Prominent Climatologist Behind 'Hockey Stick' Graph Talks About The 'New Climate War'

CBC Radio Canada - Bob McDonald

Michael Mann said he's seen tactics shift from science denial to attempting to paralyze climate action

Michael Mann, professor of atmospheric science at the Pennsylvania State University, and author of 'The New Climate War' (Sydney Herdle)

Michael Mann Michael E. Mann is distinguished professor of atmospheric science at Pennsylvania State University. He is author of the upcoming book The New Climate War: The Fight to Take Back Our Planet.

Climate scientist Michael Mann is possibly best known for the iconic "hockey stick" graph published in 1998 that showed the steep rise in planetary temperatures. 

He was also one of the targets of a massive email hack dubbed "Climategate" aimed at discrediting climate scientists.

As a result of all this he gained an intimate knowledge of the strategies of those who are attempting to resist climate action — climate change deniers, and those trying to derail the political and social changes necessary to fight climate change.

Recently he's started seeing those strategies shift. In his new book, The New Climate War, he lays out what he's seeing, and what he thinks we need to do to preserve our planet.  He spoke with Bob McDonald about his new book.

Dr. Mann is a climate scientist and distinguished professor of atmospheric science at Pennsylvania State University. 

This interview has been edited for length and clarity

Q: You titled your book The New Climate War. How is it different from the old one?

A: The old climate war really was this basic attack on the foundational scientific evidence, an effort to discredit the very science underpinning human influence on our climate, and that is simply no longer credible. 

The forces of inaction haven't given up, but they've turned to a whole new array of tactics in their effort to prevent us from moving on, seeking to divide the climate advocacy community, getting us arguing and fighting with each other, deflecting attention away from the needed systemic changes, the needed policies towards individual behaviour, as if it's just a matter of individuals behaving better. 

The iconic hockey stick graph published by Dr. Mann and his colleagues in the journal Nature in 1998. (Nature)

Any effort that they can make to delay action on climate buys them billions of additional profits. And so this is what I call the new climate war. In some ways, it's more insidious because while they are not focusing on denying that climate change is real and human-caused, they are trying to convince us that that is not a problem or that the solutions don't involve getting off fossil fuels. 

Q: You have a four-point battle plan. Take me through that. 

A: First of all, don't waste all your time and effort debating climate change deniers. They're a fringe element. There are innocent bystanders, people who are caught sort of in the middle who are essentially victims of their efforts to deny the reality of climate change. And so we need to help those people out by providing them resources, by educating them about what the science has to say. I call them the persuadable middle.

The youth climate movement has been a game changer. Greta Thunberg and her fellow youth climate protesters, they've really centred this issue where it should have been all along. It's not just about the science or the economics or the politics and the policy issues. It's about ethics, our obligation not to degrade or destroy this planet for future generations.

We need a price on carbon, and Canada has that. The United States doesn't. We still lag behind. We need incentives, massive incentives, for renewable energy. We need all of these governmental policies that individuals like you and I can't pass on our own.

And, by the way, if they can make it about individual behaviour and lifestyle, well, all the better for them because then they can get us fighting with each other, finger-pointing and carbon-shaming each other because of our lifestyle choices when it comes to our food or our modes of transportation or whether we choose to have children. They would love nothing more than to have us fighting with each other about our individual lifestyle choices rather than representing a united front demanding action. 

Q: You call out misinformation as being one of the biggest battles we're fighting these days, and you were famously the victim of a massive disinformation campaign. How have misinformation and misdirection shaped the fight against climate change? 

A: You alluded earlier to the so-called "Climategate" affair, which was this massive disinformation campaign based on stolen emails of scientists. WikiLeaks played a role in promoting this. The fossil fuel industry played a role. State actors like Russia and Saudi Arabia played a role.

Mann is inspired by the youth climate movement, and young leaders like Greta Thunberg, pictured here at a climate strike in Vancouver. (Maggie MacPherson/CBC)

It may sound a bit familiar because, of course, that attack, which was 10 years ago, we could think of that as sort of a local cancer that ultimately metastasized as sort of this larger disease:  this cancer that infects our entire body politic here in the United States, where we've lost good faith in our public discourse, we've lost the willingness to accept common facts and recognize that we can debate the implications of the facts. 

There are powerful vested interests who have seen it as advantageous to their agenda, to discredit science and to discredit the message of science. 

Q: Take me through some of the false narratives that you're trying to debunk about climate change. 

A: So this is one important narrative: doom and gloom, despair mongering. There are climate advocates who, you know, of good intentions, of goodwill, who have come to believe that it's too late to do anything about the problem.
 
That's very dangerous because first of all, it's not true. The science indicates otherwise. The science indicates that if we reduce our carbon emissions dramatically, we can avert the worst impacts of climate change. For example, this idea that global warming is now unstoppable, that warming is going to release so much methane from the Arctic that it will warm the planet beyond habitable levels. There is no scientific support for that contention. 

A lot of the folks who fall victim to the doom and gloom are, again, of good intentions, of good will. But they're being weaponized. The inactivists love that narrative because they don't care about the path you take to inaction, whether it's outright denial of the science or denial that there's any possibility of doing anything about the problem. 

Q: Now, you are a scientist first. What science are you working on these days when you're not writing books? 

A: I do continue to do science. When it comes down to it, what I really enjoy doing most is doing science that is cranking out calculations, analyzing data sets, running models and comparing them with observations.

