What 90,000 Indigenous People Have To Say About Climate Change

Fusion - Ari Phillips

Getty Images

A new study attempts to inject some anecdotal heft into the science of climate change by collecting observations from more than 90,000 people that historically depended on nature for their traditional way of life.
Six researchers from Simon Fraser University in British Columbia gathered over 10,000 observations from 137 countries, primarily in places like Central Africa, Central America, and the Himalayas where climate records are sparse and not well documented. In doing so the study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, attempts to help fill gaps in the climate record where instrumental data is not available as well as to corroborate existing records.
After sorting through all the observations, which were collated from around 1,000 studies, what the researchers found was largely consistent with climate models predicting changes in temperature and rainfall due to human-caused global warming.
Lead author Valentina Savo told Fusion that there were many similarities among changes across the globe, such as descriptions of patchy or irregular rainfall in several distant locations.

In several areas people were observing climatic phenomena that never happened before.

"It was also interesting to note that in several areas people were observing climatic phenomena that never happened before, such as hail," she said.
Savo said it's important to remember that the observations are just reports of changes, not attributions to climate change.
"People know if their crops are failing because of drought or the delayed rains," she said. "Then if they believe that climate change, god, bad luck, or whatever are responsible for the alterations of rain patterns that does not change the fact that they do not have their rains and crops."
Savo said that while many of the observations matched empirical data used in climate models, there are "also places where people's observations and other sources of data don't match and these are interesting places to go and better understand what is really going on."

We think about climate change as something that you graph or something that happens in the Arctic, but these are the experiences of real people seeing changes firsthand.

Overall, about 70% of the participating communities reported observing changes in the timing and nature of seasons, rainfall, and temperature in a manner that affects critical elements of their livelihood such as fishing, hunting, food gathering, and crop growing.
The study's authors note the significance of the "secondary impacts" of climate change, such as the challenge of producing food in a changing environment, calling these impacts "extensive" and threatening to both wild and domesticated plants and animals.
"Collectively, our results suggest that climate change is having profound disruptive effects at local levels and that local observations can make an important contribution to understanding the pervasiveness of climate change on ecosystems and societies," state the authors.
According to the study, documenting human observations is important because it's a better way to integrate climactic changes with their social and environmental consequences by incorporating the local impacts. Global models, on the other hand, identify broad patterns and physical processes rather than social impacts. By focusing on human observation, poorly understood but important climate-related phenomena such as changing animal migration patterns or pest distribution and abundance could be more effectively analyzed.
"We think about climate change as something that you graph or something that happens in the Arctic, but these are the experiences of real people seeing changes firsthand," Savo told the Vancouver Sun. "It's not theoretical. When the timing changes about when to plant and harvest, where rainfall is now concentrated and intense, it's very disruptive."
In one example of these climactic shifts influencing a local and longstanding culture, Sami herders in Sweden said they're abandoning traditional ways of life that revolved around ice formation and other regular weather conditions that are no longer dependable.
In another example, the Obama administration recently declared the Marshall Islands to be experiencing a disaster due to the ongoing severe drought crippling the remote island nation that is also threatened by sea level rise. The declaration allows the U.S. government to fund emergency relief and reconstruction on the archipelago, a request made by Marshallese president Hilda Heine on April 1.
According to the Canadian study, people around the world react to climate-induced changes in a variety of different ways, such as shifting cultural practices, migrating, or fighting over limited resources. Better understanding these ongoing causes and effects helps policymakers create more nuanced solutions that in turn better equip local communities to deal with the impacts.
And these impacts could be devastating in scope. A recent World Bank report estimated that climate change could push more than 100 million people back into poverty by 2030, with Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia being hit the hardest. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, climate change will make food and water security a lot more challenging for millions of people, often forcing them to relocate.
"Such moves, or the adverse effects that climate change may have on natural resources, may spark conflict with other communities, as an increasing number of people compete for a decreasing amount of resources," states the UNHCR.

