Covert-19: Government stacks Covid Commission with oil and gas mates
Covert-19: Government stacks Covid Commission with oil and gas mates, cosy deals follow, Michael West Media, by | May 13, 2020
The Government is quietly blowing away years of environmental protections under cover of Covid. Its Covid Commission (NCCC) is stacked with executives from the gas and mining lobbies in what is turning out to be a bonanza for multinationals and yet another destructive blow to Australia’s efforts to curb global warming. Sandi Keane investigates.
His declaration in Parliament, “This is coal; don’t be scared”, came back to haunt Prime Minister Scott Morrison when summer’s catastrophic wildfires brought global media attention over his handling of the crisis and Australia’s response to climate change.
Fast forward from bushfires to COVID-19 and his reputation has reversed thanks to the handling of the virus. Yet, while the attention of the nation has been drawn to the daily COVID-19 count and embracing the digital world of schooling, working and socialising from home, the fossil fuel industry – with help from the Morrison Government – has quietly seized the opportunity to entrench its power and profits.
A report from environmental advocacy group 350 Australia has detailed 36 individual policy changes or requests for project-specific support — all under cover of COVID-19. SEE THE EXCELLENT TABLE ON THE ORIGINAL
-
Tax cuts and other financial concessions = 💸
-
Slashing environmental or other corporate regulation = ✄
-
Fast-track project approvals = ✅
-
Delay or rollback of climate and renewables policies = 🔥
-
Attacks on charities and right to protest = 🚫
-
Undermining local communities and workers rights =
The findings are shocking. While we’ve been in a deep funk, as of May 7, 69% of demands from the fossil fuel sector have already been enacted or agreed to by the Government. Concessions and sweetheart deals include 14 requests to slash important environmental or corporate regulations, 11 requests for tax cuts and financial concessions, and 12 instances of requests to fast-track project assessment.
Lucy Manne, CEO of 350 Australia, called it out:
“It is rank opportunism for the fossil fuel lobby to call for slashing of corporate taxes and important environmental protections under the cover of COVID-19.”
Taking a cue from Howard’s love-in with the mining industry when alone among the rest of the developed world, he took key mining lobbyists to Kyoto rather than climate scientists, Morrison awarded key positions in the PM’s office to former mining executives and lobbyists. It, therefore, comes as no surprise that the National COVID-19 Co-ordination Committee (NCCC) has been:
COVID-19 National Co-ordination Committee’s links to fossil fuels
The NCCC was set up on March 25 with no terms of reference, no register of conflicts of interest with even less divulged about its financial resources. So let’s look at what 350 Australia has dug up on its links to fossil fuels.
Its six-strong Executive Board of Directors is supported by the Secretaries of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Philip Gaetjens, and Home Affairs Mike Pezzullo. Gaetjens was intimately involved with the controversial community grants pre-Election. NCCC’s role is described as two-fold … “to help minimise and mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on jobs and businesses and to facilitate the fastest recovery possible once the virus has passed.”
Here are the key players:………https://www.michaelwest.com.au/covert-19-government-stacks-covid-commission-with-oil-and-gas-mates-cosy-deals-follow/
In 2019, fire chiefs were ‘gagged’ when trying to give climate change warnings to government
|
Asked by Victorian Liberal senator James Paterson if he thought “the current serving fire chiefs are gagged in some way”, Mr Mullins replied: “yes”. Mr Mullins, a former Fire and Rescue NSW commissioner, said when he was in the role “some things were out of bounds and often climate change was one of those issues, even to the point of having to work around it when preparing documents, and I think that is a tragedy”. Greens senator Janet Rice asked Mr Mullins if it was “still the case” that fire chiefs were discouraged from raising the effect of climate change on bushfire risks with politicians. “I know it’s the case,” Mr Mullins said. “I’ve had a number of discussions and it’s clear.” Mr Mullins had a 39-year career in NSW Fire and Rescue, and was appointed commissioner in 2003. He retired in 2017. Mr Mullins was representing the Emergency Leaders for Climate Action group, which comprises 33 former fire and emergency service leaders from around the country. Mr Mullins said he was pressured not to speak out on climate change when he was a public servant. “We self-censored because we knew what would be acceptable, and what would not, for certain political masters and if you went outside those bounds life could be made very unpleasant for you,” he said. The Emergency Leaders for Climate Action unsuccessfully sought meetings with Prime Minister Scott Morrison in April and again in May last year, ahead of the long 2019-20 summer bushfire season about the looming “catastrophic” fire season…….https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/some-things-were-out-of-bounds-fire-chiefs-gagged-on-climate-change-warnings-to-government-commission-told-20200527-p54wxv.html |
