Posts Tagged ‘global warming’

NPWS Habitat Reduction Season

Tuesday, April 30th, 2024

The bush arson cult

 

It’s Autumn in the Greater Blue Mountains, and the New South Wales Government’s bush arsonists are out in full swing deliberately setting fire to native habitat at every opportunity.  Governmental ‘Habitat Reduction Season‘!     

Is this pastime not comparable with the antiquated British imported tradition of the ‘Duck Season‘ – killing NATIVE ducks that is – just for sport.  It’s the very same time of year!  

 

“Capital climes for rough shooting old sport, what!  Live on peg,  we ought to bag a few dozen before tea.”

 

On Monday 25th March 2024, the NSW Government’s National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) published a media release about its continuing “hazard” reduction burns across the Blue Mountains National Park.   It read as follows (main extracts):

 

“The NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) has announced plans for an 850-hectare hazard reduction burn in the Glenbrook area of Blue Mountains National Park, set to commence on 26 March, weather conditions permitting. This preventive measure is part of a strategic effort to reduce the risk of wildfires and protect surrounding communities.

Scheduled to unfold over consecutive days, the operation targets the reduction of naturally accumulated fuel loads in the park. The primary aim is to provide strategic protection for the residential areas of Glenbrook, Lapstone, and Mulgoa against potential future wildfires.

…This burn is a component of the comprehensive hazard reduction program carried out by NPWS each year, often in collaboration with the Rural Fire Service and Fire and Rescue NSW. These operations are crucial for managing vegetation fuel loads and reducing the intensity and spread of potential wildfires.

The planned hazard reduction burns in Blue Mountains National Park underscore the ongoing commitment of NSW authorities to wildfire risk management and community safety. By taking proactive measures to manage fuel loads, the NPWS aims to mitigate the impact of wildfires, ensuring the protection of both natural landscapes and residential communities.”

 

Our comments to this bush arson justification spin doctoring:

 

  1. The above is bush arson propaganda by contracted consultants with Communications Degrees, justifying the perpetual decimation of Australia’s native habitat since the first day of colonisation and usurpation of the continent since 1788. Nothing has changed or is likely to.  Surviving intact wilderness has become reduced to mere islands.  Just go to Google Maps  [See our extract map below]
  2. “850 hectares” is an area equivalent to about 30km x 30km   (√ 850ha).  In relative terms, that’s three times the size of Sydney’s CBD, a native habitat area capacity for many fauna;
  3. “preventive measure is part of a strategic effort to reduce the risk of wildfires” – this is because when wildfires do occur the NSW Government invariably fails to (A) detect, (B) respond and (C) extinguish the ignitions promptly whilst small and controllable.   It has an attitude that native habitat has a lower value than human habitat.  In contrast,  the urban Fire and Rescue Service is tasked to (B) respond and (C) extinguish the ignitions involving human property immediately, and unlike their unpaid volunteer Rural Fire Service (RFS) counterparts, they get paid to do it;
  4. “protect surrounding communities”  – this means human communities that have been built encroaching more and more into and usurping native habitat.  These human “communities” are the only focus of the NPWS and its support RFS.  Under this culture, wildlife communities matter not, irrespective of any threatened species impacted/killed.  This attitude belies an antiquated anthropocentric mentality.  Neither the NPWS nor the RFS employ an Ecologist.   They just don’t care about protecting Ecology – in this case forest ecology;
  5. “the operation targets the reduction of naturally accumulated fuel loads in the park“.  That’s right, the NPWS as delegated custodial organisation ‘manager’ of the Blue Mountains National Park treats native habitat and its dependent fauna within such national parks in NSW (one of some 800) instead as “fuel loads” to be reduced to sterile urban park status. NPWS should be relegated to managing urban parks like Hyde Park in Sydney’s CBD;
  6. “The primary aim is to provide strategic protection for the residential areas of Glenbrook, Lapstone, and Mulgoa against potential future wildfires.”  – this is a reinforcement approach of our Point 3;
  7. “…This burn is a component of the comprehensive hazard reduction program carried out by NPWS each year, often in collaboration with the Rural Fire Service and Fire and Rescue NSW.” –  this is a reinforcement approach of our Point 3;
  8.  “These operations are crucial for managing vegetation fuel loads and reducing the intensity and spread of potential wildfires.” – “crucial” for whom?  An expanding Sydney human housing sprawl?  So the NSW Government’s volunteer and under-resourced RFS has less forested native habitat risk and so less work to do in the event of wildfires because year-on-year there is less forested native habitat left.  Perpetuation that long term strategy, there will eventually be little or no native habitat left across NSW.  So down the track a future NSW Government may well decide that the RFS is therefore no longer needed and so make the organisation redundant.   Sydney that has been deliberately morphed by successive governments (state and federal) into the ‘Greater Sydney Region‘ has, on paper, swallowed whole the ‘Blue Mountains Region‘ (see NSW Planning map below) , presuming its world heritage status is now just outer-upper western Sydney parkland for the rezoning offing.   Allowing the 2019 megafires to incinerate 80% of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, clearly has achieved the NSW Government’s intended devaluation of the UNESCO recognised “Outstanding Universal Value” of all the Eucalypts, and is wholly consistent with a usurpation agenda for an even Greater Sydney megalopolis.
  9. “The planned hazard reduction burns in Blue Mountains National Park underscore the ongoing commitment of NSW authorities to wildfire risk management and community safety. By taking proactive measures to manage fuel loads, the NPWS aims to mitigate the impact of wildfires, ensuring the protection of both natural landscapes and residential communities.”  The spin doctoring clearly by outsourced consultants with Communication Degrees is palpable here.   It’s more repetition of contrived persuasive terms: “planned hazard reduction burns”,   underscore the “ongoing commitment of NSW authorities to wildfire risk management and community safety”.   Ask the residents of Mount Wilson who lost their homes by RFS reckless arson in 2019 on this point!  “taking proactive measures to manage fuel loads”, “the NPWS aims to mitigate the impact of wildfires”, “ensuring the protection of both natural landscapes and residential communities.”  What so burning the natural landscapes to protect them?  Seriously?  In truth it is all about avoiding bad publicity when the RFS lights a high risk fire on 14th December 2014 causing homes to be incinerated like at Mount Wilson.  “The state coroner has confirmed that a bushfire that destroyed homes in Mt Wilson, Mt Tomah, Berambing and Bilpin in December 2019 was caused after a planned RFS backburn jumped Mt Wilson Road.”   [SOURCE:  ‘Bushfire inquiry: Mt Wilson backburn to blame‘, BMG, 2nd April 2024]

 

 

 

RFS MOUNT WILSON ARSON:  Sam Ramaci, like several of his neighbours, claims a back-burn lit by the RFS on December 14, 2019, was responsible for the destruction of his cool room, tractor and the property that was to fund his retirement. “If they hadn’t started the back-burn, my house would be still standing,” he said.  (The NSW Government has refused to compensate him and others (nor even apologise) for the reckless misjudgment of its RFS – a NSW Government agency.  Who can afford a class action?  [Go to Video Link]

 

The Mount Wilson fire was the sixth backburn to escape along the southern containment line that was intended to protect the upper Blue Mountains from the Gospers Mountain Fire.

[Source:  ‘The best of a bad choice’: Megablaze was artificially enlarged by the Rural Fire Service’, 20231219, By Harriet Alexander, Sydney Morning Herald, ^https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/the-best-of-a-bad-choice-megablaze-was-artificially-enlarged-by-the-rural-fire-service-20231214-p5eren.html]

 

What sane person would join the Rural Fire Starters?

Bush arsonists have a psychological compulsion to set fire to see fire .  It’s a ritual – they’re eyes light up.  “Behold, The Fiery Cross !...”

 

NPWS is beholden to NSW Planning 

 

A headline environmental protection agency that is supposed to be caring for national parks reporting to a state land use planning authority (aka Development).  Is this a warped governmental portfolio conflict of interest of what?  Liberal-Labor-Liberal…?   Same Same.

 

The Regional Map of NSW according to the NSW Government’s Department of Planning and Environment fiefdom in 2024. Note that the Blue Mountains Region no longer exists, but has become annexed by the ever expanding ‘Greater Sydney Region’ in the mindset of Macquarie Street’s urban expansionism campaign.  Mount Victoria a Sydney suburb now?  Lookout Broken Hill!

 

 

Deforestation of Australia since colonisation and its usurpation from 1788. Remnant native forests and their native habitat have been decimated to ecologically unsustainable islands.  The entire pre-colonial eastern seaboard of the continent was originally blanketed by native forests  unbroken, extending about 600km inland.     [SOURCE Google Maps – satellite view, April 2024]

It’s no wonder that Australia continues its record of perpetuating the world’s worst rate of wildlife extinctions.  It’s akin to countries like Madagascar.  It’s all hell bent on serving the Human Plague Order, currently 8.1 Billion! and in 2024 growing (and demanding more) by $75 million p.a.  The current population of Australia is 26,654,200 as of Monday, April 29, 2024.  Compare Australia’s Federation census of 1901 counted 3,773,801 people across Australia.   [Check:  Census Bureau Projects U.S. and World Populations on New Year’s Day; and ^https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/]

 

But wait there’s more bush arson planned…

 

An update last Friday, 26th April 2024 (just days ago), the NSW Government’s environmental department website again posted a media release advising of its further planned “Hazard reduction burn in Blue Mountains National Park” for the weekend. 

It read as follows:

“The NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) with assistance from the NSW Rural Fire Service is conducting a hazard reduction burn in Blue Mountains National Park starting Sunday 28 April, weather permitting.

Staff from Metro South West and Blue Mountains regions undertaking the Pisgah Ridge hazard reduction burn near Glenbrook in the Blue Mountains National Park
The hazard reduction burn will focus on an area south of Woodford, in the mid-mountains, and cover a total area of about 400 hectares. The burn aims to reduce fuel hazards and assist in the protection of property in the surrounding Woodford, Hazelbrook and Linden areas.

