from the crisis, the impact of the fire season is only beginning to be understood.

    Recovery work has begun in some areas, while in others, the Covid-19 pandemic shut down early assessment work.

    The fire ground includes 245 of the state’s 878 national parks and 208 out of 522 state forests.

    The report maps the relative severity of the fires based on how much of the tree canopy appears to have burnt.

    The maps were produced using geospatial data and will be refined over time with more on ground assessment, a NSW environment department spokesperson said.

    Of the national parks in the fire ground, the analysis found 23% have had their canopy fully affected and 36% partially affected. In state forests, those figures are 17% and 32% respectively.

    The report rated the ecological condition of forests in the fire ground, which is a measure of the quality and the intactness of habitat compared to its original condition.

    Within the NSW RFS fire ground, 72% of the original ecological was estimated as remaining in 2013. In 2020, that figure has decreased to 44% the report states.

    The analysis also looked at the ability of these locations to support native species and ecosystems, what is known as “ecological carrying capacity”.

    It estimated that within the fire ground 62% of the original carrying capacity remained in 2013. That had now fallen to 38%.

    As well as 37% of rainforests being affected, other findings included:
    • 52% of all heathlands in NSW has been affected by fire.
    • 50% of wet sclerophyll forests has been affected.
    • 25% of the most suitable koala habitat in eastern NSW is in the RFS fire ground. That includes 68% of the best koala habitat on the south coast, 34% of the best koala habitat in the northern tablelands and 30% of the best koala habitat on the north coast.
    The report builds on earlier work which found vast areas of the Blue Mountains world heritage area and the Gondwana rainforests world heritage area were within the fire ground.

    John Merson, the executive director of the Blue Mountains World Heritage Institute, said although more than 80% of the world heritage area had burnt, it had not burnt uniformly or at the same intensity.

    He said there were areas of refuges, and recovery was occurring, but some critical ecosystems, including swamp communities that are important water resources had been affected on a large scale.

    Merson said surveys were occurring to examine not just the short term effects of the fires but what the longer term effect of climate change would be on the recovery, noting concern about fires returning with greater frequency.

    “I think we need a better understanding of how to protect this environment,” he said.

    In the state’s north, the botanist Robert Kooyman has been surveying areas of the Gondwana rainforests, including in the Nightcap national park.

    He said six months on there had been a significant resprouting in eucalypt forest and in the rainforest.

    But he said there was also a continuation of tree mortality.

    “Trees die slowly. There’s a continuing impact of the fires six months later,” Kooyman said.

    “The short story is there’s signs of life but the loss of large trees is something that doesn’t get replaced quickly.

    “We’re talking many decades and in some cases hundreds of years to replace that.”

    The department’s spokesperson said it was expected both the ecological condition and carrying capacity of the fire-affected areas would improve as areas regenerated.

    “This response will be captured in future assessments.”

    Links
    Posted by at No comments :
    Labels: , , ,
    Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )

    Lethal Heating is a citizens' initiative