Links

• The epic carbon venting 56 million years ago was 10 times slower than today
• Watching the seas rise: The new Jason-3 satellite is busy mapping the oceans
• Eight Kids Just Won a Lawsuit Forcing Their State to Create New Climate Change Rules

Time To End The Fossil Fuel Gravy Train

Huffington Post - Cam Klose & Charlie Wood, 350.org Australia



Australia's fossil fuel industry has suffered vast losses in public and corporate support, its destructive activities rightfully condemned by the community. Yet, despite this, the Federal Government - the same one that has repeatedly called for an end to the 'age of entitlement' - continues to prop up this polluting and, increasingly, economically unviable industry.
With the Federal Budget due to be released on Tuesday and the election set for July, the coming weeks will shed some light on the positions of both major parties in regards to the fossil fuel industry, and whether they are willing to break free from its dirty and corrupting influence.
Unfortunately, the signs are not looking great.
We know that mining for coal, oil and gas across Australia is destroying local communities, particularly indigenous communities.
Australians from the Hunter Valley, the Pilliga, the Darling Downs and along the Reef Coast in Queensland have seen the country they love dug up, poisoned, and left tarnished by the ugliness of such industries. All the while compromising the health of residents, before being abandoned once the resources are gone.
Once a small but vocal minority of people speaking out against mining corporations, the actions of these communities have now become a veritable and diverse movement of people. They are united by their anger and frustration at the injustice brought upon them by the fossil fuel industry with their Government's complicity.
People are rightly asking: why are governments putting the destructive fossil fuel sector above communities? And they are pressing on the big question: why, when we know what climate devastation fossil fuels bring, are will still digging them up, exporting them, and burning them at record levels?
Currently, it seems that neither of the major political parties have the backbone to stand up to an industry that flows rivers of gold into their coffers.
And therein lies the problem.
Next week the Government will hand down its third budget, crucial in the context of the upcoming election.
Budgets are often portrayed as mere fiscal documents that outline the health of an economy by reporting on revenue and spending, which distills into the ever-pursued surplus or the loathsome deficit. In reality however, budgets are political manifestos that embody the ideologies, values and priorities of a government, indicated by how funds are accrued and allocated.
As a signatory to the recent Paris Accord, the Australian Government has a responsibility to take meaningful action on climate change. We are currently run by a Government of mainly-white-men Government, who are pretending climate change doesn't exist and have no vision. Leaving us adrift without a meaningful climate policy and no vision to tackle the greatest challenge of our generation.
The Government currently spends billions of public dollars every year subsidising fossil fuel mining in Australia. It is confounding to consider that so much taxpayers' money is handed over to multinational corporations so they may further pollute our environment.
In this profoundly undemocratic arrangement, public money paid in subsidies directly funds the destruction of communities, farmland and scarce water supplies. Meanwhile, polling shows that the majority of Australians want this fossil fuel gravy train halted and for the country to transition to a completely renewable energy future.
Right now, there is unprecedented energy and desire among the community to put a stop to the folly of the Government.
Next weekend, thousands of Australians will risk arrest and fines by peacefully protesting at the world's largest coal port in Newcastle as part of Break Free From Fossil Fuels, the largest ever global movement of actions to shut down the world's most dangerous fossil fuel projects.
By putting their bodies on the line to stop the export of dangerous coal, these brave community members hailing from all walks of life will demonstrate to our Government that they want to see an end to fossil fuels and a transition to a clean energy future. Farmers, grandparents, pacific islanders, faith leaders, business people and politicians will stand side by side to create a strong, united voice to deliver this message.
Australia is proving to be an embarrassment and a laggard in the global fight against climate. As our governments continue to pander to their small coterie of fossil fuel donors facilitate them to extract coal, oil and gas to export, the rest of the world is moving away from the dirty energy of centuries passed: aware that the only way to avoid dangerous global warming is to keep fossil fuels in the ground.
In the face of such enormous challenges, the sad truth is that we cannot look to our political leaders for guidance on this issue; the influence of fossil fuel lobby groups over both parties is too strong.
The Coalition will continue to prop up the dying industry with subsidies, wedded to the dirty donations. Meanwhile, the ALP does not provide a viable alternative as it, too, is too compromised to take the necessary action to keep fossil fuels in the ground. The climate policy released by Labor this week kind of ignores the biggest contributing activity to climate change: the extraction, export and combustion of fossil fuels.
On closer inspection, however, we can find leadership on climate change all around us. We can look to the leadership of the traditional owners suing multinational mining corporation Adani for breach of native title. We can look to the leadership of Victorian town of Yackandandah, which has pledged to transition to a 100% renewable energy source, or to that of the 20 Australian local councils that have sworn off fossil fuels.
While we may not be able to rely on our Government, we can take heart from these inspiring grassroots actions. Australians are participating in a global movement that is gaining momentum: that of ordinary people taking a stand against powerful corporations and government corruption to demand that our land, resources and communities be protected from harmful climate change.
As in all struggles for justice, activists must force the reluctant ruling class to respond, as power and profit are never given up freely.
The May budget might not be cause to celebrate, but the real power is bubbling beneath the surface, and the voice of the people is only becoming stronger.

