26/07/2021

(AU The Conversation) Not Declaring The Great Barrier Reef As ‘In Danger’ Only Postpones The Inevitable

The Conversation -  |  | 

Shutterstock

Authors
  • , PSM, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University
  • , Associate Professor, James Cook University
  • , Distinguished Professor, James Cook University
After much anticipation, the World Heritage Committee on Friday decided against listing the Great Barrier Reef as “in danger”.

The decision ignored the recommendation of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the UNESCO World Heritage Centre — a recommendation based on analyses by Australian scientific experts of the reef’s declining condition.

In many ways, the outcome from the committee was expected. The Australian government fought very hard against this decision, including lobbying all the committee members, as it has done in previous years.

There was consensus among most of the 21 committee members to not apply the in-danger listing at this time. Instead, Australia has been requested to host a joint UNESCO/IUCN monitoring mission to the reef and provide an updated report by February, 2022.

This decision has only postponed the inevitable. It does not change the irrefutable evidence that dangerous impacts are already occurring on the Great Barrier Reef. Some, such as coral bleaching and death from marine heatwaves, will continue to accelerate.

The reef currently meets the criteria for in-danger listing. That’s unlikely to improve within the next 12 months.

Political distractions

Last month, the World Heritage Committee released its draft decision to list the reef as in-danger, noting the values for which the reef was internationally recognised had declined due to a wide range of factors. This includes water pollution and coral bleaching.

The draft decision had expressed concerns that Australia’s progress:
has been largely insufficient in meeting key targets of the Reef 2050 Plan [and the] deterioration of the ecological processes underpinning the [Reef has] been more rapid and widespread than was previously evident.
A photo depicting two threats to the Great Barrier Reef: coal ships anchored near Abbot Point and a flood plume from the Burdekin River (February 2019); such plumes can carry pollutants and debris to the Great Barrier Reef. Matt Curnock

In response, the government claimed it was “blindsided”, and said the UNESCO Secretariat hadn’t followed due process in recommending the decision. It also suggested there had been undue interference from China in making the draft recommendation.

These were political distractions from the real issues. During last night’s debate, one committee member strongly refuted the claims about interference from China and expressed concerns the dialogue had become unnecessarily politicised.

Following the draft decision, the intense campaign to reverse the decision began, with environment minister Sussan Ley undertaking a whirlwind visit to numerous countries to meet with ambassadors.

The government even hosted international ambassadors from 13 countries and the EU, taking them on a snorkelling trip. And it reported an increase in coral cover over the past two years as good news, ignoring the fact the assessment had cautioned the recovery was driven by weedy coral species most vulnerable to future climate impacts.

This wasn’t the first time Australia has undertaken significant levels of diplomatic lobbying of World Heritage Committee members to gain support for its position.

In 1999, Australia also strongly opposed the recommended in-danger listing of Kakadu National Park, following the Jabiluka mine proposal. This led to an extraordinary meeting of the committee being convened in Paris, specifically to discuss this matter.

Australia is expected to hand in an updated report on the reef in February 2022. Shutterstock
More focus on climate change
During its current meeting, the World Heritage Committee approved the draft UNESCO Climate Action Policy, which will guide the protection and conservation of World Heritage sites.

This policy will be ratified at the UN General Assembly later this year, but the fact it’s still a draft was one of several excuses the Australian government made as to why the reef should not be “singled out”.

The reef is one of the most iconic marine protected areas on the planet. Given Australia continues to have one of the highest per capita emission rates in the world, and has more capacity to address climate change than most other countries, it makes sense for the spotlight to be on Australia’s actions.

Marine heatwaves and water pollution are major threats to the Great Barrier Reef. Shutterstock

Not surprisingly, climate change was the central issue during the committee’s debate last night. UNESCO is now more focused on climate change than ever before, recognising the “window of opportunity to act” is now.The delegates broadly agreed climate change remains the most serious threat, not just to the Great Barrier Reef but also to many other iconic World Heritage properties. Venice, for example, also dodged a potential in-danger listing at this meeting.

