2016 Earth getting hotter. CO2 levels above 400 ppm
Confirmed: Southern hemisphere CO2 level rises above symbolic 400 ppm milestone, [Excellent pictures, graphs, diagrams] The Age May 15, 2016 –Peter Hannam Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald
NASA | A Year in the Life of Earth’s CO2
A significant marker of rising global greenhouse gas emissions has been passed, with a key monitoring site on Tasmania’s north-west tip recording atmospheric carbon-dioxide exceeding 400 parts per million for the first time.
As foreshadowed by Fairfax Media last week, a baseline reading at the Cape Grim station that exceeded the 400-ppm mark of the primary gas driving global warming was imminent.
As it turned out, “the unfortunate milestone” was reached on Tuesday May 10 at 8am, local time, said Peter Krummel, who heads the CSIRO team analysing data from the most important site in the southern hemisphere.
Atmospheric readings from Cape Grim, along with two stations in Hawaii and Alaska, are closely watched as they date back decades and closely track a range of pollutants from ozone-depleting chemicals to the various greenhouse gases resulting from burning fossil fuels and clearing forests.
Mr Krummel said that while mostly symbolic, the 400-ppm reading “highlights the problem of rising emissions, which are increasing more rapidly than they used to be”.
A report out earlier this year from the World Meteorological Organization noted atmospheric readings of CO2 at the Mauna Loa site in Hawaii rose 3.05 ppm in 2015 alone – the biggest increase in the 56 years of research……
Climate scientists, such as David Karoly at Melbourne University, note that when other greenhouse gases, such as methane, are included, the situation is even bleaker.
The so-called carbon dioxide-equivalent level that takes in the full global warming impact is now about 485 ppm.
Both 2014 and 2015 were record hot years globally in data going back about 130 years. With the effect of a strong El Nino overlaying long-term trends, this year is likely to be even hotter after a scorching start.
As sea levels rise fast, CSIRO sacks world sea level expert !
Global sea-level expert John Church made to walk the plank by CSIRO, SMH May 14, 2016 Peter Hannam “……Accelerating sea-level rises Dr Church’s achievements include developing sophisticated models linking sparse tidal gauge information around the world with satellite data to reveal how much sea levels are rising.
The current mission is retracing previous journeys along the 170 W longitude line to measure precisely how key parameters such as temperature, salinity and acidity are changing As Dr Church notes, including in a Nature paper published last month, sea-level increases are accelerating as a warming planet melts glaciers and swells oceans.
From increases of a few tenths of a millimetre annually in the 1000 years before about 1850, the rate jumped 1.7 mm on average in the 20th century. Since 1993, the rise has quickened to about 3 mm a year, he says.
Despite this trend, CSIRO will slash about half the climate staff – about 70 scientists – in its Oceans & Atmosphere division. New hires will be made in climate adaptation and mitigation, the agency promises but numbers cited so far are much smaller.
As with other CSIRO staff, Dr Church will get a chance to save his job. The sole scientist on board to be told of a pending redundancy, he was granted until June 16 – or three weeks after the voyage ends in Wellington, New Zealand – to argue his case.
Letter of support
Scientists from leading research agencies, such as NASA of the US and France’s CNES, have called for Dr Church’s group to be retained……..
‘Inconceivable to the world’
Rosemary Morrow, one of the letter’s authors, said CSIRO’s undermining of its oceans expertise “is just inconceivable to the rest of the world. Especially for a country at the crossroads of so many evolving climate modes – …of droughts and driving rains.”
Outspoken
Dr Church, who has been among the most outspoken scientists criticising the current round of CSIRO job cuts, was told one reason for his firing was the need to consolidate sea-level change into regional impacts.
“This is essentially a repetition of [chief executive] Larry Marshall’s incomplete, naive and misleading statements, except for a focus on my area of science,” he said.
“Any reading of the literature or of the most recent [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] reports would clearly indicate that the overriding uncertainty in sea level remains the amount and distribution of sea level rise,” he said.
Also mentioned was the cutback of external funds, including the Abbott government’s ending of the Australian Climate Change Science Program that had been funded from 1990 until June this year.
……….”Sea-level rise is a long term issue,” he says, noting that without emissions reductions, the world is committed to seas rising several metres over coming centuries.