So some of the problems we're working on right now include understanding the relationship between climate change and the sorts of extreme weather events we've seen in recent summers in Canada and the United States and Europe and around the world: unprecedented heat waves and wildfires and floods and droughts. And it turns out that in researching the connections, we learned a couple of things. 

The New Climate War by Michael Mann

One of them is that even the state of the art climate models right now aren't capturing some of those connections. And so the climate models may be underestimating the impact climate change is having in producing these unprecedented, dangerous, extreme weather events.

To understand these connections, you end up using math, math and physics tools that were developed back in the early nineteen hundreds for problems in quantum mechanics. So it turns out to understand the impact that climate change is having on these extreme weather events at the planetary scale, we ended up turning to some of the math and physics that I studied decades ago to understand the behaviour of matter at the smallest scale. 

Q: You've been fighting this climate war for decades. Progress has been remarkably slow. Here we are in the 21st century. We're still on fossil fuels. Emissions are still rising. And yet you say that you're cautiously optimistic. Why is that? 

A: Yeah, I'm optimistic. Even the critics can no longer deny that climate change is real. It's happening because people can see it with their own two eyes.

Science denial is deadly and coronavirus has taught us that. We will get past this crisis. A year from now I think it will be largely in our rearview mirror. But still looming there will be, of course, the even greater crisis of climate change. And I'd like to think that the coronavirus crisis, the pandemic, has opened up an important conversation that will help us as we address this even larger crisis. 

Links

• The New Climate War Review: Reasons To Be Optimistic About The Future
• A World At War
• 12 New Books Explore Fresh Approaches To Act On Climate Change
• A Vision Of The World Acting On Climate Change – Imagine
• 6 Must-Read Climate Books That'll Inspire You To Take Action In 2021
• The Ministry For The Future: A Novel By Kim Stanley Robinson
• It’s Kids Vs. Parents In This Award-Nominated Climate Novel
• Welcome To The Feminist Climate Renaissance
• The 10 Hottest Climate Change Books Of Summer
• 13 Major Climate Change Reports Released So Far In 2020
• Why the way we talk about climate change makes some people stop listening

Carbon Conscious Media: The Publishers Ushering In A New Era Of Sustainability For Brands

The Drum - Rebecca Stewart

With our planet in the midst of a climate crisis, publishers are starting to realise that the way they source stories about our planet is just as crucial as the content itself. Enter a new generation of media that is bringing the carbon footprint of its journalism to the fore and attracting green advertisers in the process.

Author Rebecca Stewart is The Drum's Trends Editor. She manages the title's UK reporting team, commissioning and writing features that shine a spotlight on the big issues affecting the media and marketing industry.

Have you ever considered the carbon footprint of the journalism you consume?

With global newspaper circulation in decline, we’re certainly not talking about how many trees had to perish to get your fingers inky here; instead, we’re referring to how the articles you read online – and the way in which they’re produced – are contributing to greenhouse gas emissions.

Each time you conduct a Google search, or send an email, the transmission of that data pollutes the planet just a tiny amount, underpinned by a process that requires millions of physical servers around the globe, each sapping their own energy as millions of other people do the same thing.

The same can be said for when you click on a news story (regardless of whether it’s about Boris Johnson or Kim and Kayne) and the content passes through a series of delivery networks, data hubs and web infrastructure, all before reaching the little blue-lit screen in your hand.

The carbon footprint of our gadgets, the internet and the systems supporting them account for around 3.7% of global greenhouse emissions, according to green French Think Tank The Shift Project. To put that in context, that is roughly the same amount produced by the global airline industry (in normal, non-Covid-19 times).

What’s more, the carbon impact of a news story will often be exacerbated by how an editor briefs it out. If a reporter is required to be on the ground for a global story, they’ll often have to take a flight to get there.

As consumers increasingly embrace social causes, they are seeking out products and businesses that align with their values, and this extends to media brands too.

Recent IBM data from over 18,000 consumers shows that nearly six in 10 respondents are willing to change their shopping habits to reduce environmental impact.

Eight in 10 indicate sustainability is important for them. And for those who say it is very or extremely important, over 70% would pay a premium of 35%, on average, for brands that are sustainable and environmentally responsible.

In line with this, a fresh cohort of publishers are leaning into the rise of the green consumer with fresh platforms that promise a more environmentally-friendly reader experience. What’s more, they’re already courting attention from brands.

A new generation of carbon-conscious publishers

Beyond the Blue Planet effect, the BBC is one media owner bringing the carbon impact of its journalism to the fore via its global commercial arm. Last year, it launched Future Planet, an editorial platform for in-depth, evidence-based stories on potential solutions to the climate crisis.

Focused in global reporting, its ethos is built around enlisting local reporters on the ground to tell the stories from their communities who are witnessing the impact of climate change first hand. As a result, travel is kept to a minimum and local voices are prioritised.

From exploring whether the dairy industry can adapt to the climate crisis to taking audiences on a tour around the desert run on hydrogen, Future Planet plays host to all sorts of relevant content.

However, there’s a crucial point of difference: each story published carries a figure estimating the carbon emissions associated with creating it, with the BBC claiming itself as the first major publisher to take this step using an independent calculator.

For Amanda Ruggeri, managing editor of the wider BBC Future vertical, which is devoted to science and evidence-based features, it's already making a big difference. Between the site's launch in February 2020 and September of the same year, its journalists have expended less than a tonne of carbon on travel.

