Rupert Murdoch's British Papers Delayed As Climate Protesters Stop The Presses

Sydney Morning Herald - Reuters

The distribution of several British newspapers was disrupted on Saturday after Extinction Rebellion climate change activists blockaded printing presses used by Rupert Murdoch's News UK, the publisher of The Times and The Sun.

The group said late on Friday that nearly 80 people had blocked roads leading to two printworks, at Broxbourne in Hertfordshire, north east of London, and at Knowsley, near Liverpool. The protests continued through to Saturday.

Extinction Rebellion protesters blockade Murdoch printing sites

Hertfordshire police said they had made 13 arrests.

The Murdoch-owned Newsprinters works also print the Daily Mail, the Daily Telegraph and the Financial Times.

Extinction Rebellion said it took the action to highlight what it regards as the newspapers' failure to accurately report on climate change.

A Newsprinters spokeswoman said the disruption meant printing had to be transferred to other sites.

Two protesters attached to bamboo and two sitting on the roof of a van block the road, outside Broxbourne newsprinters. Credit: PA via AP

"We apologise sincerely to any readers of The Sun, The Times, the Daily Mail, the Daily Telegraph and the Financial Times who may be unable to buy their usual newspaper this morning due to late deliveries," she said.

"This attack on all of the free press impacted many workers going about their jobs. Overnight print workers, delivery drivers, wholesale workers and retail newsagents have faced delays and financial penalty. This is a matter for the Police and the Home Office."

An Extinction Rebellion climate activist attends a rally highlighting the plight of indigenous peoples and the natural environment in the Amazonian area, at Trafalgar Square in London, Britain September 5, 2020. REUTERS/Toby Melville

The blockade is part of a week of protests by Extinction Rebellion, including on Wednesday in Parliament Square where demonstrators lay under white sheets to represent corpses.

The group says an emergency response and mass move away from polluting industries and behaviours is needed to avert a looming climate cataclysm.

Links

• Extinction Rebellion climate protesters arrested after blocking printing of Murdoch-owned British newspapers
• James Murdoch criticises father's news outlets for climate crisis denial
• James Murdoch resigns from News Corp board over 'certain editorial content' in news outlets
• As Australia burns, it's Murdoch versus Murdoch on climate change
• James Murdoch’s resignation is the result of News Corp’s increasing shift to the right – not just on climate
• How 'Murdochracy' controls the climate debate in Australia
• (AU) How Rupert Murdoch Is Influencing Australia’s Bushfire Debate
• Murdoch-Owned Media’s Radical Climate Denial In The Face Of Disaster

Greta Thunberg: Don't Dump Climate Crisis On Children To Fix

The Guardian - Lanre Bakare

World political leaders must step up on the environment, activist tells Venice film festival showing of documentary about her


Greta Thunberg says new film captures her 'shy, nerdy' personality

The Swedish activist Greta Thunberg has called for more action to be taken to address the climate crisis, which she says has slipped dangerously off the political agenda.

Thunberg appeared by video link at the Venice film festival where the film, I Am Greta, has been screened. It documents her life as one of the most famous teenagers in the world after she became the figurehead for a global climate crisis campaign.

She said: “Yes, we need more science. We need to do more research, definitely. But what we need above all is to take take action to change the social landscape, political action, so maybe that’s where I can be most useful.”

Thunberg said that the Covid-19 crisis had shown that world leaders were incapable of dealing with two emergencies at once, and said that climate change should be treated with urgency.

“All other things have had to be put on hold. We definitely need to realise the urgency of the climate crisis, and treat it as a crisis, because otherwise we will not be able to achieve real change,” she said.

She went on to criticise world leaders, saying too much responsibility was being placed on children to raise awareness of the climate crisis. “We should not be the ones having to do this. It should be up to adults and people in power in those who have caused this problem in the first place.”


Watch a clip from I Am Greta

During the making of the film, Thunberg was followed by documentary film-maker Nathan Grossman, who recorded her everyday life after she rose to fame for her climate activism.

She said at times during the year-long process she thought Grossman’s one-man setup was “unprofessional” but, ultimately, she was pleased with the way he had portrayed her as a “shy nerd”.

Thunberg added: “I think [Grossman] succeeded in framing me as myself and not the angry, naive child who sits in the United Nations General Assembly screaming at world leaders. Because that’s not the person I am.”

The activist said there had been too much focus on her as an individual, and she hoped the film could be a “bridge” for people who wanted to know more about the climate emergency.

She hoped the film would help to “increase momentum” and spread awareness at a time when protesting and activism have been reduced because of Covid-19 restrictions around the world.

Thunberg added that it was symbolic to have the film screened in Venice, a city that suffered severe flooding in 2019 that its mayor blamed on climate change.

The activist signed off from the press conference to go to school in Sweden. In August, Thunberg announced she was returning to the classroom after taking a year off to protest.

