19/10/2021

(AU The Conversation) Children Deserve Answers To Their Questions About Climate Change. Here’s How Universities Can Help

The Conversation -  | 

Brad Harris, Author provided (no reuse)
Authors
  •  is Research Fellow in Climate Change Communication, Climate Futures Program, University of Tasmania, and Lecturer in Communication - Journalism, Deakin University
  •  is Research Fellow, Geography, Planning and Spatial Sciences, University of Tasmania     
Our children are growing up in a volatile climate. It’s already damaging their health, wealth and well-being.

Universities can be leaders in helping young people gain the knowledge they need to navigate this uncertain future.

Curious Climate Schools, a project that connects young people directly with experts who can answer their climate questions, is a model for just this kind of leadership.

Universities across the globe come together this week to support climate action leadership in their communities as part of Global Climate Change Week.

In Tasmania, our Curious Climate Schools project has connected over 1,000 school students, aged 10-18, with 57 climate researchers from diverse disciplines to answer students’ questions.

Climate change will increasingly affect our children’s lives, even if we take the profound action needed this decade to avert the worst of it. Young people will need to be climate-literate for the world they are inheriting. Although learning about climate change is established as vital in enhancing understanding and action, climate literacy education is not mandated in the Australian Curriculum.

Our aim is to empower children to develop essential climate knowledge through student-led enquiry. Our experts’ answers to questions from schools across the state will be made public on the Curious Climate Schools website on November 1. This will coincide with the COP26 climate summit, connecting local and global climate leadership.

What do young people want to know?

Students have submitted questions to our project that range from the global to the local. Key themes in their questions included:
  • who is responsible?
  • how urgent is action?
  • how do we adapt and care for the planet and its future inhabitants?
  • why aren’t politicians listening?
The children had many queries about the science of climate change, but even more about our social and political responses. For example:
  • “I’m 13. What do you think climate change will alter about the world in my lifetime, and what can I do about it?”
  • “Does the climate crisis have the potential to unite humanity in response?”
  • “When it comes to future generations, how will they feel about what we have done?”
While children are interested in the physical science behind climate change, their questions show they are equally concerned with how we should act on climate as a society. This suggests that when climate change is taught in schools, it should be taught holistically.

While understanding the drivers of climate change is important, teaching must also address the social challenges we face and the decision-making processes this wicked problem demands.

A way to counter climate anxiety

The current silence on climate in schools’ teaching is bad for children’s mental health. Research has established that speaking about climate change is an important first step in easing legitimate climate anxiety. Education that enables students’ agency through climate literacy could reduce the mental health burden on young people.

We need climate-literate young people. Empowering them to talk about climate change could both improve their mental health and help to build the engaged citizenry and leadership we need to face the climate crisis.

Acknowledging that children have a stake in climate action and decision-making is vital. Without this, they feel disempowered and frustrated. We saw this in some of the questions submitted to Curious Climate Schools.
“Do you believe that we as the future leaders are being heard enough? For example, Scott Morrison or the other politicians, are they listening?”
Students wonder if Prime Minister Scott Morrison and other politicians are listening to their concerns. Lukas Coch/AAP

These students are our future leaders. They deserve to be heard.

A model for university climate leadership

Many universities are well equipped to address local climate challenges in partnership with their communities. Curious Climate Schools is an example of how universities can engage with the public to enhance climate knowledge and action.

Our project is harnessing the knowledge, care and enthusiasm of 57 experts. They work in a range of fields, including climate modelling, biodiversity conservation, pyrogeography, chemistry, law, social science, engineering, geology, oceanography, paleoclimatology, Indigenous knowledges and health.

The Curious Climate Schools website will equip students with holistic climate knowledge and help teachers to address a subject at the forefront of students’ minds – if not the Australian Curriculum.

With initiatives like Curious Climate Schools, universities can be leaders in climate action. In this decisive moment, it is crucial that we harness our collective talents in whatever ways we can to ensure a liveable world for our children.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , , ,

18/10/2021

(AU SMH) Joyce Weakens Morrison Before World Leaders Decide Their Pledges On Climate Change

 Sydney Morning Herald -  David Crowe

Barnaby Joyce has weakened Scott Morrison just two weeks before world leaders are due to meet in Glasgow to decide their pledges on climate change.