"That's the equivalent of less than a single flight from Chicago to Los Angeles," she explains.

"If we'd sent a reporter from London to all of the destinations we covered in that time frame it would have amounted to over 26,340 kilograms of carbon. That's almost almost 26 tonnes of carbon saved or almost five round trips from London to Sydeny. It shows the impact this model can make."

In the same period the site has clocked up 15 million page views and reached 7 million browsers.

"People are engaging with the content at length, which is wonderful to see."

Brands are starting to take notice too. BBC Global News has just snagged Standard Chartered as flagship sponsor of Future Planet from March to May 2021 in markets including Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, UAE, Kenya, Germany and China along with major cities in the US.

In addition, BBC’s StoryWorks branded content team will produce branded material for the client on the theme of ‘a force for good’, including podcasts, audiograms and dynamic articles.

The objective of the partnership is to establish Standard Chartered as a leader in sustainable, climate-friendly finance and communicate its value proposition around decarbonisation and transition to net-zero carbon, which is why it chose to align with the editorial strand.

One Pebble to start an avalanche

It’s not just media’s big boys that are investing in more sustainable media platforms, though. New players have entered the fore in recent years too.

Among them is ethical living magazine Pebble which was set up in 2016 as an antidote to the mainstream media’s “reluctance in covering sustainable issues and lifestyle topics” such as ethical fashion, plastic free living, slow travel and permaculture.

Journalist Georgina Wilson-Powell knew even four years ago that these topics would grow in everyday consumers, who want to reduce our their own environmental impact and expect businesses to do the same. Her platform now has 1.4 million regular readers.

As well as placing provenance on projects and stories other publishers might give a “once a year nod,” Wilson-Powell explains that the pure digital magazine uses green hosted servers. In 2019, it gave 1% of its revenues to various sustainable charities including Feedback and Fashion Revolution.

“When we were running events, we don’t print any flyers, use any single use plastic in set up and ensure all our signage and promo is reusable and made from recycled materials as much as possible,” adds Wilson-Powell.

Digital sustainability magazine Pebble uses green hosted servers.

This philosophy is one that has caught the eye of advertisers too.

“We’ve seen huge growth over the last few years, and our conscious consumer audience are at the forefront of eco trends, so we can spot industry growth in particular areas such as eco-friendly cleaning brands or zero waste shampoo, before it becomes mainstream,” she says.

The magazine counts a range of lifestyle brands, that share its planet and people first ethos, across native content, email marketing and social campaigns, as clients.

“I believe in working on long-term relationships where our readers feel like they’re part of the story rather than one off posts,” adds Wilson-Powell. “We like to say Pebble is a family, readers and brands both become friends and we have supported many ethical brands on their journeys to reach an audience who cares.”

However, she believes that many marketers are missing a trick when it comes to putting their money where their mouths are, and supporting ethical, independent media.

“It’s not enough to run campaigns that support causes or fly the flag for your green credentials, marketing teams need to look at where their spend is going too - and use that to help support the titles that are also doing good and working in a more ethical way than many mainstream outlets.

“While everyone is working with limited resources and budgets at a time when the media landscape has never been so precarious, we don’t funnel profits back to faceless shareholders, we use them to invest in projects that benefit the planet and our community and fund new journalism.”

The tricky maths of carbon measurement

Owing to the complexity of both travel and the internet, Ruggeri admits BBC Future Planet cannot directly measure the exact carbon emissions from any specific story. Since trains and buses aren’t fitted with emissions measuring devices, for instance, the team can’t be sure quite how much a journalist emitted on his or her journey.

BBC works with Wholegrain Digital to get a bespoke carbon estimate for Future Planet stories, but this is tricky too as the technology cannot yet measure for a given click exactly how much carbon is released from the transfer of that data over the internet or which type of device a reader is using when they make that click.

"We didn't want to let the perfect be the enemy of the good on that on though, as long as we're using the best science and the best research, we're part of the solution instead of just reporting on the solution."

Looking ahead, the media industry is coming together to find ways to collectively manage its digital carbon footprint.

A collaboration between computer scientists at the University of Bristol and nine major media companies, including BBC, ITV, Sky and Dentsu Aegis Network, will help content providers understand and manage the significant carbon impacts of digital content.

The 12-month effort, facilitated by sustainability group Carnstone, will see University of Bristol researchers working with sustainability and technology teams across the industry to map their carbon hot spots.

The aim is to create an online carbon calculator (DIMPACT) which will be available to any company offering digital products and services, democratising the ability to for media owners to bake sustainability into their products.

In the meantime, Ruggeri says its up to advertisers to support the media owners already acting in this space.

"As the world emerges from the pandemic, the climate crisis will once more emerge as the biggest challenge the world is facing. So for brands that are interested in being a part of the solution there's no better message to send right now than to align with platforms like ours."

Links

• The Shift Project: Towards Digital Sobriety (pdf)
• Research Insights: Meet the 2020 consumers driving change (pdf)
• The Drum: Climate Change
• BBC Future Planet
• Pebble Magazine: Your guide to stylish, sustainable living
• University of Bristol: Pioneering tool to manage media industry’s digital carbon footprint
• David Attenborough has issued a comms challenge and we need to prove we’re up to it
• Award Winning Stories: how the United Nations gave the world a seat at its table
• The Guardian reinforces climate credentials with fossil fuel ad ban

(AU) As Biden Hits The Accelerator On Climate Action, Australia Remains Stuck In Policy Paralysis

ABC - David Speers

Both major political parties are treading nervously on climate policy. (ABC News: Jed Cooper, Matt Roberts)

Joe Biden hit the accelerator on climate action this week.

