Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand

I have started to read Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand by Haydn Washington and John Cook (2011). So far, I am truly enjoying this book, but I wanted to share a part of the forward to this book by Naomi Oreskes.

"Most of us are aware that scientists say climate change is under way, but even if we accept it as true we act as if it had no implications. We deny, what it means, and continue business as usual. 

....will that is needed.....not the will to keep calm and carry on in the face of tragedy. It is the will to change the way we live in order to avoid an even greater tragedy; a tragedy that will affect not just Queensland, or even all of Australia, but the whole world, including the plants and animals with whom we share this rock upon which we live. 

It is about the way of life that does not reckon the true cost of living, an economics that does not take into account environmental damage and loss.

Climate change is the ultimate accounting; it is the bill for a century of unprecedented prosperity, generated by the energy stored in fossil files. By and large, this prosperity has been a goof thing. More people live longer and healthier lives than before the industrial revolution. The problem, however, is that those people did not pay for the full cost of that prosperity. And the remainder of the bill has now come due. 

What we need now is the will: the will to face the facts, the will to accept their implications and the will to do something about it."

Pin It

Resilience

Oh my goodness, I just came across an article on Tree Hugger about resilience and I love it. It is just what I was trying to discuss with my mother (in a round-about type of way) this morning.

Basically the article states that the environment is "up shit creek" and there is little we can do to change this path. However, if we build a future that is resilient, there might be hope for the survival of the human species.

My favourite quote from the article, although a little twisted, is "Environmentalism hasn't failed. It just didn't win yet. But blaming environmentalists for not turning things around is a little like bashing the foster parent for not eradicating child abuse".

The article is fabulous. Have a look at this resilience article by Sami Grover  at http://www.treehugger.com/culture/save-us-ourselves-resilience-key-making-sustainability-mainstream.html.

I think 'resilience' is going to be the new buzz word and hopefully will be adopted into the mainstream as  'sustainability' has over the last decade. Pin It

Transition Town documentary - SBS

Friday night (7:30pm) on SBS, "Town with Nicholas Crane" visits Totnes in the United Kingdom. This is a community which has significantly adapted their town to follow "environmentally sustainable" principles that are sometimes grouped under the banner of "Transition Towns".

What is a Transition Town?

Basically, a community group or town determines they will work together to build resilience in their economy and general community in light of the peak oil, climate change, reduced happiness and economic instability.

A lot of it relates to people re-connecting with other members and skills within their community, bringing their economy back to the local or regional scale (by supporting businesses within this geographic area) and attempting to reduce their reliance on oil. Some websites also link this concept in with permaculture.

Anyway, back to the subject of the documentary. Totnes has undertakes numerous activities under the banner of Transition Towns, including co-housing, cycling, eco-construction, gardening, skill shares, seed saving and a solar thermal challenge just to name a few. It also has its own Transition Town website, which can be found at: http://www.transitiontowntotnes.org/.

Further information on Transition Towns generally can be found at: http://www.transitionnetwork.org/. This webpage also includes useful resources for people and communities starting out!


Pin It

Guide to ethical supermarket shopping

I picked up this guide today from a local shop for $6. It is devised by the Ethical Consumer Group Inc (www.ethical.org.au). They advertise the guide as a way to have an impact "with every dollar you spend".

The guide is larger than you are probably likely to carry around if you're just going to be popping into your store to get a litre of milk, but if you're doing your regular shopping and you're carrying a handbag it certainly wouldn't be a struggle to fit it in. You could then use it as a easy reference guide to compare products and make some informed choices whilst in the store. I think they also have a iPhone App.

All products listed in the guide have their production location listed (ie Australia or overseas), as well as providing a rating of the product based on things such as "areas of environmental and social impact, treatment of animals and accountable business practice." The guide also lists all the products in relevant categories, provides their names and their parent company's name.

