2015 the critical year for climate change action, and for the nuclear industry
However much people can achieve through individual action, in 2015 it’s a critical time for public action. In December, world leaders meet again to make a plan for climate change action.
At the same time, the failing nuclear industry is making its last, and most dangerous stand, as the nuclear lobby portrays itself as the cure for global warming. Sometimes this pitch is subtly put, touting nuclear and renewable energy as both “part of the mix”. Whether subtly or blatantly, the nuclear lobby’s agenda includes stopping the development of renewable energy and of energy efficiency.
AUSTRALIA is in a unique position as regards climate change. It is arguably the nation that will be hit most quickly and most severely by weather extremes, and rising sea levels.
Australia is also the country with the greatest potential for renewable energy – sunshine, wind, wave.
And at the moment, Australia (?) boasts a leadership role in spruiking for nuclear power. We have Professor Barry Brook, now on the international stage, leading the pack in the story that nuclear power will fix climate change. We have PM Tony Abbott, wannabee PM Julie Bishop, and the obedient Coalition sheep doing all they can to sabotage climate action and renewable energy, both nationally and internationally. Embarrassing, and dangerous, times for Australians present and future.
The Ugly Australian. Paladin uranium miner is in the news again, and for the same old reasons, alleged exploitation of Malawin – this time by discharging radioactive sludge in to Lake Malawi (source of drinking water for millions)
Trans Pacific Partnership Tony Abbott is on the point of signing this secretive Treaty, which will allow corporations to sue Australian governments for $billions. Older Liberal voters may well get a shock if they find that the Pharmaceuticals Benefits Scheme no longer permits cheap medications.
Renewable Energy. Powershop electricity provider way ahead of the game, is about to enter the New South Wales market. It’s already proved, in Victoria, that renewable energy sourced electricity can be cheaper. Abbot government is very keen to wreck the Renewable Energy Target before people wake up to such cheaper providers.
2015 the year of extinction for climate change deniers, like the Abbott government?
Heat is on Abbott government over climate change as world turns This could be the year of extinction for the climate-change denier, writes Peter Hannam. Peter Hannam Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald January 3, 2015 -When the Baird government unveiled the first high-resolution mapping of how global warming is expected to shift the climate for NSW, Victoria and the ACT by 2070, officials were quizzed why they weren’t using “climate variability”, a term favoured by federal Coalition counterparts, to describe the outlook.“This is the NSW government, we believe in climate change!” came the immediate response at the last month’s media briefing.
In the next few weeks, 2014 will likely be declared the hottest year on record globally, beating 2005 and 2010.
So, it seems, does Victoria’s new Labor premier Daniel Andrews. His minister for climate change – Lisa Neville – is expected to take a higher profile on the issue than her Liberal predecessor Ryan Smith. NewEnergy Minister Lily D’Ambrosio has also signalled a keen interest in energy efficiency and renewable energy – both areas largely stalled under the previous government.
Gone, too, is the Coalition preference of eschewing “climate change” in Victorian agencies, such as in 2011 when agriculture minister and now state Nationals leader, Peter Walsh, launched aClimate Challenges Centre at Melbourne University. The jointly funded research interests include how crops might adapt to rising carbon-dioxide levels in an “evolving climate”.
If climate change was a liability for Prime Minister Tony Abbott in 2014 – witness how it dogged his visit to the United States and then dominated G20 coverage after President Barack Obama’s “Save the Reef” speech – there are many reasons to think it will be an even bigger issue in 2015.
By the end of this year, almost 200 nations will gather in Paris to negotiate a global treaty aimed at keeping temperature increases to less than 2 degrees above pre-industrial times (versus about a 1-degree increase so far). Each meeting in the run-up will scrutinise pledges, including Australia’s, for cutting greenhouse gas emissions beyond 2020.
Pope Francis will weigh in too, issuing the first-ever Vatican teachings to the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics to act on climate change. He is also expected to bring together other religious leaders for a summit ahead of the Paris gathering. ……… http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/heat-is-on-abbott-government-over-climate-change-as-world-turns-20150102-12ghrj.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nc&eid=socialn:twi-13omn1677-edtrl-other:nnn-17/02/2014-edtrs_socialshare-all-nnn-nnn-vars-o&sa=D&usg=ALhdy28zsr6qiq
Agreement between Iran and the West is vital for world peace
A Vital Nuclear Agreement, at Risk, NYT, By THE EDITORIAL BOARD JAN. 1, 2015There’s much more to the deeply troubled Russian-American relationship than Ukraine. Under the radar, tensions have also been brewing over compliance with a number of arms control treaties that for decades have been vital to keeping the peace between the two nuclear powers and setting an example for other countries.
Washington accuses Moscow of violating at least five of these agreements. A failure to resolve the impasse could have extremely dangerous consequences for the post-Cold War order, since even 20 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, the two sides together possess more than 10,000 nuclear weapons, more than 90 percent of what exists in the world.
The most serious dispute centers on the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which bans both sides from deploying ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with a range of between 300 and 3,400 miles that carry nuclear or conventional warheads. These were among the weapons America once stationed in Europe to demonstrate a commitment to its allies and deter the Soviets from aggression.
Under the treaty, signed by President Ronald Reagan and the Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, America destroyed 846 missiles and the Soviets, 1,846 missiles. Both sides had come to see the systems as unacceptably risky to their own forces…………….Despite the dispute, it would be a huge mistake for the United States to withdraw from the I.N.F. treaty, as some congressmen have demanded. That would remove all restraints on Russia and seriously weaken a system of treaties that has been remarkably effective over decades at curbing the spread of destructive weapons.
It would also be a mistake for either side to reintroduce the banned weapons onto their own territory or elsewhere. Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, recently asserted Moscow’s right to put nuclear missiles in Crimea, while Brian McKeon, a senior Pentagon official, told Congress this month that one response to Russia’s treaty violation could be to deploy American ground missiles in Europe. New deployments would reverse a trend in which the two countries have substantially reduced their huge arsenals in recent years.
The Obama administration should continue pursuing a diplomatic solution to the treaty dispute and resist the growing pressure in Congress for quick retaliation, which could make the situation worse. And it should explore other forms of pressure, like economic punishment and deployment of new defenses against cruise missiles.
So far, there is no evidence that Russia has deployed its new missiles, which would be a serious escalation. The United States and its allies should make efforts to bring Russia back into compliance with the treaty, and Russia needs to know that defiance will come at a cost.http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/02/opinion/a-vital-nuclear-agreement-at-risk.html?_
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 