UNEP Says Global Emissions Must Be Cut By 7.6% Every Year For Next Decade

RenewEconomy - Joshua S Hill

 Photo by koushik das on Unsplash

The United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) has warned global greenhouse gas emissions must fall by at least 7.6% each year over the next decade or risk missing the 1.5°C temperature goal of the Paris Agreement.
The UNEP’s Emissions Gap Report also highlights seven G20 member nations that are falling well behind their Paris Agreement commitments, including Australia, Japan, South Korea, and the United States.
The UNEP’s annual Emissions Gap Report compares current greenhouse gas emissions against where emissions need to be and where they are heading.
The latest 2019 report shows that things are not going well, and that even if all current unconditional commitments under the Paris Agreement are implemented, temperatures are expected to rise by 3.2°C. Such a dramatic rise in temperature by the end of the century will result in wider-ranging and more destructive climate impacts across the planet.
“For ten years, the Emissions Gap Report has been sounding the alarm – and for ten years, the world has only increased its emissions,” said UN Secretary-General António Guterres. “
There has never been a more important time to listen to the science. Failure to heed these warnings and take drastic action to reverse emissions means we will continue to witness deadly and catastrophic heatwaves, storms and pollution.”



“Our collective failure to act early and hard on climate change means we now must deliver deep cuts to emissions – over 7 per cent each year, if we break it down evenly over the next decade,” added Inger Andersen, UNEP’s Executive Director.
“This shows that countries simply cannot wait until the end of 2020, when new climate commitments are due, to step up action. They – and every city, region, business and individual – need to act now.”
“We need quick wins to reduce emissions as much as possible in 2020, then stronger Nationally Determined Contributions to kick-start the major transformations of economies and societies. We need to catch up on the years in which we procrastinated,” she added. “If we don’t do this, the 1.5°C goal will be out of reach before 2030.”
The report unsurprisingly highlighted the role of G20 member nations, which together account for 78% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and which are “collectively” on track to meet their limited 2020 Cancun Pledges.
However, seven countries – Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, South Korea, South Africa, and the United States – are currently not on track to meet their 2030 nationally determined contributions (NDC) commitments, and it is “not possible to say” for a further three countries.
Further, and to make matters worse, six countries – Canada, Indonesia, Mexico, South Korea, South Africa, the United States – are currently on track to miss their Cancun Pledges, while Argentina, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey have not made any 2020 pledges.
In all, only five G20 member nations have committed to a long-term zero emissions target.
The report notes Australia is proposing to “carry forward their overachievement from the Kyoto period to meet their 2020 Cancun Pledges” thanks in part to the Government’s decision to count cumulative emissions between 2013 and 2020.
It notes that if this “carry-forward” approach is not taken, Australia will not even achieve its 2020 pledge.
The authors of the report specify that “it appears that the Australian Government intends to use carry-over permits from the Kyoto Protocol to do so, and uses a carbon budget approach that accounts for cumulative emissions between 2021 and 2030 in order to assess progress against its NDC.”
Australia is also one of the seven countries deemed as requiring “further action of varying degree to achieve their NDC” – a fact not helped by “the re-election of Australia’s conservative Government in May” which has cemented the fact “there has been no recent material change in Australian climate policy.”
“The dropping of the proposed National Energy Guarantee in 2018 and that the renewable energy target will not be raised for years after 2020 up to 2030 … leaves Australia with no major policy tool to encourage emission reductions from the electricity sector in the short to medium term,” write the authors of the UNEP Gap report.
Looking at the overall picture, the UNEP shows that, in the short-term, developed countries will have to reduce their emissions faster than developing countries – a crucial point which will serve to undermine or clash with many conservative talking points around the world.
But the report also says that all nations must substantially increase ambition in their NDCs in 2020 and follow up with ambitious and long-term policies and strategies to implement them.

Links

• Emissions Gap Report 2019 Global progress report on climate action
• 26 Nov 2019 Story Climate Change
• On the brink: Emissions Gap Report findings in 60 seconds (video)
• UN calls for push to cut greenhouse gas levels to avoid climate chaos
• UN report reveals how hard it will be to meet climate change targets

'Dangerously Close': Tipping Points May Trigger Climate Cascade

Sydney Morning Herald - Peter Hannam

The planet faces a "global cascade of tipping points" that could lead to an abrupt shift to a warmer world and cause huge disruption to human societies and ecosystems unless nations slash their greenhouse gas emissions.
The warning is contained in an article appearing on Thursday in Nature. The authors identified several "large-scale discontinuities" in the climate system that may be underway, and which could trigger further warming.

Countries need to cut their greenhouse gas emissions much faster than agreed under the Paris Climate Agreement, the UN has warned, or risk "wide-ranging and destructive climate impacts." 

Countries need to cut their greenhouse gas emissions much faster than agreed under the Paris Climate Agreement, the UN has warned, or risk "wide-ranging and destructive climate impacts."
"If damaging tipping cascades can occur and a global tipping point cannot be ruled out, then this is an existential threat to civilisation," the scientists said.
The ice sheets in West Antarctica may be one of several cryosphere tipping points that were "dangerously close", if they hadn't already begun an irreversible retreat. These alone would raise sea levels by three metres if melted.

---

Active global warming tipping points
Evidence that tipping points are under way has mounted in the past decade.