Links

• Greta Thunberg says Venice documentary shows her real self
• Greta Thunberg tells world leaders to end fossil fuel ‘madness’
• Greta Thunberg in Twitter spat with German rail firm
• Hundreds of young people join Greta Thunberg in climate protest outside UN
• 'Time to rebel': Greta Thunberg adds voice to new song by the 1975
• Lethal Heating: Greta Thunberg Posts

(US) Retired General: Climate Change Is A Threat To National Security, Military Readiness

AZCentral - Anton L. Delgado

Climate change is a continuing threat to national security both at home and abroad, according to Stephen Cheney, a retired brigadier general who is now president of the American Security Project.

Airman 1st Class Christopher Bress, a bioenvironmental engineering technician, adjusts the Wet Bulb Globe Thermometer used daily at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base to assess extreme weather conditions. Courtesy of Dorothy Sherwood

"What we have seen today is unprecedented heat going on in the country and in the world. Those of you who are in Arizona certainly understand," Cheney said this week in an online forum.

"We have to acknowledge the risk of climate change. The risks are real and growing every day," he said. "If there is any one part of us that is threatened the most, it's our national security."

Cheney spoke specifically about how climate change in Arizona could affect national security during his keynote address in a webinar hosted by Arizona Forward, the Environmental Defense Fund and the Association of Defense Communities.

The issues are connected and need greater attention, organizers said.

“National security is typically not a top-of-mind issue when we consider climate change," said Lori Singleton, president and CEO of Arizona Forward. "But recognizing the serious impacts of climate and weather-related events occurring across the country, we were interested in learning more about this critical topic.”

The most direct affect climate change has on national security in Arizona is in the state’s military bases.

“Climate change really impacts military training readiness in Arizona because extreme heat is going to limit the amount of time a person can spend outside,” Cheney said. “As a former commander of a Marine Corps base, we have always put health and safety as no. 1. We are going to protect the troops first.”

Retired Brig. Gen. Stephen Cheney is now the president of the American Security Project. Courtesy Stephen Cheney

Training for heat-related hazards

Arizona is home to multiple military bases representing several branches, including: Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Luke Air Force Base, Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range, Yuma Proving Ground Army Base, Camp Navajo Army Base, Fort Huachuca and Marine Corps Air Station Yuma.

If a black flag is flying over any of these bases that usually indicates all physical training and strenuous exercise is suspended. Across the Air Force, Army and Marines, the flag flies when temperature hits 90 degrees and above.

Davis-Monthan Air Force Base recognized its first black flag day this summer on July 8. There have been 16 others since, according to Master Sgt. Kate Grady.

Grady is the base's flight chief of bioenvironmental engineering. She oversees any occupational health and safety issues facing airmen on base. One of her daily tasks is reading a wet bulb globe thermometer and reporting its results to command.

“It helps us alert the base to conditions and allows us to try to alleviate any heat stress issues airmen may encounter,” Grady said. “When we do have hot conditions, that doesn’t mean the mission stops, but people adhere to them as much as possible by taking more breaks and drinking more water.”

The Wet Bulb Globe Thermometer used daily at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base to assess extreme weather conditions. Courtesy of Dorothy Sherwood

Airmen commonly participate in the Air Force’s Thermal Injury Prevention Program to learn how to address the issues posed by extreme temperatures in Arizona. Grady said it teaches airmen how to adapt to the heat and still complete their mission.

“Training makes them aware of heat-related hazards and aware of what they can do to keep it from affecting them,” Grady said. “We do our best to take care of our people and we work with what we have because the mission always needs to get done.”

There have been no heat stress-related deaths or medical issues at Davis-Monthan so far this summer, Grady confirmed.

As part of daily temperature collection, Grady also factors in the fighter index of thermal stress. This considers the conditions a pilot may face while in the cockpit of an aircraft.

'Too hot to fly'

Less flight time will be another side effect of extreme temperatures, Cheney said in the online forum.

“Extreme heat means in some cases it’ll be too hot to fly,” Cheney said. “Heat creates thinner air, which won’t have enough density for planes to take off.”

As summer temperatures continue to break records in Arizona, Cheney said flights and physical training will most likely start taking place at night.

“While there are benefits to this because wars happen no matter what time of day, switching to a night model in a training base is incredibly disruptive,” Cheney said. “Everyone in all of the services has families and the whole aspect of normal living gets disrupted if everything starts getting done at night.”

During his years of active service, Cheney served as the executive officer of an artillery battalion in California. The unit was so well known for its nightly operations that one of its slogans is, “We own the night.”

“Take my word for it, no other country in the world operates as well at night as the U.S., but it’s really not ideal for our troops in training,” Cheney said.

Cheney believes the most effective step to mitigate the warming weather and maintain national security is for the Department of Defense, the government’s largest consumer of fossil fuels, to invest in renewable energy and lower its CO2 emissions.

“The military understands this but given certain administrations it has waxed and waned in importance,” Cheney said. “Even if you choose not to believe that human activity contributes to climate change, we can’t wait until there is a 100% certainty. We have to do something about climate change.”