Joyce left the Prime Minister with little room to move on one of the key negotiations at the United Nations climate summit: the goal of making deeper cuts to emissions by 2030.

Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce addresses the media during a doorstop interview ahead of a Nationals party room meeting. Credit: Photo: Alex Ellinghausen





This is a win for the Nationals leader and Deputy Prime Minister but a loss for the wider government when it is trying to convince voters it is already ahead of its targets.

If, of course, Morrison lets Joyce call the shots.

Time and again, Morrison and his Liberal ministers have claimed they are on track to “meet and beat” the official policy of reducing emissions by 26 to 28 per cent by 2030 on 2005 levels.

Climate policy
Now, it looks like the Nationals and the Greens have at least one thing in common: they do not believe it.

An agreement on a long-term target, net zero emissions by 2050, is still within reach. About one-third of the Nationals party room appears to be dead against a federal cabinet decision to make this official government policy.

But the 2050 target has support in cabinet, in the Liberal Party room and probably enough support in the Nationals party room to be adopted within days.
This will be a win for Morrison, after a painfully slow shift in his thinking, but it is undercut by the loss on the interim target.

The problem? Just as Morrison catches up, other leaders jump ahead. The head of the Carbon Market Institute, John Connor, says an Australian pledge on net zero by 2050 is only the “entry ticket” to the Glasgow UN summit next month.

It is enough to get Morrison a place at the table but not enough to get him much credit. It is as if Joyce has allowed him the ticket to the dinner but not the voucher that guarantees a meal.

Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce will chair a Nationals party room meeting to decide their climate change policy.

United States President Joe Biden has set a target of 50 to 52 per cent by 2030. Japan is aiming for 46 per cent, while South Korea set a goal of 40 per cent earlier this month. The United Kingdom is aiming for 68 per cent. Some use different base years but all are more ambitious than Australia.

Joyce took his usual roundabout route to air his view on Sunday. He dismissed the idea of a bigger 2030 target by saying it was his opinion about the mood of the whole party room.

There is a chance he got it wrong, but his way of summing up the majority view may have effectively decided it.

This has divided ministers. Some like the idea of making a 2030 forecast rather than setting a new and formal target. Others believe this needs a pledge, not a prediction. The nuance is unlikely to impress anyone in Glasgow.

It may not impress the public, either. It reveals a lack of confidence in the “meet and beat” promise Morrison has made so often.

And if the government cannot be confident about its promises, why should voters?

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , , , ,

(AU The Conversation) What’s Behind News Corp’s New Spin On Climate Change?

The Conversation -

Justin Lane/EPA/AAP

Author
is Research Fellow in Climate Change Communication, Climate Futures Program, University of Tasmania, and Lecturer in Communication - Journalism, Deakin University
Australia’s Murdoch-owned tabloid newspapers – including The Daily Telegraph, Herald Sun and Courier Mail – have embarked on a bold new climate change campaign.

This climate rebrand, dubbed “missionzero2050”, is billed by the company as “putting Australia on a path to a net zero future”.

The change has surprised Australian media observers and, no doubt, media consumers given News Corp’s long-held climate denialist stance, which is well documented in public commentary and research.

So why is this happening now? And what does it mean?

What does the new campaign say?

Last Monday, News Corp’s tabloid mastheads began the new campaign with a 16-page wraparound supplement and a splashy online campaign championing the drive to cut climate warming emissions by 2050.

News Corp must have done its climate communication research. It has assembled a collection of stories using best-practice climate communication techniques: telling a global story with a local face, visualising climate impacts and focusing on solutions, not creating fear.

Crucially, the campaign marks a change from News Corp’s long-held position on climate action. It’s moved from calling decarbonisation too expensive and bad for jobs (it tagged the cost at A$600 billion in 2015), to describing it now as a potential $2.1 trillion economic “windfall”, offering opportunities for 672,000 new jobs.

News Corp and climate change

What News Corp does matters, because it has extensive influence in Australia’s media market.