In an all-hands-on-deck approach, the US President declared Wednesday to be "climate day at the White House", as he unveiled plans to freeze oil and gas leases on public land and double offshore wind energy.

He's converting the vast government car fleet to electric vehicles (made in the USA) and plans to host a climate summit of world leaders in April. The climate crisis, he says, is an existential threat.


Joe Biden signs three executive orders to tackle climate change.

Australia, meanwhile, remains stuck in climate policy paralysis, with both major parties treading nervously.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison supports reaching net-zero carbon emissions, but he can't say when this should happen — a rather important part of the equation. He wants more gas in the energy mix, but it's unclear who will pay and whether a big new gas plant is even viable.

And even the idea of funding a new coal-fired power plant won't go away.

Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack, fending off the never-ending agitation from his National Party backbench, still flirts with the idea of taxpayer subsidies for coal. Treasurer Josh Frydenburg says it's not going to happen.

Labor's shift in emphasis

Labor, meanwhile, has been unable to capitalise on any of this Coalition confusion. Nearly two years on from its third consecutive election defeat, the ALP is still trying to work out where to land with its vexed climate policy.

Anthony Albanese made a smart political and strategic decision early last year to commit to the target of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. He read the room and was helped by the overwhelming support for the 2050 target amongst business groups and the international community.

Labor's Mark Butler has been shifted out of the climate portfolio. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)

Far more difficult, and still unresolved, is whether Labor will adopt any mid-term targets or a mechanism to get there.

Albanese's decision to replace Mark Butler from the Labor left with Chris Bowen from the Labor right in the climate portfolio is at the very least a symbolic shift.

Butler had promised Labor would adopt "medium-term targets consistent with the terms of the Paris climate agreement".

A more cautious Bowen only says Labor's policy will be "evidence based" and "economically focused". We're told this is about a shift in emphasis, not policy direction.

It's now all about the "jobs" potential of taking climate action, rather than just saving the planet.

How will climate policy deliver jobs?

The proof, though, will be in the pudding. It's one thing to talk about "framing" the debate around jobs, it's another to demonstrate how your policies will deliver those jobs.

Bowen is now tasked with achieving the elusive Labor goal of landing a suitably ambitious and credible climate policy that doesn't spook voters in regional Queensland.

Albanese's instinct is not to rush into announcing these policies. He wants to see how global events play out this year, referencing this year's climate summit in Glasgow in particular.

Scott Morrison supports reaching net-zero carbon emissions but can't say when this should happen. (ABC News: Pedro Ribeiro)

Morrison, meanwhile, is signalling he won't be taking any updated 2030 or 2035 targets to the summit. In other words, the Australian Government's approach is to "wait and see", rather than moving too far ahead of the pack.

And there's unlikely to be any pressure from the opposition for the Government to be more ambitious, with Albanese also waiting to see how Glasgow plays out.

The Glasgow summit isn't being held until November, which could well be after the Australian election, depending on when the Prime Minister decides to send voters to the polls.

That doesn't mean nothing will happen in the climate debate before Glasgow; other countries will be making commitments throughout the year, with the Biden Administration likely to be leading the charge.

It's hard to imagine either the Government or opposition will be able to avoid telling the world — or indeed Australian voters — before November what their respective plans are for Australian emissions.

Climate policy may not be just about targets, but nor can targets be ignored. 

Links

• US President Joe Biden pauses oil and gas leases, cuts subsidies in 'bold' climate steps
• (AU) ‘Breathtaking’: What Joe Biden’s Sweeping Climate Plan Means For Scott Morrison
• (AU) The Verdict On Australia’s Emissions Targets: Catastrophic
• (AU) Politics Of Carbon Has Ended, Scott Morrison Declares
• Australia, The Climate Laggard, Could Lead The World: Over To You, PM
• (AU) Albanese Is Running Out Of Time To Solve Labor’s Climate Crisis. He Needs A Plan That Works For Two Australias
• (AU) Cowardice: What Morrison And Albanese Have In Common On Climate
• (AU) Anthony Albanese Says Coal Mining Could Continue In Australia In A Net Zero Emissions World
• (AU) Australia’s Democracy Has Faceplanted And Labor Is Staring Down Some Disturbing Truths
• (AU) What Albanese Could Have Said: We Lied – Australian Coalmines Have No Future

Climate Crisis: World Is At Its Hottest For At Least 12,000 Years – Study

The Guardian - Damian Carrington

Scientists say temperatures globally at highest level since start of human civilisation
   

The world’s continuously warming climate is revealed also in contemporary ice melt at glaciers, such as with this one in the Kenai mountains, Alaska (seen September 2019). Photograph: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

The planet is hotter now than it has been for at least 12,000 years, a period spanning the entire development of human civilisation, according to research.

Analysis of ocean surface temperatures shows human-driven climate change has put the world in “uncharted territory”, the scientists say. The planet may even be at its warmest for 125,000 years, although data on that far back is less certain.

The research, published in the journal Nature, reached these conclusions by solving a longstanding puzzle known as the “Holocene temperature conundrum”. Climate models have indicated continuous warming since the last ice age ended 12,000 years ago and the Holocene period began.

But temperature estimates derived from fossil shells showed a peak of warming 6,000 years ago and then a cooling, until the industrial revolution sent carbon emissions soaring.