In Arizona, he says the solution lies in solar power.

“It’s so hot in your state because the sun is shining so much, so use that. Use what is heating us up to cool us down,” Cheney said. “Arizona could take the national lead in solar energy because it has the environment and landscape to do so.”

According to the Solar Energy Industries Association, Arizona ranks third in the country for cumulative amount of “solar electric capacity” installed in the first quarter of 2020.

Beyond the military push to combat climate change, Cheney’s suggestion to the 130 Arizonan businesses, cities and other environmental non-profits who attended the webinar, was to fight carbon emissions from the ground up.

“The average Joe would say there is nothing we can do about it, but that’s not true. Don’t be like the average Joe. Moderate your air conditioning, cut down on power use, there are a multitude of things the individual American can do,” Cheney said. “When we’ve all done that, we can also start leaning pretty hard on our elected officials to make sure they are making the best decisions for our community.”

Links

• Climate Change: A Threat to International Peace & Security?
• Coronavirus Shows We Are Not At All Prepared For The Security Threat Of Climate Change
• A Security Threat Assessment Of Global Climate Change: How Likely Warming Scenarios Indicate a Catastrophic Security Future
• (AU) Is Morrison Government Fit For Purpose, Or The Greatest Danger To Our National Security?
• (AU) Climate Change Is A Serious Threat To National Security
• (AU) 'Dystopian Future': Climate Change To Force Review Of Military's Role
• Could Climate Change Become A Security Issue — And Threaten Democracy?
• Climate Change Poses A ‘Direct Threat’ To Australia’s National Security. It Must Be A Political Priority
• Climate Change Is A National Security Issue
• Lethal Heating: Security Posts

28 Trillion Ton Ice Melt Spells Danger For Sea Level Rise, Climate Change

WBUR Boston - Robin Young | Samantha Raphelson

An aerial photo taken on Aug. 17, 2019 shows a view of the Apusiajik glacier on the southeastern shore of Greenland. (Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP via Getty Images)

A total of 28 trillion tons of ice has disappeared from the Earth’s surface since 1994, according to the results of a study that shocked the U.K. researchers who conducted it.

This report fulfills the worst-case scenario that was predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 30 years ago. Scientists from Leeds and Edinburgh universities and University College London predict that by the end of this century, sea level could rise by more than 3 feet.

Researchers studied satellite imagery of the planet's ice-covered surfaces, including glaciers, mountains and poles, to determine the amount of ice melt triggered by global heating caused by rising greenhouse gas emissions.

It’s the first study to examine loss of ice coverage from every region of the planet, says one of the study’s co-authors, professor Andrew Shepherd, director of the Leeds University Centre for Polar Observation and Modeling. His team has previously studied ice loss with a focus on Antarctica and Greenland.

“But when we added everything up together, we saw similar amounts of ice being lost in every corner of the planet, actually,” he says. “And so that multiplied up what we'd been looking up from Antarctica alone, for instance, to a number that was much, much bigger and really quite worrying.”

Shepherd says the total ice melt measures out to about a trillion tons each year — and the Earth’s ice continues to melt. The rate of ice loss has risen by 57% since the 1990s, from 0.8 to 1.2 trillion tons of ice per year, according to the report.

To put that total of 28 trillion tons in perspective, it would cover an area about the size of the U.K.

“If you spread all of that ice on the U.K., for instance, where I live, it would be 100 meters thick, 330 odd feet,” he says. “I mean, that's a thick layer of ice, and the U.K. is not a small country.”

The study looked at two types of ice on Earth: the ice on the ground and the ice that’s normally floating in the sea. If the ice that is normally above land melts into the sea, it will cause sea level to rise, Shepherd says. Every centimeter of sea level rise that's about a third of an inch means a million people will be displaced.

Sea level rise often presents a bigger problem for low-lying islands, leading many people to believe they won’t be affected by it, Shepherd says.

“But it's become increasingly apparent that the bigger threat to our lifestyles and also livelihoods is coastal flooding when we have intense storms which superimpose themself upon the mean sea level,” he says.

Scientists expect sea level to rise by an average of 50 centimeters over the next few decades, which increases the frequency of coastal flooding, Shepherd says. So these coastal flooding events will become much more common than in the past.

“We expect an extra million people to be flooded once per year with every centimeter of sea level rise,” he says.

The ice melting on the surface of the ocean is also concerning because those ice sheets keep Earth cooler, Shepherd says. That ice melt will also speed up the rate of sea level rise.

According to the report, the surface temperature of the planet has risen by 0.85 degrees Celsius since 1880, which has in turn driven up sea and atmospheric temperatures and led to this catastrophic ice loss.

“If you retreat the sea ice, particularly in the Arctic Ocean, but also now in the Southern Ocean, you just bring forward in time the sea level rise that we thought might be 50 or 100 years away,” Shepherd says. “It's going to happen sooner because the floating ice is melting, too.”