The company’s newspaper, radio, pay TV and online news portfolio gives it significant audience reach and huge political sway. In April, former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull labelled the Murdoch media “the most powerful political actor in Australia”. Most people derive their understanding of climate change from the media. So News Corp’s audience reach (which included about 100 print and digital mastheads as of early 2021) has given it extensive influence over Australians’ knowledge of and opinions about climate change, profoundly shaping public debate.

Murdoch media outlets have denied the science of climate change and ridiculed climate action for more than a decade.

A 2013 study by the Australian Centre for Independent Journalism found climate denialist views in a third of Australian media coverage of climate change, and pointed to News Corp outlets as the key reason for this.

News Corp’s commentators have described those arguing for climate action as “alarmists” and “loons”, who are prone to “warming hysteria”. They have also said climate concern is a “cult of the elite” and the “effects of global warming have so far proved largely benign”.

Despite this, in 2019, Murdoch declared there were “no climate change deniers” in his company.

Signs of a mood shift

This pivot on climate change was not entirely unexpected.

The company had been signalling a mood shift since early 2020, in the wake of its controversial reporting on the Black Summer bushfires, which saw it accused of downplaying the fires and fuelling misinformation about the cause.

James Murdoch, pictured in 2015, has become a vocal critic of News Corp’s approach to climate. Sang Tan/AP/AAP

At that time, Rupert Murdoch’s son James expressed his concerns about the “ongoing denial” of climate change at News Corp in the face of “obvious evidence to the contrary”.

He subsequently resigned his position on the company’s board. Early last month, the Nine newspapers flagged an imminent change of stance on climate at News Corp, noting, “Rupert Murdoch’s global media empire has faced growing international condemnation and pressure from advertisers over its editorial stance on climate change”.

The fine print

Despite the gloss of missionzero2050 (the newspapers say they are only focusing on “positive stories” about creating “a clean future while having fun and feeling good at the same time”), a deeper analysis shows the campaign has some quite specific agendas, signalling its climate epiphany may be limited.

In the stories that make up the campaign, it is still rolling out business-as-usual narratives like:
  • defending Australia’s emissions as small compared to other countries, especially China (therefore suggesting we do not need to take drastic action)
  • framing renewables as an unreliable source of energy (so not an adequate replacement for fossil fuels)
  • promoting Australia’s coal as cleaner than other countries’ (some of it may be, but the International Energy Agency says the world must start quitting coal now to stay within safer global warming limits)
  • promoting gas as having half the emissions of coal (burning gas does emit less carbon dioxide, but its extraction also causes fugitive emissions of methane, a gas that’s about 30 times more powerful as a heat-trapping greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide over 100 years)
  • advocating carbon capture and storage (which is not yet a proven way to reduce emissions from burning fossil fuels)
  • criticising a carbon pollution price (economists widely agree this is the single most effective way to encourage polluters to reduce greenhouse gas emissons).
Surprisingly, the campaign is making a big effort to spruik nuclear power. It states: “our aversion to nuclear energy defies logic” and advocates strongly for an Australian nuclear industry for “national security” purposes as well as energy. Overall, the missionzero2050 agenda seems to be set on supporting new and existing extractive industries and Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s “gas-led recovery”.

Strangely, the campaign also emphasises “putting Australia first” – although efforts to deal with climate change must be inherently globally focused.

Loud silences

What’s most perverse, perhaps, about missionzero2050 are the things it does not say or acknowledge. There has been no mention of News Corp’s years of intentionally undermining decarbonisation and helping to topple Australian leaders who advocated for climate action. Oddly, News Corp has not muzzled its high-profile commentators. Columnist Andrew Bolt was quick to make it known that he thought the campaign was “rubbish”.

Nor has it aligned its advertising with the missionzero2050 message. For example, last Wednesday, the Herald Sun ran a half-page ad placed by the climate “sceptical” Climate Study Group about the “great climate change furphy,” discrediting climate science and advocating for more coal and nuclear power.

What might it mean?