This conflict undermined confidence in the climate models and the shell data. But it was found that the shell data reflected only hotter summers and missed colder winters, and so was giving misleadingly high annual temperatures.

“We demonstrate that global average annual temperature has been rising over the last 12,000 years, contrary to previous results,” said Samantha Bova, at Rutgers University–New Brunswick in the US, who led the research.

“This means that the modern, human-caused global warming period is accelerating a long-term increase in global temperatures, making today completely uncharted territory. It changes the baseline and emphasises just how critical it is to take our situation seriously.”

The world may be hotter now than any time since about 125,000 years ago, which was the last warm period between ice ages. However, scientists cannot be certain as there is less data relating to that time.

One study, published in 2017, suggested that global temperatures were last as high as today 115,000 years ago, but that was based on less data.

The new research examined temperature measurements derived from the chemistry of tiny shells and algal compounds found in cores of ocean sediments, and solved the conundrum by taking account of two factors.

First, the shells and organic materials had been assumed to represent the entire year but in fact were most likely to have formed during summer when the organisms bloomed. Second, there are well-known predictable natural cycles in the heating of the Earth caused by eccentricities in the orbit of the planet.

Changes in these cycles can lead to summers becoming hotter and winters colder while average annual temperatures change only a little.

Combining these insights showed that the apparent cooling after the warm peak 6,000 years ago, revealed by shell data, was misleading. The shells were in fact only recording a decline in summer temperatures, but the average annual temperatures were still rising slowly, as indicated by the models.

“Now they actually match incredibly well and it gives us a lot of confidence that our climate models are doing a really good job,” said Bova.

1.0C Difference in temperature compared with the last 1,000 years

Guardian graphic. Source: Bova et al, Nature, 2021

The study looked only at ocean temperature records, but Bova said: “The temperature of the sea surface has a really controlling impact on the climate of the Earth. If we know that, it is the best indicator of what global climate is doing.”

She led a research voyage off the coast of Chile in 2020 to take more ocean sediment cores and add to the available data.

Jennifer Hertzberg, of Texas A&M University in the US, said: “By solving a conundrum that has puzzled climate scientists for years, Bova and colleagues’ study is a major step forward. Understanding past climate change is crucial for putting modern global warming in context.”

Lijing Cheng, at the International Centre for Climate and Environment Sciences in Beijing, China, recently led a study that showed that in 2020 the world’s oceans reached their hottest level yet in instrumental records dating back to the 1940s. More than 90% of global heating is taken up by the seas.

Cheng said the new research was useful and intriguing. It provided a method to correct temperature data from shells and could also enable scientists to work out how much heat the ocean absorbed before the industrial revolution, a factor little understood.

The level of carbon dioxide today is at its highest for about 4m years and is rising at the fastest rate for 66m years. Further rises in temperature and sea level are inevitable until greenhouse gas emissions are cut to net zero.

Links

• Nature: Seasonal origin of the thermal maxima at the Holocene and the last interglacial
• Climate crisis: record ocean heat in 2020 supercharged extreme weather
• Climate crisis making autumn leaves fall earlier, study finds
• World's beaches disappearing due to climate crisis – study
• Climate emergency: 2019 was second hottest year on record 
• Tackling degraded oceans could mitigate climate crisis - report 
• Climate change made European heatwave at least five times likelier
• Warming oceans likely to raise sea levels 30cm by end of century – study
• Past four years hottest on record, data shows

(AU) Business Council Of Australia Supports Zali Steggall’s Climate Change Bills

NEWS.com.au - Sarah McPhee

An independent MP’s proposal for drastic action on climate change has received the unexpected backing of a powerful lobby group. 

A new report from CSIRO and BOM has warned us about the worsening effects of climate change.

Public hearings into climate change legislation proposed by independent MP Zali Steggall have begun in Canberra today, backed by a business group representing chief executives from the mining, energy and manufacturing sectors.

The private members’ bills, released in February last year but introduced in parliament in November, include a long-term target of net-zero emissions by 2050.

Ms Steggall also wants to see an independent Climate Change Commission established.

With hearings on Friday and on Monday, February 1, the House of Representatives Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy has promised an independent review of the proposed legislation.

“We have recently managed inquiries into nuclear energy, bushfires, Scope 3 emissions and feral cats, and so the Committee is well placed to now deliberate on the proposed climate change bills,” chair Ted O’Brien said in a statement.

“As a Committee, we’ll do what we always do,” he said. “We won’t draw any conclusions prematurely, but rather assess the information with dispassionate independence.”

Independent Member for Warringah Zali Steggall. Picture: Mick Tsikas/AAP Source: AAP

There are more than 700 publicly available submissions to the inquiry including from the Law Council of Australia, the Australian Medical Association, the Property Council of Australia and prominent TV personality Osher Günsberg.

Another notable submission is a three-page document from the Business Council of Australia, which has a membership of “CEOs of Australia’s top companies” such as AGL, BHP, BlueScope, Fortescue Metals Group, Origin Energy and Rio Tinto.

Members hail from sectors including mining, retail, manufacturing, infrastructure, information technology, financial services and banking, energy, professional services, transport, and telecommunications.

Signed by BCA chief executive Jennifer Westacott, the submission states the bills ensure environmental sustainability “but also the need to manage the economic and social impacts”.