The scientists’ conclusions affirm the IPCC’s worst fears reported in the group’s first assessment report 30 years ago, which confirmed that climate change was real and was caused by increasing levels of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels.



The report comes in the middle of an unprecedented pandemic and residual economic collapse across the world. Shepherd says the experience of 2020 has taught people that they can adapt their lifestyles, which means similar measures could be taken to slow down climate change.

“We've learned through this natural experiment that the world doesn't end when we change our lifestyles, and we can continue and be prosperous,” he says. “And so it's been a little bit of a fortunate experiment because people can't say now that we can't adapt to climate change.”

Through the current economic downfall, people have also realized that “economies can be rebalanced to deal with emergencies,” Shepherd says.

“We've found cash where people believed it didn't exist, and we could do the same for climate change,” he says. “It's a simple economic cost. We can't continue to allow coastal cities to be flooded and people to bear the costs.”

At this point, it’s unrealistic to think we will be able to cool the planet back down, but what we can do is slow down the rate at which the Earth continues to warm, Shepherd says. Hopefully, we can do so at a rate slow enough to allow us to adapt.

“We're living in a time when ice is melting everywhere on the planet, and now we've got 20 or 30 solid years of satellite measurements,” he says. “It's really impossible for people to deny that that's happening.”

Links

• Earth has lost 28 trillion tonnes of ice in less than 30 years
• Earth's ice imbalance
• Estimating global mean sea-level rise and its uncertainties by 2100 and 2300 from an expert survey
• The climate crisis has already arrived. Just look to California’s abnormal wildfires
• Covid is 'restart button' for climate action, Royal Institution Christmas lecturers say
• Antarctica: 60% Of Ice Shelves At Risk Of Fracture, Research Suggests
• Greenland’s Ice Sheet Melted At A Rate Equivalent To ‘Six Olympic-Sized Swimming Pools Every Second’ Last Year
• Canadian Ice Shelf Area Bigger Than Manhattan Collapses Due To Rising Temperatures
• Devastating Simulations Say Sea Ice Will Be Completely Gone In Arctic Summers By 2050
• Greenland's Melting Ice Raised Global Sea Level By 2.2mm In Two Months
• Hotter Oceans, Wilder Weather, Less Ice: The IPCC Upgrades Projections To Catastrophic

Why ‘Carbon Neutral’ Is The New Climate Change Mantra

Washington Post - Jeremy Hodges

A view of the cooling towers of the Drax coal-fired power station near Selby, northern England on September 25, 2015. Photographer: OLI SCARFF/AFP/Getty Images

The industrialized world has been spewing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases faster than they can be contained for centuries. Climate change, and growing popular frustration about the inadequate response, is pushing countries to take action, or at least say they will.

Becoming carbon neutral -- also known as climate-neutral or net zero -- is now a legal requirement in some countries, while European authorities are adopting legislation to become the first net zero continent. Even oil companies are getting in on the act.

1. What is carbon neutral?

It means cutting emissions to the very limit and compensating for what can’t be eliminated. Countries, for example, can spur the use of cleaner vehicles, transition their economies away from carbon-intensive heavy manufacturing and switch to greener sources of electricity such as wind and solar. Companies can adjust their practices, so a data center operator might switch to renewable power or an airline might purchase carbon offset credits.



2. What are carbon offset credits?

Developed by the United Nations and non-profit groups, these let the buyers emit a specified amount of greenhouse gas, which is offset by using the money raised to fund carbon-reduction projects such as reforestation. Carbon offsetting has spiked in the past year as more companies and individuals adopt the approach. There’s also an effort to harness existing markets that trade pollution permits to provide a similar mechanism.

3. Who’s trying to be carbon neutral?

What was a vague concept only several years ago is now a widely adopted goal that’s central to efforts to combat climate change. Dozens of countries have committed to go net zero, or at least outperform carbon-reduction targets set out in the landmark 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change. The U.K. and France are among a growing number of nations worldwide to have passed legislation requiring net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. The European Union proposed to completely overhaul its economy to achieve the same goal and will pour more than 500 billion euros ($590 billion) into everything from electric cars to renewable energy and agriculture. Dozens of global cities and companies have announced carbon-neutral initiatives. Even oil giant BP Plc is planning to become a net-zero emissions company by 2050. Buildings, airlines and events have also made the pledge, while investments groups managing almost $5 trillion of assets have committed to having carbon-neutral portfolios by 2050.

4. What’s driving this?

Climate experts blame the vast build-up in atmospheric CO2 and other greenhouse gases since the Industrial Revolution for speeding up global warming. Without radical measures to reduce emissions, scientists warn that the fight against climate change will become unwinnable. CO2 pollution is still rising -- 2019 was another record -- and is unlikely to peak before 2040, driven by growing use of fossil fuels, says the International Energy Agency.