Rather than making challenging decisions now, it’s clear the committee is simply kicking the can down the road. Some committee members remarked during the meeting about the need to “maintain the credibility of the Convention” and acknowledged that the world is watching. The spotlight on the reef, and on Australia, will only intensify in coming years.

The government’s own report from 2019 shows many of the values for which the reef was inscribed on the World Heritage list in 1981 have declined in recent decades. Yet every delay weakens Australia’s claim it is doing all it can to protect the reef.

Later this year, the next major international climate summit will be held in Glasgow, Scotland, where even more attention will be placed on Australia’s inadequate actions.

An in-danger listing is not a punishment

It’s important to remember that throughout the meeting, UNESCO and the committee made it clear an in-danger listing is not a sanction or punishment. Rather, it’s a call to the international community that a World Heritage property is under threat, thereby triggering actions to protect it for future generations.

Now, more than ever, it is important to expand efforts to reduce the locally manageable impacts, such as poor water quality, while rapidly accelerating action on climate change.

These efforts must occur locally, nationally and globally. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is critical to stop the worst of the impacts now unfolding, not just on the reef, but on all the world’s natural and cultural heritage.

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

(AU SBS) Australia Accused Of ‘Censoring Science’ After Great Barrier Reef Avoids World Heritage ‘In Danger’ Listing

SBS - Rashida Yosufzai | Biwa Kwan

Federal Environment Minister Sussan Ley says lobbying almost 20 nations led to the outcome as parties were convinced by the "merits of our argument". But scientists say they are concerned politics has eclipsed the science.

An undated photo of the Great Barrier Reef near the Whitsunday, Australia. Source: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority

The Australian government has praised the United Nations World Heritage Committee for its decision to avoid adding the Great Barrier Reef to the World Heritage list of 'in danger' sites. 

But scientists have voiced concerns over the decision, saying assessments conducted on the ground painted a clear picture of the threats it faced.

After hold a series of face-to-face meetings in Europe with committee members, Environment Minister Sussan Ley presented Australia's case on Friday evening, winning support from 19 of the 21 members on the committee.


Read More

Great Barrier Reef avoids UNESCO 'in danger' listing after Australian lobbying effort
The committee, meeting online in China's Fuzhou city, voted to delay any decision on the reef's status until 2023. 

Australia has been asked to provide an updated report on the state of reef by February 2022 and the committee said it is interested in a monitoring mission to visit Australia to study the reef's current condition.

Ms Ley said the decision "was a good one" and a recognition of the strength of the federal government's argument. 

"In meeting almost 20 countries virtually or in-person, the merits of our argument won the day," she told SBS News.

"I can honestly say that. Because we said that this 'in danger' listing makes no sense without a site visit, without consultation and without the latest science. Those points were well understood."

'Stop censoring science'

Scientists who have been monitoring the Great Barrier Reef said they are concerned that politics has eclipsed the scientific analysis. 

ANU Emeritus Professor Will Steffen said the scientific assessments conducted on the ground paint a clear picture of the threat facing the Great Barrier Reef.

“Australia must stop censoring science, and start taking the steps to help protect the Reef. This is history repeating itself," said Prof Steffen, who is also a Climate Council spokesman.

 An undated photo of Hardy Reef, part of the Great Barrier Reef. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
"In 2015, I reviewed a UNESCO report on climate change and World Heritage sites, which included the Great Barrier Reef. In the final report, all mention of the Reef was cut completely, after the Australian government successfully pressured UNESCO to remove any reference to it.

"This censorship of science is wrong, but sadly a common tactic used by this government. It’s wasting time and effort that we can’t afford to waste."

Dr Dean Miller, Director of the Great Barrier Reef Legacy, spent the last month surveying and documenting the climate change impacts on the reef.

"It seems politics has won the day, not the Great Barrier Reef," he said.