“The proposed legislation adopts a science-based, risk-management approach to addressing climate change … which is aligned with how businesses and their shareholders, increasingly, are responding to climate-related risks,” Ms Westacott writes.

“Having a very clear set of government policy ‘goalposts’ would enable company directors to focus their resources and efforts more efficiently with respect to climate-related transition risks.”

Ms Westacott said investors’ needs are “twofold”, being “a clearly articulated policy destination; and a policy pathway for achieving this destination”.

She said the climate policy response would benefit the community by providing opportunities for new jobs, particularly in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic-induced recession.

It raised six aspects requiring “careful interpretation” to be consistent with “an efficient, least-cost climate policy response for Australia”, including that “sectoral policies” should not prevent “emissions mitigation and adaptation efforts being optimised across sectors”.

The parliamentary inquiry public hearings are being held on Friday and Monday. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Gary Ramage Source: News Corp Australia

Ms Steggall said the sheer number of submissions to the inquiry, totalling 6500, demonstrates “how broad the support is for a sensible plan to tackle emissions reduction and management of climate change risk”.

“The inquiry’s two public hearings offer a significant opportunity for the public to hear from the private and public sectors on the impact of climate change and how we tackle it and make a difference,” she said.

“As we have seen in the UK, climate change policy can be bipartisan.

“The world is heading to net zero by 2050 led by US President Joe Biden. It’s time Prime Minister Scott Morrison sets Australia on the right path.

“Dragging this out and delaying significant emissions reduction will only cost more and increase risks to our communities.”

Prime Minister Scott Morrison. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Martin Ollman Source: Supplied

In an interview with The Weekend Australian last week, Mr Morrison said he would not be updating the country’s medium-term emissions reduction targets ahead of the UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow in December.

“It is about whether you can produce hydrogen at the right cost, it is about whether (carbon capture and storage) can be done at the right cost, it is whether we can produce low emissions steel and aluminium at the right cost,” Mr Morrison said.

“That is how you actually get to net zero. You don’t get there by just having some commitment.

“That is where the discussion has to go and I think the Biden administration provides an opportunity to really pursue that with some enthusiasm.”

Late last year, Energy Minister Angus Taylor told ABC Radio a “net zero across-the-board 2050 target” would mean a 2030 target around 43 per cent.

“That will destroy jobs, that will require taxes, that will impose costs on Australian energy consumers and raise the price of electricity in this country,” he said.

Australia is party to the Paris Agreement, aiming to keep global warming to well below 2C.

Ms Steggall won the blue-ribbon Sydney seat of Warringah in 2019, held by former prime minister Tony Abbott since 1994.

Her proposed legislation is backed by the Greens and several crossbenchers including Rebekha Sharkie, Andrew Wilkie and Helen Haines.

Links

• Australian faces major climate change reality check
• What 2C of warming will look like in Australia 
• Zali Steggall's climate bill gets broad backing from industry groups and investors
• Business Council of Australia backs Zali Steggall's climate change bill for 2050 net zero target
• Net zero, saving koalas and forest wars: the crucial environment battles looming in Australia
• Spinning emissions: Australia's climate projections are not what they seem
• Australia urged to overhaul environment laws and reverse 'decline of our iconic places'
• ‘Breathtaking’: what Joe Biden’s sweeping climate plan means for Scott Morrison
• Coalition quietly adds fossil fuel industry leaders to emissions reduction panel
• Morrison’s tech roadmap flags more investment in carbon capture and storage
• UN climate summit president thanks Australian states – but not Morrison government – for backing net zero

(AU) ‘Breathtaking’: What Joe Biden’s Sweeping Climate Plan Means For Scott Morrison

The Guardian - Adam Morton

As the US president vows to push the rest of the world to do more on climate change, the prime minister will face increasing pressure to measure up

Joe Biden has declared climate change an existential threat to the planet and pledged to put ‘environmental justice’ at the heart of all decision-making. Photograph: REX/Shutterstock

When John Kerry, the United States’ new special presidential envoy for climate, stepped up to speak to the World Economic Forum in Davos on Wednesday he had Australia on his mind.

The former secretary of state had been struck by an article in the New York Times by the author Michael Benson that described satellite images of the “flame vortexes” that spiralled into the atmosphere as the continent’s wildlife burned a year ago, sending a plume across New Zealand and into the Pacific.

It was, Kerry said, evidence of the urgency of climate change “literally all around us”.

He quoted Benson: “In the end Australia’s fires killed dozens of people, destroyed 5,900 buildings and quite likely, according to the best science, rendered some of the country’s endangered species extinct.

“With shocking iconographic precision, that unfurling banner of smoke said: ‘The war has started, we’re losing’.”

The expectation that Joe Biden would move quickly to reverse US recalcitrance on the climate crisis under Donald Trump has built since his election, but even those expecting an ambitious re-positioning have been stunned by the pace and breadth of the changes made.

The new president made a detailed and multi-part executive order on Wednesday, a week after signing papers to re-join the Paris agreement on his first day in office.

Observers who spoke with Guardian Australia about the plan emphasised the comprehensiveness of the Biden administration’s vision.

The order embeds dealing with the climate emergency across all government operations, with a particular focus on its importance in foreign policy and national security.

It underscores the scale of the international pressure the Morrison government is likely to face this year if it maintains its resistance to making the science-based commitments expected under the 2015 climate pact.

Where the Morrison government prefers not to use the term “climate change”, having banished it from the ministry and its main emissions reduction policy, Biden declared it an “existential threat to the planet” and his order says there is only “a narrow moment to pursue action at home and abroad” to avoid “the most catastrophic impacts” and to seize opportunities to create jobs.