5. How will the goals be reached?

More urgent government action is needed to trigger changes in transport, infrastructure, land use and how cities are built. To get anywhere close to net zero by 2050, the world must invest $2.4 trillion in clean energy every year through 2035, according to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. That compares with $1.8 trillion spent in 2018 on all forms of energy systems. Coal should also be phased out almost entirely by mid-century, the panel said. Individuals are increasingly able to contribute. The market for consumer offsetting is flourishing, albeit with doubts over the effectiveness of some methods. Much will ride on technologies that on the grand scale required are as yet unproven, including carbon capture, using hydrogen as fuel and removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

6. Who’s policing the rules?

Nobody really. There is some oversight built into the Paris Agreement that holds countries accountable if their climate plans aren’t ambitious enough, but nothing is enforceable by law at a global level. So far, scientists, protesters, NGOs and investors have been the main source of pressure on countries to change and make sure their promises are kept. As well as countries, a growing number of U.S. states have enshrined their commitments into legislation, making pledges harder to break.

7. Is this all just talk?

That’s the big question. Any country can make its carbon footprint appear smaller by shifting the burden, for instance winding down polluting industries at home but buying the same products from abroad. Carbon offset programs are also fallible, since there’s no mechanism to guarantee purchases are legitimate. And lawmakers can make ambitious pledges in the knowledge they’ll be out of office before any deadlines hit. Skeptics call environmental promises rolled out for the sake of good publicity “greenwashing.” Still, politicians are taking note as public opinion shifts quickly, evidenced by a global wave of protests and support for activists such as Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg. Former Vice President Joe Biden, who will stand against Donald Trump in November’s U.S. presidential election, is proposing a climate plan that includes a carbon-free electrical grid by 2035 brought about by $2 trillion in climate-related spending over the next four years.

Links

• Carbon neutrality - Wikipedia
• European Parliament Endorses $1.6 Trillion Investment Plan For Green New Deal
• Opera House Goes Carbon Neutral Five Years Ahead Of Schedule
• Carbon Neutral is a carbon solutions provider and Australia's major biodiverse reforestation offset developer
• Carbon neutral and Go Neutral
• How are we making the City of Adelaide carbon neutral
• Australia’s first carbon neutral government
• Carbon Neutral Programs for Regional Australia
• How Australia can be a carbon-neutral nation by 2050

Portuguese Children Sue 33 Countries Over Climate Change At European Court

The Guardian - Jonathan Watts

Ground-breaking crowdfunded case demands that states make more ambitious emissions cuts

A wildfire in Monchique in Portugal in 2018. The case was initiated in 2017 after devastating forest fires in Portugal killed over 120 people. Photograph: Filipe Farinha/EPA

Young activists from Portugal have filed the first climate change case at the European court of human rights in Strasbourg, demanding 33 countries make more ambitious emissions cuts to safeguard their future physical and mental wellbeing.

The crowdfunded legal action breaks new ground by suing multiple states both for the emissions within their borders and also for the climate impact that their consumers and companies have elsewhere in the world through trade, fossil-fuel extraction and outsourcing.

The plaintiffs – four children and two young adults – want the standard-setting court to issue binding orders on the 33 states, which include the EU as well as the UK, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Switzerland and Ukraine, to prevent discrimination against the young and protect their rights to exercise outdoors and live without anxiety.

The case is being filed after Portugal recorded its hottest July in 90 years. It was initiated three years ago following devastating forest fires in Portugal that killed over 120 people in 2017. Four of the plaintiffs are from Leiria, one of the worst-hit areas. The two other applicants live in Lisbon, which sweltered through record-breaking 44C heat in 2018.

Expert testimony will warn that these trends will worsen in the future. On the current path of about 3C of warming above pre-industrial levels, scientists have predicted a thirty-fold increase in deaths from heatwaves in western Europe by the period 2071-2100. At 4C, which is also possible, they say heatwaves above 40C would endure for more than 30 days a year, quadrupling the risk of forest fires.

Catarina Mota, 20, said governments must act on scientific warnings because the climate crisis was already affecting young people psychologically and physically.

“I am afraid for the future,” she said. “Lately, it is already impossible to exercise outdoors. If that was only for a few days it would be fine but the heatwaves are extreme and recurring. I live with the feeling my home is becoming more hostile each year. It scares me a lot.”

Sofia Oliveira, aged 15, said her generation was acutely conscious of the dangers that lie ahead: “We have seen unbearable heatwaves that cause water shortages and damage food production, and violent wildfires that give us anxiety and make us afraid to travel through our country’s forests … If we already see these extremes in 2020 what will the future be like?”

She said the EU must commit to a minimum 65% emissions reduction target by 2030 and ensure a green recovery from the Covid crisis by investing in renewables and clean technology rather than fossil fuels.

The young applicants are being represented by British barristers, including Marc Willers QC, who are experts in environmental and climate change law, and supported by the London- and Dublin-based NGO Global Legal Action Network (Glan), which raised £27,000 through crowdfunding.

