14/08/2021

(AU EDO) Landmark Bushfire Survivors’ Climate Case Is Heard

Environmental Defenders Office

Bushfires ravage the NSW Mid-North Coast in 2019. By Ash Hogan via CC Licence.

Survivors of devastating bushfires have taken the NSW Environment Protection Authority to court, in a landmark climate case this week.

For the first time, an Australian court has allowed evidence on climate change to be heard in a case involving an alleged failure by a government agency to perform a statutory duty.

On Monday, former chief scientist Professor Penny Sackett gave evidence in Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action case against the New South Wales EPA, telling the court that:

“We know we’re in a dangerous situation now.  I personally don’t want it to be any more dangerous.

“1.5 (degrees warming) is not a magical temperature … however, the thing that does distinguish it is that … this is still a target that we can meet. When I say we, I mean globally, the world.”

On Tuesday, the court heard that EDO’s clients would like to tender further evidence from Professor Sackett in light of the IPCC’s dire 6th report on climate change, released on Monday evening.

Richard Beasley SC told the court, “We already know that the NSW environment is suffering under the impacts of climate change right now. We know that the impacts are likely to get much greater without extraordinary measures being taken.

“There could hardly be more significant pollutants now for the environment than greenhouse gas emissions. And so we say that the duty imposed on the EPA is one that must respond to the level of threat that the NSW environment faces.

“The threat is of significant damage to the environment, not just to NSW, but the globe, if there is temperature rise of 1.5 degrees or more. The science is just clear on that, and frankly, it’s been clear for a while.”

The three-day hearing before Chief Judge Preston in the NSW Land and Environment Court has now concluded.

The Landmark Case Begins
Bushfire Survivors for Climate Change Action at Parliament House in Canberra.

Environmental Defenders Office (EDO) is representing Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action (BSCA) in the case against the independent authority over its alleged lack of greenhouse gas emissions policy.

The group’s members are people who lost their homes, communities, loved ones and peace of mind in bushfires; people who’ve fought fires as RFS or other volunteers, community leaders concerned about the impact and growing risks of bushfires and primary producers who’ve watched stock and wildlife impacted by bushfires and their after-effects.

The group’s president Jo Dodds has lived through three bushfires, including Black Saturday in 2009, the Tathra bushfires in 2018 and the megafires of 2019/20.

BSCA filed the case in April 2020, following the Black Summer bushfires that ripped through large swathes of New South Wales.

The group is seeking to encourage and, if necessary, compel the NSW EPA to develop policies to measure and regulate greenhouse gases in the state.

BSCA argues that the EPA is not only explicitly empowered by its legislation to take strong action on climate by controlling the emission of greenhouse gases, it is also required to do this under its own laws.

Win over climate evidence

Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action President Jo Dodds.

In November 2020, the Land and Environment Court ruled that BSCA would be allowed to prepare expert scientific evidence on climate change for the hearing.

It was the first time an Australian court has ruled on whether evidence on climate change can be put forward in a case involving an alleged failure by an authority to perform a statutory duty.

The November ruling also permitted evidence to be prepared on whether the emissions trajectories for New South Wales, Australia, and the world, are in line with the Paris Agreement goals to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, and to examine the link between climate change and bushfire risk.

NOTE: Elaine Johnson is the Solicitor on Record for BSCA and Matt Floro is the Senior Solicitor with carriage of this matter. EDO would like to thank Richard Beasley SC and David Hume of Counsel for their generous assistance.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , ,

(AU The Conversation) Communicating Climate Change Has Never Been So Important, And This IPCC Report Pulls No Punches

The Conversation -  |  | 

AAP Image/James Ross

Authors
  •  is Honorary Fellow, School of Earth Sciences, The University of Melbourne
  •  is Senior Knowledge Broker, Monash University
  •  is Lecturer in climate science and science communication, The University of Melbourne
On Monday, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released the first instalment of their sixth assessment report. As expected, the report makes for bleak reading.

It found all regions of the world are already experiencing the impacts of climate change, and its warming projections range from scary to unimaginable.

But the report also makes for dry reading. Even the Summary for Policymakers, at 42 pages, is not a document you can quickly skim.