The timing of the campaign, just as Morrison negotiates with the Nationals ahead of the COP26 climate conference, is likely to be no coincidence. It seems designed to provide cover for a potential shift on the part of the Coalition towards a mid-century net zero declaration.

Morrison is also under intense pressure from other world leaders to lift his ambitions on climate. He’ll be expected to bring new plans for emissions cuts to the table in Glasgow.

Some commentators have labelled the Murdoch pivot “greenwashing”. Others have called it a “desperate ploy to rehabilitate the public image of a leading climate villain”.

However perplexing the Murdoch papers’ climate U-turn may seem, at least Morrison will know Australia’s “most powerful political actor” is not likely to campaign against any 2050 net zero declaration.

Given News Corp’s power to subvert the national narrative on climate, that’s important if we want to see the action that’s so long overdue.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , ,

17/10/2021

(Salon) We Now Know How Badly Our Cities Will Be Flooded Due To Climate Change

Salon - Matthew Rozsa

Even if carbon emissions are curbed today, hundreds of millions will be displaced as vulnerable cities see flooding
A vehicle passes through a flooded street. All the major roads are flooded after the heavy rain during monsoon at Kolkata, West Bengal, India (Dibakar Roy/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)

When it comes to climate change, the point of no return has already passed.

That is the message of a new report published in the esteemed scientific journal Environmental Research Letters.

It paints a picture of a future Earth in which, regardless of actions taken today, hundreds of millions of people will be displaced from their homes by rising sea levels. The carbon dioxide emissions already released into our atmosphere will linger for hundreds of years, warming the oceans and thus causing sea levels to rise. The only question now is whether the damage can be limited.

The answer, according to the report, is yes — but humans will need to take specific, drastic actions as soon as possible.

"Meeting the most ambitious goals of the Paris Climate Agreement will likely reduce exposure by roughly half and may avoid globally unprecedented defense requirements for any coastal megacity exceeding a contemporary population of 10 million," the authors write. (The report was co-written by Benjamin H. Strauss and Scott A. Kulp of Climate Central, DJ Rasmussen of Princeton University and German scientist Ander Levermann.)

The long-term goal of the Paris Agreement is to limit the mean increase in global temperatures to no more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Even if that happens, however, oceans will continue to swell, meaning there will be millions upon millions of drenched city dwellers.

"Roughly 5 percent of the world's population today live on land below where the high tide level is expected to rise based on carbon dioxide that human activity has already added to the atmosphere," Strauss told AFP. With roughly 7.8 billion human beings alive today, this means approximately 390 million currently live on land that will be under the high tide level as a result of climate change.

That said, reducing the temperature rise is crucial, experts say. If Earth's average temperature increases by even half a degree Celsius, an extra 200 million people will be vulnerable to the effects of sea level rise and increased storm surges. Each successive degree only increases the damage, as sea levels progressively rise and thereby displace more people.

In the report, the scientists offer detailed projections for the 20 most-affected large countries (those with at least 25 million people) in terms of the percentages of their populations that currently occupy land below high tide lines based on different warming scenarios.

If the planet merely warms by 1.5°C, 2.8 percent of the population of the United States could be directly impacted. Increase that by half a degree, and suddenly 5.9 percent of Americans could deal with rising sea levels. If it goes up by 3°C or 4°C, 7.9 percent or 9.9 percent of the American population could see rising sea levels where they live.

Things will be particularly bad in New York City, where officials are already considering sea walls and other measures to fortify its population against rising sea levels. Even under the most ambitious Paris Agreement target, land will fall under the high tide line that is currently home to 6.7 percent of the population. At 2°C, that rises to 13 percent; at 3°C, it reaches 19 percent; and at 4°C, it hits 28 percent.

The most vulnerable region, however, is Asia. Nine of the ten megacities at the highest risk are on that continent, and many of the countries with the starkest projections are also located there.

The jump from 1.5°C to 2°C makes the difference, in Vietnam and Bangladesh, between more or less than half of their total populations living below the high tide line.

If the planet's temperature rises to 4°C above pre-industrial levels, more than 60 percent of those nations' populations could fall below the high tide line.

More than 30 percent of the populations of Egypt, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Japan and Myanmar would also suffer that fate in a scenario where the temperature rises by more than 4°C.