Fire trails around the burn area, including Bedford Creek, will be closed to the public, along with the Murphy’s Glen camping and day use area.
The campground will be reopen when it is safe to do so.

Smoke may be seen in the area for up to a week after the initial operation.

The burn is one of many hazard reduction operations undertaken by NPWS each year, many with the assistance of the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) and Fire and Rescue NSW.

All burns around the state are coordinated with the NSW RFS to ensure the impact on the community is assessed at a regional level.

People with known health conditions can sign up to receive air quality reports, forecasts and alerts via email or SMS from the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. For health information relating to smoke from bushfires and hazard reduction burns, visit NSW Health or Asthma Australia.

More information on hazard reduction activities is available at NSW Rural Fire Service and the NSW Government’s Hazards Near Me website and app.”

 

Asthma sufferers? –  NSW Government care factor?   

Carbon emissions? –  NSW Government care factor?

 

10th December 2019:  NPWS world heritage Eucalyptus woodsmoke enveloping Sydney from what started as an abandoned pile burn off Army Road near Gospers Mountain in the distant Wollemi NP two months prior on 26th October 2019.   She’ll be right, eh NPWS boss David Crust?

 

The RFS is one of the planet’s highest emitters of airborne carbon particulates by way of causing mass wood-smoke by repeatedly lighting bushfires and ignoring wildfires.  Wood smoke we feel is a tad more polluting than humans exhaling carbon dioxide. But then how many humans on the planet?

Yet the climate change cult remains quiet on this more serious global problem.  Why so selective about a lesser pollutant in the hysterical ideology that has morphed from ‘Global Warming‘ (Wallace Smith Broecker’s term of 1975) to ‘The Greenhouse Effect‘ (Mike Hulme’s term in 1994) to ‘Climate Change Scientology‘ (U.S. National Academies of 2014) to currently ‘Climate Crisis‘ actually predating the former (U.S Vice President Al Gore of 2007). 

The RFS and NPWS press on regardless – as it’s not carbon dioxide, so all good!

 

Here’s the latest bush arson schedule to further set fire to the still unburnt native habitat of the Blue Mountains: 

 

RFS:   “It’s ok love, it’s good for the bush. She’ll be right.”

 

It’s an age old mentality of the fox charged to look after the chickens.  Both the NPWS and RFS have a cultural attitude that the national parks are NOT to be protected, despite the NPWS delegated to so-called manage NATIONAL parks across New South Wales (NSW).  That is despite the Rural Fire Service (RFS) charged with putting out wildfires.

That perverted culture is conditioned to regard native habitat only as a ‘fuel’ that burns and so NOT habitat but a ‘hazard’ to be controlled and burned to prevent it burning.   If there is no habitat  left, then the meathead rationale, no hazard, so job done!  Of recent times the spin doctors in government seconded as contractors with Communications Degrees (aka the art of spin) have softened the community sell of these ‘hazard reductions’ to ‘prescribed burns” to justify and take some noble authority from on high that the BUSH WAS ORDERED TO BE BURNED, WE HAVE NO CHOICE !  

All their fire trucks are filled with more flammable liquids light a bushfire than water to put it out.  ‘RFS’ should stand for for Rural Fire Starters.

Blue Mountains World Heritage?

 

Eventually the bush grows back but with a vastly different flora community make up.  The biodiversity is gone.  The wildlife don’t come back from the dead.

 

One of countless Koalas tragically burned to death in her native habitat during the Blue Mountains megafires of 2019.  They won’t come back. [This website is not suitable for children to view]

 

This native Koala would have looked something like this:

National parks throughout Australia over the 236 years since colonisation and its continent-wide deforestation, land use destruction and introduced bushfires, have consistently and hatefully  made Australia’s ecological landscape very very quiet and devoid of wildlife.

The 2019 mega bushfires of NSW that the NPWS and RFS let get out of control over months, wiped out 80% of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, including rare remnant koala  communities and hosts of other at-risk wildlife and their special native habitat that NPWS has no clue of the statistical losses.  NPWS does not manage, it mismanages, else just oversees politically drive projects like multi-million dollar tourists track upgrades to benefit humans.   The NSW State Government tasked to look after UNESCO world heritage on behalf of the Australia Government?

This habitat reduction regime is to burn the remaining 20% that didn’t cop the 2019 wildfire megablaze.  They call this “stewardship”?  All trust in the NSW Government to protect world heritage has long gone out the window.

 

The ‘NPWS’ is a misnomer   

 

‘NPWS” is an abbreviation for the National Parks and Wildlife Service in the state of New South Wales. 

Logo of the NPWS

 

The problem is that this government bureaucracy is supposed to be the governmental (public) custodian for national parks is misleading:

  1. NPWS is not national, rather it is only a NSW governmental sub-department.  Governmental ‘management’ of national parks is not national, rather each state and territory has its own national parks, and the Australian Government is not involved – so a bizarre and misleading naming tradition;
  2. NPWS does NOT look after wildlife.   Native habitat in these ‘national parks’ is supposed to be protected. Yet every year vast selected areas are burnt deliberately else left to burn on a grand scale, so killing wildlife and destroying their habitat. 

As a consequence, the NPWS deserves to be more appropriately renamed as ‘NSW Parks Service‘ just like in Victoria, the Victorian Government calls its equivalent ‘Parks Victoria‘.

On the relevant NSW Government’s website pertaining to its NPWS, it explains that the NPWS is part of  a sub-department called ‘Environment and Heritage, which in turn: 

“Environment and Heritage is part of the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water.

Our vision is for a thriving, sustainable and resilient New South Wales.Environment and Heritage works with communities, businesses and governments to protect, preserve and strengthen the quality of our natural environment and heritage. We do this through active stewardship that supports a healthy New South Wales.We are committed to creating thriving environments, communities and economies that benefit the people of New South Wales.”

SOURCE:   ^https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/about-us/who-we-are

 

The three most trendy feel-good terms above include:  “thriving”, “resilient” , active stewardship”.  Pure motherhoodism by the contracted young spin doctors with a Communications Degree.    So where are the published wildlife regional extinction stats before and after the Blue Mountains 2019 megablaze? 

 

Recall Tathra Sunday 18 March 2018, the consequence of the RFS deliberately lighting a bushfire on a 38 degree Celsius (100 Fahrenheit) gusty day upwind of this coastal village. [Read Our Article: ‘Bushfire Scenario Was Not Rocket Science‘

 

 

Further Reading:

[All accessed 20240430]

 

[1]  ‘Blue Mountains‘, Local Alerts, NPWS website, ^https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/visit-a-park/parks/blue-mountains-national-park/local-alerts

 

[2]  ‘Blue Mountains National Park, Current alerts in this area‘, (last reviewed: Tue 30 April 2024, 9.49pm), ^https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/visit-a-park/parks/blue-mountains-national-park/local-alerts

 

[3]   ‘Hazard reduction burns continue across Blue Mountains National Park‘, 20240325 NPWS,

^https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/news/hazard-reduction-burns-continue-across-blue-mountains-national-park#:~:text=The%20NSW%20National%20Parks%20and,week%2C%20beginning%20Tuesday%2026%20March.

 

[4]   ‘Hazard reduction burn in Blue Mountains National Park‘, 20240426, NPWS,  ^https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/news/hazard-reduction-burn-in-blue-mountains-national-park-28-april

 

[5]  ‘Hazard Reduction Burns Scheduled in Blue Mountains National Park to Mitigate Wildfire Risks‘, 20240325, by Mau Mendoza, Modern Campground website, ^https://moderncampground.com/australia/hazard-reduction-burns-scheduled-in-blue-mountains-national-park-to-mitigate-wildfire-risks/

 

[6]  ‘Western Ride HR‘, NPWS, ^https://www.abc.net.au/emergency/warning/nsw/AUREMER-0479ff79feccc8e54815994214aa5ff9

 

[7]  ‘Crossing the Blue Mountains‘ (school excursion), Stage 2 (Years 3-4), History, Blue Mountains National Park, NPWS website , ^https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/education/stage-2-hsie-crossing-the-mountains-mt-york-blue-mountains-national-park/local-alerts

 

[8]   ‘Impact of the 2019-20 Mega-Fires on the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, New South Wales‘, 20221129, by P Smith and J Smith, Issue Vol. 144 (2022),  Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales, ^https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/LIN/article/view/17079

 

[9]  ‘Fires Near Me‘, (webpage), accessed 20240430, by Rural Fire Service (NSW Government department), ^https://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/fire-information/fires-near-me

 

[10]   ‘RFS Blue Mountains District‘, (The official page of the NSW Rural Fire Service Blue Mountains District), Facebook, ^https://www.facebook.com/RFSBlueMountainsDistrict/

 

[11]   ‘Hazard Reduction Burning Program‘, by NSW NPWS, (video on YouTube) ^https://youtu.be/IL50aYkTKIs

 

[12]   ‘NSW Rural Fire Service addressed a ‘wounded’ community seeking an apology after ill-fated back-burn‘, 20220916, by By Harriet Tatham, ABC,  ^https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-09-16/nsw-rfs-apologises-over-mount-wilson-back-burn-bushfire/101446080

 

[13]   ‘The best of a bad choice’: Megablaze was artificially enlarged by the Rural Fire Service‘, 20231219, by Harriet Alexander, Sydney Morning Herald, ^https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/the-best-of-a-bad-choice-megablaze-was-artificially-enlarged-by-the-rural-fire-service-20231214-p5eren.html

 

[14]   ‘The day Sydney choked: Smoke forces drastic measures in harbour city‘, 20191210, by Matt O’Sullivan, Anna Patty and Peter Hannam, Sydney Morning Herald, ^https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/the-day-sydney-choked-smoke-forces-drastic-measures-in-harbour-city-20191210-p53ik8.html

 

[15]   ‘Zoned Employment Land – Regional News South Wales‘, January 2022, Regional NSW Zoned Employment Lands Map’, NSW Department of Planning and Environment,  ^https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/research-and-demography/employment-lands/employment-lands-development-monitor/regional-nsw-zoned-employment-lands-map

 

[16]   ‘Census Bureau Projects U.S. and World Populations on New Year’s Day‘, 20240103, U.S Department of Commerce, ^https://www.commerce.gov/news/blog/2024/01/census-bureau-projects-us-and-world-populations-new-years-day#:~:text=The%20projected%20world%20population%20on,the%20U.S.%20and%20world%20populations.