Local governments, national and international policymakers, insurance companies, community groups, new home buyers, you and me: everyone needs to know some aspects of the IPCC’s findings to understand what the future might look like and what we can do about it.

With climate action more crucial than ever, the IPCC needs to communicate clearly and strongly to as many people as possible. So how is it going so far?

The most assertive report in 30 years

The gruelling IPCC process and an extensive author list of 234 scientists make IPCC reports the world’s most authoritative source of climate change information. Every sentence is powerful because each one has been read and approved by scientists and government officials from 195 countries.

So when the report states “it is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land”, there is absolutely no denying it. In fact, the IPCC has become progressively more assertive in the 30 years it has been assessing and summarising climate science.

In 1990, it noted global warming “could be largely due to natural variability”. Five years later, there was “a discernible human influence on global climate”. By 2001, “most of the observed warming […] is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations”.

This week’s reference to “unequivocal” human influence pulls no punches.

The IPCC needs to communicate clearly and strongly to as many people as possible. EPA/ALESSANDRO DELLA VALLE

Why has this language changed? Partly because the science has progressed: we know more about the complexities of the Earth’s climate than ever before.

But it’s also because the report’s authors understand the urgency of communicating the message effectively. As this week’s report makes clear, limiting warming to the most ambitious 1.5℃ goal of the Paris Agreement may be (at least temporarily) out of reach within decades, and the goal of keeping warming below 2℃ is also at risk.

As the IPCC’s scientific assessment reports are only published every seven years or so, this may be the authors’ last chance to warn people.

Climate change communication isn’t easy

Communicating any science is hard, but climate science has particular challenges. These include the complexities of the science and language of climate change, people’s misunderstanding of risk management, and the barrage of deliberate misinformation.

The IPCC has standardised the language they use to communicate confidence: “likely”, for example, always means at least a 2-in-3 chance. Unfortunately, research has shown this language conveys levels of imprecision that are too high and leads to readers’ judgements being different from the IPCC’s.

The gruelling report approval process also means IPCC statements can be conservative to the point of confusion. In fact, a 2016 study showed IPCC reports are getting harder to read. In particular, despite the IPCC’s efforts, the Summaries for Policymakers have had low readability over the years, with dense paragraphs and too much jargon for the average punter.

Condensing the IPCC report to its highlights, such as in this graphic, is an effective way to engage time-poor readers. Monash Climate Change Communication Research Hub/IPCC

There has also been a rise in communication barriers since the final part of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report was released in 2014, including more fake news, and climate news fatigue.

The IPCC’s complex results can appear controversial and hotly debated, because of politicisation and a well-funded disinformation campaign from fossil fuel giants. And with news so often passed through social media, it’s easy for people to turn to someone they trust, even if that person’s information is wrong.

While there has been an increase in communication imperatives, including the urgency for action and the increase in science information, these are all taking place during a headline-stealing global pandemic.

Also, people are exhausted. Eighteen months of living with a pandemic has probably shrivelled everybody’s ability to take on more big problems.

On the other hand, hunger for COVID-19 information has raised familiarity with exponential curves, model projections, risk-benefit calculations, and urgent action based on scientific evidence to combat a global threat.

Remaining hopeful

To address the challenges of communicating the science, climate communicators should aim for consistent messages, draw on credible information, focus on what is known rather than the uncertainties, offer tangible action, use clear language that avoids despair, connect locally, and tell a story.

To a large extent, Australian contributors to the IPCC release this week have done just that, chiselling relevant facts from the IPCC’s brick of a report into blogs and bites. To its credit, the IPCC has also provided a plethora of communication resources in different formats. This includes videos, fact sheets, posters and, for the first time, an interactive atlas enabling you to explore past and possible future climate changes in any region.

However, there’s (so far) less focus on information for different audiences, such as students, young people, managers and planners rather than just politicians and scientists.

And the atlas, while a great tool, still requires users to have some climate science literacy. For example, average users looking for future climate information may not understand that CMIP6 and CMIP5 are the next, and previous, generations of climate models used by the IPCC. While mainly focusing on the report’s terrifying findings and commitment to global warming, media coverage this week also emphasised the importance of immediate action, and sources of hope.

This is a positive approach because feeling that humanity cannot, or will not, respond adequately can lead to a lack of engagement and action, and eco-anxiety.