|
Australia, and other countries – deaths from global heating are being underestimated
|
Experts Warn Climate Change Is Already Killing Way More People Than We Record, Science Alert ,CARLY CASSELLA, 25 MAY 2020
People around the world are already dying from the climate crisis,and yet all too often, official death records do not reflect the impact of these large-scale environmental catastrophes. According to a team of Australian health experts, heat is the most dominant risk posed by climate change in the country. If the world’s emissions remain the same, by 2080 Australian cities could see at least four times the number of deaths from increasing temperatures alone. “Climate change is a killer, but we don’t acknowledge it on death certificates,” says physician Arnagretta Hunter from the Australian National University. That’s a potentially serious oversight. In a newly-published correspondence, Hunter and four other public health experts estimate Australia’s mortality records have substantially underreported heat-related deaths – at least 50-fold. While death certificates in Australia do actually have a section for pre-existing conditions and other factors, external climate conditions are rarely taken into account. Between 2006 and 2017, the analysis found less than 0.1 percent of 1.7 million deaths were attributed directly or indirectly to excessive natural heat. But this new analysis suggests the nation’s heat-related mortality is around 2 percent. “We know the summer bushfires were a consequence of extraordinary heat and drought and people who died during the bushfires were not just those fighting fires – many Australians had early deaths due to smoke exposure,” says Hunter……. “Death certification needs to be modernised, indirect causes should be reported, with all death certification prompting for external factors contributing to death, and these death data must be coupled with large-scale environmental datasets so that impact assessments can be done.” …… Such action, they say, is imperative. Not only for Australia but many other countries in the world. The United Kingdom has documented some problems with accurately filling out death certificates, and cities in several parts of the world are on track for similar heat-related mortality rates as Australia. But there are some places that will need to do more than just update their current system. In the tropics, there’s little valid mortality data on the more than 2 billion people who live in this heat-vulnerable region. And that makes predicting what will happen to these communities in the future much trickier. “Climate change is the single greatest health threat that we face globally even after we recover from coronavirus,” says Hunter. “We are successfully tracking deaths from coronavirus, but we also need healthcare workers and systems to acknowledge the relationship between our health and our environment.” In an unpredictable world, if we want to know where we’re going, we have to know where we’ve been. Figuring out how many of us have already died from climate change will be key to that process. We can’t ignore it any longer. The correspondence was published in The Lancet Planetary Health. https://www.sciencealert.com/official-death-records-are-terrible-at-showing-how-many-people-are-dying-from-the-climate-crisis |
|
|
Australian government’s climate and post-Covid policy is a sop to the fossil fuel industries
Angus Taylor suggesting it is not government policy to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, and the government giving in-principle support to recommendations made by a panel headed by a former CEO of Origin Energy, Grant King, to allow the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation fund projects involving carbon capture and storage.
pushes for the same energy mixes that were being advocated a decade ago – more gas, the discredited carbon capture, as well as nuclear power.
The climate crisis looms as the Coalition fiddles with fossil fuels https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/24/the-climate-crisis-looms-as-the-coalition-fiddles-with-fossil-fuelsGreg Jericho The government is like a smoker switching to low-tar cigarettes. Its energy policy is just a sop
We may be dealing with a health crisis, but the climate change crisis has not gone away, nor become any less urgent. In fact, the opposite.
A few conservative commentators have suggested Covid-19 shows what a real crisis looks like compared with, in their opinion, the hyperventilating over climate change.
What bollocks.
Nasa estimates that last month was the hottest April on record and the first four months of this year are the second hottest start to a year.
The past seven months have all been 1C or higher than the 1951-1980 average (roughly around 1.3C above the pre-industrial average) – tied with the longest streak set from October 2015 to April 2016. But unlike in 2015 and 2016 the Bureau of Meteorology records we are currently not in El Niño.
That very much suggests the pace of warming is speeding up.
The linear trend of temperatures over the past 60 years suggests we will hit 2C above pre-industrial levels in 50 years; the trend of the past 20 years has it happening in around 30 years, but the trend of the past decade would see us hit that level in 2038 –just 18 years’ time.