Source: Nature

---

Illustration: Matt Golding

Those in the Wilkes Basin of eastern Antarctica may be similarly unstable, with another four metres of potential sea-level rise if they disintegrated.
"The time to act decisively is now. Any more dithering is irresponsible, as the risks are increasing year by year," said Stefan Rahmstorf, head of Earth system analysis at Germany's Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, and one of the authors.
"But even once we pass a tipping point – and probably we have done so for the West Antarctic Ice Sheet – we will need to reduce emissions even more urgently, to slow down the unfolding effects and to avoid passing further tipping points."

Running AMOC
The interconnected nature of the giant mixing processes that distribute heat around the world's oceans is a key reason why one region's changes could reinforce other shifts.
For instance, the melting of Greenland's ice sheets is driving an influx of fresh water into the North Atlantic, slowing the Gulf Stream – also known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) – by 15 per cent since the middle of the 20th century.
Another outcome is a further heating of the Southern Ocean, resulting in more Antarctic ice melt.

A view from a NASA aircraft of large icebergs that have broken from the calving side of Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica. Credit: NASA

Other effects include drought for the Sahel region because of disruptions to the West African monsoon, and worse fires in the Amazon as that region dries out.
Will Steffen, an emeritus professor at the Australian National University and another author, said some of the processes would add to warming by releasing more carbon dioxide or methane to the atmosphere.
Amazon dieback alone had the potential to release about 90 billion tonnes of CO2 while boreal forests could add another 110 billion tonnes. Even without including the methane, emissions from melting permafrost could total 100 billion more tonnes of CO2, the report said.

Fires in the northern hemisphere's boreal forest will add to the atmosphere's carbon dioxide emissions. Credit: Jason Franson/The Canadian Press

By contrast, humans directly contribute to about 40 billion tonnes of CO2 a year. We also have a total emissions budget of 500 billion tonnes if the world is to have a 50:50 chance of hitting the Paris climate target of keeping warming to 1.5 degrees.
Entire ecosystems, such as the Great Barrier Reef, were also facing tipping points. Half the reef's coral cover had been lost in recent bleaching and only a tiny fraction would remain if warming reached 2 degrees, the paper said.

A red sun among heavy smoke caused by the fires in the Amazon forest in the state of Rondonia, Brazil, in August 2019. Credit: Joedson Alves

Australia is among the most exposed nations given it is already exposed to droughts and heatwaves.
"The warning signs are clear," Professor Steffen said. "It will be a much tougher climate for us to live in."

Mustering of sheep in a paddock of a failed wheat crop at Rebecca and Dan Reardon's property near Moree, NSW, which has been affected by years of drought. Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

The risk was not of runaway global warming but rather of a world stabilising at perhaps 5 degrees warmer.
"The schoolchildren are right," he said. "We indeed have a climate emergency, and an emergency-level response is now needed to ensure that we don’t activate the tipping cascade."

Links

• 'No sign of slowdown': Atmospheric greenhouse gas levels hit new high
• Emissions Gap Report 2019 Global progress report on climate action
• 26 Nov 2019 Story Climate Change
• On the brink: Emissions Gap Report findings in 60 seconds (video)
• UN calls for push to cut greenhouse gas levels to avoid climate chaos
• UN report reveals how hard it will be to meet climate change targets

Climate Emergency: World 'May Have Crossed Tipping Points’

The Guardian - Damian Carrington

Warning of ‘existential threat to civilisation’ as impacts lead to cascade of unstoppable events

‘Part of the west Antarctic ice sheet may be in irreversible retreat,’ said one of the researchers. Photograph: Handout/AFP/Getty Images 

The world may already have crossed a series of climate tipping points, according to a stark warning from scientists. This risk is “an existential threat to civilisation”, they say, meaning “we are in a state of planetary emergency”.
Tipping points are reached when particular impacts of global heating become unstoppable, such as the runaway loss of ice sheets or forests. In the past, extreme heating of 5C was thought necessary to pass tipping points, but the latest evidence suggests this could happen between 1C and 2C.
The planet has already heated by 1C and the temperature is certain to rise further, due to past emissions and because greenhouse gas levels are still rising. The scientists further warn that one tipping point, such as the release of methane from thawing permafrost, may fuel others, leading to a cascade.
The researchers, writing in a commentary article in the journal Nature, acknowledge that the complex science of tipping points means great uncertainty remains. But they say the potential damage from the tipping points is so big and the time to act so short, that “to err on the side of danger is not a responsible option”. They call for urgent international action.
“A saving grace is that the rate at which damage accumulates from tipping could still be under our control to some extent,” they write. “The stability and resilience of our planet is in peril. International action – not just words – must reflect this.”

---

Scientists' warning: a cascade of climate tipping points is possible

Guardian graphic. Source: Lenton et al, Nature, 2019

---

Prof Tim Lenton at the University of Exeter, the lead author of the article, said: “We might already have crossed the threshold for a cascade of interrelated tipping points. The simple version is the schoolkids [striking for climate action] are right: we are seeing potentially irreversible changes in the climate system under way, or very close.”
“As a scientist, I just want to tell it how it is,” he said. “It is not trying to be alarmist, but trying to treat the whole climate change problem as a risk management problem. It is what I consider the common sense way.”
Phil Williamson at the University of East Anglia, who did not contribute to the article, said: “The prognosis by Tim Lenton and colleagues is, unfortunately, fully plausible: that we might have already lost control of the Earth’s climate.”
The new article comes as the UN warns action is very far from stopping global temperature rise, with the world currently on track for 3C-4C. The commentary lists nine tipping points that may have been activated.