As Al Gore pointed out 15 years ago in An Inconvenient Truth:
there are a lot of people who go straight from denial to despair without pausing on the intermediate step of actually doing something about the problem.
Early next year, the IPCC will release two volumes about ways to adapt to, and reduce, climate change. After the confronting results of this first volume, the next two must provide messages of hope if we’re to keep fighting for our planet.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , ,

(AU EDO) $21 Million In Beetaloo Gas Grants To Face Federal Court Challenge

Environmental Defenders Office
The Environmental Defenders Office (EDO) has filed urgent proceedings on behalf of the Environment Centre Northern Territory (ECNT), challenging the lawfulness of a Federal Government decision to grant up to $21 million to gas company Imperial Oil and Gas.

The decision by the Commonwealth Minister for Resources and Water was announced earlier this month under the Beetaloo Cooperative Drilling Program, a program set up to provide funding for gas exploration activities in the Northern Territory’s Beetaloo sub-basin.

The legal action – a judicial review in the Federal Court – questions the lawfulness of the Beetaloo Cooperative Drilling Program and the decision of the Minister to grant these funds. The solicitor with carriage of this matter is Anna Gudkov, working with Ruby Hamilton, both under the supervision of Sean Ryan.

Grants under this program are subject to the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (Cth) which requires that the Minister not approve the expenditure unless he “is satisfied, after making reasonable inquiries, that the expenditure would be a proper use of…money”.

A “proper” use of money is defined by section 8 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act as one that is “efficient, effective, economical and ethical”.

The Federal Court proceeding filed by ECNT alleges that before deciding to give Imperial Oil and Gas up to $21 million to support their gas exploration activities, the Minister failed to make reasonable inquiries in respect of the increased risks of climate change if the Beetaloo Basin is exploited for gas development.

In addition, the filing argues the Minister failed to make reasonable inquiries into the economic risks of expenditure on these projects in the context of a world which is moving rapidly away from fossil fuel use.

The proceeding argues that an assessment of these risks is necessary under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act and the Minister made an error of law by not making reasonable inquiries into these risks prior to making a decision on this expenditure.

On behalf of ECNT, EDO has also sought an undertaking from the Minister that he will not execute a grant agreement with Imperial Oil and Gas, and/or transfer public funds to Imperial until the legality of his decision to make the grant is clarified by the Court.

“This case is about whether the proper process has been followed in respect of the Federal Government’s decision to grant $21 million to Imperial Oil and Gas for exploration activities in the Beetaloo sub-basin in the Northern Territory,” said EDO CEO David Morris.

“Our client will argue that before making a decision to grant these funds, the relevant Minister needed to make reasonable inquiries into a range of risks, including climate and economic risks, that may arise from the expenditure.”

“We will argue on behalf of our client that the Federal Government did not make these reasonable inquiries, and thus the Minister’s decision is invalid.”

Co-Director of ECNT, Dr Kirsty Howey stated, “We want to see taxpayers money used wisely and with all the consequences being fully considered. Granting $21 million to a private fossil fuel company should only be done after all care is taken to examine the impacts on climate change, the environment and the community.”

“The law requires the Minister to be satisfied that the expenditure is a proper use of money having made reasonable inquiries. We say that means inquiries into the risks of a heating climate if the heart of the Northern Territory was opened up to fracking.”

The Court documents argue that Minister Pitt didn’t make reasonable inquiries about climate change risks, transition risks to a zero carbon economy, and risks associated with failing to meet the targets of the Paris Agreement.

“It’s not apparent from the available public documents that the Minister made any inquiries about the climate change risks of gas developments in the Beetaloo”, added Dr Howey.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , ,

13/08/2021

(BBC) Climate Change: Low-Income Countries 'Can't Keep Up' With Impacts

BBC - Navin Singh Khadka

Caribbean island countries say their adaptation plans are not effective because hurricanes have become more powerful. Getty Images
Low-income countries are struggling to protect themselves against climate change, officials and experts have told the BBC.

Organisations representing 90 countries say that their plans to prevent damage have already been outpaced by climate-induced disasters, which are intensifying and happening more regularly.

The UN says the number of developing countries with climate adaptation plans has increased. But it stresses that there's limited evidence these plans have reduced any risks.