And no, the virus has not bought us more time.
A study published this week in Nature Climate Change estimates the annual global drop in emissions due to virus shutdowns will be “comparable to the rates of decrease needed year-on-year over the next decades to limit climate change to a 1.5°C warming”.
That it took forcing people to stop their lives to achieve such cuts highlights just how big the job ahead of us is and how it cannot be done through individual action alone.
Cutting emissions without crippling the economy requires not everyone self-isolating, but changing industries and the very foundations of our economy.
We need to move away from oil, coal and gas to renewable energy.
And so it should be of great concern that the government is using the coronavirus as cover to push fossil fuels.
This week Adam Morton revealed that a manufacturing taskforce, headed by Dow Chemical executive and Saudi Aramco board member Andrew Liveris, is recommending to the National Covid-19 Coordination Commission (itself headed by the current deputy chairman of Strike Energy, Neville Power) that “the Morrison government make sweeping changes to ‘create the market’ for gas and build fossil fuel infrastructure that would operate for decades”.
It comes off the back of Angus Taylor suggesting it is not government policy to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, and the government giving in-principle support to recommendations made by a panel headed by a former CEO of Origin Energy, Grant King, to allow the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation fund projects involving carbon capture and storage.
Taylor also this week released a discussion paper for a “framework to accelerate low emissions technologies”. While suggesting renewables are vital, it essentially pushes for the same energy mixes that were being advocated a decade ago – more gas, the discredited carbon capture, as well as nuclear power.
It’s the wrong policy at precisely the wrong time.
As Morton has reported, organisations and governments around the world are advocating using economic stimulus measures to push towards a greener economy.
A report released this week by the Australian Conservation Foundation echoed the Grattan Institute’s recent “Start with steel: A practical plan to support carbon workers and cut emissions” report, arguing that we should see the virus as an opportunity to transform our economy and invest in renewable energy.
But no. It is clear the government remains wedded to a fossil-fuel based economy in which its climate change policy is merely a sop rather being designed to deal with a major crisis that is only becoming more urgent.
Leaked plan for huge gas subsidies
The Morrison government manipulates, to paint the coal industry as “clean” and “renewable”
The Clean Energy Finance Corporation has this awkward word “Clean”
The Australian Renewable Energy Agency has this awkward word “Renewable”
How can the those agencies put coal into those categories? With some difficulty.
My heart goes out to them, -like those poor gardeners in “Alice in Wonderland” – forced to paint red all the white roses , lest the Queen should cut off their heads.
Government looks to carbon capture for climate action, The Age By Mike Foley, May 19, 2020 The Morrison government is considering legislative changes to allow its clean energy agencies to fund carbon capture and storage from fossil fuel projects in a bid to unlock $2 billion of private investment to reduce greenhouse gases.
Energy and Emissions Reduction Minister Angus Taylor has accepted 21 of the 26 recommendations from an independent panel reviewing the $2 billion Emissions Reduction Fund, including all those relating to carbon capture and storage.
The panel, chaired by former Business Council of Australia president Grant King, said the government would attract more private investment in the Emissions Reduction Fund if legislation were amended to “enable a method to be developed for carbon capture and storage”.
The King report also recommended an “expanded, technology-neutral remit” for the Clean Energy Finance Corp (CEFC) and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency so they too could attract more private investment in a wider range of technologies outside renewables, such as coal or gas-fired power incorporating carbon capture and storage. This would be a significant change to the remit of the agencies, which were set up to promote the development of renewable wind and solar supplied to the electricity grid.
Carbon capture and storage, which has not yet been successfully implemented on a commercial basis, involves capturing carbon dioxide from industrial processes and transporting it to a suitable storage site for safe, long-term storage deep underground.
Mr Taylor said emissions reduction policy driven by “technology not taxes” would attract significant private investment.
“The government will target dollar-for-dollar co-investment from the private sector and other levels of government to drive at least $4 billion of investment that will reduce emissions across Australia,” he said in a statement accompanying the report’s release.
The Climate Solutions Fund was set up in 2015 with $2.5 billion funding under the Abbott government as an alternative to a carbon tax. It pays polluters to employ cleaner technologies and funds carbon capture through tree planting, soil carbon sequestration on farms and energy efficient systems in commercial properties, as well as methane capture from landfill and waste management.