 

[17]   ‘Current World Population‘, Worldometer (website),  ^https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

 

As at 30th April 2024

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Blue Mountains (AU), Ph04 Species Justice, Ph09 Conservation Governance, Threats from Bushfire | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

Taxing Air – daring to question ‘Climate Change’

Thursday, June 27th, 2013
Taxing Air by Bob Carter and John Spooner 2103
‘Taxing Air : Facts & Fallacies about Climate Change’
A new book by leading environmental scientist Professor Bob Carter
and political cartoonist John Spooner, with Bill Kininmonth, Martin Feil, Stewart Franks, Bryan Leyland.

.

Book released in June 2013:

<< In this accessible and beautifully produced full colour book, The Age (newspaper’s) brilliant political cartoonist John Spooner and leading environmental scientist Professor Bob Carter combine with colleagues to answer a series of critical and highly controversial questions about the politics and science of climate change.

Are human industrial carbon dioxide emissions causing dangerous global warming?

If it is so then climate change surely is one of the great moral challenges of our time.

But is it possible that the so-called consensus science around global warming produced by lavishly funded research institutes and with its own international political lobby organization – the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – is wrong?

Could it be that the emperor has no clothes?

Climate Change Armageddon
Climate Change Alarmism
Continues to invoke taxpayer billions to be wasted
without stopping the culprit, Pollution – notably worst from coal power, road traffic, petro/chemical industry, landfill into oceans…

.

<< Accessible, clearly written and illustrated with simple scientific illustrations, and accompanied by Spooner’s brilliantly wry and telling cartoons, Taxing Air answers – without the spin, evasions or propaganda that pollutes most official writing on climate change – every question you have about global warming but have been too intimidated by the oppressive ‘consensus’ to ask. >>

.

..Did You Know?

.

• Just 8,000 years ago, there was virtually no summer sea-ice in the Arctic Ocean.

• Sea-level rise is natural, and declining in rate.

• Australian rainfall has not decreased over the last 100 years.

• A previous Australian drought lasted 69 years.

• By catchment management, the Murray-Darling Basin now contains almost 3 times as much water as it held naturally.

• Global air temperature has not increased for the last 16 years, despite an 8% increase in CO2.

• Global ocean temperature is also steady or cooling slightly.

• Australian territory absorbs up to 20 times the amount of CO2 that we emit.

• The CO2 tax will cost about $1,000/person/year; and rising.

• The result of reducing Australian CO2 emissions by 5% by 2020 will be a theoretical (and unmeasurable) cooling of between 0.0007 O and 0.00007 O C by 2100.

• No scientist can tell you whether the world will be warmer or cooler than today in 2020.

.

Just a selection of the fascinating facts provided in answer to more than 100 basic questions about global warming and climate change that are covered in the book. >>

.

[Source:   ‘Bob Carter’s new book: “Taxing Air” – climate change facts and fallacies‘, 201306, Australian Conservative, ^http://australianconservative.com/2013/06/bob-carters-new-book-taxing-air-%E2%80%93-climate-change-facts-and-fallacies/]

.

 

[Ed:  Yet while they tax air in the name of Climate Change,

Weak Environmental Laws exacerbate pollution]

.

Manmade Pollution
Simple old fashioned Pollution is ignored in favour of Climate Change Evangelism
Where is the Pollution Alarmism? It is real.  You can touch and taste it!
[Source:  ‘Beijing China motorway smog pollution January 2013, by Getty’s Images,
^http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbint/1347280267-smog-envelops-huge-swathes-of-china]

.

James Cook University caves in to Climate Change Evangelism and Bullying

.

James Cook University

So much for “higher” education.

James Cook University (in Townsville, Far North Queensland, Australia) has blackballed Professor Bob Carter, not because of any flaw in his scientific reasoning, but because he speaks outside the permitted doctrine. His views on climate science do not fit with the dominant meme (or the grant applications). And then there were pesky complaints and emails from disgruntled fans of the prophets-of-doom. (Quite a drain on the office.)

They took his office a while back, then they took the title. Carter was still supervising a student, and another professor hired him for an hour a week with his own budget. It meant Carter could continue supervising and keep his library access. But that wouldn’t do. Professor Jeffrey Loughran blocked that as well. The library pass and the email was shut off on June 21. It takes an active kind of malice to be this petty.

.

Professor Bob CarterProfessor Bob Carter

.

In years to come when everyone admits that the Great Global Warming Scare was hyped, James Cook University (JCU) could have been seen as one of the rare beacons of academic honour and principle. Instead, apparently, it’s as spineless as any other bureucratic collective. The irony for James Cook University, is that Bob Carter has been working there for 31 years, and they only had to put up with him for a little bit longer in order to claim their glory (albeit post hoc) and then pretend that really they had supported him all along.

The dominant meme is collapsing, thousands of respected scientists are speaking out and skeptic blogs are storming the awards. The evidence has turned, the carbon market has sunk to junk status, and assertive daring articles are appearing in mainstream media in places they would never have been seen a few years ago, like the New York Times, and the Economist. The climate scientists themselves are admitting they don’t know why the world isn’t warming. But the man who was right about that all along is persona non-gratis.

Professor Bob Carter has been a key figure in the Global Warming debate, doing exactly what good professors ought to do, challenging paradigms, speaking internationally, writing books, newspaper articles, and being invited to give special briefings with Ministers in Parliament.

He’d started work at James Cook University in 1981 and served as Head of the Geology Department until 1998. [UPDATE: to clarify, sometime after that he retired]. Since then he’s been an honorary Adjunct Professor.

All James Cook University had to do was to approve an extension of this arrangement, giving him library and email access, at little cost to them, and he could have continued to help students and staff, provide a foil, a counterpoint, and keep alive the spirit of true scientific enquiry. (Not to mention his continued speaking, books, and influence on the National debate).

Instead every person in the chain of command tacitly, or in at least one case, actively endorsed the blackballing. Each one failed to stand for free speech and rigorous debate. In the end, James Cook University didn’t even make any effort to disguise the motive. The only reasons given were that the staff of the School of Earth and Environmental Studies had discussed the issue (without any consultation with Carter) and decided that his views on climate change did not fit well within the School’s own teaching and research activities.

Apparently it took up too much time to defend Carter against outside complaints about his public writings and lectures on climate change. (Busy executives don’t have time to say “Why don’t you ask Carter yourself?” or “We value vigorous debate here.” Presumably they are too busy practising their lines and learning the litany? )

Each of these eminent professors, no doubt, is certain that they are independent minded, tolerant of other views, and have exacting ethical standards. I gather any one of them could have risen above the lap-dog obedience to the dogma of the day.

None did. >>

.

[Source:  ‘JCU caves in to badgering and groupthink — blackballs “politically incorrect” Bob Carter‘, 201306, by Joanne Nova, ^http://joannenova.com.au/2013/06/jcu-caves-in-to-badgering-and-groupthink-blackballs-politically-incorrect-bob-carter/]

.

Climate Change HypocriteJet A1 gusling hypocrites fly globally
to attend Climate Change talkfests like the failed Copenhagen Summit in 2009
[Source:  ‘Hypocrite Prince Charles slammed for flying to Copenhagen in jet with large carbon footprint’, 20091217,
^http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/hypocrite-prince-charles-slammed-for-flying-to-copenhagen-in-jet-with-large-carbon-footprint-20091217-kxzl.html]

 

.

And while Australia scaremongers Climate Change, Coal remains King

.

Coal Pollution
Coal Fired Power Pollutes worse than Climate Change
[Photo:  http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/03/epa_to_reduce_new_power_plants.html]
 

Australia’s Pollution Fact Sheet

.

1. Australia is the world’s #1 Developed Nation polluter

Consulting the US Energy Information Administration database (see: http://www.eia.doe.gov/ ) we obtain the following information on “annual per capita fossil fuel-derived carbon dioxide (CO2) pollution” in “tonnes (t) per person per year” for Australia and other major polluters (2004 data): 19.2 (for Australia; 40 if you include Australia’s coal exports), 19.7 (the US), 18.4 (Canada), 9.9 (Japan), 4.2 (the World), 3.6 (China), 1.0 ( India) and 0.25 (for Bangladesh).

.

2. Germanwatch index places Australia #54 in the list of the worst polluters (#56 being worst)

Of course “annual per capita fossil fuel-derived CO2 pollution” is but one – albeit a very important – indicator of climate impact. The Germanwatch Climate Change Index 2008, a comparison of the 56 top CO2 emitting nations (see: http://www.germanwatch.org/ccpi.htm ), takes other parameters into account in ranking. In this ranking of 56 top CO2 emitting nations, Sweden and Germany are #1 and #2 for greenhouse responsibility, while shale-oil-rich Canada (a US ally), coal-rich Australia (a US ally), the USA and oil-rich Saudi Arabia (US-linked) rank #53, #54, #55 and #56, respectively (see: http://www.germanwatch.org/ccpi.htm ).

.