Climate Central has also released visual illustrations of how prominent American landmarks will look after sea level rises. Almost all of the land around the Statue of Liberty National Monument will be submerged, as will the area surrounding Space Center Houston.

Yet these and other major landmarks would almost certainly have to be abandoned long before sea levels rose that high, as there will be an increase in heavy rainfalls and storm surges.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , ,

(NYT) The Most Important Global Meeting You’ve Probably Never Heard Of Is Now

New York Times - Catrin Einhorn

Countries are gathering in an effort to stop a biodiversity collapse that scientists say could equal climate change as an existential crisis.

Credit...Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

As 20,000 government leaders, journalists, activists and celebrities from around the world prepare to descend on Glasgow for a crucial climate summit starting late this month, another high-level international environmental meeting got started this week.

The problem it seeks to tackle: A rapid collapse of species and systems that collectively sustain life on earth.

The stakes at the two meetings are equally high, many leading scientists say, but the biodiversity crisis has received far less attention.

“If the global community continues to see it as a side event, and they continue thinking that climate change is now the thing to really listen to, by the time they wake up on biodiversity it might be too late,” said Francis Ogwal, one of the leaders of the working group charged with shaping an agreement among nations.

Because climate change and biodiversity loss are intertwined, with the potential for both win-win solutions and vicious cycles of destruction, they must be addressed together, scientists say. But their global summits are separate, and one overshadows the other.

“Awareness is not yet where it should be,” said Hans-Otto Pörtner, a biologist and climate researcher who has helped lead international research into both issues. He calls them “the two existential crises that humankind has elicited on the planet.”

Why biodiversity matters

Apart from any moral reasons for humans to care about the other species on Earth, there are practical ones. At the most basic level, people rely on nature for their survival.

“The diversity of all of the plants and all of the animals, they actually make the planet function,” said Anne Larigauderie, an ecologist who directs a leading intergovernmental panel on biodiversity. “They ensure that we have oxygen in the air, that we have fertile soils.”

Lose too many players in an ecosystem, and it will stop working. The average abundance of native species in most major terrestrial biomes has fallen by at least 20 percent, mostly since 1900, according to a major report on the state of the world’s biodiversity published by Dr. Larigauderie’s panel, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. An estimated million species are threatened with extinction, it found.

Credit...Galih/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Climate change is only one driver of biodiversity loss. For now, the major culprit on land is humans destroying habitat through activities like farming, mining and logging. At sea, it’s overfishing. Other causes include pollution and introduced species that drive out native ones.

“When you have two concurrent existential crises, you don’t get to pick only one to focus on — you must address both no matter how challenging,” said Brian O’Donnell, director of the Campaign for Nature, an advocacy group. “This is the equivalent of having a flat tire and a dead battery in your car at the same time. You’re still stuck if you only fix one.”

How it works

This week, environment officials, diplomats and other observers from around the world gathered online, and a small group assembled in person in Kunming, China, for the meeting, the 15th United Nations biodiversity conference.

The United States is the only country in the world besides the Vatican that is not a party to the underlying treaty, the Convention on Biological Diversity, a situation largely attributed to Republican opposition. American representatives participate on the sidelines of the talks, as do scientists and environmental advocates.

Because of the pandemic, the conference has been broken into two parts. While this virtual portion was largely about drumming up political will, nations will meet again in China in the spring to ratify a series of targets aimed at tackling biodiversity loss. The aim will be to adopt a pact for nature akin to the Paris Agreement on climate change, said Elizabeth Maruma Mrema, the executive secretary of the convention.

Last year, officials reported that the world’s nations largely failed to achieve the targets of the previous global agreement on biodiversity, made in 2010.

If the new commitments are not translated into “effective policies and concrete actions,” Ms. Mrema said this week at the meeting, “we risk repeating the failures of the last decade.”