Last year, the Morrison government topped up the fund with another $2 billion and rebadged it the Climate Solutions Fund. To date, it has issued 450 contracts to abate a cumulative 190 million tonnes of carbon at a total cost of $2.3 billion, or an average of $12 a tonne of carbon…….
Current legislation prohibits CEFC from investing in carbon capture and storage. But changing the legislation would enable the $1 billion Grid Reliability Fund to invest in new gas, hydrogen and coal projects relying on carbon capture.
….
Morrison govt plans to direct climate action measures to promote coal industry
Coalition reveals new emissions reduction measures, including paying polluters to stay under capMorrison government also plans to allow businesses to bid for carbon capture projects via the $2.55bn emissions reduction fund Guardian Adam Morton Environment editor @adamlmorton 19 May 2020
Big polluters will be able to earn revenue by emitting less than their allocated limit under new emissionsThe Morrison government has promised new measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including introducing an incentive scheme to allow big industrial polluters to earn revenue by emitting less than an agreed limit.
It also plans to allow businesses to bid for funding from its main climate policy, the $2.55bn emissions reduction fund, for projects that capture emissions and either use them or store them underground.
Angus Taylor, the energy and emissions reduction minister, said the government had agreed to 21 of 26 recommendations in a review headed by former Business Council of Australia president Grant King, who was charged with coming up with new ways to cheaply cut emissions.
The appointment in October of the panel of business leaders and policy experts was not publicly announced, and was seen by observers as an effective concession the emissions reduction fund, now rebadged as a climate solutions fund, was failing to cut national pollution………
Recommendations agreed by the government included allowing carbon capture and storage projects to qualify under the fund, a step the government said it had began consulting with industry on last month.
In a shift likely to be criticised by clean energy advocates, the government gave in-principle support for two agencies, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Arena) and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC), to be given a “technology neutral remit” to support “the widest possible range of technologies that reduce emissions”. The Greens previously accused the government of planning changes to the CEFC to allow it to fund more fossil fuel projects……
Recommendations agreed by the government included allowing carbon capture and storage projects to qualify under the fund, a step the government said it had began consulting with industry on last month.
In a shift likely to be criticised by clean energy advocates, the government gave in-principle support for two agencies, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Arena) and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC), to be given a “technology neutral remit” to support “the widest possible range of technologies that reduce emissions”. The Greens previously accused the government of planning changes to the CEFC to allow it to fund more fossil fuel projects…….https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/may/19/coalition-reveals-new-emissions-reduction-measures-including-paying-polluters-to-stay-under-cap
New climate models suggest that Australia could reach 7C temperature rise by 2100
Just how hot will it get this century? Latest climate models suggest it could be worse than we thought, The Conversation, May 18, 2020 , Michael Grose, Climate Projections Scientist, CSIRO, Julie Arblaster, Associate Professor, Monash University Climate scientists use mathematical models to project the Earth’s future under a warming world, but a group of the latest models have included unexpectedly high values for a measure called “climate sensitivity”.
Climate sensitivity refers to the relationship between changes in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and warming.
The high values are an unwelcome surprise. If they’re right, it means a hotter future than previously expected – warming of up to 7℃ for Australia by 2100 if emissions continue to rise unabated.
A Covid-19 Green Recovery for Australia
Seizing the moment: how Australia can build a green economy from the Covid-19 wreckage, As the government prepares plans for economic recovery, investors and green groups alike say this is a once-only opportunity to move towards zero emissions
This is the first a new series, The Green Recovery, looking at the environmental challenges of a post-pandemic world, Guardian, by Adam Morton 13 May 20 There is a growing case that recovery from the coronavirus offers Australia a chance to succeed where it has failed for more than a decade: to break away from the climate wars and head in a new direction.
Here and overseas, the idea of helping jumpstart an economic rebuild after the pandemic-forced shutdown by also tackling the other great existential challenge of the time is gaining currency across the political spectrum.
It has been supported not just by climate activists and conservationists, but by industry, banks, energy companies, unions and major investors.
Kristalina Georgieva, the head of the International Monetary Fund, articulated the push in late April while addressing the heads of 30 countries at the annual Petersberg Climate Dialogue. She rejected the suggestion that the health crisis and the economic crash caused by the “great lockdown” that followed meant steps to fight the climate crisis should be paused.
“Nothing is further from the truth,” she said. “We are about to deploy a massive fiscal stimulus which can help us address both crises at the same time.