"We need to adapt our plans to the worsening climate crisis. Our existing plans are not enough to protect our people," says Sonam Wangdi, chair of the UN's Least Developed Countries (LDC) Group on climate change.

Their call for action comes as the UN's climate science body prepares to publish its latest assessment on Monday about the state of global warming.

The report, compiled by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, will provide a scientific assessment of current and future climate change, and be a key reference for policymakers at the UN climate summit in Glasgow this November.

The world has already warmed by about 1.2C since the industrial era began, and temperatures will keep rising unless governments around the world make steep cuts to emissions.

Chaos in the Caribbean

Climate experts say houses in the Caribbean countries are unable to stand against category five hurricanes. Getty Images
Last year, the Caribbean had a record-breaking 30 tropical storms - including six major hurricanes.

The World Meteorological Organisation says the region is still recovering.

On islands like Antigua and Barbuda, experts say that many buildings have been unable to withstand the intense winds these storms have brought.

"We used to see category four hurricanes, so that's what we have prepared for with our adaptation plans, but now we are being hit by category five hurricanes," says Diann Black Layner, chief climate negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States.

"Category five hurricanes bring winds as strong as 180 miles per hour which the roofs cannot withstand because it creates stronger pressure inside our houses," she said.

Falling seawalls in Pacific islands
Pacific island countries say their defences against rising seas and cyclones are proving to be increasingly weak. Getty Images
Several Pacific Island countries were hit by three cyclones between the middle of 2020 and January 2021.

"After those three cyclones, communities in the northern part of our country have seen the sea walls built as part of their adaptation plans crumbling," says Vani Catanasiga, head of the Fiji Council of Social Services - a group representing Fijian NGOs in the country's Disaster Management Council.

"The water and the wind repeatedly battering the settlements even displaced some locals."

Although it's rare to see so many storms in such a short space of time, experts say sea storms have been growing in strength.

Studies suggest tropical cyclones have become more intense in the past 40 years, but an increase in the overall number of cyclones has not been established.

Uganda's mountain menace
Some African countries say intensified landslides and floods have rendered their adaptation efforts useless. Getty Images
In Uganda, communities in the Rwenzori region have been trying to protect themselves from landslides and floods by digging trenches and planting trees, helping to prevent soil erosion.

But it has not always been a success.

"The rains have become so intense that we have seen huge, sudden floods sweeping away these defences," said Jackson Muhindo, a local climate change and resilience coordinator for Oxfam.

"As a result, there have been multiple landslides on mountain slopes which have buried settlements and farms," he adds. "Adaptation works based on soil conservation are proving to be increasingly useless in the wake of these extreme weather events."

Adaptation low on the agenda

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change says more than 80% of developing countries have begun formulating and implementing their national adaptation plans.

But a study by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), published last month, suggests that the 46 of the world's least-developed countries don't have the financial means to "climate proof" themselves.

The IIED says these countries need at least $40bn (£28.8bn; €33.8bn) a year for their adaptation plans. But between 2014-18, just $5.9 billion of adaptation finance was received.

Developing countries say adaptation has not been a priority issue among their wealthier counterparts. Getty Images
Under the UN climate convention, the EU and 23 developed countries have pledged to make $100bn available every year to fund climate-related projects in developing nations - like schemes to cut emissions, and adaptations to mitigate damage caused by weather-induced disasters.

From 2020, this money will be passed on through the Green Climate Fund, Global Environment Facility and other such agencies. But developing countries argue that promise has largely been unkept.

A report by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) showed developed countries had made nearly $80bn available in 2018 as total climate finance. But it found that only 21% of that money was provided for adapting to climate impacts, while most went towards cutting carbon emissions.

Developing countries have criticised climate finance figures provided by developed world, pointing out they also include money from regular aid payments.

Some experts say adaptation plans have been hampered by politics.

"When you have other issues like [bad] governance, poverty and now Covid, it becomes very difficult for the plans to work. They simply aren't a government's priority," according to Carlos Aguilar, a climate adaptation expert with Oxfam.

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

(EDF) New IPCC Report Zeroes In On Urgency Of Reducing Methane

Environmental Defense Fund - 

The new report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the direst warning yet that we must rapidly and drastically slash climate emissions around the world and that reducing methane emissions is mission critical.