More than 1,300 climate-related lawsuits have been filed worldwide since 1990. The most successful so far was in the Netherlands, where the Urgenda Foundation forced the government into scaling back coal-fired power plants and taking other compliance measures worth about €3bn (£2.7bn).

Gerry Liston, legal officer with Glan, said the latest case could go further because Strasbourg sets standards that other courts follow. “This case is unique in scale. This is the most countries ever taken to a regional court in a climate change case. If we win, it will have a very significant effect throughout Europe.”

He noted that this was the first time the court had dealt with an issue that threatens the very system of rules it was established to uphold, citing a warning last year by the UN special rapporteur Philip Alston that human rights may not survive the upheaval caused by climate change.

The NGO behind the case says the legal campaign aims to amplify the pressure applied by school climate strikers.

“This is a culmination of all the campaigning that the youth movement are engaged in. Now they are asking the courts to step up. This is a last-ditch effort to put the ship back on a course that doesn’t involve catastrophic climate change,” said Gearóid Ó Cuinn, the director of Glan. “It is the youth who stand to be discriminated against. They bear the burden in terms of risk.”

The court will have to consider whether the case is admissible and then, if so, rule on the merits of the case. This could take months or years. A new phase of crowdfunding has been launched. Ó Cuinn said there was no time to wait: “The situation is dire. The climate threat dwarfs Covid. Given the urgency of dealing with emissions, we think our case should be a priority.”

Links

• Portuguese children to crowdfund European climate change case
• Six young people from Portugal are taking thirty-three countries to the European Court of Human Rights for failing to do their part to avert climate catastrophe
• Children -v- Governments of Europe & Climate Change
• Governments and firms in 28 countries sued over climate crisis – report
• More people heading to court to spur action on climate change, study finds
• ‘Climate apartheid’: UN expert says human rights may not survive
• Lethal Heating: Legal Posts

(AU) The Mystery Of The Murray-Darling’s Vanishing Flows

ABC News - Michael Slezak | Mark Doman | Katia Shatoba | Penny Timms | Alex Palmer

It might be the biggest whodunnit — or what-dunnit — in Australia.

More than 2 trillion litres of water — enough to fill Sydney Harbour four and a half times — has gone missing from our largest and most precious river system — the Murray-Darling Basin.

And it’s happened in what was already one of the driest periods the basin has seen.

According to an investigation by some of Australia’s top water scientists, shared exclusively with the ABC, 20 per cent of the water expected to flow down the rivers from 2012-2019 was simply not there. That’s despite almost $7 billion being spent to protect the health of the system’s rivers and ecosystems that rely on them.

Was it stolen? Was it lost? Has climate change made it go up in steam? Or was it simply never there in the first place?

There are clues scattered up and down the rivers but one simple message is clear in the scientists’ findings. For the first time, they provide evidence that the Murray-Darling Basin Plan — the most expensive environmental program in Australia’s history — is delivering much less water than was expected.

And the implications could be huge.

The Murray-Darling Basin covers a seventh of the continent, is home to nearly 10 per cent of Australia's people, and produces a third of our food.

The Murray-Darling Basin is enormous network of rivers, creeks, wetlands and valleys.

“It’s a huge discrepancy to be missing a fifth of the water that’s meant to be in the rivers,” said Jamie Pittock from the ANU. He’s an expert in water management and a co-author of the Wentworth Group’s report.

“It means that there are all sorts of things that Australians value that won’t be sustained … like more water for towns … the floodplains, growing grass for sheep and cattle, in terms of biodiversity being conserved, waterbirds, red gum forests and conserving our fish.”

Rob Vertessy is a hydrologist and chair of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority’s (MDBA) Advisory Committee on Social Economic and Environmental Sciences.

He said the report was an important contribution to the body of scientific knowledge on the system.

“It is pointing to a problem, which I guess people have had a sense of, but which hasn’t been properly dimensioned until now,” Professor Vertessy said.

“The levels of flow in the river are lower than everyone would have hoped.”

The MDBA itself worked with the Wentworth Group to help with the analysis over the past several months, and is completing its own similar analysis set to be released later this year.

The MDBA’s head of basin strategy, Vicki Woodburn, said the shortfall was not a failure of the basin plan itself, since it was still being implemented.

The missing water is a mystery — nobody knows exactly why it’s not being seen in the rivers.

But here’s the thing: there are clues. Lots of them. We’ve seen water go missing up and down the river with clear explanations before. And looking closely at the new report, many of those explanations are consistent with the new data.

Clue one: tampered meters and criminal prosecutions

One possible explanation for the shortfall is that some of the missing water has been stolen.

An investigation by Four Corners in 2017 put water theft in the spotlight — much of it around the Barwon-Darling catchment in the Northern Basin.

Irrigation pumps in the Barwon River near Brewarrina in New South Wales. AAP: Dean Lewins

Irrigators there, according to official figures, use 3 per cent of all the water taken from the entire Murray-Darling Basin.

But on top of those official figures, there has been significantly more water taken in that area. The Murray-Darling Basin Authority itself estimated that in the Northern Basin, as little as 25 per cent of surface water take has been metered.