“If this recovery is to be sustainable – if our world is to become more resilient – we must do everything in our power to promote a green recovery. In other words, taking measures now to fight the climate crisis is not just a ‘nice-to-have’. It is a ‘must-have’ if we are to leave a better world for our children.”
Implicit in Georgieva’s call is that this may be a one-off opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and avoid what scientists warn would be a catastrophe for vast swathes of the planet.
Others agree. The German government has called for recovery programs to invest in future-proof jobs that would cut emissions, rather than return to business as usual. Britain has proposed an accelerated take-up of green technologies, saying it could have a profound impact on “our societies’ future sustainability, resilience and, ultimately, wellbeing”.
The idea of a green stimulus has been supported by governments in countries as diverse as Pakistan, Portugal, Canada and the United Arab Emirates, backed by major business energy giants including BP and Shell, and promoted by the World Bank, which has published a series of blog posts with detailed suggestions of how to respond.
Significant money supports this stance. Global investor groups representing members responsible for more than $55tn in assets warned governments to avoid focusing on short-term, big-emitting projects when backing clean growth, which could create jobs while improving things that have a less obvious monetary value – such as clean air. Again, the opportunity borne from crisis was central to the message. “The path we choose in the coming months will have significant ramifications for our global economy and generations to come,” the groups said in a statement……
States lead, federal government drags its feet
In Australia, the discussion about a green recovery did not begin as urgently as elsewhere, reflecting perhaps the country’s notoriously difficult climate politics and a media tendency to treat climate as a second-order issue unless it is the subject of a political fight.
That began to change last week. Industry groups the Smart Energy Council and Clean Energy Council hosted online summits on green recovery themes with attendances in the thousands. Speaking at both, Innes Willox, the chief executive of the Australian Industry Group, said recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic and setting a path for net zero were overlapping issues that should be dealt with together to boost growth.
The AIG is among a number of Australian interest groups, research organisations and experts working on what a sustainable rebuild could look like, built on evidence that renewable energy is now the cheapest source to invest in.
Just as striking as Willox’s call was that, across the two summits, every state and the ACT was represented either by a premier, energy minister or, in Tasmania’s case, state-owned clean energy agency. Queensland’s Annastacia Palaszczuk spoke about the potential to develop a battery manufacturing industry and claimed green hydrogen resources would eventually surpass the state’s liquefied natural gas exports. South Australia’s energy minister, Dan van Holst Pellekaan, praised his Labor predecessors for helping develop the state into a world leader in renewable energy generation (while taking a swipe at them over cost) and said he hoped the state would run on 100% clean electricity before 2030.
Fellow Liberal Matt Kean, from New South Wales, said his government was considering its electricity strategy and net zero plan in the wake of the pandemic to see what measures could be brought forward to support the economy. He said they would be subject to three tests: “Will they deliver decarbonisation? Will they deliver jobs? And will they deliver faster economic growth?”
On Thursday, the Tasmanian Liberal government went further, launching a draft renewables energy action plan for reaching 200% renewable energy generation by 2040, a goal that means the creation of a vast clean export industry. The state’s energy minister, Guy Barnett, said the shift to renewable energy was more important than ever in the wake of the pandemic.
“As a result of Covid-19, there are unprecedented challenges facing Australian households and industries. By seizing Tasmania’s immense potential, renewable energy can grow our economy, attract investment, create jobs and support Australia’s transition to renewable supply,” he said………
Practical solutions on the horizon
Australia listened to the science on coronavirus. Imagine if we did the same for coal mining
Australia listened to the science on coronavirus. Imagine if we did the same for coal mining The Conversation, Matthew Currell Associate Professor in Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering, RMIT University, Adrian Werner, Professor of Hydrogeology, Flinders University, Chris McGrath, Associate Professor in Environmental and Planning Regulation and Policy, The University of Queensland, Dylan Irvine, Senior lecturer in hydrogeology, Flinders University -12 May 20,We interrogated scientific evidence available to governments and Adani over almost a decade. Our analysis shows governments failed to compel Adani to fully investigate the environmental risks posed by its water plans, despite concerns raised by scientists.
There is also evidence the government approval decisions were influenced by the political climate and pressure exerted by members of government.
Our findings come as the Morrison government conducts a ten-yearly review of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act. It is critical these laws – Australia’s most important environmental legislation – are reformed to put rigorous, independent science at the core.