Though the report includes some important opportunities, it’s a very sober read.

Let’s get some of the central but troubling conclusions out of the way.

We’ll likely pass 1.5C earlier than expected

Conducted by more than 200 of the world’s most influential climate scientists, the new assessment concludes we’re on course to surpass 1.5 C of warming by 2040, roughly a decade earlier than predicted in IPCC’s 2018 landmark report.

A warming of 1.5 C will likely result in stronger and more frequent heat waves, heavier rainfall and flooding, more severe droughts and more powerful storms.

Each of these become more severe as we pass 1.5 C. Absent dramatic climate action, we could exceed 2 C of warming around midcentury and more than 5 C by 2100. The last time the planet sustained above a 2.5 C temperature increase was 3 million years ago.

Changes are happening everywhere, and some are accelerating and irreversible

The rate of sea level rise was twice as fast from 2006 to 2018 than from 1971 to 2006, and three times as fast as 1901 to 1971.

Carbon dioxide levels are the highest in at least 2 million years.

The last time the ocean warmed this quickly was at the end of the last ice age. Even as we reduce emissions, some consequences will continue before they abate: oceans will continue to warm and glaciers and ice sheets will continue to melt.

That’s a lot to process, and it will make some people feel hopeless. But there are important conclusions in the report that point us toward meaningful and powerful solutions.

Every degree matters

This report makes the existential threat of climate change undeniable, but it underscores the need for action now. IPCC concludes that every 0.5 C of global warming will worsen extreme events.

Extreme heat, heat waves and heavy rainfall will further intensify and become more frequent.

More areas will be affected by drought, and tropical cyclones will become more powerful. Likewise, every incremental increase in temperature rise we avoid matters, too.

The harsh conclusions by these scientists should not dissuade us from action, but should push us toward it.

Reducing methane is critical to slow warming and hit climate targets

Carbon dioxide is the most plentiful and longest-lasting climate driver.

Methane, though it is less prevalent, is more than 80 times as powerful a heat trapper over the first 10-20 years, and human-made methane emissions are responsible for at least a quarter of today’s warming.

That means reducing methane has an outsized impact on near-term temperature rise even as we work to reduce CO2 pollution.

In a red alert climate emergency, we need every available option to get us off life support, and IPCC recognizes that reducing methane is a critical one.

The report cites robust evidence that methane reductions will improve air quality and that sustained reductions are essential to achieving Paris Agreement targets.

This builds on findings from a scientific paper published in April, which showed a rapid, all-out effort to substantially reduce methane emissions could slow the rate of current warming by 30%.

Fully deploying known solutions could avoid 0.5 C of warming by end of century.

This avoided warming could be the difference between a 2 and 1.5 degree world and mean 10 million fewer people at risk from sea level rise, half the number of people stressed for water, and half the number of plant and animal species losing crucial habitat.

And the quickest, most cost-effective reduction technologies are in the oil and gas industry.

Decreasing methane from the agriculture and waste sectors, two other major emitters, is also important.

But reducing methane pollution from the oil and gas sector remains the fastest, lowest-cost opportunity to slow down the speed of warming now — and in light of the IPCC report, we need policymakers moving with greater urgency and ambition to eradicate these emissions.

Reducing methane will not solve the climate crisis alone, but it is an unparalleled opportunity to shave off incremental warming that can keep planetary temperatures below 2 C.

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

(UK The Guardian) Global Food Supplies Will Suffer As Temperatures Rise – Climate Crisis Report

The Guardian - 

Politicians around world continue to respond to report from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Wheat harvesting season in Ghaziabad, India. When heat and humidity is high, people cannot work safely in the fields. Photograph: Pradeep Gaur/SOPA Images/REX/Shutterstock

Food production around the world will suffer as global heating reaches 1.5C, with serious effects on the food supply in the next two decades, scientists have warned, following the biggest scientific report yet on the climate crisis.

Rising temperatures will mean there will be more times of year when temperatures exceed what crops can stand, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in its sixth assessment report published on Monday.

Politicians around the world continued to respond to the report. 