“These will become critical issues without major and urgent greenhouse gas mitigation for the many millions of people living near the coast,” he says. http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/global-sealevel-expert-john-church-made-to-walk-the-plank-by-csiro-20160513-gov0k9.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nc&eid=socialn%3Atwi-13omn1677-edtrl-other%3Annn-17%2F02%2F2014-edtrs_socialshare-all-nnn-nnn-vars-o%26sa%3DD%26usg%3DALhdy28zsr6qiq#ixzz48lgN8kfP
A referendum might be held to decide on nuclear waste import plan
Daniel Wills: Voters’ nuclear reaction can avoid meltdowns in future May 13, 2016 The Advertiser
EVERY South Australian has been assured they can join a grand debate over a high-level nuclear waste dump for the state, but it’s no certainty that voters will get to directly decide.
The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission’s final report this week included a strong call for the state to urgently pursue the opportunity and usher in a golden era of new wealth for SA.
Premier Jay Weatherill is holding fire until the end of the year. The State Government’s formal position is that its mind is not made up, and a combination of statewide consultation and two citizens’ juries made up of average people will help chart the course to be taken from here.
But ultimately, he’s indicated the final decision will be taken by the Cabinet, Government and 69 members of State Parliament who are put in place to make decisions on behalf of all.
The prospect of a referendum, which could be held concurrently with the 2018 state election and would effectively offer every South Australian a direct say on what would be an irreversible decision, is not being ruled out at the highest levels either major party.
If it were to occur, the electoral dynamics in two years’ time would be dramatically altered………
if a simple change to an Act of Parliament is all that’s required for a future government in coming decades and centuries to shift course, South Australians have reason to be wary.
A business case penned by Jacobs & MCM for the commission shows the state would be swimming in cash for 75 years, and then serious bills would start rolling in for the next 50……..
It’s easy to imagine a future where short-term politics triumphs over today’s best intentions…..
The next six months — with two citizens’ juries and a statewide consultation process — will shake out some of these questions and may even formally recommend a nuclear referendum…… http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/daniel-wills-voters-nuclear-reaction-can-avoid-meltdowns-in-future/news-story/fae428aedd70a823c06302bf15b92289
Electoral suicide for Labor? The nuclear waste dump plan.
from “Sanity” “Mr Weatherill is understood to be favouring a political decision taken without the delay and additional hassle of a referendum.” Sorry Jay, but it is reasonable to go to the “hassle of a referendum” when the the decision has such a significant impact upon our state and citizens.
Tom Koutsantonis threatened the Liberal party with a referendum on the issue (a nuclear waste dump in SA) so it would be beyond hyporitical (even for a politician) for him not to require one now.
Daniel, could you publish the results of the ‘Advertiser -Galaxy’ poll here too?
Earlier this week a survey of ‘AdelaideNow’ readers gave the following results:
Are you in favour of a nuclear waste dump in SA?
No: 61.04% (1,648 votes)
Yes: 35.63% (962 votes)
Undecided: 3.33% (90 votes)
Which indicates certain electoral suicide for any party that allows SA to become a nuclear dump.
Corporations rejoice as The Age sacks a top investigative journalist
A pity that I can’t read the full article. Being on a low income, I don’t subscribe to any paid journal or newspaper. Well, I did, until today, subscribe to Fairfax’s The Age. But not any more.
It is a sad sacking of many staff, and I feel for all of them.
However, it says something a bit more about Fairfax, when they pick out a top investigative journalist. Michael West not only has confronted the big end of town with some very inconvenient facts, but – a worse crime – he has written about them in lively language that the peasantry can understand.
Watch now as the Business Pages of the Age become more obscurely written, and even more pro business. And along with that. The Age particpates in the general dumbing down of the Australian media.