His instructions include pausing and reviewing oil and gas drilling on federal land, doubling energy from offshore windfarms by 2030, moving federal government agencies from fossil fuel to clean cars, setting a goal of conserving at least 30% of lands and oceans by 2030, and ordering a national intelligence estimate on the economic and security implications of climate change.

The White House will introduce an office of domestic climate policy to coordinate Biden’s agenda, a national climate taskforce comprising of 21 government agency leaders and an environmental justice interagency council to address racial and economic inequities exacerbated by climate change and air and water pollution. 

It hopes to pass a $2tn clean energy package, with 40% of investments aimed at disadvantaged communities.

Bill Hare, chief executive of Berlin-based Climate Analytics and an adviser to developing countries on climate change for decades, says the scope of Biden’s actions so far has been surprising.

“It’s more than people thought they would do,” he says. “It’s comprehensive and coherent. Breathtaking really is the word.”

Martijn Wilder, a former chair of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and founding partner of the climate advisory firm Pollination, says he believes Biden’s plan is “the most comprehensive plan by any government ever on climate change”, and people were yet to fully grasp its significance, particularly in terms of national security and foreign policy.

How Biden intends to wield his influence internationally will become clearer in the lead up to a major economies climate summit he plans to host on Earth Day, 22 April. 

He has set the summit as a deadline to announce a new emissions reduction target for 2030 to put the US on the path to net zero by 2050. He has already promised a carbon-free power supply by 2035.

In contrast, Scott Morrison has said he will not increase what is widely seen as an unambitious 2030 emissions target (a 26-28% cut below 2005 levels) this year. 

The government has pulled out of the global climate fund, and continues to resist a mid-century net zero emissions target despite it being backed by more than 120 countries collectively responsible for about three-quarters of global GDP.

There is a growing expectation Morrison may relent on that point before a year-ending UN climate summit in Glasgow. 

But scientists and parts of the international community say a net zero target for 2050 would mean little unless backed by a detailed plan to get there, including deeper emissions cuts this decade. 

A group of policymakers and scientists this week released an analysis warning Australia should be aiming for net zero emissions well before 2050 if it was to take a science-based approach.

This isn’t a fly-by-night effort. This is a serious change to government operations and ... it is going to have a profound effect globally
Howard Bamsey

Reports have suggested the government believes it will not come under pressure from the US to do more on climate after an initial phone call between Kerry and the emissions reduction minister, Angus Taylor, which is said to have included discussion about establishing a working group on developing low-emissions technology.

Analysts largely dismiss this as bravado or wishful-thinking, but it is unclear how forceful and direct any pressure would be.

John Morton, a former senior director for energy and climate change in Barack Obama’s national security council and now a Washington DC-based partner in Pollination, says Biden has left no doubt in his first 10 days that he plans to do exactly what he promised on climate.

His rhetoric before taking office included using “every tool of American foreign policy to push the rest of the world” to do more.

“Climate is a top priority for his government. I think it would be foolhardy to expect the Biden administration would not pursue it in its interactions with Australia. It will with every country, but particularly countries with significant means and significant fossil fuel and extractive industries,” Morton says.

“Australia obviously fits into both of these categories. I think Australia has to expect this will play a central role in how the US deals and hopes to interact collaboratively with it.”

Hare says it is unlikely US will accept a belated commitment to a net zero goal for 2050 as a substantial shift in Australia’s stance. “They’ll want to see an improvement in the 2030 target,” he says.

John Kerry, the United States’ new special presidential envoy for climate, said the Australian bushfires were evidence of the urgency of climate change ‘literally all around us’. Photograph: Saeed Khan/AFP via Getty Images

The international push for Australia to do more is not coming from the US alone. Morrison was embarrassed when rejected for a speaking slot at a leaders’ climate ambition summit in December due to Australia’s perceived lack of ambition, and is likely to come under similar pressure ahead of a G7 meeting in Cornwall in June.

The British prime minister, Boris Johnson, has invited the leaders of Australia, India and South Korea to attend every session of the summit in what is seen as an attempt to turn the forum into a D10 meeting of major democracies.

Diplomatic sources say Britain has made clear climate and energy will be a top priority at the summit, and it plans to push for commitments on both net zero emissions by 2050 and deeper cuts and financial commitments to help developing countries for 2030.

With every G7 member having already adopted a carbon neutrality goal, the expectation is the three guests will be pressed to put their names to an ambitious communique.

Morrison appeared to pre-emptively respond to this push in an interview with the Australian last week in which he argued the political debate over whether to act on climate change was over, and it was now just a matter of how - and, by implication, when – emissions were reduced.

He said he would tell the G7 and G20 that his priority was to take action by developing technology, not committing to new emissions goals.

It puts him directly at odds with Kerry, who stressed this week that all countries must increase ambition before meeting in Glasgow in November “or we will all fail”.

Howard Bamsey, a former Australian special envoy on climate change and executive director of the green climate fund, now an honorary professor at the Australian National University, says an underlying message from the US beyond the specifics is the extent to which its plans had been considered and mapped out before taking office.

In one sense, this isn’t surprising. Many of the people in key roles are former Obama administration officials, and Biden signalled his plans on climate change in advance in a way no other incoming president has.

Bamsey says people should be reassured that his administration is clear in what it is doing, and that Kerry has emphasised it was being realistic about what could be achieved.