"You can improve the water quality, kill many crown-of-thorns starfish, and replant as many corals as you like, but when the heat stress events driven by a changing climate hit the corals have nowhere to hide. You can't address one without the other. It's coral or coal. It could not be any simpler."

Government defends management of Great Barrier Reef

The Great Barrier Reef has come very close to being added to the 'in danger' list over the years, including in 2015.

Last month, the federal government said it was dissatisfied with the recommendation from the World Heritage Centre and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature to add the Great Barrier Reef to the 'in danger' list.

The groups said the reef's recovery plan needed to include "clear commitments to address threats from climate change" to match the obligations of the Paris climate agreement.

Environment Minister Sussan Ley says the World Heritage Committee decision "was a good one". AAP 
A series of mass coral bleaching events in 2016, 2017 and 2020 destroyed half of the shallow-water corals, depleting the rate of coral reproduction. 

Ms Ley said Australia's management of the reef is at a high level and that the main reason the Reef was even being considered for an 'in danger' listing was the impact of climate change. 

"There was really good recognition around the World Heritage Committable table that Australia is doing an incredible amount to manage our Reef with $3 billion of investment - that Australia should not be singled out for a climate change reason when the whole world is dealing with the climate change effect on World Heritage properties," she said.

She said committee members were receptive to the argument that Australia did not belong in the same category of countries on the World Heritage 'in danger' list for being "recalcitrant" in its obligations to protect a World Heritage site. 

"An 'in danger' listing would have made no sense. And that is why overwhelmingly the consensus of the meeting was that 'in danger' should not appear anyway on the decision that came out of that meeting. 

"Because the issue that confronts the World Heritage Committee - the reason why we had that recommendation in the first place - is global climate change. 

"Now, we are a Paris signatory. We are meeting and beating our targets. We are 1.3 per cent of global emissions. But we are also working with technology internationally to hasten the take-up of low emissions technology, of carbon capture. We are well and truly playing our part."

Read More

Government 'blindsided' after UNESCO recommends listing Great Barrier Reef as 'in danger'
Ms Ley said the federal government had invested $3 billion in recovery projects and the Reef 2050 plan.

"An in-danger listing is about how the country manages its site. And the way we manage our site is outstanding - as was recognised. 

"So the issue is we are continuing to spend record amounts managing, looking after and caring for our Barrier Reef."

Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk said she would like to see increased funding to match the state government's spending of $2 billion on renewable energy, $270 million on water quality, and $500 million on land restoration.

"Today sets a clear timeline now the for the federal government to show that it’s acting to protect the Great Barrier Reef.

"The eyes of the world are watching – especially with the 2032 Olympic Games. More has to be done."
Australia has committed to a target to reduce emissions by between 26 and 28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.

Climate change scientists have calculated that to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, Australia would need to almost triple its 2030 pledge to a 74 per cent emissions reduction on 2005 levels.

Under a scenario of 1.5 degrees Celsius of global warming, up to 90 per cent of the world's corals will perish, according to a 2019 UN report.

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

(Surviving C21) Our Existential Crisis: What Is To Be Done?

Surviving C21 - Julian Cribb

 
Author
Julian Cribb is an Australian author and science communicator.
He is a fellow of the Royal Society for the Arts, the Australian Academy of Technological Science (ATSE) and the Australian National University Emeritus Faculty.
He is a Member (AM) of the Order of Australia (General Division).
The accompanying article is the text of a speech given by him to Australia21, July 2021.
Quarter of a century ago, as a science writer, I began encountering a lot of rather depressed scientists.

Every day they went to work and grappled with data showing that the Earth was falling apart.

Species were vanishing at accelerating rates, poisons were spreading unchecked, the climate becoming more violent, oceans fouled and lifeless and vital resources like soil, water, fish, large animals and forests were disappearing.

The scientists were soon joined by concerned grandparents. Then the grandparents were joined by a multitude of millennials and young people and finally by many educated people of all ages and backgrounds,

Many of these fear that we are in the endgame of human history.