3. In 2004 Australia (0.3% world population) gave 3% total fossil fuel

Consulting the US Energy Information Administration database (see: http://www.eia.doe.gov/ ), in 2004 Australia (0.3% world’s population) yielded 1.4% of world’s fossil fuel-derived CO2 (3% including coal exports). The World’s 27,043 Mt fossil fuel-derived CO2 (2004) comprised 10,850 Mt (petroleum), 5602 Mt (gas), and 10,592 Mt (coal) with the Australia breakdown being 810 Mt (total), 117 Mt (petroleum), 52 Mt (gas), 217 Mt (coal, domestic), 424 Mt (coal exports).

.

4. Australia world’s largest coal exporter (30% total world coal exports)

From Australian Coal Association (see: http://www.australiancoal.com.au/exports.htm ) Australia maintained its position as the world’s largest coal exporter with exports of 233 Mt in 2005-06 ($A24.5 billion) or 30% of the world total (777 Mt) (M, G, T = million, billion, trillion).

.

5. Australia produces about 6% of world hard coal (black coal)

From World Coal Institute (see:

http://www.worldcoal.org/pages/content/index.asp?PageID=188 ) total World: hard coal consumption 5339 Mt (2006); coal production 5370 Mt (2006); World brown coal 914 Mt ; Australia 309 Mt hard coal (5.8% of World production; used for thermal electricity and as coking coal for steel production).

From Australian Minerals Index (see:

http://www.australianminesatlas.gov.au/build/common/siteindex.jsp ) Australia produces about 6% of the world’s saleable black coal and is ranked fourth after China (45%), US (19%) and India (8%).

.

6. Australia has 24% of World’s brown coal and produces 8% of World’s Total

From Australian Minerals Index (see: http://www.australianminesatlas.gov.au/aimr/commodity/brown_coal.jsp )

Australian brown coal production for 2005/06 was 67.7 Mt (valued at $849 million) – all was from Victoria and used to generate electricity. Australia has about 24% of World recoverable brown coal and is ranked first. However, Australia produces about 8% of the World’s brown coal and is ranked fifth largest producer after Germany (22%), Russia (10%), USA (9%) and Greece (8%).

.

7. Australian coal reserves

Australia has about 77 billion tonnes of coal resources

http://gc3.cqu.edu.au/modern-world/index.php . There are 909 billion tonnes of proven coal reserves worldwide (see: http://www.worldcoal.org/pages/content/index.asp?PageID=100 ). The price in 2006 was about US$100/t but is expected to reach US$300/t in 2008.

.

8. Coal to CO2 and coal to kWh conversions

Carbon (C, atomic weight 12) to carbon dioxide (CO2, molecular weight 44 ) conversion involves a stoichiometry of 12 g C -> 44 g CO2 i.e. 1 g C to 3.7 g CO2. 1 g coal yields about 1.9 g CO2 (depends on coal type). Thus the US Energy Information Agency estimates World total CO2 from energy-related coal burning at 12,898 Mt in 2008 (see: http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/ask/environment_faqs.asp#source_by_fuel )  and the World Coal Institute estimates 2008 coal production at 5,845 Mt  hard coal and 951 Mt brown coal/lignite (see: http://www.worldcoal.org/resources/coal-statistics/ ), this yielding 12,898 Mt CO2/6,796 Mt coal = 1.9 Mt CO2/Mt coal, the specific values for different kinds of coal being  2.85 Mt CO2/Mt coal (anthracite), 2.47 Mt CO2/Mt coal (bituminous), 1.86 Mt CO2/Mt coal (sub-bituminous) and 1.40 Mt CO2/Mt coal (lignite, brown coal) (see: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/coefficients.html ).  In a coal-fired power station 0.327 kg coal yields 1 kWh (kilowatt hour) of energy.

Greenlivingpedia (see: http://www.greenlivingpedia.org/Australian_coal_exports ) estimates that in 2008 Australia exported 288 Mt CO2/120 Mt thermal coal (2.4 Mt/Mt thermal coal) and 238 Mt CO2/140 Mt coking coal ( 1.7 Mt CO2/Mt coking coal) for an average value of 526 Mt CO2/260 Mt coal (and an average value of 2.0 Mt CO2/Mt coal exported from Australia).

.

A further estimate comes from 12,064 Mr CO2 from coal in 2006 (see US EIA: http://www.eia.doe.gov/iea/carbon.html )  and World production of 6779 million short tons of coal (6779 x 0.9072 = 6,150 Mt of coal) in 2006 (see US EIA: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/txt/ptb1114.html ) – 12,064 Mt CO2 /6,150 Mt coal = 1.96 or about 2.0 Mt CO2 per Mt coal (this includes brown coal and low quality sub-bituminous coal in the denominator and would thus  would underestimate the CO2 from the burning of exported Australian coal).

.

9. Australia gets 77% of its electricity from coal, 92% from fossil fuels

According ot the Australian Uranium Association (see: http://www.uic.com.au/nip37.htm ) electricity generation in Australia involves about 51 billion W (51 GW) capacity; the price varies during the day etc at about 4 c /kWh; in 2006 Australia’s power stations produced 255 billion kilowatt hours (trillion Wh = TWh) of electricity; the energy source breakdown was 92.2% Carbon-based (black coal 54.8% , brown coal 21.9%, oil 1.3%, gas 14.2%, hydro 6.8%. and renewables 1%; 77% is coal-based electricity.

.

10. The true cost of coal energy is 4 times the market cost (Ontario Government study) – 4,860 Australians killed by coal annually @ $1.6 million each?

In Ontario (see: http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=8836) the cost/kWh jumped from $0.04 to $0.164 with environmental and human impacts added; pollution from coal plants producing 27 TWh/year (20% of supply) kill 668 people per year in Ontario (population 12.2 million) suggesting coal plants producing 77% of Australia’s annual 255 TWh of electricity (see: http://www.uic.com.au/nip37.htm ) i.e. 0.77 x 255 = 196.4 TWh/year might kill about 196.4 TWh x 668/27 TWh = 4,859 people annually in Australia (population 21 million); in Australia 255 bn kWh x $0.04/kWh = $10.2 bn; 0.77 (coal-based) x $10.2 bn = $7.85 billion; $7.85 bn /4,859 deaths i.e. Australian electricity consumers pay for electricity @ $1.6 million per fellow Australian killed by coal.  >>

.

[Source:  ‘Yarra Valley Climate Action Group (YVCAG)’, 200806, ^https://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/%E2%80%9Ccoal-is-king%E2%80%9D-australia-co2-pollution-fact-sheet]

 

Australian Coal Train

Australia is the world’s leading coal exporter !

 

.

<< Over the past 10 years black coal exports have increased by more than 50%.

Japan takes 39.3% of Australia’s black coal exports – the largest share, with a total of 115.3 million tonnes exported last financial year.

China is our second largest market with 42.4 million tonnes in 2009-2010, almost double the previous year.

The Republic of Korea accounts for 40.7 million tonnes, India for 31.92 million tonnes and Taiwan for 26.53 million tonnes, rounding out the top five destinations for coal from Australia.

Together these five countries accounted for 88% of all black coal exports with a further 28 countries taking the remaining 12%.

Demand for coal in China and India is expected to increase dramatically over the next decade in line with these countries’ projected need for coal for energy and manufacturing.

Australia was the only one of the world’s 33 advanced economies to grow in 2009 during the worst global recession since the Great Depression.

The principal reason for this was our continued coal exports. The importance of coal in the economy is also evident in its growing share of Gross Domestic Product.

This share has more than doubled, from 1.7 % in 2006-07 to 3.5 % in 2008-09, making it the largest contributor to the mining sector.

In 2011, Australia’s thermal coal exports grew by four %, relative to 2010, to total 148 million tonnes. Projections for 2012 see an increase of 10% in 2012 to 162 million tonnes, then growing at an average annual rate of 11 % between 2013 and 2017, to total 271 million tonnes by the end of the period.

Australia’s exports of metallurgical coal are forecast to increase at an average annual rate of eight %, reaching 218 million tonnes in 2017, with total earnings forecast at $40 billion in current Australian dollars..

Looking to purchase coal?

Please contact our members for further information. >>

Australian Coal Association

.

[Source:  The Australian Coal Association, ^http://www.australiancoal.com.au/exports.html]

.

Pollution Tax not Carbon Tax
If pollution causes climate change and coal is the worst polluter, why is Australian Coal not pollution taxed?
[Source: Greenpeace, ^http://www.greenpeace.org/australia/en/news/climate/Coal-train-stopped-in-tracks1/]

.

Chinese Coal
Chinese Coal
[Source:  Econews, ^http://econews.com.au/news-to-sustain-our-world/greenpeace-china-coal-plan-may-spark-water-crisis/]

.

China's Coal PollutionHaze and sulfur aerosol pollution produced by China unnaturally.
[Source: NASA]

.

Pollution of ChinaPollution impacts on China
[Source:  ^http://splashman.phoenix.wikispaces.net/East+Asia+Environmental+Issues,+RS]

.

.

.

Further Reading

.

[1]   “Taxing Air” – climate change facts and fallacies’

For more information about this book, including how to order go to: ^www.taxingair.com.

.

[2]  “Axe the tax”and “adapt to the fact” of climate change, Professor Bob Carter says’

^http://australianconservative.com/2011/08/%E2%80%9Caxe-the-tax%E2%80%9Dand-%E2%80%9Cadapt-to-the-fact%E2%80%9D-of-climate-change-prof-bob-carter-says/

.

[3]   ‘Gillard’s climate committee is a farce, Bob Carter says’

^http://australianconservative.com/2010/11/gillards-climate-committee-is-a-farce-bob-carter-says/

.

[4]    ‘Prof Bob Carter reviews the climate debate and Gillard Govt’s irrational response’

^http://australianconservative.com/2012/02/prof-bob-carter-reviews-the-climate-debate-and-gillard-govts-irrational-response/

.

[5]    ‘Bob Carter on the climate counter-consensus’

^http://australianconservative.com/2010/05/prof-bob-carter-on-the-climate-change-counter-consensus/

.