Michael West among Fairfax redundancies, Crikey.com, Myriam Robin Media Reporter, May 13, 2016 Hard-hitting business journo Michael West is among those saying goodbye to Fairfax. Senior business reporter Michael West, whose work appeared in the Business Day sections of the Sydney Morning Herald and Age, is leaving Fairfax today.West confirmed his compulsory redundancy, but declined to comment further. In a tweet after this piece was published online, west wrote “told my skillset not aligned with fairfax strategy going forward”….. subscribers only http://www.crikey.com.au/2016/05/13/michael-west-fairfax-redundancy/
Citizens’ Juries can be a valuable guide in nuclear decision-making
The role of Citizens’ Juries in decision-making on nuclear waste importation, Online opinion, By Noel Wauchope 13 May 2016 On May 10th South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill announced the process by which the state will decide whether or not to host a global nuclear waste import industry, as recommended by the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission.
The first step will be to set up a “Citizens’ Jury” of 50 participants randomly selected from 25,000 invitees statewide, to be followed later by another one of 350 participants.
I think that Weatherill might have mistaken his terms here, as a Citizens’ Jury, by definition, means a group of 10 to 12 participants. The Weatherill plan sounds more like a “Deliberative Poll”, which involves a much larger group.
A properly constituted Citizens’ Jury can be a valuable process in participatory democracy. The group of 10 or 12 people serves as microcosm of the public. …… The process depends on having the oversight of a neutral but well informed advisory panel. Questions need to be framed in a way that does not risk influencing the response. Transparency is important, and complete audio or video recordings of all jury hearings should be publicly available, although the actual jury room deliberations should be private.
The citizen jury process can be an empowering one for the participants, and, as long as it is perceived to be fair and transparent, can be a valuable democratic option for assessing public opinion. It also has the advantage of being cost-effective.
The “Deliberative Poll” method is potentially another very useful form of participatory democracy. It is a lot more expensive, and more complicated. The biggest disadvantage of the Deliberative Poll method is probably its cost. Wikipedia notes:
“Imagine how much money is needed to pay for the trips, the hotel and the food for each participant, hiring the research crew and moderators, booking a venue, etc. Additional costs can include paying for participants’ compensation so that people that are randomly selected can put aside their duties to attend the events (i.e. hiring someone to milk a participant’s cow and providing child care”
Some critics insist that funding for either of these processes should not come from on single body.
“Multiple sources of funding help to ensure that the jury’s organisers are not seen as having a financial interest in producing a verdict that supports the interests of a single funding body. To maximise the scrutiny they provide, the two or more funders should have somewhat opposing interests regarding the subject likely to be under discussion.”……
In Japan, in 2012, a Deliberative Poll formed the guide to government decision-making. The Japanese government used the Center for Deliberative Democracy’s Deliberative Polling method to both inform participants and allow them to influence policymakers about the public’s will with regard to energy production issues. As a direct result of the deliberative polling process, Japan’s national government pledged to have zero percent dependency on nuclear energy after 2030. (This decision was overturned by a later government).
The South Australian government’s decision to start with a participatory democracy process is a welcome one, provided that it is done fairly and properly. Neither a Citizens Jury nor a Deliberative Poll can be a substitute for a fully democratic process like a referendum, but either could be a valuable contributor to a wider process of decision making. http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=18230
South Australian govt will decide on nuclear waste import, but let citizens talk about it anyway
Premier Jay Weatherill Thursday, 11 May 2016 Community views critical to our State’s nuclear future Olympic Dam for nuclear waste? BHP does not agree
Have these people read BHP’s Submission to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission?
BHP clearly states that it doesn’t want to have any involvement in storage or disposal of nuclear waste:
“Irrespective of whether storage or disposal is preferred, BHP Billiton considers that either option would be inconsistent with our core business of mining and the production of high quality copper and associated by-products at Olympic Dam.” – http://nuclearrc.sa.gov.au/app/uploads/2015/11/BHP-Billiton-03-08-2015.pdf
Olympic Dam mooted as nuke dump site The area around BHP Billiton’s Olympic Dam site has been raised in informal discussions within government as a prospective site for a future high-level nuclear waste dump, InDaily can reveal. INDAILY, Tom Richardson, 12 May 15, While a decision on whether to proceed with an international nuclear repository – as strongly recommended by this week’s Scarce Royal Commission final report – won’t be made until November at the earliest, it’s understood the viability of the Stuart Shelf region of the Gawler Craton, much of which is covered by the Olympic Dam indenture agreement, is “a question that’s been asked” in State Government circles.
The discussions also raised the prospect of an approach to Oz Minerals, whose Prominent Hill operation is around 130km northwest of Olympic Dam…….