As a journalist, I didn’t know for a fact whether this was true or not. But I knew I could find out, by studying the world’s best science, from the finest institutions and leading minds.

The result was a book, ‘Surviving the 21st Century’ which concluded humanity faces an existential crisis consisting of ten, interconnected, mega-threats all bearing down on us at the same time.

These threats cannot be solved one by one, as solving one threat generally makes others worse. They must all be solved together, at the same time, using cross-cutting solutions that make none of them worse.

These findings have informed the establishment of the Council for the Human Future.

Here is a brief review of what the latest science is saying about each of the megathreats:

EXTINCTION: the current mass extinction rate is 1,000-10,000 times higher than natural background rates. It is currently proceeding three times faster than the event that took out the dinosaurs. It is entirely due to humans. It may be the second worst such event in Earth history. The loss of species at such a rate is predicted to cause the collapse of ecosystems that sustain human life.

CLIMATE: Despite moves to limit carbon emissions in Europe and the US, the rest of the world is increasing them. They rose even during the covid lockdown. Currently they total 37 billion tonnes and will soar as economic activity picks up.  CO2 concentrations are the highest in human history at 419ppm, and NASA has just warned that the Earth is now trapping twice as much heat as it did in 2005. The icecaps are melting and sea levels rising much faster than predicted. 1.5 degrees is now seen by many scientists as a politically unattainable target. We are on track for +4 degrees by 2100. At this level the world will lose about a third of its agriculture, creating famines, mass migration and wars. Heatwaves will kill millions. There are 3-5 trillion tonnes of frozen methane in the Earth’s crust, vastly more powerful as a climate driver than CO2: if this gets loose we are, quite literally, cooked.

POLLUTION: The world produces <220 billion tonnes of chemical emissions yearly – five times more than our climate emissions. They will double by 2030. There are 350,000 manufactured chemicals, most never tested for human safety. These toxins are in our air, our food, our water, our homes and workplaces. Deaths from chemical poisoning and disease are between 9 and 12 million a year, making this the worst case of mass homicide in human history. It is damaging human IQ and causing pandemics of brain disease and cancers. Very little is presently being done to prevent it.

RESOURCES: The world is entering a freshwater crisis, with over half the human population facing acute scarcity by 2050. Losses of topsoil now amount to 48-75 billion tonnes a year and will halve the food growing area by mid-century. The world has lost over a third of its forests and they continue to shrink at 10 million hectares per year. 90 per cent of the world’s fish stocks are now overfished. The number of ocean dead zones has tripled since the 1950s. Humanity now uses a full year’s resources in just 8 months.

NUCLEAR WEAPONS: The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has set the Doomsday Clock at 100 seconds to midnight – the highest threat level since the H-bomb fell on Japan. “Modernisation of nuclear programs in multiple countries have moved the world into less stable and manageable territory. Development of hypersonic glide vehicles, ballistic missile defences, and flexible weapons-delivery systems may raise the probability of miscalculation. Governments in the United States, Russia, and other countries appear to consider nuclear weapons more-and-more usable, increasing the risks of their actual use.” The Bulletin rates the nuclear threat as far worse than Covid-19.

PANDEMIC DISEASE: There have been six pandemics since 2000 (Flu H1N1, MERS, SARS, Ebola, and Covid. HIV continues to rage). On average a new pandemic arises every 2-3 years. Primary drivers are environmental destruction, overpopulation, air travel and scientific error. The resumption of travel will increase their spread. New plagues are unavoidable so long as populations remains high and densely packed. Some will be more deadly than Covid.

POPULATION: World population is just shy of 8 billion and growing at a net rate of 85m or 1% a year. Urban population is 4.4 billion and megacities are at increasing risk of collapse due to water scarcity, fragile food chains and failing infrastructure. Global fertility rates are still 2.4, about 0.2 above ‘replacement’. The UNPD’s median forecast has the population peaking in the 2060s and starting to decline naturally towards 2100 from around 10 billion – five times what the Earth can support sustainably. However, most governments, afraid of an ageing population, continue to bribe their people to have more children. 