Phasing Out Fossil Fuels For Renewables May Not Be A Straightforward Swap

The Conversation - Anthony James | Josh Floyd*

Despite the benefits of going renewable, it may be harder to get there than we thought. Indigo Skies Photography/Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND

To have any chance of preventing dangerous climate change, the world needs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero or even negative by mid-century. Many experts suggest this means we need to completely phase out fossil fuels and replace them with renewable energy sources such as solar and wind.
Several studies have concluded that 100% renewable energy supply systems are technically and economically feasible. This informs the widespread view that fossil fuels can be more or less "swapped out" for renewables, without significant economic consequences.
We are strongly sympathetic to the need for a rapid global shift away from fossil fuels. But new modelling conducted independently and made publicly available by my colleague at the Understandascope, Josh Floyd, suggests that such a transition may face significant challenges.

Future energy
Analyses of how to get to 100% renewable energy typically look at how future energy sources can supply enough energy to meet a given future demand.
This is what's known as an "energy balance". The high-quality work of Mark Diesendorf and his colleagues on the transition of Australia's electricity supply to 100% renewables typifies such modelling.
But this approach doesn't tell us what will happen to overall energy supply during the transition.
This new modelling suggests a significant decline in availability of overall energy services during the transition phase. This reflects the increased energy demand associated with the transition task itself.
Such an energy "trough" would significantly impact the economy during the transition. This has flow-on consequences for how to maintain the massive renewables roll-out.

What are net energy services?
To investigate what might happen to energy availability during transition, the model looks at "net energy services" at a global scale.
Net energy services are the total work and heat that energy sources – for instance solar photovoltaic (PV) systems or petroleum – make available to end users, minus the energy services required to provide that supply.
Petroleum requires energy services to find, produce, transport and refine it. Solar PV systems require energy services for mining raw materials, manufacturing, installation, replacement and so on. The net services are what remains available for all other purposes, such as heating buildings and moving goods and people.
A rapid, large-scale energy transition creates extra demands for energy services. This demand will compete with other economic activity.

The speed of transition matters
To start with, the model assumes that fossil fuels are phased out over about 50 years. Biomass, hydro and nuclear contributions are assumed roughly to double.
The model then attempts to maintain the net energy services to the global economy at the maximum level before the fossil fuel phase-out. To do this it uses electricity from onshore wind turbines and large-scale solar PV plants, buffered with lithium ion batteries.
The findings show that the faster the transition rate, the greater the energy services required by the transition task, and the lower the services available for other uses.
This is because of the time lag between energy investments and returns. It is exacerbated for sources where up-front energy investment is a relatively high proportion of the total life cycle, particularly so for solar PV.
A 50-year fossil-fuel phase-out represents a relatively modest transition rate. Even so, in the model's baseline scenario, net energy services decline during that transition period by more than 15% before recovering.
And that recovery is not certain. The model doesn't consider how this decline in energy services might affect the transition effort. If less energy services are available, then energy transition will come at the expense of other economic activity. That may impact the collective will to continue.

The cost of transition
In the model's baseline scenario – phasing out fossil fuels over 50 years – wind and solar plants need to be installed at eight to ten times current rates by 2035.
Financially, this corresponds with capital investment in wind and solar PV plants plus batteries of around US$3 trillion per year (in 2015 dollars) and average lifetime capital cost in the order of US$5 trillion to US$6 trillion per year.
For comparison, in 2014 the International Energy Agency forecast global investment for all energy supply in 2035 at US$2 trillion per year.
This implies that total expenditure on energy supply will increase its share of world spending, reducing scope for other expenditure. Compounding the decline in energy services during transition, this has potential to apply contractionary pressure to the global economy. This has implications in turn for financing and maintaining the political will for the renewables rollout.
What if it were possible to roll out renewables even faster? This could reduce the depth and duration of the decline, but not eliminate it. Again, due to the time lags involved, accelerating deployment in the short term takes energy services away, rather than adding them.