The scientists report that 17% of the Amazon rainforest has been lost since 1970. Photograph: Léo Corrêa/AP

“We have this alarming evidence that part of the west Antarctic ice sheet may be in irreversible retreat,” said Lenton. “All the signals are that it is.” A similar situation appears to be occurring at the Wilkes basin in east Antarctica. The collapse of these ice sheets would eventually raise sea level by many metres.
The massive Greenland ice sheet was melting at an accelerating rate, the scientists said, while Arctic sea ice is shrinking fast. “Permafrost across the Arctic is beginning to irreversibly thaw and release carbon dioxide and methane,” they said.
The Gulf Stream current in the Atlantic, which warms Europe, has also slowed by 15% since the mid-20th century. “That is just about in the range of natural variability, but it is also hard to rule out that it is part of a longer downturn,” Lenton said.
The scientists report that 17% of the Amazon rainforest has been lost since 1970. The tipping point, where loss of forest leads to it drying out, could lie in the range 20%-40%, they said. In temperate forests, especially in North America, heating has triggered more fires and pest outbreaks, potentially turning some regions from a sink for carbon to a source. In the tropics, corals are predicted to be wiped out by 2C of heating.
A cascade of tipping points could occur because, for example, the melting of Arctic sea ice amplifies heating by exposing dark ocean that absorbs more sunlight. That may increase the melting of Greenland ice and permafrost areas. “Multiple risks can interact, with one change reinforcing another, and with warming of just a degree or two sufficient to result in dramatic cascading effects,” said Williamson.
Prof Martin Siegert, at Imperial College London, said: “The new work is valuable. They are being a little speculative, but maybe you need to be.” He pointed out that the extremely rapid rate at which CO2 was being pumped into the atmosphere was unlikely to have ever occurred on Earth before. “It may mean that tipping points can occur in unexpected ways as there is no geological precedent for this rate of CO2 change.”
The article reports that preliminary results from the latest climate models suggest global heating will be greater than expected, increasing the risk of tipping points. Prof Piers Forster, at the University of Leeds, disagreed on that point. However, he added: “I completely endorse their call for action. Although possibly low probability, the risks they identify are real.”
Lenton said action would still have real benefits, by slowing the impacts and giving more time for people to adapt. He said: “This article is not meant to be a counsel of despair. If we want to avoid the worst of these bad climate tipping points, we need to activate some positive social and economic tipping points [such as renewable energy] towards what should ultimately be a happier, flourishing, sustainable future for the generations to come.”

Links

• Domino-effect of climate events could move Earth into a ‘hothouse’ state
• Climate-heating greenhouse gases hit new high, UN reports
• Climate tipping points — too risky to bet against
• ‘Ecological grief’ grips scientists witnessing Great Barrier Reef’s decline
• Permafrost collapse is accelerating carbon release
• Greenland is losing ice at fastest rate in 350 years
• The hard truths of climate change — by the numbers

Women In Climate Change Hotspots Face Greater Burdens When Under Environmental Stress

ABC Science - Suzannah Lyons

Environmental stress can hamper women's ability to adapt in climate change hotspots, like Bangladesh. (Getty Images: Zakir Hossain Chowdhury/Barcroft Media)

Key points After about 100 people made a two-hour hike up a volcano, children installed a memorial plaque to the glacier The plaque, which notes the level of heat-trapping carbon dioxide, warns "we know what is happening and what needs to be done" Iceland's PM says climate change will be a priority when Nordic leaders meet in Reykjavik on Tuesday

Climate change has a negative impact on women's ability to make meaningful decisions in their lives, according to new research looking at climate change hotspots in Africa and Asia.
Even when household structures, social norms and legal frameworks support women's agency, environmental stress and its repercussions can still increase the burdens they face compared to men.
The study, published in Nature Climate Change on Tuesday, analysed 25 case studies from African and Asian climate change hotspots to identify factors that affect women and their ability to adapt.
The researchers wanted to move away from basic climate change and gender analyses that present women as victims, said social scientist and lead author of the paper Nitya Rao of the University of East Anglia.

"What we see in our fieldwork is that women are not sitting there doing nothing. Actually they're quite active in trying to do a lot of things in order to adapt," Professor Rao said.

However, Professor Rao and her co-authors found that unless social supports like childcare, health services or minimum wage conditions were in place, it was very hard for women to actually adopt climate change solutions.
This is due to the disproportionate disadvantages women already face, and the extra burdens environmental stress can bring, particularly in societies that mostly rely on agriculture.
These can include gendered labour division, limited access to land, limited access to credit and the reproductive burden women carry, both in bearing and looking after children, Professor Rao said.
Adding to that, women are often left to manage their households alone if their male partners need to migrate to look for work.

"When you double the work of a woman and … she's not able to do any more work, that's a good reason for not taking up climate-resilient rice for instance," Professor Rao said.

---

  11,000 scientists declare 'climate emergency'

More than 11,000 scientists around the world have signed a scientific paper declaring a climate emergency, backing protesters across the world demanding action.