FOOD INSECURITY: The world food supply is on a knife-edge. Loss of access to fresh water, loss of topsoil and a more hostile climate mean that agriculture will be unable to supply humanity’s needs from the mid-century on. There will be an increase in droughts, famines, pests, refugee crises and wars. Despite this, the world clings to an outdated model for food production when other, far safer, healthier and more effective means to produce food exist. The modern industrial diet is now implicated in 2 out of every 3 deaths.

UNCONTROLLED TECHNOLOGIES: Dangerous new technologies such as artificial intelligence, robotic killing machines, synthetic biology and quantum computers are proliferating without public oversight or government control.  

MASS DELUSION: The most deadly aspect of these combined threats is mass ignorance, disinformation and the rise in false beliefs. The four greatest belief systems – money, politics, religion and the human narrative – are all founded on delusion.

Together, these ten megathreats add up to the greatest existential challenge humans have ever faced.

However, it is a challenge than can be solved. We have the brains and the technology to solve it. But we do not yet have the institutions, the awareness or the collective will.

Here, for example, are some of the most urgent solutions:
  1. Outlaw all nuclear weapons, eliminate their stockpiles and safely recycle or bury their materials.
  2. End all extraction and use of fossil fuels and their byproducts, pesticides, plastics and petrochemicals by 2030. Replace with renewable energy. Rewild half the Earth’s land area.
  3. Create a circular global economy in which every resource is recycled and nothing is lost, wasted or allowed to pollute.
  4. Develop a renewable world food system consisting of:
  5. Regenerative agriculture
  6. Urban food systems that recycle water and nutrients
  7. Deep ocean farming of plants, fish and marine animals. (See Food or War)
  8. Return half of the world’s current farmlands to forest or wilderness to end the 6th Extinction. Create a Stewards of the Earth program to implement it.
  9. Create a new Human Right Not to Be Poisoned and a Clean Up the Earth Alliance (see Earth Detox), to eliminate all forms of toxic pollution. Introduce a global inventory and universal safety testing of all manufactured chemicals.
  10. Introduce a world plan to progressively and voluntarily reduce the human population by 75 per cent by 2120.
  11. Prevent future pandemics by ending environmental destruction (5), banning dangerous scientific experiments, discouraging global travel, creating early warning systems and reducing world population (7).
  12. Put Women in Charge. Unlike men, women do not start wars, wreck oceans, fell forests, ruin landscapes, pollute and poison. They do care about the needs of future generations.
  13. Introduce a global megarisk awareness and education platform, as proposed by the Council.
The challenge facing humanity is vast – but solutions are both feasible and available.

The question is whether humans have the intelligence to adopt them.

At present no government on Earth has a policy for human survival.

The mission of the Council for the Human Future is to spread these facts and solutions as fast and far as we possibly can.

Our purpose is to help save literally billions of lives that will otherwise be needlessly sacrificed.

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

25/07/2021

(The Guardian) IPCC Steps Up Warning On Climate Tipping Points In Leaked Draft Report

The Guardian -  and agencies

Scientists increasingly concerned about thresholds beyond which recovery may become impossible

Dried area of the Penuelas Lake, in Valparaiso, Chile. Hunger, drought and disease will afflict tens of millions more people within decades, according to a draft UN assessment. Photograph: Martin Bernetti/AFP/Getty Images

Climate scientists are increasingly concerned that global heating will trigger tipping points in Earth’s natural systems, which will lead to widespread and possibly irrevocable disaster, unless action is taken urgently.

The impacts are likely to be much closer than most people realise, a a draft report from the world’s leading climate scientists suggests, and will fundamentally reshape life in the coming decades even if greenhouse gas emissions are brought under some control.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is preparing a landmark report to be published in stages this summer and next year. Most of the report will not be published in time for consideration by policymakers at Cop26, the UN climate talks taking place in November in Glasgow.