What’s next

The working draft includes 21 targets that act as a blueprint for reducing biodiversity loss. Many are concrete and measurable, others more abstract. None are easy. They include, in summary:
  • Create a plan, across the entire land and waters of each country, to make the best decisions about where to conduct activities like farming and mining while also retaining intact areas.
  • Ensure that wild species are hunted and fished sustainably and safely.
  • Reduce agricultural runoff, pesticides and plastic pollution.
  • Use ecosystems to limit climate change by storing planet-warming carbon in nature.
  • Reduce subsidies and other financial programs that harm biodiversity by at least $500 billion per year, the estimated amount that governments spend supporting fossil fuels and potentially damaging agricultural practices.
  • Safeguard at least 30 percent of the planet’s land and oceans by 2030.
A turtle that became caught in a fisherman’s net was released into the Watamu National Marine Park in Kenya last month. Credit...Brian Inganga/Associated Press
In the lead-up to the conference, that last measure, pushed by environmentalists and a growing number of nations, has received the most attention and resources. Last month, nine philanthropic groups donated $5 billion to the effort, known as 30x30.

“It’s catchy,” said E.O. Wilson, an influential biologist and professor emeritus at Harvard University. He said he hoped 30x30 would be a step on the way to one day conserving half of the planet for nature.

Indigenous groups have watched with hope and worry. Some welcome the expansion, calling for a higher number than 30 percent, while others fear that they will lose the use of their lands, as has happened historically in many areas set aside for conservation.

The debate underscores a central tension coursing through the biodiversity negotiations.

“If this becomes a purely conservation plan for nature, this is going to fail,” said Basile van Havre, a leader, with Mr. Ogwal, of one of the convention’s working groups. “What we need is a plan for nature and people.”

With the global human population still increasing, scientists say that transformational change is required for the planet to be able to sustain us.

“We actually need to see every human endeavor, if you will, through the lens of biodiversity and nature,” Dr. Larigauderie said. Since everyone depends on nature, she noted, “everyone is part of the solution.”

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , ,

(AU The Guardian) ‘We All Have A Role’: More Than 260 Australian Rules Footballers Sign Up To Climate Campaign

The Guardian - 
‘I’m not a scientist, but I listen to the climate experts and they’re telling us we need to act now.’ North’s Tom Campbell helped launch AFL Players For Climate Action. Photograph: Graham Denholm/Getty Images
Australian rules footballers have come together to tackle the climate crisis with more than 260 players from the men’s and women’s competitions signing up to the newly formed AFL Players For Climate Action group.

The group is thought to be the largest from any single Australian professional sporting code – all of which leave heavy carbon footprints due to the regular and extensive travel involved – to collectively put their names to a climate campaign.

North Melbourne’s Tom Campbell and retired Kangaroos and Port Adelaide player Jasper Pittard on Sunday launched the initiative, which includes recent AFL premiership winner Ben Brown and other high-profile players such as Dyson Heppell, Jordan Roughead and Luke Parker, along with AFLW stars Daisy Pearce, Erin Phillips and Darcy Vescio.

The group aims to provide players with guidance on how to reduce their individual impact on the environment by reducing their emissions, as well as using their profiles to build support for greater climate action from clubs and fans.

The AFL said it “fully supports” the initiative, but initially there will be no official involvement from the league or its clubs. The next step for the group is to begin conversations with clubs and encourage change in the way they build infrastructure and travel. There will also be a push to use more renewable energy and cut down on waste.

A recent survey of 580 AFL and AFLW players suggested 92% were concerned about climate change but most were unsure how they could be part of the solution. AFL Players For Climate Action aims to provide players with credible information from experts in an attempt to effect change.

The idea was born out of conversations between Campbell and Pittard when they had time to research and educate themselves while stuck in the AFL’s Queensland Covid bubble last season. Prompted by Australia’s catastrophic bushfires in the summer of 2019-20, the pair engaged teammates in discussions about how climate change was worsening extreme weather events.

Campbell and Pittard found their views struck a chord with a number of players and vowed to do something about it.

“Talking to other players and others about climate I can really see the passion come out – people care about each other and the places we love, and they want to be a part of the solution. It’s just hard to know where to start,” Pittard said.

“Being involved in footy since I was a young kid, I know the power of teamwork and the importance of having a strong collective voice. I believe the opportunity to leverage our platform as current and former AFL players to help normalise climate action in this country is important. People listen to what athletes have to say.”