---

The study addresses a really important gap in our understanding of the gender dimensions of vulnerability to climate change, said human geographer Fiona Miller of Macquarie University, who wasn't involved in the research.
"They might have more responsibility to manage money, but they don't necessarily have more power to make decisions concerning that money," Dr Miller said.
In a positive case study from Nepal, women were able to improve their agency by forming a cooperative.
However, low-caste women were excluded from that cooperative.
"I think one of the wider findings of the work is that yes, we need to focus on gender equity, but we also need to …. focus on those women who are especially marginalised due to caste or class or ethnicity," Dr Miller said.

So, does that mean climate change is sexist?

When men migrate to larger towns for work, more tasks at home fall to women. (Supplied: Nitya Rao)

The research really highlights the social impact of climate change, said Climate Council CEO Amanda McKenzie.
"What it's saying is that the people who are most vulnerable will suffer the most, and the most quickly," she said.

---

  How does climate change affect our health?

It's been dubbed "the biggest global health threat of the 21st century". But how does a warming climate pose risks to our physical and mental health?

---

And yet, while organisations like Plan International and Marie Stopes International have position papers on gender and climate change, there isn't as much awareness of it in the broader public sphere.
"I think that the social dimensions of climate change haven't been adequately discussed," Ms McKenzie said.

"We're still moving beyond understanding climate as an environmental issue, to understanding it's a human issue [with a] whole range of direct human costs."

These can be the immediate risks facing people in the middle of a natural disaster for example, or the longer-term impacts that adapting to climate change can have on people's health and the resilience of their communities.
While climate change itself is not sexist, the nature of gender and power relations means climate stress can exacerbate problems that are already there.
"Whenever there is something occurring that is damaging to our society, it tends to hurt women, people of colour more," she said.
Ms McKenzie believes there isn't enough discussion about who is paying the price and who is profiting from climate impacts.
"I think there's a sexism element there too, because the people who are profiting the most would tend to be powerful men in Western countries."

Is this research relevant to Australia?

Emergency response organisations need to be sensitive to how women and men respond to things like fires in different ways. (Getty Images: Brett Hemmings)

While the research focused on climate change hotspots in Africa and Asia, Professor Rao said it also has relevance for other parts of the world.
"[In] labour markets across the world we know there is a gender wage gap," she said.
And that includes Australia.
Talking about how climate change affects women's ability to feed their families is something we can relate to, said geographer Celia McMichael of the University of Melbourne, who wasn't involved in the work.
"When you read of other people trying to cope with climate variability, I think it's something we can increasingly empathise with because that is not removed from our lives in Australia [any more]," Dr McMichael said.
"Yeah, we can turn on the AC but we still are dealing with bushfires and things."
One of the findings the paper identifies is that public institutions are really important in terms of supporting households and communities to respond to environmental stresses, said Dr Miller, and we need to have gender equity within those response organisations.
"If you're thinking about the fires that we're dealing with now across Australia, and particularly in New South Wales, we do tend to see an overrepresentation of men in emergency response organisations," she said.
"If we're thinking about issues around evacuation, for example, men and women may respond to that challenge in quite different ways.
"If you have emergency response agencies that are sensitive to those gendered issues … then you can give advice and support so that people can make appropriate decisions."
Ms McKenzie said the importance of educating women and girls has already been shown to be an important climate change solution by organisations such as Project Drawdown.
"I think that these solutions that involve women and girls and education, maternal health etc. are really important," she said.
"Not just for resilience, but also in getting down emissions in the first instance."

Links

• A qualitative comparative analysis of women’s agency and adaptive capacity in climate change hotspots in Asia and Africa
• Gender Transformative Climate Change Action in the Pacific (pdf)
• Climate Change Solutions: Empowering Women and Girls through Reproductive Choice (pdf)
• Project Drawdown: Summary of Solutions by Overall Rank
• Our Young Girls Are Bearing The Burden Of Climate Action. But Should They Be?
• Green With Rage: Women Climate Change Leaders Face Online Attacks
• Women Take The Lead On Climate Change
• The Misogyny Of Climate Deniers
• Can Women Save Planet Earth? 4 Women Fighting Climate Change Say They Can — And Must
• From Antarctica To Costa Rica, Women Team Up To Build A Climate-Safe Future

(AU) The Most Important Issue Facing Australia? New Survey Sees Huge Spike In Concern Over Climate Change

The Conversation - Andrew Markus

Nearly half of Australians aged 18-24 view climate change as the biggest problem facing Australia in new national survey. James Ross/AAP

While most Australians still view the economy as the most important issue facing the country, a new survey released today shows climate change is rapidly becoming a major concern, as well.
Now in its 12th year, the Scanlon Foundation survey is the largest- and longest-running poll tracking public opinion on social cohesion, immigration, population and other issues in Australia. The 2019 survey was administered by telephone and the internet in July-August to a representative sample of 3,500 respondents.
The largest change in the survey from 2018 to 2019 came with the open-ended question: “What do you think is the most important problem facing Australia today?”
Both years, the economy ranked as No. 1. But this year, climate change jumped to a clear second with the equal-largest increase from one year to the next, up from 10% to 19% in our telephone-administered survey and from 5% to 17% in the self-completed online survey.

Responses to the most important problem facing Australia in telephone-interview survey. Author provided

As would be expected, there were major variances in the responses depending on demographics.
Nearly half (43%) of those aged 18-24 viewed climate change as the biggest problem facing Australia, compared to 12% of those aged 35-44 and just 8% of those over the age of 75.
The responses also varied by state – 20% of Victoria residents and 18% of NSW residents said climate change was the biggest problem, compared to 8% in Western Australia.
And there was a stark difference depending on political affiliation, with 54% of Greens voters saying climate change was the most important issue, compared to 21% of Labor, 7% of Coalition and just 3% of One Nation voters.