A draft of the IPCC report apparently from early this year was leaked to Agence France-Presse, which reported on its findings on Thursday. The draft warns of a series of thresholds beyond which recovery from climate breakdown may become impossible.

It warns: “Life on Earth can recover from a drastic climate shift by evolving into new species and creating new ecosystems … humans cannot.”

Tipping points are triggered when temperatures reach a certain level, whereby one impact rapidly leads to a series of cascading events with vast repercussions.

For instance, as rising temperatures lead to the melting of Arctic permafrost, the unfreezing soil releases methane, a powerful greenhouse gas that in turn causes more heating.

Climate tipping points could topple like dominoes, warn scientists.  Read more

Other tipping points include the melting of polar ice sheets, which once under way may be almost impossible to reverse even if carbon emissions are rapidly reduced, and which would raise sea levels catastrophically over many decades, and the possibility of the Amazon rainforest switching suddenly to savannah, which scientists have said could come quickly and with relatively small temperature rises.

Bob Ward, the policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, said: “Scientists have identified several potential regional and global thresholds or tipping points in the climate beyond which impacts become unstoppable or irreversible, or accelerate.

"They could create huge social and economic responses, such as population displacements and conflict, and so represent the largest potential risks of climate change. Tipping points should be the climate change impacts about which policymakers worry the most, but they are often left out of assessments by scientists and economists because they are difficult to quantify.”

Previous work by the IPCC has been criticised for failing to take account of tipping points. The new report is set to contain the body’s strongest warnings yet on the subject.

Simon Lewis, a professor of global change science at University College London, said: “Nothing in the IPCC report should be a surprise, as all the information comes from the scientific literature.

"But put together, the stark message from the IPCC is that increasingly severe heatwaves, fires, floods and droughts are coming our way with dire impacts for many countries.

"On top of this are some irreversible changes, often called tipping points, such as where high temperatures and droughts mean parts of the Amazon rainforest can’t persist. These tipping points may then link, like toppling dominoes.”

Earth is trapping ‘unprecedented’ amount of heat, Nasa says.  Read more

He added: “The exact timing of tipping points and the links between them is not well understood by scientists, so they have been under-reported in past IPCC assessments.

"The blunter language from the IPCC this time is welcome, as people need to know what is at stake if society does not take action to immediately slash carbon emissions.”

Myles Allen, a professor of geosystem science at the University of Oxford, declined to comment on the draft report but stressed that avoiding dire impacts was still possible. “It’s important people don’t get the message ‘we’re doomed anyway so why bother?’.

"This is a fixable problem. We could stop global warming in a generation if we wanted to, which would mean limiting future warming to not much more than has happened already this century.

"We also know how. It’s just a matter of getting on with it,” he said.

According to AFP, the IPCC draft details at least 12 potential tipping points. “The worst is yet to come, affecting our children’s and grandchildren’s lives much more than our own,” the report says.

The report may be subject to minor changes in the coming months as the IPCC shifts its focus to a key executive summary for policymakers.

It says that with 1.1C of warming above pre-industrial levels clocked so far, the climate is already changing.

A decade ago, scientists believed that limiting global warming to 2C above mid-19th-century levels would be enough to safeguard the future.

That goal is enshrined in the 2015 Paris agreement, adopted by nearly 200 nations who vowed to collectively cap warming at “well below” 2C – and 1.5C if possible.

On current trends the world is heading for 3C at best.

Earlier models predicted that Earth-altering climate change was not likely before 2100.

But the UN draft report says prolonged warming even beyond 1.5C could produce “progressively serious, centuries-long and, in some cases, irreversible consequences.”