Some of the water that went unmetered was stolen.

Peter Harris, who was named in the 2017 Four Corners, was this year found guilty of water theft just upstream from those gauges at Brewarrina.

Anthony Barlow, another person named in the program, was found guilty and fined $190,000, for water theft just upstream again.

Since the Natural Resources Access Regulator (NRAR) was formed in NSW in 2018, 15 additional charges have been laid in these locations across the state for water theft and related actions, according to an NRAR spokeswoman.

Emma Carmody, a lawyer at the Environmental Defenders’ Office, said the criminal prosecutions do not represent how widespread water theft has been.

“I’d actually go so far as to say that this situation pre-2018 was catastrophically bad in those northern catchments in relation to compliance and enforcement,” Dr Carmody said.

Irrigators deny water theft is a significant issue in the missing water mystery.

“I think if people are saying, ‘oh, well, this is about water theft’, then what they’re doing is really just trying to find someone to blame rather than trying to find solutions,” said Steve Whan, the CEO of the National Irrigators’ Council.

It’s probably impossible now to calculate the true scale of water theft over the seven years analysed by the Wentworth Group, but it’s unlikely to explain much of the shortfall. And whatever role it played, there are other key suspects in the case of the missing water.

Clue two: shadow take

Travel further upstream along the Macquarie River towards Dubbo, and you land in the internationally protected wetlands of the Macquarie Marshes.

It’s one of the largest remaining inland, semi-permanent wetlands in the Murray-Darling Basin and supports more than half a million birds in a large flood.

In the vast flat landscape, decent rains cause water to spill over the banks of the Macquarie and its tributaries and spread as far as the eye can see.

The Macquarie Marshes are listed as a wetland of international importance. ABC News: Matthew Abbott

In a landscape so flat, structures like roads, engineered channels and small levee banks can divert staggering volumes of floodwater — potentially shepherding it across a farmer’s fields where it is left to soak into the ground, or even pumped into dams.

This water taken by irrigators and graziers from the floodplains — rather than from the rivers — has hardly ever been measured.

Using satellite imagery, flood paths appear guided by seemingly innocuous structures, or completely cut off by others.



Richard Kingsford is a river ecologist at the University of New South Wales who has studied the Macquarie Marshes and the impacts of floodplain harvesting.

He says water that spills over floodplains often drains back into rivers, and interrupting its flow can have big impacts, including contributing to the missing flows.

“There are very few places where we have an accurate estimate of how much water is being taken from the floodplain. And to me, this has been a yawning gap in the policy,” he said.

This floodplain harvesting was not always illegal — so long as the earthworks were approved and the total amounts taken were within certain limits. But without proper measurement, nobody can be sure, and the volumes taken were unknown.

The idea that floodplain harvesting could explain some of the missing water fits with the data in the Wentworth Group’s report. In late 2016, there was a flood in some parts of the basin and despite there being much more water in that period, the shortfall remained high.

Infographic: Even in high-flow years, there were still discrepancies between the expected and observed flows at Marebone Break. (Source: Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists)

“During the wet sequences, which haven’t been frequent … I think it’s a matter of legitimate disquiet that many have about the failure to really bring those floodplain harvesting schemes into the calculations,” says Professor Vertessy.

“It’s well past the time that we should have a full fix on that,” he said.

In NSW, where the potential for floodplain harvesting is the biggest, rules are now being implemented to measure it.

Steve Whan from the National Irrigators’ Council said the new rules would help reduce shortfalls in future analyses.

“We’re seeing extensive work done to improve measurement, including bringing floodplain harvesting into a volumetric system … And all those things are really important steps. Many of them are still only partway through,” Mr Whan said.

Clue Three: The cash splash

If we head all the way to southern NSW, we see a completely different clue.

Billions have been spent subsidising “efficiency measures” to help farmers save water there.

That can be done by upgrading old irrigation systems to deliver water directly to roots, or lining water channels, for example. Then about half of the water saved by the farmers gets handed to the government for the environment.

But according to some experts, the “inefficiencies” prior to the upgrades just meant some of the water used by irrigators flowed back into the rivers. The upgrades mean that “return flow” stops happening.

“So when you say ‘I’ve saved all this water’, the question is what was it doing before it was saved?” said John Williams, another co-author of the Wentworth Group report and former head of the CSIRO’s Division of Land and Water.

In a report published in 2019, Professor Williams estimated that at least 280 billion litres of water per year might have been lost from the rivers — and are unaccounted for — due to this problem.

“That must be a major reason that we’re not getting the flow regimes that we need,” Professor Williams said.

The MDBA commissioned its own analysis of the issue and concluded the loss of return flows was reducing water in the rivers by 121 billion litres a year.

They say that review shows the reduction in return flows is not a significant factor and does not impact the outcomes of the basin plan.

“The most comprehensive analysis suggests it is an issue, but not a huge one,” said Professor Vertessy.