Less worry about immigration numbers
Last year, immigration was a major political issue in Australia. Several polls, variously worded and with different approaches to sampling, found majority support for a reduction in the numbers of immigrants permitted into Australia each year.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison said his government was listening to the public’s concerns and responded with changes, including a reduction in the annual immigration target.
This year, however, there is evidence of a decline in public concern.
The percentage of people who agreed the immigration intake was too high in the annual Lowy Institute poll fell from 54% in 2018 to 47% in 2019.
And in our poll, the proportion of those who agreed with a reduction in the number of immigrants fell marginally from 43% in 2018 to 41% in 2019 in our interviewer-administered survey and from 44% to 41% in the self-completed version.

Responses to the question about the number of immigrants in Australia in telephone survey. Author provided

Endorsement of the value of immigration
There is continuing endorsement of the value of immigration by a substantial majority of Australians.
In the self-completed version of this year’s survey, 76% agree that immigration is good for the economy, 78% agree that immigration “improves Australia by bringing new ideas and cultures” and 80% agree that multiculturalism has been good for Australia.
Since 2015, the survey has tested public support for immigration restrictions on the grounds of race, ethnicity or religion, which have been advocated by minor right-wing and populist parties. The consistent finding is that a large majority – 70% to 80% of Australians – do not support such policies.

But concerns remain over the impact of immigration
While public opinion is generally positive with regard to immigration today, many are concerned about the impact of rising immigrant numbers on their daily lives.
Seventy percent of respondents said they were concerned about “overcrowding”, 60% by the impact of immigration on housing prices and 58% by the impact on the environment.
A new question in 2019 asked for responses to the proposition that “too many immigrants are not adopting Australian values”. Nearly two-thirds of respondents (67%) agreed with the statement.

Policy towards asylum seekers
In 2018 and 2019, a new question asked respondents “are you personally concerned that Australia is too harsh in its treatment of asylum seekers and refugees?”
Opinion was found to be almost evenly divided. In 2019, 49% said they were “a great deal” or “somewhat” concerned, 50% “only slightly” or “not at all” concerned.
Here, too, there were major variances in viewpoints depending on demographics.
For instance, 87% of Greens voters and 61% of Labor voters were “a great deal” or “somewhat” concerned, compared to just 30% of Coalition voters and 16% of One Nation.
A similar split could also be seen with age, with 70% of those aged 18-24 “a great deal” or “somewhat” concerned, compared to just 39% of those aged 55-64. And with location: 55% of Victoria residents were “a great deal” or “somewhat” concerned, compared to 37% of those in Western Australia.

Social cohesion still relatively stable
On the much broader question of social cohesion, our survey continues to find a large measure of stability in Australia.
One indication is provided by the Scanlon Monash Index (SMI), which aggregates responses to 18 questions and measures attitudes in five areas of social cohesion: belonging, worth, social justice, political participation and acceptance of diversity.
Over the course of our 12 national surveys, the SMI registered the highest level of volatility during 2009-2013, the period of the Rudd and Gillard governments, when it declined by more than 10%. It has been largely stable since 2014.
On the individual factors that comprise the SMI, however, there have been some significant changes. When it comes to sense of belonging, for instance, just 63% said they felt this to a “great extent” in 2019, compared to 77% in 2007.
And on the acceptance of diversity, 19% of respondents said they had experienced discrimination on the basis of race, ethnic origin or religion, which was significantly higher than the 9%-10% from 2007 to 2009.

Links

• (AU) The Day That Plunged Australia's Climate Policy Into 10 Years Of Inertia
• (AU) Scott Morrison and the big lie about climate change: does he think we're that stupid?
• (AU) If a catastrophe can't pause the culture war, we really are in a lot of trouble
• (AU) Australia's Bushfire Politics: The Parties Prevaricate While The Country Burns
• (AU) Actually, It Is Climate Change
• (AU) Barnaby And The Idiot Foghorns: Not Everyone Got The Memo About 'Quiet Australians'
• (AU) We Mustn’t Bring Politics Into The Disastrous Situation That Was Created By ... Wait For It ... POLITICS
• (AU) If You Can’t Talk About Climate When The Country Is Burning, When Can You?
• (AU) NSW Public Servants At Climate Conference Told Not To Discuss Link With Bushfires
• (AU) Regional Mayors Criticise Politicians For Failing To Link Climate Change And Deadly Bushfires
• (AU) The Wealthy Australians Funding Climate Change Candidates
• Australians think immigration should be cut? Well, it depends on how you ask

(AU) It's The Climate, Not Immigration, That Keeps Australians Awake At Night

The Guardian - David Marr

The Scanlon Foundation’s annual report on social cohesion finds a country still largely welcoming of migrants, although 40% hold negative feelings towards Muslims

Only 6% of Australians say immigration is the biggest issue facing the country, while 19% nominate climate change. Photograph: James Ross/AAP

Something happened in 2017. Australia is second only to Canada in welcoming immigration on a large scale. Our faith in the benefits of accepting newcomers of all faiths and races is rock solid. But a couple of years ago we began to grow impatient about the government’s management of the immigration program, impatient in particular about overcrowding in our cities.