It’s understood the Rann Government approached BHP in its first term to canvas using Olympic Dam for a low-level state repository, a suggestion the company declined.
It has since maintained that stance, unsurprisingly given the relatively low financial return of such an enterprise, saying in February that it had not been shortlisted for the national waste repository for low and intermediate level waste “and we expect this process to run its course”……http://indaily.com.au/news/2016/05/12/olympic-dam-mooted-as-nuke-dump-site/
Environment groups slam NSW government attempts to generate interest in uranium trade.
The future is renewable, not radioactive: Environment groups slam NSW government attempts to generate interest in uranium trade.
Environment groups have slammed attempts by the NSW government to talk up the potential for uranium exploration as well as coal seam gas to international investors.
The Sydney Morning Herald reported yesterday that at a conference held in Toronto in March, Department of NSW Trade and Investment spruiked NSW as a ‘greenfields’ opportunity for uranium, citing areas in the central west around Broken Hill and the New England region as possible hotspots.
Beyond Nuclear Initiative coordinator Natalie Wasley said “Minister Roberts is going head first down a radioactive rabbit hole. The uranium industry is outdated and unsafe and it is flat lining economically.”
“When the uranium exploration moratorium was overturned in 2012, environment groups were joined by trade unions and medical organisations, as well as the state ALP and Greens parties to launch the NSW Uranium Free Charter. There has historically been strong opposition to uranium exploration and mining in NSW and this has not waned over time.”
“Attempts to open a uranium mining industry here will be challenged head on.”
Kerry Laws from Uranium Free NSW added: “NSW has the potential to be a leader in renewables, but the government is instead trying to drag the state back into the dirty dark ages of the uranium trade.”
“Minister Roberts and Premier Baird could give some substance to Turnbull’s innovation bandwagon, by exploring and mapping out renewable options, rather than resorting to an industry that both damages our land and creates by-products that remain toxic for 100,000 years.”
“The future is in regional, renewable industries.”
How will the environment factor in the Federal Election campaign?
Transition from dirty to clean energy a priority election issue http://www.themercury.com.au/news/opinion/talking-point-transition-from-dirty-to-clean-energy-a-priority-election-issue/news-story/1f6ea59d019243b1ff199e731677a018
Paul Sinclair is campaign director for the Australian Conservation Foundation. May 11, 2016 How will the environment factor in the Federal Election campaign?
If last week’s Budget was anything to go by, the Turnbull Government still favours the interests of polluters over the community.
Malcolm Turnbull’s first Budget follows the environmental neglect of his predecessor.
In fact, under the Turnbull Government, spending on the environment is forecast to fall by 17 per cent by 2019-2020.
Despite talking up the need to shift to a diversified economy, policy commitment supporting a transition away from coal and stimulating renewables or helping workers transition to a more energy-efficient future was absent from the Budget.
This is a great pity because we know the PM understands the science of climate change, and elsewhere political leaders are connecting the dots.
In the past weeks Labor and Green party leaders have released climate policies that are miles ahead of where we were 12 months ago. Continue reading
Wind and hydro providing 100% renewable energy to Tasmania
Tasmania completely powered by renewable energy as rainfall boosts hydro dams ABC News 12 May 16, Tasmania is being completely powered by renewable energy for the first time this year, Hydro Tasmania says.
Key points:
- Sustained rainfall fills dams by more than 3 per cent over 10 days
- All diesel generators and gas power stations have been turned off
- Rough weather hampers repairs to Basslink cable
The state has been in crisis for several months with dam levels at record lows after unprecedented dry weather…….
Hydro Tasmania CEO Stephen Davy said the state’s emergency diesel generators had been switched off through the week and the gas fired Tamar Valley Power Station was turned off yesterday.
“The past 10 days have been very positive,” he said.
“We’ve had more rain than predicted and our storages have risen strongly.
“There’s currently enough hydro and wind energy available to meet all Tasmanian demand.
“For the first time in months, our island is being powered solely by renewable energy.”…..http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-12/tasmania-completely-powered-by-renewable-energy/7408148
Nuclear dump site for a culturally and archaeologically significant area!