What does this mean?
Of course, this is "just" modelling. But good models can tell us a lot about the real world. If this modelling is right, and energy services fall and costs rise, we'll have to complement building cleaner energy supply with other approaches.
The other key aspect of transition that we have control over is how much energy we expect to use. Usually discussions of transition focus on maintaining energy supply sufficient for a growing economy much like we see today – just with "clean" energy. But this is changing.
Growing numbers of analysts, business leaders and other prominent figures are calling for broader cultural change, as it becomes clearer that technological change alone is not enough to avoid climate catastrophe and myriad other consequences of energy-intensive consumer societies.
This is about more than efficiency. It is about a shift in our collective priorities and how we define progress, wellbeing and quality of living. Reducing energy demand within these redefined aspirations will markedly improve our prospects for successful transition.

*This article was co-authored by Josh Floyd, advisor on energy, systems and societal futures at independent research and education organisation the Understandascope, and founding partner of the Centre for Australian Foresight.

Links

• Newsflash: solar power costs are falling below fossil fuels
• Explainer: what is photovoltaic solar energy?
• Baseload power is a myth: even intermittent renewables will work
• Solar power can bring a bright energy future – even in the UK

Federal Election 2016: Labor's Billion-Dollar Hole In Renewable Energy Funding

Fairfax - Peter Hannam

Labor faces "a litmus test" of its support of renewable energy after it emerged that a Shorten government would book $1 billion of the savings cut from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency by the Coalition.
The Abbott government's 2014 budget cut $1.3 billion from the agency's funding but its subsequent attempts to axe ARENA failed in the Senate.

The outlook for Australia's support for renewable energy remains unclear. Photo: Bloomberg

Last month, the Turnbull government pledged to spare ARENA but would end its ability to make grants to develop new renewable energy. However, until its act is amended by parliament, ARENA's remaining funding profile - including almost $57 million in 2016-17 - remains intact.
Under Labor's election policies on climate action released last week, it promised to spend $206.6 million over four years on emerging concentrated solar thermal technology that uses mirrors or lenses to focus energy and boost electricity output. It also promised $98.7 million for community power networks.
Mark Butler, shadow environment minister, declined to say whether Labor would support or introduce legislation amending ARENA to lock in the $1 billion cut.

Ivor Frischknecht (right), head of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, at a launch last year of a study into using batteries to bolster solar power. Photo: Jay Cronan

"Any legislation required to enable the Prime Ministers'  cuts to ARENA is an issue at this stage for the government," Mr Butler told Fairfax Media.
Mr Butler implied more outspoken criticism to Turnbull's plan for ARENA - to retain ARENA but mainly to administer $100 million in annual loans - might have helped his argument within shadow cabinet to keep more funding.
"We were very surprised by the supportive noises from ARENA and the broader sector when this change to ARENA's role and the cut to ARENA's funding was announced, he said.

Mark Butler, Labor's shadow environment spokesman. Photo: Andrew Meares

Groups, such as the Australian Conservation Foundation, welcomed aspects of the government's plan while saying they were "disappointed" by the end of grant funding by ARENA. However, John Grimes, head of lobby group Australian Solar Council, said Labor was "trying to squib it".
"The irony is that it will be a Labor government, if it has the majority, that would give life to the attacks on  ARENA from the Abbott and Turnbull governments," he said. "This is a litmus test of the conviction of the Labor Party on this issue."
The Greens said Labor's reduced ARENA support was "deeply concerning", adding it would "fight tooth and nail" to stop both major parties' cuts.
"It's appalling that either the Coalition or Labor would propose ripping over $1 billion from clean energy research and innovation, right when the rest of the world is surging ahead, and when clean energy promises to create thousands of jobs," said Greens deputy leader Larissa Waters.
ARENA funding underpins key research programs such as new solar cells being developed by the University of NSW that use relatively abundant elements to generate electricity.