This is the verdict of the Scanlon Foundation’s 2019 Mapping Social Cohesion report, published on Tuesday. The mission of the foundation for the past decade or so has been to measure how this migrant nation hangs together. In that time an extraordinary 50,000 of us have been polled to track the hopes and fears that sweep Australia – and not just about immigration.
The author of the reports, Prof Andrew Markus of Monash University, finds most Australians now share “an underlying concern about the government not properly managing the situation – the impact on overcrowding, house prices, environment”.
Markus is one of this country’s leading authorities on the politics of race and this is the 12th report he has written for the Scanlon Foundation. His findings are a civilised rejoinder to those who skew politics to the far right in this country that their racist constituency does not speak for the nation.

But in 2019 Markus fears impatience with government management might imperil majority support for Australia’s immigration program. “This has not yet occurred, but the potential is evident.”
We are not Europe. Asked every year to name the most important problem facing their countries, Europeans have lately nominated immigration. “It’s sort of cooled down a bit now,” says Markus, “but even to the present day when people are asked what’s the main issue for the EU, they still nominate controlling population movement and immigration.”

Concern about the climate crisis is surging. Photograph: Steven Saphore/AAP

Not in Australia. We always put the economy at the top of the list. Immigration came in fourth in 2019, nominated by 6% of us. In second place on the list, after an abrupt rise, is the environment and climate change.

Markus has never seen such a sudden surge. The last was after the the Lindt cafe siege, when for a few years about 10% nominated national security and terrorism as the great problem facing the nation. “But this year climate change went not to 10, it went to 19,” says Markus. “And that’s so far ahead of the third issue. There’s a lot of daylight there.”
The importance of the shift is underlined by the discovery that climate sceptics have all but lost traction. In 2011, when 11% of us said climate change was our biggest worry, another 6% nominated overreaction to those fears as the great problem facing Australia. The following year, the sceptics outnumbered the climate worriers almost two to one.
Not any more. Against the 19% nomination for climate change in 2019, the sceptics could muster, at best, a contrary 1%. Markus sees this shift as an acute challenge to Canberra. “Morrison has got an opportunity to actually rebuild some capital in effective government,” he says. “But he’s got this issue of climate change. If he doesn’t deal with that, which is emerging as a major issue, that could very seriously damage this government.”

What do you think is the most important problem facing Australia today?

Showing the % who selected the issue as ‘most important problem’, by year of survey

*Indicates change between 2018 and 2019 statistically significant
Guardian graphic Source: Scanlon Foundation

Steady as she goes
Markus began his work at the end of the Howard era and the arrival of Kevin Rudd. In those years of hope and renewal, the Scanlon survey showed nearly half of us believed government did the right thing for the Australian people almost always or most of the time.
But with Rudd’s collapse in 2010 went a good measure of trust in government. It has never recovered. In the weeks before Malcolm Turnbull’s downfall, the Scanlon survey of 2018 revealed only 29% believed in the good intentions of Canberra. After the re-election of the Morrison government this year, the figure is essentially unchanged at 30%.
It’s a long slide, but Marcus disputes claims in other surveys that Australia is experiencing a catastrophic loss of faith in democracy. “There are some people out there who do surveys with small samples,” he says. “And with small samples from one year to the next you will get variability. And that produces headlines.
“But we’ve got I think the most rigorous way of surveying. We actually do it in two different modes – by telephone and by self-administration – and what that is showing is much more a picture of ‘steady as she goes’ rather than dramatic decline.”

The education line cuts across the immigration debate like a mighty trench

They shift a little, and the shifts have lately been gloomy, but year in and year out the steady findings of the Scanlon surveys define Australia:

• 90% of us have a sense of belonging to this place.
• 87% are proud of the Australian way of life.
• 85% agree multiculturalism has been good for Australia.
• 84% report having a happy 2019.
• 80% welcome resettlement in Australia of refugees assessed abroad.
• 79% oppose selecting immigrants by race.
• 73% believe Australia is a land of economic opportunity where, in the long run, hard work brings a better life.
• 71% believe globalisation is good for the country.
• 68% believe accepting immigrants from many different countries makes Australia stronger.
• 62% are optimistic about Australia’s future.

Then there’s the darker side:

• 61% of Australians disapprove of asylum seekers making their way here by boat.
• 47% of us have little or no concern about the treatment we mete out to asylum seekers in PNG and Nauru.
• 40% in 2019 admit negative or very negative feelings towards Muslims.

The level of hostility to Muslims was masked until a couple of years ago, when the Scanlon Foundation began parallel tracking its research. Telephone interviews over the years showed 21% to 25% of us hostile to Islam. But these figures essentially double when surveys are completed in private and online.
The gap between the two sets of results shows us to be a polite people. We hesitate to admit personal unhappiness or gloom for the future of the country. We clearly don’t enjoy confessing to strangers that we’re in financial trouble. A little of our optimism about the impact of mass immigration evaporates online. We’re even shy of confessing to strangers that we don’t much like Christians – only 4% would own up to that on the telephone in 2019, but 14% said so clearly online.
Markus argues that while our sunny picture of the country darkens a little when we answer in private, those Australians most hostile to race speak loud and clear however they are surveyed.
“The views of the hardcore negative types are pretty constant irrespective of the surveys,” says Markus. “And often it’s around 10% of the population. Now it would be a worry if self-completion surveys then showed it wasn’t 10% but it was 20% to 25%. But it’s actually pretty constant.”
So who are the most hostile to immigration?
Easy answer: One Nation voters. The 2019 report shows One Nation voters are profoundly pessimistic about Australia’s future; loath globalisation; don’t give a rats about the environment; are scathing about the motives of government; dismiss multiculturalism; are fiercely hostile to Muslims; couldn’t care less how harshly we treat asylum seekers; and are the only group in the survey – young and old, rich and poor, city and country – where most still hanker for the old White Australia policy of selecting migrants by race and religion.