[6]  ‘ “Their” ABC gags climate realist Bob Carter’

^http://australianconservative.com/2010/03/their-abc-gags-bob-carter/

.

[7]     ‘Politicians miss the point on climate change’

^http://australianconservative.com/2010/08/politicians-miss-the-point-on-climate-change/

.

[8]    ‘100 reasons why climate change is natural’

^http://australianconservative.com/2009/12/100-reasons-why-climate-change-is-natural/

.

[9]     ‘The World’s Worst Pollution Problems:  Assessing Health Risks at Hazardous Waste Sites’

2012, by Blacksmith Institute and Greencross Switzerland

>World’s Worst Polluted 2012  (4MB, PDF)

^http://www.worstpolluted.org/files/FileUpload/files/2012%20WorstPolluted.pdf

 

[10]   Who are the world’s biggest polluters?

^http://www.reuters.com/news/pictures/slideshow?articleId=USRTXRKSI#a=1

.

[11]    Eleven Most Polluted Rivers in the World  (by Humans)

^http://www.takepart.com/photos/10-most-polluted-rivers-world/lake-karachay–russia

.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Threats from Pollution, Threats from Weak Environmental Laws | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

‘Prescribed Burning’ is a greenhouse gas

Saturday, June 16th, 2012
 
The following article is from the Tasmanian Times entitled ‘This is just plain wrong. Why is it allowed to continue?‘ contributed by Tasmanian resident Prue Barratt 20120614. Tigerquoll has contributed to the debate condemning prescribed burning.  Further investigation has revealed the extent of the bush arson culture on the Island and is included below.
What’s left of Tombstone Creek old growth rainforest in Tasmania after a ‘Planned Burn’
This wet forest was dominated by sassafras, myrtle, tree-ferns and tall Eucalyptus after logging and subsequent regeneration burn, 2006. It is situated at the headwaters of the South Esk River catchment water supply for the town of Launceston.
(Photo by Rob Blakers, 2006)

.

‘My name is Prue Barratt and I live in Maydena in the Derwent Valley (Tasmania).  I’m writing this to highlight what small towns around this state have to deal with in Autumn and Winter.

Today (Wednesday) started off as a spectacular crisp winter’s day; one of a few really beautiful days we get through our colder months.  So I was excited to get outside for the day to enjoy the sun.  But by the time I organised myself to venture out it was too late … as I opened my front door I was confronted by smoke … it was literally blowing in my door.

I covered my nose and stepped out to see what was going on and realised there were fires right around our little town;  not one fire but a two or maybe three, I couldn’t actually see how many because I couldn’t see and I could hardly breath, I stepped back inside, grabbed the camera,  and took the pictures above; this was the view from my roof … 360 degrees surrounded by smoke.

It was one of the worst smoke-outs I had experienced whilst living here and by the time I got back inside I reeked of smoke.

This is just plain wrong. It is the 21st Century on a planet that is worried about carbon pollution!   Our leaders need to put an end to these archaic practices now. There is no need to subject communities or the environment in general to this kind off filthy practice.

Tasmania already has one of the country’s highest rates of asthma allergies and lung problems.  Why is this allowed to continue?  Tassie is supposed to be the “Clean Green State”.

I’m pretty sure the tourist bus loaded with people which crawled through town didn’t think it was a clean green state.  I’m pretty sure they were horrified that this happens in a supposed developed country every year.

When your eyes are stinging and you are too scared to open the doors of your home because your house will become unbearably flooded with smoke; when you are concerned for the wellbeing of old and frail family members because you just can’t get away from it unless you completely pack up and leave for the night …

You feel like a prisoner in your own home … in country in this day and age.. There is a serious problem!

Postscript:   I just needed to add to my article that three Norske Skog (Boyer pulp mill) employees just turned up on my doorstep and apologised for all the smoke.  They weren’t burning coupes but were asked by a couple of locals to burn piles close to their houses; most of the coupes were already burnt earlier in the season, so I need to acknowledge that … but the whole burning off thing needs to stop regardless. They said they were looking into alternatives but it needs to stop now; not later. They have had long enough to change the way they do things … at our expense.’

[end of article]

.Smoke-filled atmosphere engulfing Maydena, South West Tasmania
(Photo by Prue Barratt, April 2012)

.

In 2009 paper maker, Norske Skog, with its pulp mill plant situated at Boyer on Tasmania’s Derwent River, axed 50 jobs as a combined consequence of its automation upgrade to its pulp mill plant and due to the structural downturn in paper sales by its newspaper clients. 

[Source: ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-10-02/norske-skog-paper-mill-boyer-tasmania/1088740]

.

Ed:  Newspapers are losing advertising revenue to Internet based businesses like Seek.com, CarSales.com.au, and HomeSales.com.au and so selling less newspapers and so buying less paper from the likes of Norske Skog.

Pile burning and forest (coupe) burning by Norske Skog is typical business-as-usual deforestation across Tasmania, not only by the forestry industry but by National Parks, the Tasmanian Fire Service and by rural landholders.  It is all part of an inherited colonial cult of bush arson that is a key threatening process driving habitat extinctions across the island.  Prescribed burning, aka ‘hazard reduction’, is a euphemism for State-sanctioned bush arson which is endemic practice not only across Tasmania’s remanining wild forests, but throughout Australia.  It is a major contributor to Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions, which are what many scientists argue are Man’s cause of global warming and climate change.

The Gillard Labor Government is about to introduce a Carbon Tax on 1st July 2012, whereby Australia’s major industrial polluters must pay a Carbon Tax of $23 per tonne.  Yet the many hundreds of thousands of tonnes of timber that are burnt by bushfires is somehow excluded – whether it be lightning ignitions allowed to get out of control, or deliberate State-sanctioned bush arson.  This makes the Carbon Tax nothing but discriminating political greenwashing, with minimal climate impact.  Meanwhile, and more critically, Australia’s ecology, regions by regions, is being driven closer to extinction by destructive bushfire management. 

.

Comments to Prue’s article by Tigerquoll

.

‘CEO Bob Gordon and his Forestry Tasmania (FT) forest marauders along with his partners in eco-crime Tasmania Fire Service (TFS) Chief Officer Mike Brown need to be paying Julia’s Carbon Tax.  But instead of $23 per tonne, it ought be $23 per cubic metre.

Send the two organisations broke. Do not donate to the TFS bastards.  They light more fires than they put out.  ‘Fuel’ Reduction is a euphemism for bush arson.  It gives ‘em somthing to do in the off season.  It reflects the helpless defeatism of Tasmania’s non urban fire emergency service denied proper and effective government resources to put out serious wildfires when they occur.’

.

TFS bastards setting fire to native forests is defeatism, knowing that unless native vegetation is converted to sterile parkland that in a real wildlife it is every man for himself.

They even have removed the ‘Low Fire Risk’ category and added a ‘Catastrophic Fire Risk’ category.  They may as well add an ‘Armageddon’ category and be done with it!  It is defeatism at its worst.

Local case in point – look recent Meadowbank Fire near Maydena in February this year east of Karanja.  It started on Saturday, reportedly by “accident” at the Meadowbank Dam and  burnt out 5000 hectares.  Two days later was still officially ‘out of control’.  The meaningless and flawed motto of ‘Stay or Go’ was supplanted by the false sense of security of ‘Prepare, Act, Survive’.  In reality the pragmatic community message ought to be ‘You’re On Your Own’.

This Tassie Dad’s Army fire agency is more adept at starting bushfires than putting them out.

The under-resourced, raffle funded volunteer dependent model is abject Government neglect of emergency management.  Every time someone criticises the non-urban fire fighting performance, the government bureaucracy and politicans hide behinds the nobleness of community volunteers.

Imagine if URBAN fire fighting was volunteer dependent on someone’s pager going off?  Goodbye house.

I feel for the volunteers, but have no respect for the policy or organisation.’

Tasmania’s Derwent Valley 20120401
..a Forestry Industry April fool’s joke
[Source: ^http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2012/04/02/314811_tasmania-news.html]

.

Here’s a question..what is the impact on Tasmanian fauna?

Here’s some research…

“It’s spring, and soon we’ll start to get sensationalist stories predicting a horrendous bushfire season ahead. They will carry attacks on agencies for not doing enough to reduce fuel loads in forests close to homes, for unless those living on the urban fringe see their skies filled with smoke in winter they panic about losing their homes in January.

Fighting fires with fear is a depressing annual event and easy sport on slow news days. Usually the debate fails to ask two crucial questions: does hazard reduction really do anything to save homes, and what’s the cost to native plants and animals caught in burn-offs?

…A new scientific paper published in the CSIRO journal Wildlife Research by Michael Clarke, an associate professor in the department of zoology at La Trobe University, suggests the answer to both questions is: we do not know.

Much hazard reduction is performed to create a false sense of security rather than to reduce fire risks, and the effect on wildlife is virtually unknown.’

.

[Read More:  ‘The dangers of fighting fire with fire‘ by James Woodford, Sydney Morning Herald, 20080907, ^http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/the-dangers-of-fighting-fire-with-fire/2008/09/07/1220725850216.html]

.

~ Tigerquoll.

.

State-sanctioned bush arson in Tasmania
[Source: http://www.forestrytasmania.com/fire/fire1.html]

.

Bushfires, their smoke and heat, contribute to greenhouse gas emissions.  So Bushfire Management has an obligation to reduce bushfires, not create them.  Bushfire Management needs to pay a Carbon Tax just like any other industrial polluter.

.

.

‘Forestry tries to spin results of CSIRO Emissions Study’

..more smoke and mirrors from an out-of-touch agency.

 

‘The Tasmanian Greens today said that a CSIRO study comparing smoke emissions from wood-heaters with forestry burn-offs did nothing to justify Forestry Tasmania’s outdated and unsustainable management practices.  The study, commissioned by Forestry Tasmania, found that the majority of smoke pollution in specific parts of the Huon Valley during 2009 and 2010 was caused by wood-heater emissions.