Advice ignored
In mid-2019, the federal and Queensland governments approved groundwater management plans for Adani’s Carmichael coal mine. It granted the company unlimited access to groundwater in central Queensland’s Galilee Basin.
We and other experts warned the mine threatens to damage aquifers, rivers and ecosystems – in particular, the Doongmabulla Springs Complex. This system contains more than 150 wetlands which support rare plant communities found nowhere else on earth.
The springs are of major cultural significance to the Wangan and Jagalingou people.
We analysed the full suite of evidence on the groundwater plans from agencies and scientists with expertise in hydro-geology. The evidence, provided to state and federal environment ministers, spanned almost a decade and included at least six independent scientific reviews.
The evidence highlighted major shortcomings, and gaps in knowledge and data. For example – ………
Once-in-a-decade chance
Our analysis exposes flaws in how evidence informs major government decisions. It also shows why reform of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is so urgent.
The laws are currently under review. Many reputable organisations and scholars have proposed ways the legislation can better protect the environment, increase its independence from government and put science at the core.
Independent scientific committees, such as the federal IESC, are commissioned by governments to advise on mining proposals. We suggest such committees be granted greater powers to request specific data and studies from mining companies to address knowledge gaps before advice is issued.
Alternatively – or in addition – a new independent national commission should be established to oversee environmental impact assessments conducted by mining and other development proponents.
This commission should be empowered to interrogate and resolve key scientific uncertainties, free from political interference. Its recommendations to government should take into account a wide range of expert advice and public feedback.
This would not only improve the evidence base for decisions, but may also speed up assessments – ensuring more effective resolution of uncertainties that often lead to protracted conflict and debate about a mine’s impacts.
Such reform is urgently needed. Australia is suffering unprecedented water stress, environmental harm and declining trust in government.
Australian governments listened to the science when it needed to flatten the curve of COVID-19. The same approach is needed if we’re to preserve the places we love and the ecosystems we depend on. https://theconversation.com/australia-listened-to-the-science-on-coronavirus-imagine-if-we-did-the-same-for-coal-mining-138212
Coronavirus shows that international co-operation is essential, as it is for climate action
Coronavirus hasn’t killed globalisation – it proves why we need it The 
Conversation Sunil Venaik Associate Professor of International Business, The University of Queensland, May 6, 2020 “………………… One person practising social distancing during the pandemic might think their effect is negligible. But coronavirus is highly infectious: on one estimate, a single person with coronavirus could eventually infect 59,000 others.
Similarly, many countries seek to avoid responsibility for taking climate action by claiming their contribution to the global problem is small. The Australian government, for example, repeatedly points out it contributes just 1.3% to the world’s emissions total.
But on a per capita basis, Australia is one of the world’s highest emitters. And as a rich, developed nation, we must be seen to be taking action on cutting emissions if poorer nations are expected to follow suit. So actions Australia takes will have major global consequences.
Act quickly
In the two months it took the virus to spread from China and become a global pandemic, other nations could have readied themselves by amassing test kits, ventilators and personal protective equipment. But many nations did not adequately prepare.
Of course the world has had a far longer time to adapt to and mitigate climate change. The time lag between emissions and their consequences is years, even centuries. There has been ample opportunity to take progressive and thoughtful corrective action against climate change. Instead, the crisis has been met with complacency.
Challenges ahead
As others have noted, a major supplier of swabs used for coronavirus testing is based in Italy, and a German company is a primary supplier of chemicals needed for the tests. Many counties rely on foreign suppliers for ventilators, and an Indian firm – the world’s largest vaccine manufacturer – says once a COVID-19 vaccine is ready for mass production, it will supply large volumes to the world, at low cost.
It’s clear that international cooperation is critical for effective mass testing and treatment for the virus. Nations must work together to improve production and distribution, and resources must be shared.
So too is cooperation needed to deal with the worldwide economic downturn. The global recovery will be long and slow if nations adopt sovereign mindsets, putting up barriers to protect their own economies.
With the coronavirus as with climate change, working together is best way to secure humanity’s safety, health and well-being. https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-hasnt-killed-globalisation-it-proves-why-we-need-it-135077
Australia’s govt betting on a fossil-fuel led recovery – despite expert advice on renewable energy
Trouble with gas: the Coalition is betting on the fossil fuel for recovery – but the sums don’t add upThe Australian government says gas is ‘essential’, but the global view is it’s the second-least desirable source of electricity Guardian, Adam Morton Environment editor @adamlmorton, Sun 3 May 2020 The agency that runs Australia’s electricity last week gave its verdict on how to deliver what would have seemed fanciful not that long ago – a power grid that within five years should at times be able to run on 75% wind and solar energy.