PM Malcolm Turnbull and Environment Minister Greg Hunt at the launch of the Clean Energy Innovation Fund in March. Photo: Don Arnold, Getty

ARENA's new board met for the first time last Wednesday and is understood to have sought clarification about the absent funds in Labor's platform.
Until the act is amended, the board must pursue the "true and proper purpose" of its establishment by the Labor Gillard government to increase the supply of renewables and assume its $1.3 billion remains, said former ARENA chairman, Greg Bourne.
"All governments signal their will but not all governments get their way," Mr Bourne said.
Labor's election plan attacked the Turnbull government for removing ARENA's grant funding "to support the next big idea". It also pledged to work with the new board based on the agency's "original intent".
The Turnbull government says ARENA will have $130 million to offer grants, although $100 million is already earmarked for large-scale solar plants.
Under the Coalition's proposed Clean Energy Innovation Fund, projects would need to repay loans carrying an interest rate 1 per cent above the government's long-term borrowing rate.
As reported by Fairfax Media, the move prompted more than 60 leading scientists to write to the PM decrying the government's decision last month to end grants from ARENA.
Kane Thornton, head of the Clean Energy Council, said it was "critical" that ARENA and its partner body, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation "continue in the future with the necessary capability and funding in the form of debt, equity and capital grants for a range of exciting new technologies".

Links

• Labor's climate plans
• UNSW students create solar cells
• Perilous': Bureau of Meteorology boss Rob Vertessy exits with climate warning
• Greenland ice sheet melting has started early

"These Kids Can't Wait": New Win in Youth Climate Lawsuit in Washington

Common Dreams - Nadia Prupis

Judge orders state Department of Ecology to create new rules to cap emissions by end of 2016

Friday's ruling is "the first time [that] a U.S. court not only recognized the extraordinary harms young people are facing due to climate change, but ordered an agency to do something about it." (Photo: Joe Brusky/flickr/cc)

The young activists suing the U.S. government over its role in climate change scored another victory in court on Friday, as a judge in Seattle ordered the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) to announce an emissions reduction rule by the end of the year and make recommendations to reach those targets to the state legislature in 2017.
King County Superior Court Judge Hollis Hill also ordered the department to consult with the young plaintiffs on crafting those recommendations.
"This is an urgent situation," Hill said in issuing the order. "These kids can't wait."
The DOE in February withdrew its proposal to cap emissions, following a landmark ruling in November 2015 which found that the state's current standards fail to "preserve, protect, and enhance the air quality for the current and future generations."
Friday's ruling is "the first time [that] a U.S. court not only recognized the extraordinary harms young people are facing due to climate change, but ordered an agency to do something about it," said Andrea Rodgers, an attorney with the Western Environmental Law Center who represents the young plaintiffs. The DOE "is now court-ordered to issue a rule that fulfills its constitutional and public trust duty to ensure Washington does its part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the planet."

"This is an urgent situation ... these kids can't wait." Judge Hollis R. Hill, Seattle, Washington

The case in Washington is one of several similar legal battles underway in the U.S., all supported by the environmental advocacy group Our Children's Trust, as youth activists take U.S. agencies to court to demand action over climate change. An Oregon judge ruled earlier this month that a complaint filed by more than a dozen young plaintiffs against the federal government—referred to by advocates as "the most important lawsuit on the planet right now"—can go to trial.
"It was absurd for [the DOE] to withdraw its proposed rule to reduce carbon emissions," petitioner Aji Piper, 15, who is taking part in both the state and federal lawsuits, said in a statement on Friday. "Especially after Judge Hill declared last fall that our 'very survival depends upon the will of [our] elders to act now…to stem the tide of global warming.'"
Julia Olson, executive director and chief legal counsel at Our Children's Trust, added, "This case explains why youth around this country, and in several other countries, are forced to bring their governments to court to secure a healthy atmosphere and stable climate. Despite clear scientific evidence and judicial recognition of the urgency of the climate crisis, Washington and most governments across the U.S. and other countries are failing to take correspondingly urgent, science-based action."
"That failure unfairly consigns youth to a disproportionately bleak future against which they can only reasonably ask the courts to step in to address this most sensitive issue of our time," Olson said.

Links

• Youths Secure Second Win In Washington State Climate Lawsuit
• "Landmark Climate Lawsuit: Meet the Youth Activists Suing the U.S. Government & Fossil Fuel Industry"
• VICTORY IN LANDMARK CLIMATE CASE!
• In Wake of WA Climate Rule Withdrawal, Youth Petitioners Return to Court
• Youth Files Constitutional Climate Petition with the Supreme Court of Pakistan
• Colorado Youth File Appeal After Court Places Oil & Gas Development Above Public Health Interests

At Last: Non-Toxic And Cheap Thin-Film Solar Cells For 'Zero-Energy' Buildings

ScienceDaily - University of New South Wales

World's highest efficiency rating achieved for CZTS thin-film solar cells

Dr Xiaojing Hao of UNSW's Australian Centre for Advanced Photovoltaics holding the new CZTS solar cells. Credit: Quentin Jones/UNSW

Summary 'Zero-energy' buildings -- which generate as much power as they consume -- are now much closer after engineers have achieved the world's highest efficiency using flexible solar cells that are non-toxic and cheap to make.