NASA scientist and European Space Agency dismayed at CSIRO climate research cuts
‘Dismay’: NASA scientist appeals to CSIRO not to cut global climate efforts, The Age, May 12, 2016 Peter Hannam Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald
A top scientist from US space agency NASA has appealed to CSIRO to abandon plans to cut a key monitoring program that it says will undermine Australia and the world’s ability to monitor and predict climate change. Continue reading
Australian Greens solar policy
Greens unveil solar policy http://www.examiner.com.au/story/3904209/greens-unveil-solar-policy/?cs=95 Georgie Burgess
@georgieburgo May 13, 2016 The Australian Greens have released a policy that aims to encourage households to take up battery storage technology by introducing a 50 per cent refundable tax credit to assist with solar costs.
Tasmanian Greens Senator Nick McKim said the policy would support the more than 26,000 Tasmanians that have solar capacity installed, with $54 million to gain.
Under the policy, people would get up to half the cost of their battery storage system covered, up to a maximum of $5000 in the first year of the program.
The program would run for five years and the amount of the credit would taper off to $1,500 by 2021, reflecting the projected decline in battery storage costs.
A grant scheme would also be available for those on low incomes.
It’s expected up to 1.2 million Australian homes could be supported over the five years of the program.
Together, small household systems in Tasmania are generating approximately 81.5 megawatts of power, with more than 12 per cent of households using rooftop solar.
“The Greens battery storage policy will support the 26,529 Tasmanian households that already have solar capacity installed and encourage thousands more to shift to battery storage,” Senator McKim said.
“Tasmanian households could gain over $54 million in support for battery storage.
“Unfortunately, the energy crisis has exposed Tasmania’s vulnerability and our over-reliance on Basslink importing dirty power from the Latrobe Valley.”
Senator McKim said the policy would be a game changer for the state’s energy security and increase Tasmania’s reputation as a centre of renewable energy.
“The Greens are the only party with the courage and vision to propose sustainable solutions for Tasmania’s energy security.”
Earlier this week, Greens energy spokeswoman Rosalie Woodruff said the feed-in tariff decision by the Economic Regulator to pay solar PV owners 6.6c per kilowatt hour “is a slap in the face for solar owners and the installation industry”.
Can citizen’s juries make decision on Australia importing global nuclear wastes?
Citizen’s council to steer SA nuclear waste decision MEREDITH BOOTH THE AUSTRALIAN MAY 11, 2016
A system used to decide “tricky policy issues” such as how South Australians manage unwanted dogs and cats will be set up to decide the state’s nuclear future.
Labor Premier Jay Weatherill said a citizen’s jury of 50, chosen from 25,000 “everyday South Australians’’ in a similar way to how a jury is chosen for a criminal trial, will be formed next month to pose key questions raised by the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission into the state’s further involvement in the nuclear industry.
A second jury of 350 would seek community feedback and report to the government by September, before a decision on a dump is made by November. Including an advertising campaign, the process would cost $1 million, Mr Weatherill said…..
The Premier said it would be impossible to proceed with recommendations, which included expanding uranium mining and considering nuclear power, without strong community support. “This is going nowhere if it is going to be the subject of political controversy,” he said……
“No serious investor will co-operate with us, no international partner will want to be part of entering into what is a long-term, extraordinarily expensive set of investments if they don’t think the community is going to be able to deliver on them.
“This is a test of our democracy. Can we have a mature and reasoned debate about this issue and come up with a wise judgment,“ he said.
The government has recently used citizen juries on issues of dog and cat management and cycling laws, saying it develops independent views not dominated by lobbyists and activists.
But the nuclear question was “clearly a very significant decision to entrust to this process,’’ said University of Adelaide political analyst Clement Macintyre.
“It means that the decision is arms’ length from the government, and potentially politically safer for them,’’ he said.
Mr Weatherill’s openness to a nuclear dump has clashed with Labor’s national platform, which is strongly opposed to the importation and storage of nuclear waste. However, he said political consensus had to be achieved at state level before taking the question nationally. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/citizens-council-to-steer-sa-nuclear-waste-decision/news-story/20e35875865926c8d1746ed9a55174b5
1 This month
Help Aunty Sue Protect Her Land and Sacred Sites From Destructive Rocket Testing.
.
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