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , ,

(AU ABC) Australia Avoids Great Barrier Reef Global Embarrassment, But The Dangers Of Climate Change Remain For The Reef

ABC News - Michael Slezak

Australia has avoided the embarrassment of the Great Barrier Reef being labelled in danger after lobbying by Environment Minister Sussan Ley. (ABC/AAP)
When the scientific advisors to UNESCO recommended the Great Barrier Reef be added to UNESCO's in-danger list, Environment Minister Sussan Ley claimed the process stunk.

She argued it was a result of dirty politics, not science.

So it's a matter of some irony that her victory this week — avoiding an in-danger list for at least another couple of years — comes after some skilled politicking.

If there are claims that politics have swayed outcomes, then let's strip away the politics and look at the facts — the things that actually matter to the reef.

The Great Barrier Reef will not be added to UNESCO's "in danger" list this year, after environment minister Sussan Ley's whirlwind diplomatic effort won enough support. Read more



In 2015, the Great Barrier Reef narrowly escaped being listed as "in danger".

And regardless of that decision, and whether it fits UNESCO's criteria this time around, the facts show the reef clearly in danger.

'Dead corals don't make babies'

Mass bleaching events on the reef were a new — but still relatively rare — phenomenon back in 2015. The first one was in 1998 and then there was another in 2002.

The combined impact of those two bleaching events, outbreaks of crown of thorns starfish and severe cyclones mean the reef has lost half of its hard coral cover since 1985. 

That rate of loss is unprecedented in the previous 400 years, according to the Australian Institute of Marine Science.

Layered on top of that, the reef was being assaulted by fossil fuel giants developing major infrastructure along its coast.

Three massive LNG plants had just been built in the World Heritage Area on Curtis Island off Gladstone, the construction of which involved dredging.

And Adani was proposing to expand the Abbot point coal terminal, and dump dredge spoil in the World Heritage Area.

Adani's Abbot Point coal storage and dam beside Caley Valley wetlands in north Queensland. (Supplied: Adani)
 
Regardless, Australia was spared the embarrassment of an in-danger listing at the time, with stern words from UNESCO about acting on climate change, and the need for the reef's declines to halt and "reverse".

But fast forward six years and Adani's dumping proceeded, mass bleaching events hit three times in five years, and Australia's policies on climate change have not grown in ambition.

The 2016 and 2017 bleaching events wiped out half the shallow-water corals and the next year, coral reproduction dropped by nearly 90 per cent.

"Dead corals don't make babies," Professor Terry Hughes from James Cook University said at the time.

The reef's return

Despite the 2020 bleaching event, the reef has been in a period of recovery since 2019, and the most fast-growing (but also most fragile) corals have boomed, and coral cover in many parts of the reef has today returned to levels not seen since the 1980s.

Great Barrier Reef in 'recovery window'.
But it could be short lived

The Great Barrier Reef is experiencing a rare window of recovery due to a break in weather and bleaching events according to the latest observations from marine scientists. Read more
But the repeated insults have changed the reef, and left it more vulnerable. Those fast-growing corals make up a much greater percentage of the overall cover, and are much more vulnerable to storms, bleaching and predation.

"Because of these vulnerabilities and likelihood of more climate-related severe weather events, future disturbances may result in rapid decline on these reefs," said Dr Mike Emslie from the Australian Institute of Marine Science when their long-term monitoring results were released this month. 

Through all this, the official outlook for the reef remains "very poor".

And according to the federal government's Great Barrier Reef Authority: "The window of opportunity to improve the Reef's long-term future is now." 

Environment Minister Sussan Ley with Prime Minister Scott Morrison. (AAP)

Despite all that, Australia again avoided the embarrassment of a listing this year.

But without Australia taking international leadership on climate change, it's hard to see how it will be avoided in the years to come.

UNESCO has said that Australia's plan for the reef needed to include actions to address climate change, which are in line with the Paris Agreement, which involves trying to stop climate change at 1.5C of warming.

That makes sense, because even at 1.5C of warming, up to 90 per cent of the world's corals could be lost.

And for Australia's targets to be consistent with the agreement, Australia will need to nearly triple its ambition for 2030.