Greens Forestry spokesperson Kim Booth MP said that these results aren’t surprising, particularly in the more densely populated areas such as Geeveston and Grove where the study was conducted.

“This is not a case of one type of smoke pollution being better than another.  All smoke emissions are an unwanted nuisance for the community, particularly for those with pre-existing respiratory problems such as asthma.”

“The commissioning and release of this study by Forestry Tasmania is another obvious attempt to justify their so-called regeneration burns. That’s despite the Environment Protection Authority identifying numerous breaches of guideline safety levels for particle emissions caused by burn-offs.”

“We need to be working as a community to reduce all smoke emissions and improve air quality.  This means that we must work to educate people on the importance of installing heaters that burn efficiently, and comply with Australian standards.”

“Forestry can’t play down the negative impact of its burn-offs.  The Greens receive many complaints from people suffering from respiratory problems, such as asthma, who have no option in some cases but to pack up and leave home during the forest burns season.”

“Proper systems need to be put in place, or its time these burns were stopped once and for all.”

[Source:  ‘Forestry tries to spin results of CSIRO Emissions Study’ – more smoke and mirrors from an out-of-touch agency, by Kim Booth MP, Tasmanian Greens Forestry Spokesperson, 20110825, Tasmanian Times, ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php/article/smoke-from-regeneration-burns-exceeded-healthy-limits-only-three-times]

.

[Source: Water S.O.S Tasmania, ^http://www.water-sos.org/forestry-tasmania/index.html]

.

.

2010:  Escaped Controlled Burn at Ansons Bay in mid-Summer

.

‘The derived fire location..corresponds to a wildfire at Ansons Bay (north-east Tasmania, near Bay of Fires) , listed on the Tasmanian Fire Service (TFS) webpage on the 23rd of January.

This fire had burnt out 100 ha on 23rd January 2010, and had burnt a total of 200 hectares when reported as extinguished on the 26th.

The fire was reported as an escaped permit burn.  The permit burn was ignited on the 22nd of January 2010. The local TFS brigade responded to the wildfire at 14:00 EDT on the 23rd. The wildfire burnt mainly in grassland.

Smoke from a bushfire at Ansons Bay on the 23rd of January 2010 moved westwards towards the Tamar River. The BLANkET air stations at Derby, Scottsdale and Lilydale each detected the smoke as it moved. Ti Tree Bend station(Launceston) and the Rowella station in the lower Tamar also detected the smoke. Derby is approximately 35 km from the fire location, while Ti Tree Bend and the Rowella stations are approximately 100 km from the burn. The peak 10–minute PM2.5 concentrations at these stations were of order 10 to 15 μg m−3.

At Rowella the hourly–averaged PM2.5 reached to near 20 μg m−3 near 21:00 AEST.

[Source:  ‘Blanket Brief Report 7: ‘Smoke from a bushfire at Ansons Bay, north–east Tasmania moving into to the Tamar Valley 23rd January 2010’, Air Section, Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), Tasmanian Government, February 2011, ^http://epa.tas.gov.au/Documents/BLANkET_Brief_Report_07.pdf, Read Report]

.

.

Tasmanian Forest Industry – its case for burning native forests every year

.

‘The Tasmanian forest industry planned burning program, which includes both burning for forest regeneration, and burning for property protection generally commences in mid-March if conditions are suitable.

.. The Coordinated Smoke Management Strategy developed by the Forest Practices Authority is being used by the Tasmanian forest industry.

As of 2011, all smoke complaints are being received and investigated by the Environment Protection Authority, a Division of the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment.  [Ed.  But the EPA has no watchdog besides the community, so it can be as incompetent, as negligent, as complicit, as dismissive, as colluding with its sister Tasmanian Government agencies all it likes.  The EPA does not have any law that requires it to be publicly transparent.  The photos in this article evidence the Tasmanian EPA as an ineffectual and spurious organisation.]

.

Forest Regeneration


Fire is an important part of the life cycle of Eucalypts. In nature most eucalypt species require the disturbance provided by fire to regenerate. Eucalypt seeds and seedlings need a mineral soil seedbed, abundant sunlight and reduced competition from other plants to establish and grow. In nature this situation is provided by a major wildfire. Tasmanian forest managers mimic nature by using fire in a planned and controlled way to re-establish healthy fast growing trees after harvesting.

Planned burns are part of an industry-wide programme by :

  1. Forestry Tasmania (FT)
  2. The Forest Industries Asssociation of Tasmania (FIAT).
  3. Tasmania Fire Service
  4. Parks & Wildlife Service, Tasmania.

. 

Forests & Timber


Forests managed for timber production take more carbon out of the atmosphere over time than unmanaged  forests locked up in reserves.  Tasmania currently has 47% of forests locked up and unmanaged.

Timber from managed forests is used to build an array of structures from houses to multi-level buildings, sports arenas to architecturally designed public spaces.  Timber is light and easy to work with and allows for flexibility and efficiency in design.  Timber is warm, aesthetically pleasing and most importantly, renewable.  Environments rich in timber have a kinship with nature and make people living and working in them feel at one with the outdoors.

It is so important, in these tough economic times, to use local products.  Tasmanian timber produced in the state comes from sustainably managed forests, administered under processes established by Government. In addition, all public and most private forests in Tasmania are third party certified as being sustainably managed by the Australian Forestry Standard.  Tasmanian timber is a particularly environmentally friendly choice and we should be using more wood to help combat climate change.

Wood is stored greenhouse gas – held together with stored sunlight.  If we are serious about trying to address greenhouse and climate change problems, we should be growing and using more forests, for sustainable energy-efficient products that store carbon and for sustainable biomass-based energy systems.

Harvesting a forest results in the release of some carbon dioxide back into the air from which it came however a considerable portion remains stored in resulting forest products such as furniture, timber for housing and a myriad of paper products.

Use more wood not less.’

[Source: Forestry Industry Association of Tasmania (FIAT), ^http://www.fiatas.com.au/]

 

Ed:  Fire is unnatural in old growth wet Eucalypt forests.  Many forest plant species are fire sensitive so will not recover in teh evnt of a fire.  No fauna are fire tolerant – they either burn to death or die after fire from starvation, exposure or predation.  Those who burn forests have no idea of the impacts upon fauna populations, nor the impacts of fire upon biodiversity.   Their lay observation upon seeing regrowth of some species is that setting fire to forest habitat must be ok. 

Those who perpetuate and extend this myth, fabruicate the notion that fire is healthy and indeed essential for forest regeneration and survival.  All new recruits of the Tasmanian Forest Industry, Tasmania Fire Service and Parks & Wildlife Service are duly indoctrinated to this dogma.  Of course it is unsubstantiated crap.  Al one needs do is walk through an ancient Styx forest that has not been burnt for hundreds of years to disprove the myth.

Those vested interests who stand to profit from deforestation and exploitation of native forests, brandish all protected forest habitat as being ‘locked up’ and ‘unmanaged’.  The ecological values of the forests are dismissed as worthless.  It is no different to 17th Century traders denied access to Africans for the slave trade.

Timber that is from native old growth forests is not “renewable” unless the industrial logger is prepared to wait 500 plus years to harvest.  Logging old growth is eco-theft and irreversibly ecologically destructive.

Tough economic times means that the smart investment is into sustainable industries where there is strong market demand and growth for products not vulnerable to buyer rejection on the basis of immoral sourcing or production.

Biomass-based energy is a technical euphemism for burning forests, which is unacceptable because is causes green house gas emissions.  Buring natiuve forests also drive local habitat extinctions.

Use LESS wood NOT more!

 

2010:  Smoke rises into the sky above the Huon Valley in southern Tasmania
as the state’s Forestry Department (Forestry Tasmania) conducts fuel-reduction burns on April 18, 2010
[Source:  ‘Anger over smoke haze prompts review’ , ABC Northern Tasmania, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/04/19/2877011.htm?site=northtas]

.

Parks & Wildlife Service – its case for burning native forests every year

.

‘Planned burning is an important part of fire management designed to maintain biodiversity and to reduce the risk posed by bushfires to people, houses, other property and the natural environment.   Fire plays a major role in the ecology of the Tasmanian natural environment. Fire can be a vital force in maintaining healthy bush. But in the wrong place at the wrong time, it can also lead to the destruction of unique vegetation communities, human life and property.

Our diverse vegetation communities have differing responses to fire, from potentially devastating impacts in alpine areas and conifer forests, to ecologically sustainable effects in buttongrass moorlands and dry scelerophyll forest.  Tasmania’s unique fauna has some interesting adaptations to fire. For some species, it is essential for their habitat requirements.

‘The Parks and Wildlife Service is responsible for the management of bushfires on all reserved land in Tasmania.

This management includes:

  • control of unplanned bushfires
  • planned burning to reduce fuel loads and make fire control easier and safer
  • planned burning to help maintain biodiversity, promote regeneration of plants that depend on fire and to maintain suitable habitat for animals
  • maintaining assets that assist with bushfire control, for example, fire trails, firebreaks and waterholes.

.

Planned Burning of Tasmania’s National Parks (to date) for 2012

Burn Date Location  Hectares
 16/05/2012 Narawntapu 796
10/05/2012 Binalong Bay  21
 8/05/2012 Peter_Murrell_(private_land?)  15
 7/05/2012  Arthur River  75
 30/04/2012  Lime Bay  175
 30/04/2012  Fisheries, Coles Bay  20
 30/04/2012  Wineglass Bay Walk Track  4
 26/04/2012  Mt William  710
 18/04/2012  Coles Bay  43
 17/04/2012  Rifle Range  251
 4/04/2012  Mt Field  16.5
 3/04/2012  Dora Point  20
 2/04/2012  Seaton Cove  9.5
 27/03/2012  Arthur River  532
 27/03/2012  Arthur River  50
 26/03/2012  Stieglitz  5
 19/03/2012 Peter_Murrell_(private_land?)  3
 14/03/2012  Mt Field  6
 23/02/2012  Trevallyn  9
 23/02/2012  Trevallyn  7
 23/02/2012  Trevallyn  3
 2,771 ha
 
[Source: ^http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/index.aspx?base=26614]

.