Zero-energy' buildings -- which generate as much power as they consume -- are now much closer after a team at Australia's University of New South Wales achieved the world's highest efficiency using flexible solar cells that are non-toxic and cheap to make.
Until now, the promise of 'zero-energy' buildings been held back by two hurdles: the cost of the thin-film solar cells (used in façades, roofs and windows), and the fact they're made from scarce, and highly toxic, materials.
That's about to change: the UNSW team, led by Dr Xiaojing Hao of the Australian Centre for Advanced Photovoltaics at the UNSW School of Photovoltaic and Renewable Energy Engineering, have achieved the world's highest efficiency rating for a full-sized thin-film solar cell using a competing thin-film technology, known as CZTS.
NREL, the USA's National Renewable Energy Laboratory, confirmed this world leading 7.6% efficiency in a 1cm2 area CZTS cell this month.
Unlike its thin-film competitors, CZTS cells are made from abundant materials: copper, zinc, tin and sulphur.
And CZTS has none of the toxicity problems of its two thin-film rivals, known as CdTe (cadmium-telluride) and CIGS (copper-indium-gallium-selenide). Cadmium and selenium are toxic at even tiny doses, while tellurium and indium are extremely rare.
"This is the first step on CZTS's road to beyond 20% efficiency, and marks a milestone in its journey from the lab to commercial product," said Hao, named one of UNSW's 20 rising stars last year. "There is still a lot of work needed to catch up with CdTe and CIGS, in both efficiency and cell size, but we are well on the way."
"In addition to its elements being more commonplace and environmentally benign, we're interested in these higher bandgap CZTS cells for two reasons," said Professor Martin Green, a mentor of Dr Hao and a global pioneer of photovoltaic research stretching back 40 years.
"They can be deposited directly onto materials as thin layers that are 50 times thinner than a human hair, so there's no need to manufacture silicon 'wafer' cells and interconnect them separately," he added. "They also respond better than silicon to blue wavelengths of light, and can be stacked as a thin-film on top of silicon cells to ultimately improve the overall performance."
By being able to deposit CZTS solar cells on various surfaces, Hao's team believe this puts them firmly on the road to making thin-film photovoltaic cells that can be rigid or flexible, and durable and cheap enough to be widely integrated into buildings to generate electricity from the sunlight that strikes structures such as glazing, façades, roof tiles and windows.
However, because CZTS is cheaper -- and easier to bring from lab to commercialisation than other thin-film solar cells, given already available commercialised manufacturing method -- applications are likely even sooner. UNSW is collaborating with a number of large companies keen to develop applications well before it reaches 20% efficiency -- probably, Hao says, within the next few years.
"I'm quietly confident we can overcome the technical challenges to further boosting the efficiency of CZTS cells, because there are a lot of tricks we've learned over the past 30 years in boosting CdTe and CIGS and even silicon cells, but which haven't been applied to CZTS," said Hao.
Currently, thin-film photovoltaic cells like CdTe are used mainly in large solar power farms, as the cadmium toxicity makes them unsuitable for residential systems, while CIGS cells is more commonly used in Japan on rooftops.
First Solar, a US$5 billion behemoth that specialises in large-scale photovoltaic systems, relies entirely on CdTe; while CIGS is the preferred technology of China's Hanergy, the world's largest thin-film solar power company.
Thin-film technologies such as CdTe and CIGS are also attractive because they are physically flexible, which increases the number of potential applications, such as curved surfaces, roofing membranes, or transparent and translucent structures like windows and skylights.
But their toxicity has made the construction industry -- mindful of its history with asbestos -- wary of using them. Scarcity of the elements also renders them unattractive, as price spikes are likely as demand rises. Despite this, the global market for so-called Building-Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) is already valued at US$1.6 billion.
Hao believes CZTS's cheapness, benign environmental profile and abundant elements may be the trigger that finally brings architects and builders onboard to using thin-film solar panels more widely in buildings.
Until now, most architects have used conventional solar panels made from crystalline silicon. While these are even cheaper than CZTS cells, they don't offer the same flexibility for curved surfaces and other awkward geometries needed to easily integrate into building designs.