I'll let you know if I find it useful once I try it out whilst shopping. Pin It

1200 Building Initiative

The 1200 Buildings program is a building retrofit program in the City of Melbourne. It was generated out of a council idea to support commercial building owners to retrofit their buildings with measures that will increase a building's water and energy efficiency and reduce waste. It is also supports the Council's goal  for the entire Council area to become "carbon neutral by 2020". What an idea, particularly since the City of Melbourne doesn't own and cannot dictate these changes to these privately owned buildings. In reality, this goal will only be achieved through support, education and changes made by building owners.

How to achieve this? My goodness I can't even imagine. However, Melbourne city has come up with some very exciting ideas to achieve this, which include some new financial lending models. One of the imaginative models means that finance institutions can forward funding to commercial building owners for activities to achieve the goals set by the Melbourne City Council and then these funds are re-couped to the bank by having a charge in your Council rates to fund these "loans".

I don't know the precise details of how this finance model works, but it certainly seems like an innovative one and one that will break some of the dis-incentives for owners of properties, to undertake sustainability measures, when these buildings are rented out, and it is the tenant that in fact receives the cost-breaks through energy and water cost savings!

If you want to know more about the program have a look at the 1200 Buildings website.

Pin It

Occupy Wall Street

The idea behind Occupy Wall Street is to bring the 99% of the population together to protest against greed and consumption of the wealthiest people in the US (those that make up only 1% of the population). There are also going to be supportive protests here in Australia: Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane today. 

Some people are questioning whether it is relevant here because the American/Canadian movement commenced out of the impacts they felt as a result of the Global Financial Crisis. I personally think it is still relevant here in Australia, as most people here would probably be interested in supporting their fellow global citizens and also saying 'no' to the way the world seems to progressing. That is, the dominance of corporations and wealthy people and their influence over government process. 

I think there is definitely a ground-swell or movement where people are expressing that they are sick of this influence and would like the government once again to be an elected representative of the people rather than large corporations, wealthy people or their political party. 

I think this is a great conversation starter and allows you to introduce new ideas to people and also meet people of like-minded experience.

A "blog" that expresses the opinions and views of some of the 99% (American focus) can be found at: http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/. Maybe you could subscribe and add your story. Cool community spirit!

Pin It

Carbon tax impact on Queensland Economy

The Queensland Treasury has recently released a report that outlines the expected future impact on the Queensland economy as a result of the introduction of the carbon tax. The introduction of this report states the overall short to medium term impact the carbon tax will be minimal to minor on the overall Queensland economy.

The figures stated in the report indicate the Queensland gross state product is estimated to be only 0.4% lower by 2019-2020 and 3.5% lower by 2049-2050 after the introduction of the carbon tax. The report goes on to say that the Queensland economy is still expected to be strong, with an annual real growth of 3.5% by 2019-2020.

The important take home message from this analysis is that the information in the report is based on a Business as Usual model and doesn't calculate or estimate the potential impact on the economy if markets, industry and the government modify and adapt to a post-carbon tax environment. If the modification scenario does eventuate, the economy could move towards a growth situation based on new industries and products and move its reliance away from situations that rely heavily on carbon polluting inputs.

The full report can be found on the Queensland Treasury website at: http://www.treasury.qld.gov.au/knowledge/docs/carbon-price-impact-assessment/carbon-price-impacts-queensland.pdf.

Note: The above analysis is based on a particular set of assumptions and an analysis is done with alternate sets of assumptions there will obviously be different conclusions drawn. So it is important to understand the premise upon which an analysis is done before a comparison is done between reports and conclusions. Pin It

Did you know NZ has an emissions trading system?

Today I found out that New Zealand established an emissions trading scheme last year (July 2010). This is fantastic news as it shows a first world economy still functioning successfully after the implementation such a system. The NZ scheme incorporates agriculture, industry, energy, liquid fossil fuels, fishing, synthetic gases, forestry, waste and horticulture sectors of their economy and aims to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by putting a price on these emissions. Currently the price for each NZ unit is NZ$25. However, the NZ government only requires one unit be surrendered for every two tonnes of carbon emitted during the transition period, thus effectively pricing each unit at $12.50.