Boris Johnson, British prime minister, published a video on his social media channel, setting out the four areas he wanted to focus on in the run up to the autumn’s climate change summit: outlawing coal for power generation by 2040, ditto fossil fuels for transport; getting countries to stump up cash to help poorer nations with climate change; and ending “the massacre of the forests”.

US president Joe Biden was under pressure to get his climate change legislation passed after saying “We can’t wait to tackle the climate crisis. The signs are unmistakable. The science is undeniable. And the cost of inaction keeps mounting.”

In Australia PM Scott Morrison pointed the finger at China, saying in a press conference on Tuesday that it could not be ignored that the developing world accounts for “two-thirds of global emissions”, and adding that China’s emissions “accounted for more than the entire OECD combined”.

The Chinese government issued a statement to AFP saying that “China has insisted on prioritising sustainable, green and low-carbon development”. It added that President Xi Jinping intended to “strictly control” the growth of coal power plants.

Challenges to our food production systems will be just one of the impacts, the report found: changing rainfall patterns will leave many areas vulnerable to drought, while extreme weather will make agriculture harder and damage crops.

Bonnie Waring, senior lecturer at the Grantham Institute, Imperial College London, said: “Across the globe, over 80% of calories consumed come from just 10 crop plants, including rice, maize, and wheat.

Although a few staple crops – like soybean – may do better in a warmer future, warming temperatures and increasingly frequent droughts are likely to reduce yields of these key crops across many regions of the globe.”

The full spectrum of the damage will not be fully revealed until next year, when the IPCC publishes the second part of its landmark assessment, which will cover the impacts of climate breakdown on key areas of human life and the planet.

The first part of the report, published this week, deals with the physical science basis of climate change – that is, what will happen to the atmosphere, seas and land – but from those finding many of the likely harms to agriculture can already be assessed.

Ilan Kelman, professor of disasters and health at University College London, said: ““If we fail to act, then significant numbers of people could face major problems with food. Increased heat and humidity will harm current crops and livestock, with droughts and floods having the potential to wipe out harvests as well. Massive shifts in agricultural practices, including changes to crops and livestock, would be needed to counter these effects.”

David Reay, professor of carbon management at Edinburgh University, added: “For key staples like rice – the main source of nourishment for over a billion of us – warming is not just changing rainfall patterns, it is threatening the glacial meltwaters that irrigate millions of hectares of South Asian croplands. ”

Extreme weather this year has also revealed another major impact: when “wet bulb” temperatures soar, people cannot safely work in the fields. These conditions occur when both heat and humidity are high, and people’s bodies cannot wick away sweat efficiently.

Some people have speculated that warming temperatures could be good for agriculture, by allowing for longer growing seasons in northern latitudes, and from the fertilising effect of more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which plants absorb from the air as they grow.

Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science at UCL, dismissed these claims. “Any benefits are likely to be small and will be outweighed by the damages and the risk of extreme weather,” he said, warning that food prices rises will also be a major danger.

Animal husbandry will also be affected, though reducing our reliance on meat and dairy products is likely to be one of the key ways of slowing global heating: Methane, much of it from agricultural sources including ruminants and manure, is one of the leading causes of climate breakdown identified in the IPCC assessment report.

Rob Percival, head of food and health policy at the UK’s Soil Association, said people did not need to give up eating or producing meat, but that food consumption patterns needed to change alongside food production.

“A rapid transition to agroecological farming offers a healthier and more sustainable approach to producing our food and requires a shift in our diets to less and better meat, with an emphasis on fresh fruit and vegetables and the consumption of more pulses and legumes,” he said.

Shefali Sharma, director of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, told the Guardian that all areas would be affected, not just the poorer regions of the world where many farmers are already vulnerable, and that all governments must act urgently.

“Governments must begin taking urgent steps now to build resilience into agri-food systems. This means building soil health, agricultural biodiversity in crops and animals, serious extension work that builds on traditional knowledge and local breeds and seeds and adequate support for adaptation.”

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

12/08/2021

(AU The Guardian) It Should Not Come As A Surprise That Climate Change Is Worse Than We Thought And Also Getting Worser

The Guardian - First Dog On The Moon

If it wasn’t time to listen before (it was) it is time to listen now (yes it is).

Cartoon by First Dog on the Moon
LARGE IMAGE
Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , ,
Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )

Lethal Heating is a citizens' initiative