The latest assessment by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published in August found human activities were unequivocally heating the planet and causing changes not seen for centuries and in some cases thousands of years.

“You don’t have to look far to see the devastation climate change is having on Australians, and our sport, including the impacts of extreme weather events,” Campbell said. “I’m not a scientist, but I listen to the climate experts and they’re telling us we need to act now to tackle global warming. We all have a role to play.”

Carlton star Vescio, who was the AFLW’s leading goalkicker in 2017 and 2021, said she was looking forward to joining up with like-minded players to use their high-profile platforms to speak to fans of the game, clubs and the league.

“Things are changing really quickly and it’s scary,” she said. “Global warming and worsening extreme weather can be hard to deal with, so for a long time I haven’t engaged in the conversation. But now it’s urgent and scientists and experts say we need to take action.”

Changes in the world’s climate is “Australia’s big elephant in the room”, said another member of the group, Sydney Swans’ Tom Hickey.

“Our government doesn’t want to talk about it,” he said.

“As sportspeople we have a platform where we can talk about things we are passionate about and encourage the conversation. Climate activism is essentially about just giving a shit. Giving a shit about the world we live in and the creatures on it. Wanting to protect the natural world. Climate change will affect all of us so it seems like it’s an important thing to care about and we need to take urgent action.”

An AFL spokesperson said many clubs and stadia were already engaged in actioning initiatives on climate change and the league was working through next steps on how the football industry as a whole could make contributions to environmental sustainability.

An “overwhelming majority” of members of the players’ union, the AFLPA, also support the initiative, which has prompted a review of its own workplace processes “to see how we can do better”, the organisation’s chief executive, Paul Marsh, said.

A number of members are already involved in a wider sporting scheme headed by the Wallabies great David Pocock and signatories of an open letter to the federal government calling for cuts to Australia’s emissions by at least half by 2030 and net zero before 2050.

“Australia has a huge opportunity to be world leaders in the clean energy transformation – just look at our renewable energy resources,” Pittard said. “We want to be part of the winning team that helps to make this happen and helps safeguard the future of the people, the places and the sports we love.”

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , ,

16/10/2021

(ABC) Times Square Billboard Ads Shame Australia's Climate Change Policies

ABC News

Australian comedian Dan Ilic raised the money through a crowdfunding campaign. (AP:  Mary Altaffer)

Key Points
  • Comic Dan Ilic raised $14,000 for the slot
  • Scott Morrison will attend the COP26 climate summit next month
  • Ilic told CNN: "We have to lead our leaders"
With Prime Minister Scott Morrison bound for Glasgow for next month's COP26 climate summit of world leaders, Australian comic Dan Ilic took the opportunity to highlight the federal government's contentious environmental policies.

In a post on crowdfunding website Indiegogo, Ilic, who refers to himself as an "investigative humourist",  asked fans for "financial support to do something silly".

Ilic originally planned to buy advertising space in the Scottish city during the conference hosted by the United Nations.

The images appear in Times Square for 10 minutes. (Supplied)

But when his crowdfunding campaign rocketed to $14,000, his budget suddenly allowed for a slightly higher-profile space: the biggest billboard in Times Square.

Images displayed during the 10-minute slot on Thursday (local time) included slogans such as "Cuddle a koala (Before we make them extinct)".

One ad referred to the PM as Coal-o-phile Dundee, while another contained an open letter to the world:
"Dear World, … yeah, look … sorry about our government bullsh**ing you about our emissions targets. Kind regards, People of Australia."
The federal government has not committed to net zero emissions by 2050, amid tensions between the Liberal and Nationals arms of the Coalition.

The stunt got plenty of traction on social media, with supporters like Australian actor Russell Crowe sharing the exploits.
In an interview with CNN, Ilic criticised Mr Morrison for "running away from a crisis".

"This is what we have to do in this country, we have to drag our leaders to lead us," he said.

"We have to lead our leaders, because our leaders don’t work for us, they work for the fossil fuel companies." 

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

Lethal Heating is a citizens' initiative