All that certainly sounds like "danger" for the reef.

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

(AU RenewEconomy) Australia Lifted Fossil Fuel Subsidies More Than Any G20 Nation, Says BNEF

RenewEconomy - 


Australia’s financial support of fossil fuels increased by 48% over the five-year period between 2015 and 2019, the biggest increase in fossil fuel subsidies among G20 nations, and putting the country well behind its peers in supporting the goals of the Paris Agreement.

A new report from BloombergNEF (formerly Bloomberg New Energy Finance), called the Climate Policy Factbook, shows that Australia – along with a number of other G20 countries – is failing to keep up with even the bare minimum of climate action necessary.

Australia, it says, is lagging in all three areas highlighted in the report – the phasing out support for fossil fuels, putting a price on carbon emissions, and making companies disclose the risks they face due to climate change.

Moreover, while the report graciously describes Australia’s response to carbon pricing and climate-risk disclosure as “mixed”, it is Australia’s continued financial support for fossil fuel projects which draws the biggest concern, categorised in the report as heading in the “Wrong direction”.

According to BloombergNEF’s figures, Australian financial support for fossil fuels between 2015 and 2019 grew by 48% – the largest increase amongst all G20 nations, totalling $US38 billion ($A52 billion).

In 2019, that translated into a fossil fuel subsidy of $293 per person. And while the share of financial fossil fuel support spent on coal was zero in 2019, this just meant there was more left over to go towards oil and gas consumers.


Tax breaks formed the lion’s share of Australia’s financial fossil fuel support thanks to capex deductions for mining and petroleum operations, fuel-tax credits, reduced fuel-excise rates, and offset schemes.

Bloomberg’s report was less critical of Australia’s positions on both carbon pricing and climate-risk disclosure, but in both instances, there remains significant room for improvement.

Bloomberg says the Safeguard Mechanism “lacks ambition … as it was not designed to cut emissions – just ensure they remain below the baseline.”

And while the Australian Government has scrapped a real carbon price on industry and power generation – claiming such a mechanism would damage business – Australian businesses are nevertheless voluntarily ramping up their own investments to offset carbon emissions.

According to figures published earlier this month by market analyst RepuTex, Australia’s carbon market has grown by 21% in the first six months of 2021, with the spot price rising to $20 a tonne – and expected to increase further to over $50 a tonne by 2030.

Australia’s lacklustre, and at times blatantly obtuse climate action, is unfortunately not an outlier. Bloomberg’s latest Climate Policy Factbook shows that, together, the G20 provided $US636 billion ($A870 billion) in direct support for fossil fuels in 2019 alone – only 10% below 2015 levels.

During the report’s timeframe, eight G20 countries increased their support for fossil fuels – notably Australia, Canada, and the United States – “encouraging the use and production of fossil fuels, distorting prices, and risking carbon ‘lock-in’ – where assets funded today continue to emit high levels of emissions for decades ahead.” To make matters worse, five countries allocated over $US1 billion to coal in 2019.

 
Over the five-year period covered in the Factbook, G20 governments provided $US3.3 trillion worth of direct support for coal, oil and gas, and fossil-fuelled power – an amount which, at today’s prices, could have funded 4,232GW worth of new solar plants.

China, unsurprisingly, provided nearly a quarter of the 2019 financial support for fossil fuels, but by a per-capita accounting was nevertheless well below the G20 average – with China’s fossil fuel support working out to $104 per capita compared to the G20 average of $313 per capita.

In contrast, Saudi Arabia’s support for fossil fuels per capita led the way at $1,962, followed by Argentina well back at $734 and Russia at $523.

“Given that the G-20 accounts for nearly three-quarters of global emissions, progress from those governments in these three areas would mark a huge step forward toward tacking climate change,” said Victoria Cuming, head of global policy at BloombergNEF and lead author of the Factbook.

“So far, they have yet to step up to the plate.”

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

Lethal Heating is a citizens' initiative