Links

• Higher Solar-Cell Efficiency Achieved With Zinc-Oxide Coating
• Understanding What Makes a Thin Film Solar Cell Efficient
• Thin Film Solar Cells: New World Record for Solar Cell Efficiency
• New Insights Into Power-Generating Windows

Greenland Ice Sheet Melting Has Started Early

Fairfax - Peter Hannam

In a year of startling data pointing to a warming world, the thin blue line in the chart below of Greenland's ice melt was initially dismissed as just too outlandish to be accurate.
Greenland is home to the world's second largest ice mass, containing enough water to lift average sea levels about seven metres if it all melted.

The early-season melting of Greenland ice has scientists worried. Photo: Daniel Beltra, via Catherine Edelman Gallery (Chicago)

So in early April, signs that the giant ice sheets were melting at least a month earlier than typical during the three decades-plus of reliable records stunned scientists at the Danish Meteorological Institute.

"We had to check that our models were still working properly" Peter Langen, a climate scientist at DMI, told Polar Portal earlier this month.

Water lies on part of the glacial ice sheet that covers about 80 per cent of Greenland. Photo: Getty Images

And they were.
Warm air sweeping in from the south-west of Greenland had prompted more than 12 per cent of the ice sheet to register melting.
Weather stations 1840 metres above sea-level reported temperatures of above 3 degrees, conditions that would be considered a warm day in July, let alone April.

Meltwater flows along a glacial river on the Greenland ice sheet last July. Photo: New York Times

"Everything is melting", said Aqqaluk Petersen, a resident of Nuuk, Greenland's capital.
The heatwave, Greenland style, added to other evidence that the top of the world continues to warm about twice as fast as the rest of the planet.

'The big show'
"Greenland is really the big show when it comes to ice melt," said Matt King, Professor of Polar Geodesy and an ARC Future Fellow at the University of Tasmania. "It's probably losing as much ice as all the small glaciers around the world combined, and probably more than Antarctica.
"Greenland is being eaten away from away from above and from the edges."
Arctic air temperatures have risen about two degrees since the 1960s. Ocean temperatures are also warming, thawing Greenland glaciers in contact with surrounding seas.
Since satellite records date only from the 1970s, some natural fluctuations may be in play, he said. Still, Greenland's early April warmth was consistent with other signals of a warming planet.
"Such a big spike in melting so early is in complete agreement with what you'd expect when we heat the atmosphere so much," Professor King said, referring to the impact from humans burning fossil fuels and releasing other greenhouse gases.
The Arctic sea ice, for instance, also set a record low maximum range this year, setting up a shorter-than-usual melt season in spring and summer, according to the US National Snow and Ice Data Center. Less ice also fosters more warming since there is less reflection of solar radiation back into space, with more of the warmth absorbed by the now ice-free waters.
Warmer conditions mean there are more days when polar temperatures are positive, meaning that they is more melting of surface ice.

Sea-level impact
While April's early warm spurt in Greenland eased back, the loss of ice mass has continued, running at about two months ahead of the average for the period since 1990, according to the DMI.

The loss of a gigatonne of ice per day amounts to about one cubic kilometre, or one billion tonnes, of water.
For the 2003-2011 period, Greenland net annual ice loss was 234 cubic km of water. That's enough to lift global sea levels by an average of 0.65 mm, the DMI said.
"This process of mass loss started around 1990 and has accelerated since the year 2000," the Polar Portal said. "The mass loss in recent years is approximately four times greater than it was before 2000."
Professor King said that one effect of early melting is that the surface snow turns to water, exposing the darker glacial ice below. That ice has a lower albedo effect, trapping in more warmth and adding to the melting trend.
The warm start to April, meanwhile, has continued for much of the month, leaving Greenland on course for a month well-above normal temperatures:

Updated April surface temperature anomalies show nearly all of #Greenland averaging at least 4°C above normal 

Links

• Greenland's ice is melting
• Scorching start to 2016
• Emerging threat in the oceans
• Emerging threat from climate change: ocean oxygen levels are starting to drop
• 'Perilous': Bureau of Meteorology boss Rob Vertessy exits with climate warning