It also means it is more likely to follow through.

“This isn’t a fly-by-night effort. This is a very serious change to government operations and now they have put it in a national security setting it is going to have a very profound effect globally,” Bamsey says. “It’s really hard to see the Australian government keep resisting.”

Links

• Watching Earth Burn
• Existential Threat: Biden Takes Action To Address Climate Crisis
• Net zero, saving koalas and forest wars: the crucial environment battles looming in Australia
• Coalition quietly adds fossil fuel industry leaders to emissions reduction panel

• Origin seeks fossil fuel leases in 'incredibly fragile' Queensland channel country

• Cape York station owner refused to accept land-clearing would affect threatened species
• WA coastline facing marine heatwave in early 2021, CSIRO predicts
• 'The platypuses were glowing': the secret light of Australia's marsupials
• Spinning emissions: Australia's climate projections are not what they seem

UN Global Climate Poll: ‘The People’s Voice Is Clear – They Want Action’

The Guardian - Damian Carrington

Biggest ever survey finds two-thirds of people think climate change is a global emergency

In countries where fossil fuels are a major source of emissions, people strongly supported renewable energy. Photograph: John Giles/PA

The biggest ever opinion poll on climate change has found two-thirds of people think it is a “global emergency”.

The survey shows people across the world support climate action and gives politicians a clear mandate to take the major action needed, according to the UN organisation that carried out the poll.

The UN Development Programme (UNDP) questioned 1.2 million people in 50 countries, many of them young.

While younger people showed the greatest concern, with 69% of those aged 14-18 saying there is a climate emergency, 58% of those over 60 agreed, suggesting there is not a huge generational divide.

Even when climate action required significant changes in their own country, majorities still backed the measures.

In nations where fossil fuels are a major source of emissions, people strongly supported renewable energy, including the US (65% in favour), Australia (76%) and Russia (51%).

Guardian graphic. Source: UNDP

Where the destruction of forests is a big cause of emissions, people supported conservation of trees, with 60% support in Brazil and 57% in Indonesia. 

Overall, the most popular actions to tackle the climate crisis were protecting and restoring forests, followed by renewable energy and climate-friendly farming. The promotion of plant-based diets was the least popular of the 18 policies in the survey, with only 30% support.

Gender was a factor in some countries, with at least 5% more men and boys saying there is a climate emergency than women and girls in 16 countries. However, in four nations – the US, Australia, Canada and the UK – significantly more women and girls were concerned about global heating.

The UNDP ran the “Peoples’ Climate Vote” in 50 high-, middle- and low-income countries, representing more than half the world’s people. Experts at Oxford University weighted the replies to reflect the population of each nation.

Majority of all ages say climate change is a global emergency

Guardian graphic | Source: UNDP

“The voice of the people is clear – they want action on climate change,” said Cassie Flynn, the UNDP’s strategic adviser on climate change.“If 64% of the world’s people are believing in a climate emergency then it helps governments to respond to the climate crisis as an emergency.

“The key message is that, as governments are making these high-stakes decisions, the people are with them.”

Flynn said the survey connects the climate concerns of people, particularly the young, with governments at a time when accelerated action must be agreed, in particular at a UN climate summit in November. The climate crisis continued unabated in 2020, with the joint highest global temperatures on record.

“We are at a fork in the road and the poll says ‘this is how your future generations are thinking, in specific policy choices’ – it brings a way to envision the future,” she said.

Flynn heads the UNDP’s Climate Promise programme that helps countries take more ambitious climate action.

The poll found the highest proportion of people saying there is a climate emergency was in the UK and Italy, both at 81%. Australia was at 72% and the US at 65%, the same as Russia, and India was at 59%. Even the lowest proportion, in Moldova, was 50%.

The relatively low support for the promotion of plant-based diets may be because there are few plant-based options in some countries or people may have felt that diet is more of a personal choice, said the UNDP. Support was highest in Germany (44%) and the UK (43%).

The reason why more men and boys said there was a climate emergency than women and girls in countries such as Nigeria and Vietnam may be because girls have less access to education in those places.

The poll found that the more education a person had completed, the more likely they were to think there is a climate emergency. Why more women and girls are more concerned in the four English-speaking nations is unclear.

The poll was distributed via advertisements in video games and puzzles, including Angry Birds, Subway Surfers, Sudoku and Words With Friends, and this particularly helped reach younger people.

The idea came to Flynn when she was on the subway in New York City: “I looked around and everyone was on their phones and most were playing games.”

The data was collected between October and December 2020 and, despite the coronavirus pandemic, 59% of the people saying there is a climate emergency also said the world should “do everything necessary and urgently” in response.

Prof Stephen Fisher at Oxford University said: “The Peoples’ Climate Vote has delivered a treasure trove of data on public opinion that we’ve never seen before. Recognition of the climate emergency is much more widespread than previously thought.”

Links

• US returns to global climate arena with call to act on 'emergency' 
• Paris climate deal: world not on track to meet goal amid continuous emissions
• Oil and gas companies undermining climate goals, says report
• Fossil fuel dependence poses 'direct existential threat', warns UN chief
• The seven megatrends that could beat global warming: 'There is reason for hope'
• How India’s battle with climate change could determine all of our fates
• UK climate change masterplan – the grownups have finally won
• Global trade deal threatens Paris climate goals, leaked documents show
• Dangerous global warming will happen sooner than thought – study