The first planned burn area in the table above labelled as ‘Narawntapu‘ applied to Narawntapu National Park, specifically at Cosy Corner, Bay of Fires Conservation Area, in north-east Tasmania.  The ecology is renowned for its Wombats and Tasmanian Devils.  Where do they go when Parks Service starts fires?

Tasmania’s famous ‘Bay of Fires’
(Narawntapu National Park)

.

The posted notice read:  

‘Parks and Wildlife Service is today (Tuesday 8 May) conducting a fuel reduction burn in the Bay of Fires Conservation Area south of St Helens at the Cosy Corner North campground.  The burn is about 20 hectares. The objective is to reduce fuel loads to provide protection for the campground in the event of a wildfire.’

[Source:  Parks and Wildlife Service, Tasmania, 20120508, ^http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/index.aspx?sys=News%20Article&intID=2575]

.

So somehow the planned burn of 20 hectares extended to nearly 800 hectares inside the protected National Park!  Was this yet another escaped burn?  Where is the ecological report of damage to flora and fauna?   So much for the National Parks motto ‘leave no trace’.  How hypocritical!

.

“How can walkers help keep Tasmania wild and beautiful?

Leave No Trace is an internationally accepted way of minimising impacts on the places we visit.”

~ Parks and Wildlife Service, Tasmania

.

The National Park before the burn

.

A wombat in Narawntapu National Park cannot run from fire

.

The Burn Area of nearly 2800 hectares of Tasmania’s National for 2012, translates to 28 square kilometres.
This is that aggregate area relative to Hobart – the entire map above!
It’s like Hobart’s 1967 Black Tuesday every year in Tasmania’s National Parks

.

Forest Smoke across southern Tasmania, from planned burning, April 2008

.

Tasmania Fire Service – its case for burning native forests every year

.

Ed:   It doesn’t just have one programme, but two.  One programme to burn native forests every year, the other to slash and bulldoze access to get good access to burn the native forests.

.

Fuel Reduction Programme

‘Each summer, bushfires in our forests pose a significant threat to communities in rural areas, and on the rural-urban interface. Large, uncontrollable bushfires can have serious consequences for Tasmanians. The Tasmanian Government has committed funds towards a program of planned fuel reduction burns to help protect Tasmanians from the threat of wildfires. The program will see the State’s three firefighting agencies, Forestry Tasmania, the Tasmania Fire Service and the Parks and Wildlife Service combine their expertise in a concerted program aimed at reducing fuel loads around the state.

The objective of the inter-agency Fuel Reduction Burning Program is to create corridors of low fuel loads to help prevent large wildfires.  The program complements but does not replace fuel reduction burning and other means of fuel reduction close to houses and other assets.’

.

Bushfire Mitigation Programme

‘The Bushfire Mitigation Programme provides funds for construction and maintenance of fire trails and associated access measures that contribute to safer sustainable communities better able to prepare, respond to and withstand the effects of bushfires.

The program is administered by Australian Emergency Management (AEM) within the Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department. Tasmania Fire Service is the lead agency in Tasmania for the Bushfire Mitigation Program.

In the 2009 Budget the Australian Government announced funding of $79.3m over four years for a new Disaster Resilience Program (DRP).

The DRP will consolidate the existing Bushfire Mitigation Program (BMP), the Natural Disaster Mitigation Program (NDMP) and the National Emergency Volunteer Support Fund (NEVSF) in an effort to increase flexibility for the jurisdictions and streamline the associated administration for both the Commonwealth and the States and Territories.

The Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department is currently working with representatives from each jurisdiction to ensure that the transition to the new DRP is as smooth as possible.

The DRP will commence in 2009-10 and details of the funding arrangements, program guidelines and implementation plans will be announced by the Commonwealth Attorney-General’s department and disseminated to the relevant agencies and stakeholders in each jurisdiction in due course.’

[Source:  Tasmania Fire Service, ^http://www.fire.tas.gov.au]

.

.

.

‘Burnoffs’ Chemical Cocktail’

.

Smoke haze from burnoffs pushed Tasmania close to breaching air safety standards last week.

In one 24-hour period, emission levels from the forestry regeneration and fuel-reduction burns “were approaching the standard”, state environmental management director Warren Jones told the Sunday Tasmanian.

Elevated particle levels had been detected in Launceston and Hobart on several days during the week.

A Sunday Tasmanian investigation into the smoke haze has revealed:

  • Between 5000ha and 7000ha is earmarked for forestry regeneration burns this season.
  • About 70,000ha of the state’s forest was razed by wildfire in the past summer.
  • The smoke contains a mix of carbon monoxide, tar, ash, ammonia and known carcinogens such as formaldehyde and benzene.’
[Source:  ‘Burnoffs’ Chemical Cocktail’, April 2008, This Tasmania website, ^http://www.thistasmania.com/burnoffs-chemical-cocktail/]

.

.

‘Forestry burn offs continue to threaten…’

.

The Tasmanian Greens today said that the Parliament needs to commission an independent study into the total social, environmental and economic costs of forestry burns, as they continue to emit pollutants into the air causing distress to the many Tasmanians suffering from respiratory complaints, and also impacting on Tasmania’s clean, green and clever brand.

Greens Health spokesperson Paul ‘Basil’ O’Halloran MP burn-off practice as outdated, old-school and not in line with appropriate practice today, especially when it continues to put thousands of Tasmanians with respiratory complaints in distressing situations. These airborne emissions impact disproportionately on children.

“Once again Tasmania’s beautiful autumn days are blighted by the dense smoke plumes blocking out the sun and choking our air,” Mr O’Halloran said.

 

Tasmanian forests – planned burn
http://www.discover-tasmania.com/smoke-fire/

.

“This is an unacceptable situation. It compromises Tasmanians’ health, our environment, and is an insult to common-sense.”

“The Greens are calling for the Minister to commission independent social, environmental and economic impact study of these burns.”

“Tasmania’s tourism industry also has reason for concern over this due to the plumes of smoke that choke up the air sheds and appear as a horrible blight on the Tasmanian Landscape.”

“We also want to see an end to these burns, and are calling on the Minister to consult with the community to establish a date by which this polluting practice will end once and for all.”

“It is also concerning at the impact these burns have on Tasmania’s biodiversity and threatened species such as the Tasmanian Devil, burrowing and freshwater crayfish, and a myriad of other plant and animal species.”

“The annual so-called forest regeneration burns have just commenced with Forestry Tasmania alone intends to conduct 300 coupe burns over five districts, and this will emit copious amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, contributing to climate change, not to mention the risk this poses for the many Tasmanians who suffer from respiratory complaints such as Asthma,” Mr O’Halloran said.

[Source:  ‘Forestry burn offs continue to threaten…’,  20110315, Paul ‘Basil’ O’Halloran MP, Health spokesperson, Tasmanian Greens, ^http://mps.tas.greens.org.au/2011/03/forestry-burn-offs-continue-to-threaten-health-and-well-being-communities-animals-and-plant-life-being-threatened-by-forestry-burn-offs/]

.

.

The Killing of Wild Tasmania – Extinction by a Thousand Fires

.

These photographs provide an illustration of current Tasmanian forestry practices. The photos are from Coupe RS142E, in the upper valley of Tombstone Creek, one kilometer upstream from the Tombstone Creek Forest Reserve in the northeast highlands of Tasmania. Tombstone Creek is a tributary of the upper South Esk River, the headwaters of the water supply for Launceston.

Majestic ancient Rainforest in Tombstone Creek (c.1000 AD to 2006)
BEFORE the Tasmanian Government’s State-sanctioned arson
(Photo taken in 2003)

.

 

AFTER
(Photo taken in October 2006)

 

‘I first came upon this forest in May 2003, and was so struck by it’s beauty that I made several return visits during the following 12 months. This steep valley-side supported a wet and mossy forest characterized by myrtles, blackwood, tall eucalypt emergents, groves of tree-ferns up to eight meters high and some of the largest sassafras that I have seen anywhere in Tasmania. Many of the sassafras trees had trunk diameters of one meter or more at chest height.

This forest was clear-felled by cable-logging in the summer of 2005 and burnt in an exceedingly hot fire in April 2006. All of the rainforest trees were killed outright. The site is steep and soils are sandy and the valley side was left in a condition which was highly vulnerable to severe soil erosion. This coupe is bordered by some areas that were logged within the last 10 years or so, and the regrowth in these adjacent coupes is a mix of wattle and eucalypt. A narrow strip of rainforest remains at the new coupe’s lowest edge, along Tombstone Creek, but recolonization by the rainforest trees cannot occur, due to the competitive advantage of the eucalyptus and wattles in a full sunlight situation. This is especially so in the context of a drying climate. Simply put, the process enacted here is conversion, in this case from a mature mixed rainforest dominated by myrtle and sassafras, with eucalypt emergents, to an uncultivated crop of wattle and, presumably, the aerially sown eucalypt species.

In this process of conversion, which is far from being confined to this particular coupe, two options are precluded. Firstly, the option for the natural forest to continue to exist for it’s own sake and to develop towards rainforest, a point from which, given the age of the eucalypts, it was not far removed. The second opportunity forgone is for the possibility of alternative uses of species other than wattle and eucalypt, including wood uses, for future generations of people.

Other negative and significant ecological impacts have occurred here, including devastating effects on wildlife, altered hydrology, atmospheric pollution, weed invasion and not least, the release of massive amounts of carbon, previously sequestered within the soil and the living vegetation, into the atmosphere.