What divides us?
How important here is the city/country divide?Not at all on the importance of climate change. Wherever we live in cities or the bush, we agree that after the economy, the climate is the single biggest problem facing Australia today. But on immigration, the gap between city and country widens significantly.
The 2019 survey found that outside the capital cities there was an 8% drop in support for multiculturalism; a 4% rise in those wanting immigrants selected by race and religion; a 6% fall in those concerned about the treatment of refugees; and, though the bush is where migrants don’t settle and governments are desperate to send them, a nine-point jump to 49% of those who believe Australia’s immigration intake is too large.

The fundamentals are sound, even as about one in 10 of us continue to rage against this new Australia of many faiths and many cultures

But this is not the most dramatic divide revealed in the Scanlon surveys over the years. The education line cuts across the immigration debate like a mighty trench:

• Only 27% of university graduates say Australia takes too many immigrants, but for those who never finished high school the figure is 70%.
• Nearly 90% of graduates applaud multiculturalism but only 61% of those who never finished school.
• Among graduates, 58% worry we treat refugees too harshly, but their fears are shared by only 32% of who never finished school.
• While a rump of 14% of graduates still wish immigrants could be chosen by race, support for the old White Australia position more than doubles to 35% who never finished school.

Western Australia emerges from the survey as a fascinating puzzle: wildly optimistic about the future of the nation, peculiarly trusting in government, little perturbed by climate change and not particularly worried about the size of the immigration intake. But of all mainlanders, West Australians are most keen to select immigrants by race and are, by a long shot, the most hard-hearted about Australia’s treatment of refugees.
Nothing Canberra has done to its prisoners in PNG and Nauru in the past couple of years has budged the national 50:50 split between the indifferent and the sympathisers. Markus says: “It’s pretty rock solid.”
But when these figures are broken down by political alignment, Markus sees signs of movement.

ALP Senator Kristina Keneally during a September rally in support of a Tamil asylum seeker family. Markus says refugee policy is ‘huge problem for Labor’. Photograph: Joel Carrett/AAP

Thirty per cent of the Liberal constituency say Australia is being too harsh, compared with 87% of Greens. The 2019 figure for refugee sympathisers in Labor ranks is 61%.“It is a huge problem for Labor,” says Markus “because the government with its constituency can keep doing what it’s been doing, but it really wedges Labor.”
Are Christians notably more compassionate? Certainly not Anglicans. In 2019 only 39% of them could muster some sympathy for the asylum seekers Australia is putting through the mill out in the Pacific. Markus doesn’t blame their God. He says gently: “Conservative old Australia.”
Though not quite so bleak, the figures for the other faiths put paid to the notion that the churches are mighty reservoirs of sympathy for refugees. On the subject of the Pacific solution, Catholics come in slightly under the national split, with only 46% of them reporting some or a great deal of concern for what Australia is doing to refugees.
That’s typical. On issues such as the size of the immigration intake, support for multiculturalism, a hankering for the right to pick migrants by race and confidence that immigrants improve our society by introducing new ideas and cultures, the churches don’t put the attitudes of the rest of the community to shame. At best they merely mirror them.
Markus ran some figures for Guardian Australia which show that on nearly all questions asked in the survey – including concern for climate change – the progressive horse to back is those who nominate No Religion.
Overall, Markus is a grim optimist. Reports of discrimination are too high, but not for the moment growing higher. The fundamentals are sound, even as about one in 10 of us continue to rage against this new Australia of many faiths and many cultures. It’s in the government’s hands whether we continue to support what is in world terms very high support for large scale immigration.
Markus is at pains to emphasise that multiculturalism backed by almost all of us is a two-way street. “They’re saying we recognise that diversity is good, that diversity has made us a better country. You get very high levels endorsing the notion that immigration improves society by bringing new ideas and cultures.
“But on the other hand, it’s two-way because the expectation is that immigrants will, over time, be more like us. It’s not an endorsement of pluralism. It’s an endorsement of a two-way change and obviously in that change the immigrants are changing more than the host society.”
But we’re all changing? “Yes. We’re moving. But they’re moving more.”

Links

• (AU) The Day That Plunged Australia's Climate Policy Into 10 Years Of Inertia
• (AU) Scott Morrison and the big lie about climate change: does he think we're that stupid?
• (AU) If a catastrophe can't pause the culture war, we really are in a lot of trouble
• (AU) Australia's Bushfire Politics: The Parties Prevaricate While The Country Burns
• (AU) Actually, It Is Climate Change
• (AU) Barnaby And The Idiot Foghorns: Not Everyone Got The Memo About 'Quiet Australians'
• (AU) We Mustn’t Bring Politics Into The Disastrous Situation That Was Created By ... Wait For It ... POLITICS
• (AU) If You Can’t Talk About Climate When The Country Is Burning, When Can You?
• (AU) NSW Public Servants At Climate Conference Told Not To Discuss Link With Bushfires
• (AU) Regional Mayors Criticise Politicians For Failing To Link Climate Change And Deadly Bushfires
• (AU) The Wealthy Australians Funding Climate Change Candidates

Greenhouse Gas Levels Have Hit A Record High And There's No Sign Of A Slowdown

SBS - AFP | SBS

Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere hit a new record in 2018, rising faster than the average rise of the last decade and cementing increasingly damaging weather patterns, the World Meteorological Organisation says.