The Australian Energy Market Operator delivered a report on integrating renewable energy into the system with an optimistic message.
As described by its chief, New Yorker Audrey Zibelman, the technical capacity was already there, but markets and regulations would have to be adjusted. There were no “insurmountable reasons” why the grid could not take even higher levels of renewables, as it will need to for Australia to meet the Paris agreement goal of zero greenhouse gas emissions.
The minister in charge of both energy and cutting emissions, Angus Taylor, chose a different emphasis.
In a statement issued as the study was released, Taylor said it had highlighted the challenges of increased amounts of solar and wind given the system needed continuous inertia – support from constantly running “synchronous generation” – to ensure grid stability. He suggested that inertia could come from gas-fired power.
The market operator’s report does not mention gas generation, but the fossil fuel – often described as having half the emissions of coal, though recent studies have suggested it could be much more – is clearly on Taylor’s mind. A few days earlier he had given interviews to Nine newspapers to support the idea of a “gas-fired recovery” from the Covid-19 pandemic, suggesting it may be a focus of future economic stimulus measures……..
Andrew Grant, head of oil, gas and mining with London-based financial thinktank Carbon Tracker, says the global view of gas has flipped from it being seen as a cleaner fuel than coal, to it being the second-least desirable source of electricity. He points to analysis by the International Energy Agency that found global gas-fired power generation must begin to decline later this decade under a sustainable development scenario. “Better than coal is not exactly a ringing endorsement,” Grant says. …….
t there is little evidence that the Australian electricity grid will need more gas power. Last year, it provided about 9% of generation. The market operator assessment suggested this could fall to near zero in the second half of this decade before returning in a much smaller amount – less than a third of what it is now – in the 2030s if the grid was to run at lowest cost……
Simon Holmes à Court, senior advisor to the Climate and Energy College at the University of Melbourne, says the services needed for a secure power grid are increasingly available from sources other than gas, including government-backed large batteries and potentially through adjustments at wind or additions at solar farms……… https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/may/03/trouble-with-gas-the-coalition-is-betting-on-the-fossil-fuel-for-recovery-but-the-sums-dont-add-up
Why does the Morrison govt hear the experts on coronavirus, but ignore the experts on climate change?
|
Perhaps we should ditch the word entirely, and with it the forest of feel opinions about what governments “must” do to advance an author’s previously-held ideological positioning in the post-corona world. Imagine if we took just two lessons from the way Australian governments responded to the coronavirus: that good decisions are made when they consider the evidence and the best available expert advice; and that policy-making can accommodate reasonable differences of opinion, without becoming a “war”…… For six years now leading business, environmental, investor, union, farming and social welfare groups have been trying, largely in vain, to create a space for a sensible discussion about global heating, and to give Australian politicians a way to retreat from the self-defeating culture war that has scuppered all attempts at policy. They wouldn’t put it this way, but in effect the environmentalists, desperate for Australia to make some meaningful move towards reducing emissions, and the business groups, desperate for some kind of investment certainty, have been trying to save Australia’s politicians from themselves. The starting point for the Australian Climate Roundtable’s deliberations is that Australia needs to reach net zero emissions, and that delaying action just increases the cost of reaching that goal. Unremarkable propositions in any fact-based forum, but in some Coalition circles, still close to heresy. Now the roundtable, including its business members, argues that this post-corona reconstruction is a chance to speed up decarbonising the economy. The Business Council of Australia chief executive, Jennifer Westacott, argued in an opinion piece that the post-corona discussion should divest itself of “ideological constraints”. “In resuscitating our economy, we can tackle some of our most vexed problems. Every dollar we invest in energy should be a dollar towards a lower carbon economy and lower energy bills,” she wrote. And expert evidence about what might be possible has been flooding in by the day. The Australian Energy Market Operator this week released its long awaited “renewable integration study”, which found Australia could accommodate levels of up to 75% “instant” penetration of wind and solar in its main grid by 2025 – that we have the know-how, but need to update market and regulatory settings….. And then there was the advice from the International Energy Agency this week that renewable electricity will be the only energy source resilient to the biggest global energy shock in 70 years, triggered by the pandemic. …. – the latest Climateworks report released earlier this month found that net zero emissions by 2035 is possible in Australia, using technologies that are mostly already mature and available. The CSIRO’s roadmap released last year found there was no trade-off between economic growth and transitioning to zero emissions, and in fact strong action could lead to GDP growth, an increase in real wages and net zero emissions by 2050. …… https://www.theguardian.com/environment/commentisfree/2020/may/02/australia-listened-to-the-experts-on-coronavirus-its-time-we-heard-them-on-climate-change |
|
Govt scheme to underwrite gas, hydro and coal power needs investigation – Zali Steggall
Zali Steggall calls for investigation of Coalition plan to underwrite gas, hydro and coal power
Independent MP says scheme lacks transparency and government has no authority to introduce it, Guardian, Adam Morton Environment editor @adamlmorton, Mon 27 Apr 2020 Independent MP Zali Steggall has asked the auditor general to investigate a Morrison government scheme to underwrite gas, hydro and coal power, saying it lacks transparency and citing legal advice that the Coalition had no constitutional or legislative authority to introduce it.