The scenes depicted here are all within 100 meters of each other. The forest scenes were photographed in 2003, the other scenes in October 2006.

[Source:  ^http://www.water-sos.org/before-after/index.html]

.

.

[Source: The Observer Tree, Styx Valley South West Tasmania^http://observertree.org/]

.

.

Further Reading

.

[1]   Bush Arson excuse by Forestry Tasmania  ^http://www.forestrytas.com.au/uploads/File/pdf/pdf2012/regen_burn_program_insert_2012.pdf  [Read Document (PDF, 1.4 mb)]

.

[2]   Fuel Reduction Programme, March 2008, Tasmania Fire Service, ^http://www.fire.tas.gov.au/Show?pageId=tfsFuelReductionProgramme, [Read Document  (PDF, 1.7 mb)]

.

[3]   ‘The burning of Tasmania’, 20080425, various contriubutors Vica Bayley, Dave Groves, Tim Morris, Matthew Newton, Tasmanian Times,  ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/tassie-burns/

.

[4]   ‘The dangers of fighting fire with fire’, by James Woodford, 20080908, Sydney Morning Herald, ^http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/the-dangers-of-fighting-fire-with-fire/2008/09/07/1220725850216.html]   Text extract below:

.

‘It’s spring, and soon we’ll start to get sensationalist stories predicting a horrendous bushfire season ahead. They will carry attacks on agencies for not doing enough to reduce fuel loads in forests close to homes, for unless those living on the urban fringe see their skies filled with smoke in winter they panic about losing their homes in January.

Fighting fires with fear is a depressing annual event and easy sport on slow news days. Usually the debate fails to ask two crucial questions: does hazard reduction really do anything to save homes, and what’s the cost to native plants and animals caught in burn-offs?

A new scientific paper published in the CSIRO journal Wildlife Research by Michael Clarke, an associate professor in the department of zoology at La Trobe University, suggests the answer to both questions is: we do not know.

What we do know is a lot of precious wild places are set on fire, in large part to keep happy those householders whose kitchen windows look out on gum trees.

Clarke says it is reasonable for land management agencies to try to limit the negative effects of large fires, but we need to be confident our fire prevention methods work. And just as importantly, we need to be sure they do not lead to irreversible damage to native wildlife and habitat.

He argues we need to show some humility, and writes: “The capacity of management agencies to control widespread wildfires ignited by multiple lightning strikes in drought conditions on days of extreme fire danger is going to be similar to their capacity to control cyclones.” In other words, sometimes we can do zip.

Much hazard reduction is performed to create a false sense of security rather than to reduce fire risks, and the effect on wildlife is virtually unknown.

The sooner we acknowledge this the sooner we can get on with the job of working out whether there is anything we can do to manage fires better. We need to know whether hazard reduction can be done without sending our wildlife down a path of firestick extinctions.

An annual burn conducted each year on Montague Island, near Narooma on the NSW far South Coast, highlights the absurdity of the current public policy free-for-all, much of which is extraordinarily primitive. In 2001 park rangers burnt a patch of the devastating weed kikuyu on the island. The following night a southerly blew up, the fire reignited and a few penguins were incinerated. It was a stuff-up that caused a media outcry: because cute penguins were burnt, the National Parks and Wildlife Service was also charcoaled.

Every year since there has been a deliberate burn on Montague, part of a program to return the island to native vegetation. Each one has been a circus – with teams of staff, vets, the RSPCA, ambulances, boats and helicopters – all because no one wants any more dead penguins.

Meanwhile every year on the mainland, park rangers and state forests staff fly in helicopters tossing out incendiary devices over wilderness forests, the way the UN tosses out food packages. Thousands of hectares are burnt, perhaps unnecessarily, too often, and worse, thousands of animals that are not penguins (so do not matter) are roasted. All to make people feel safe. Does the burning protect nearby towns? On even a moderately bad day, probably not. Does it make people feel better? Yes.

Clarke’s paper calls for the massive burn-offs to be scrutinised much more closely. “In this age of global warming, governments and the public need to be engaged in a more sophisticated discussion about the complexities of coping with fire in Australian landscapes,” he writes.

He wants ecological data about burns collected as routinely as rainfall data is gathered by the agricultural industry. Without it, hazard reduction burning is flying scientifically blind and poses a dangerous threat to wildlife.

“To attempt to operate without … [proper data on the effect of bushfires] should be as unthinkable as a farmer planting a crop without reference to the rain gauge,” he writes.

In the coming decades, native plants and animals will face enough problems – most significantly from human-induced climate chaos – without having to dodge armies of public servants armed with lighters. Guesswork and winter smoke are not enough to protect our towns and assets now, and the risk of bushfires increases with the rise in carbon dioxide.

James Woodford is the editor of www.realdirt.com.au.

.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Tasmania (AU), Threats from Bushfire, Threats to Wild Tasmania | 1 Comment »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

Cancun Agreement: US delinquent again!

Monday, December 20th, 2010

For United Nations credibility, Cancun had to be better than the Copenhagen shemozzle.  Remember when US President Obama’s last minute token promise failed because he hadn’t secured a US  Congress mandate.

A memorandum of understanding between the ‘have’ nations and the ‘have not’ nations seems to be a follow-the leader approach to dealing with human-caused climate change – aka ‘pollution’ rebranded.  Problem is the responsible leader, the United States is AWOL, delusional that its 20th Century economics can restore its capital prowess in our 21st Century society.

Assuming global warming is real and being caused by human carbon emissions, the overarching aim of the United Nations is to reduce carbon emissions and so minimise global warming and its consequential problems of sea-level rise, mass extinctions and associated climate catastrophes – droughts, floods, heatwaves, massive storms and exponential human misery.

Toward this ideal, COP16 has been the 16th annual Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP) and the 6th Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP). This year COP16 was hosted in Cancun, Mexico.

So what was the outcome of the conference this time around?

Well, according a summary by The Climate Institute the delegate at COP16 broadly accepted the ‘Cancun Agreement‘ on 14th December 2010. Three important areas of achievement should be noted:

  1. Anchoring of national mitigation commitments: formal recognition and ‘anchoring’ of existing pollution targets and commitments from all major polluting countries, covering around 80 per cent of global emissions. This is the first time pollution commitments from US, China and all other major economies (both developed and developing) have been captured in a formal UN agreement.
  2. New ‘Green Climate Fund’: agreement to establish a new fund to help mobilise US$100 billion a year by 2020 to support low pollution economic development; protecting tropical forests and helping the world’s most vulnerable people build resilience to change impacts. However, there was no decision on how to raise the public and private money for this fund.
  3. Improved transparency: measures to improve transparency and verification of domestic efforts to reduce pollution, including a process for international review of countries’ actions by technical experts.

.

According to Greenpeace, “the talks did not deliver a global climate deal but have placed the building blocks for that strong deal to be created.” There are acknowledgements of the gap between commitments on emissions cuts and scientific evidence, the establishment of a climate fund and an agreement on REDD [United Nations Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries].

However, we are still missing the actual commitments on lower emissions, a way to deliver that climate fund and some critical parts of the REDD agreement to make it a strong one. Now we must continue to demand our leaders redouble their efforts to drive change at home.

So in other words, nations are gradually coming around to the climate change problem, but still a bit slow working out what to do.  They’re getting there.

There are positive signs of progress, and moreso than the token promises by the United States like at Copenhagen.  For instance, there is at least now general agreement that greater pollution reduction effort is required.  There are sources of financing by the World Bank to make this happen. There are now common accounting rules, and a legal framework.

Tangible promises have also been committed by Mexico, the host nation of this year’s conference, including a promise to reduce 51 million tons of CO₂ in 2012, securing a US$500 million loan with the World Bank to finance technological assistance and increase scientific knowledge in relation with current sources of emissions and carbon sinks.  Mexico has also promised to ensure that in 2012, 26% of the electricity produced will come from renewable sources.  Mexico will also receive US$15 million from the Norwegian government to reduce emissions through soil conservation and reforestation.

While the worst polluter and most conspicuous carbon consumer, the United States, has been AWOL and navel-gazing; this time China has promised to cut 45% of its greenhouse gases by 2020.

However, the conference has not been without its criticism.  The editor of the Sydney Morning Herald makes the following observations:

“There are no binding targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and the world is not on course yet to avoid the worst climate change scenarios. Developed and developing countries still cannot agree to concerted action, developing countries arguing they should not have to bear an equal burden, because they have not had polluting industries as long, or on the same scale, as the developed world.

The US and China are still circling each other warily, and (President) Obama is now forced to negotiate any agreement through a Congress that, following the midterm elections, will contain significantly increased numbers of climate-change sceptics and Sinophobes.”

[Source: ‘ Back on course after Cancun‘, Sydney Morning Herald, editorial, 14-Dec-2010, page 10, ]

It’s all happening one year at a time.  Next year’s conference will be in Durban, South Africa.

In between, some individual countries are already moving unilaterally.  May be the United States could show some leadership next round; dare this mean Republican warmongers pulling back from high carbon- intensive imperial war games in Afghanistan and Korea!

The U.S.S. George Washington has left its home port and is sailing to the Korean Peninsula. (Please not again)

The Aircraft Carrier, with 75 fighter aircraft and 6000 Sailors and Marines will be participating in exercises in the region.  What will be the carbon footprint of this ego?  Meanwhile, North Korea said on Friday it would strike again at the South if a live-fire drill by Seoul on a disputed island went ahead, with an even stronger response than last month’s shelling that killed four people.  The North had said its November shelling was a response to South Korean “provocations” after an artillery battery on the island fired in what Seoul said was a routine drill.

How delinquent?  So 20th Century imperial!

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Threats from Pollution | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

error: Content is copyright protected !!
The Habitat Advocate