The Extinction Rebellion movement has organised climate change protests in scores of cities, including across Australia. Source City of Sydney

Greenhouse gases levels in the atmosphere, the main driver of climate change, hit a record high last year, the UN said Monday, calling for action to safeguard "the future welfare of mankind".
"There is no sign of a slowdown, let alone a decline, in greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere despite all the commitments under the Paris Agreement on Climate Change," the head of the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) Petteri Taalas said in a statement.

#Greenhouse gas concentrations hit a new record high.
Future generations will face increasingly severe impacts of #climatechange, incl rising temperatures, extreme weather, water stress, sea level rise, ocean acidification, disruption to ecosystems. #COP25https://t.co/xA9sblfJrD pic.twitter.com/JfL1YQUgPE

— WMO | OMM (@WMO) November 25, 2019

The WMO's main annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin listed the atmospheric concentration of CO2 in 2018 at 407.8 parts per million, up from 405.5 parts per million in 2017.
That increase was just above the annual average increase over the past decade.
CO2 is responsible for roughly two-thirds of Earth's warming.
The second most prevalent greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is methane - emitted in part from cattle and fermentation from rice paddies - which is responsible for 17 per cent of warming, according to WMO.
Nitrous oxide, the third major greenhouse which is gas caused largely by agricultural fertilisers, has caused about six per cent of warming on Earth, the UN agency said.
Atmospheric concentration levels of both methane and nitrous oxide both hit record highs last year, the UN said.

"This continuing long-term trend means that future generations will be confronted with increasingly severe impacts of climate change, including rising temperatures, more extreme weather, water stress, sea-level rise and disruption to marine and land ecosystems," WMO said.

'More hopeful'?
Emissions are the main factor that determine the amount of greenhouse gas levels but concentration rates are a measure of what remains after a series of complex interactions between atmosphere, biosphere, lithosphere, cryosphere and the oceans.
Roughly 25 per cent of all emissions are currently absorbed by the oceans and biosphere - a term that accounts for all ecosystems on Earth.

A schools climate strike rally in Melbourne earlier this year. Source AAP

The lithosphere is the solid, outer part of the Earth while the cryosphere covers that part of the world covered by frozen water.
The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has said that in order to keep warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, net CO2 emissions must be at net zero, meaning the amount being pumped into the atmosphere must equal the amount being removed, either through natural absorption or technological innovation.
While Mr Taalas made clear that the world was not on track to meet UN targets, he did highlight some reasons for cautious optimism.
"The visibility of these issues is the highest (it has) ever been," he told reporters in Geneva, noting that the private sector was increasingly investing in green technology.

Police officers remove climate change activists from their road blockades around the Bank of England in the City of London financial district. Source AFP

Even in the United States, where President Donald Trump's administration this month began the process of formally withdrawing from the Paris agreement, "plenty of positive things are happening," Mr Taalas said.
While Washington may have renounced its Paris agreement commitments, he added: "we have plenty of states and cities who are proceeding in the right direction."
"Personally, I am more hopeful than I used to be 10 years ago but of course we have to speed up the process."

Australia 'most vulnerable' to climate change
Australia is responsible for around 1.3 per cent of global emissions, according to the Federal Environment Department.
The government has set a target to reduce emissions to 26-28 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030.
But a new study commissioned by the Climate Council revealed that more than 53 per cent of Australians thought more action, such as increased focus towards renewable energy, is needed.
"We are the biggest iron ore exporter in the world and there are ways you can turn iron ore into steel using the Australian sunshine, to create effectively zero emissions steel," Climate Council Senior Researcher, Tim Baxter, said.
"We're the sunniest and windiest continent that's inhabited on the planet so we are best placed to lead the global emissions reduction effort."

More than half of those polled in a recent survey agreed climate change had made the threat of bushfires worse in Australia.

53.3% also thought the government should be doing more to reduce the impact of climate change on bushfires. @CharisChang2https://t.co/g8R0NKqPm0

— Climate Council (@climatecouncil) November 25, 2019

The report also found more than half of the 1500 people surveyed believed climate change had made the threat of bushfires worse.
About 42.9 per cent “strongly agreed” with the statement, while another 13.7 per cent agreed. A further 39.9 disagreed or strongly disagreed, and 3.5 per cent were unsure.
"Australia is probably the most vulnerable developed country in the world when it comes to the impact of climate change," Mr Baxter said.
"This spring we've had five states subjected to fires that can only be described as catastrophic."

Links

• WMO: Greenhouse gas levels in atmosphere reach new record
• Greenhouse gases hit another record high in 2018, UN agency says
• Climate-heating greenhouse gases hit new high, UN reports 
• Greenhouse gas -  Wikipedia
• Understanding Greenhouse Gases
• Let’s get something straight – Australia is not on track to meet its Paris climate target
• Climate Change in Australia: Greenhouse gases
• Mental health, environment top concerns for young Australians
• Climate council accuses federal government of 'reckless lack of leadership' on renewables