Clue Four: Climate change

There is one issue, however, that most experts do agree is a major reason for the missing water in the basin.

“The MDBA considers a changing climate to be the primary contributory factor,” said the MDBA’s Vicki Woodburn.

Since the basin plan was introduced, heat records across the area have been broken in four of the eight years. The last three years have been the hottest ever recorded in the basin.

Infographic: 2019 was the hottest year on record in the Murray-Darling Basin. (Source: Bureau of Meteorology)

According to the South Australian royal commission into the Murray-Darling basin plan, the MDBA “completely ignored climate change” when determining how much water needed to be saved.

If true, that means the overall target may have been set too low — that more water needs to be recovered from irrigation to save the river system.

But the same models used to set those targets have also been used to manage the rivers, and now to calculate how much water should be in the rivers. And by inadequately accounting for climate change, those models are likely over-predicting how much water is being recovered.

Climate change means more water is likely being lost between gauges, as it flows along — lost into the dry river beds and the hot air.

“The river models that project where the water will be in the rivers haven’t accounted for things like greater evaporation of water,” said Professor Pittock.

Professor Vertessy said most people were surprised by the magnitude and speed of the changes seen across the basin.

“I think a very important thing to appreciate is that we’re in a very different hydro-climatic sequence than we ever would have envisaged at the time of the architecting of the basin plan,” he said.

Clue five: The water was never there

In a twist worthy of any whodunnit, could it be that some of the missing water was simply never there in the first place?

According to the Wentworth Group, the government modelling used to predict how much water we should see in the river has some fundamental flaws which likely exaggerate the volumes.

For example, in 2018, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority found its modelling “has trouble predicting low flows”.

That meant that when water stopped flowing in the river, the model would still show water flowing — something that could have been particularly problematic over the past seven years when low flows were very common.

If true, it likely means much more water needs to be recovered to save the system to get the same outcomes.

The Wentworth Group scientists say they are confident they applied the modelling as best as was possible, and Rob Vertessy, who advises the MDBA on science, agrees.

“Given their intent, which is to make a comparison of expected flows and those which were realised, then, yes, I think it’s as solid as any approach you could adopt,” he said.

But the MDBA has some reservations. “While the Wentworth Group has partially accounted for the climate and as-yet-unfinished basin plan implementation, both effects are still present in the analysis and inflate the outcome,” said Vicki Woodburn.

Everyone seems to be on the same page about how much better the modelling needs to be.

“The MDBA is working to achieve this improved modelling, however it requires further investment and would be done in collaboration with all basin governments,” said Ms Woodburn.

“This type of analysis should be a fairly routine thing, but in effect, it’s a significant research project,” said Professor Vertessy.

But Wentworth Group scientists are scathing of the lack of adequate modelling and monitoring of flows.

“You can’t manage properly what you’re not measuring. And it’s concerning that the governments haven’t been measuring the … real water in the rivers against their flow targets,” said Professor Pittock.

What it all means

If there’s less water in the rivers than we ever planned for, what’s to be done about it?

Irrigators say the response should not be to buy more water from farmers, as that would cost too many jobs.

“If we think about changes to [sustainable diversion limits], then we also have to then think about what impact it has on those things as well,” said Steve Whan from the National Irrigators’ Council.

Mr Whan wants environmental targets to focus more on “complementary measures” — measures of environmental health, rather than volumes of water.

The MDBA itself says we need to wait until more of the basin plan is enacted before we think about changing the recovery targets, or “sustainable diversion limits” (SDLs) — which are set for review in 2026.

“The basin plan is still not fully implemented so it is too early to suggest the SDLs need to change,” says Vicki Woodburn.

But Professor Vertessy, who advises the MDBA, thinks this sort of shortfall could contribute to a rethink of the long-term water recovery targets.

“We may have to — I think everyone would accept that these sustainable diversion limits aren’t quantities which you ossify for posterity,” he says.

“They’ve got to be adjusted to fit in with the new climate realities and the social preferences of the day.”

And the scientists say whatever the response to the findings, something has to give.

“The current basin plan tries to pretend that we can do everything with a smaller and smaller cake,” says Professor Pittock.

“What this really means is that society is going to have to make some hard choices. How much irrigated agriculture do we want as a society versus how much do we want to retain by way of wetlands and ecosystems [or] of sites of cultural value to Indigenous people?”

Links

• Missing in action: possible effects of water recovery on stream and river flows in the Murray–Darling Basin, Australia
• Assessment of river flows in the Murray-Darling Basin: Observed versus expected flows under the Basin Plan 2012-2019
• Bureau of Meteorology: Climate of the 2019–20 financial year
• NSW landholders charged by Natural Resources Access Regulator over alleged water theft
• Murray-Darling Basin Plan: Taxpayer-purchased water intended for rivers harvested by irrigators
• Potential impacts of groundwater Sustainable Diversion Limits and irrigation efficiency projects on river flow volume under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan (pdf)