Announced in late 2018 after the government abandoned Malcolm Turnbull’s proposed national energy guarantee, the underwriting new generation investment (Ungi) scheme promises public support for new dispatchable power generation projects to increase competition in the electricity grid. Twelve projects have been shortlisted, including six pumped hydro plants, five gas generators and an upgrade to the Vales Point coal-fired power plant.
Steggall has written to the auditor general, Grant Hehir, asking him to consider investigating the program “as a matter of priority”. Her letter refers to research by The Australia Institute, a progressive thinktank, suggesting the program has no constitutional or legislative standing, no guidelines or criteria to assess projects, and its development and implementation did not follow a clear process.
She said despite these apparent flaws the government had shortlisted projects, started “advanced negotiations” to support gas-fired plants in Victoria and Queensland and entered a memorandum-of-understanding with the New South Wales government to support three projects in the state. ……
Steggall, who entered parliament last year on a climate action platform, said the focus on fossil fuels was questionable and there was little visibility of how and why the projects shortlisted for underwriting had been chosen….
“There’s just no transparency or accountability around this,” Steggall told Guardian Australia. “We’ve seen what happened with sport rorts. We’re talking about commonwealth money at a time when we know the economy has taken a hit due to coronavirus, and I think it should be properly investigated.”……https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/apr/27/zali-steggall-calls-for-probe-of-coalition-plan-to-underwrite-gas-hydro-and-coal-power
Australia’s climate experts urge govt to use rebuilding economy to combat global heating.
|
Climate scientists say coronavirus could be Australia’s golden opportunity— SBS News
Climate experts say the way Australia chooses to rebuild its economy after the COVID-19 pandemic will seal its climate change fate. BY CLAUDIA FARHART, 22 APR 20
Australian climate scientists are urging the government to recognise the similarities between the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change, arguing they could be the key to stopping global warming. Professor Matthew England from the University of New South Wales’ Climate Change Research Centre said acting early, listening to expert advice and mitigation were the keys to solving both crises.
While the coronavirus is posing a serious risk to millions of lives right now, Professor England said climate change will threaten even more lives over the next five decades. “We’ve seen all around the world that the nations ignoring the best advice of their scientists are suffering the most, and climate change is no different,” he told SBS News. “We have expert reports that have been tabled for the last three or four decades, but many nations are ignoring those, so I think that COVID-19 provides a wake up call for what happens if you do ignore the best scientific advice.”………
While these significant improvements in air and water quality are showing people around the globe what is possible when emissions are reduced, Professor England said it is not time to celebrate yet. Instead, he says Australia needs to recognise the opportunity COVID-19 presents to rebuild in a more environmentally friendly way. “This is going to be a major stall in the global economy, but out of this pandemic we’re certainly going to see a huge economic boom and it’s going to be a real chance to make that boom a low-carbon boom,” he said.
“To solve climate change, we actually need large scale innovation and the huge economic boom that is poised to happen out of this pandemic.” ‘Fight or flight’While COVID-19 has already killed at least 90,000 people, the World Health Organisation has warned that climate change will kill as many as 250,000 people per year by 2030………https://www.sbs.com.au/news/climate-scientists-say-coronavirus-could-be-australia-s-golden-opportunity |
|
1 This month.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 