I have heard the level of impact that this system has had on the NZ economy has been almost unrecognisable. There does however, need to be recognition that there have been serious challenges to their economy as a result of the natural disasters that have occurred in their country over the past 12 months. Thus, the level impact that this new trading scheme has had has been potentially dwarfed by these other situations. Nevertheless, it is positive news that such a trading scheme, of similar nature to the proposed carbon tax here in Australia, has been successfully implemented without flattening their economy or causing significant hardships for families and households. Hopefully, this provides some comfort to regular Australians. Further, the NZ system includes fuel (petrol/diesel) in their system, which has been explicitly excluded from the Australian situation, thus further buffering Australian households during our transition period.    

Further information about the NZ government's perspective on their emissions trading scheme can be found on their Ministry for the Environment's website.

It is important to note that I looked, not just the positive, but also the negatives that could be associated with the NZ emission trading scheme. I didn't manage to find any significant negative impacts vocalised by reputable sources from a brief review (20 mins) of a couple of Internet search engines. This may be because the scheme is only new and investigations into it haven't been complete. But I definitely thought I would at least find scores of groups/people that were opposed to the scheme prior to its introduction saying 'I told you so', but almost none of this. Hopefully this situation will be the same here in Australia after the introduction of the carbon tax.   Pin It

Historic Tasmania forest protection agreement

Recently (22 June 2011) Environment Tasmania and the Australian Conservation Foundation signed an agreement to move towards greater protection for Tasmania's old growth forests. The idea behind the agreement seems to be greater protection for native vegetation forests, in the form of additional areas of Tasmania dedicated into conservation reserves and a transition approach to a sustainable forestry industry.

I believe all environmental movements/protests that directly impact on people's economic well-being have to address these economic and welfare situations in the solution. It certainly appears that these two environment groups are proposing sensible options to provide transition and adjustment for the industries that currently rely on these resources.

The agreement does however rely on the government to provide backing to this agreement and these groups are requesting people indicate their support to the local members of parliament. The GetUp website has an automated message generator indicating people's support for this agreement and provides you either with the name of your local member of parliament if you're in the area or provides a list of relevant members of parliament in the area that you can direct an email to.

Go on, show your support for the Tassie forests and some sensible transition strategies that will in turn support environmental outcomes. Pin It

Don't sit back, make a difference

An issue with the modern generations is their inactivity in decision-making in either their neighbourhood, the political environment, their workplace, their family or anywhere decisions are required.

In discussion with some friends this morning we were chatting about some infrastructure development in their neighbourhood and the options that have been put forward by the infrastructure provider.  My friends were passionate about the option that was proposed through one of the last remaining patches of bushland/wetland in their area. That is, they don't want it to go through that area.

There are a number of options the infrastructure provider has put forward for comment and many others that have not been raised to the public. At present, placing the infrastructure through the environmental reserve is the easiest option and therefore one the project manager would definitely prefer. You may ask, why is the environmental reserve option the easiest option? Well, without any public outcry, the infrastructure provider would only have to deal with the local government, as the current custodian of this land, and this does not pose much restraint when community infrastructure is seeking an easement or land. It is certainly much easier to deal with than a commercial entity who is looking at lost profit and therefore potentially significant compensation or a number of home-owners who feel passionately about their home that they have lived in for the last X number of years. All the infrastructure developer would need to do is come up with a suitable compensatory package and certainly in my experience and many project managers' experience this is much cheaper and more politically stable option than dealing with the other landholders and economic interests.

I know that many people have concerns for the retention of environmental spaces and parks within their local neighbourhoods, but without communication of this concern to the decision makers and project managers these intact, environmental area will always end up having the conflicting landuse placed in them or being sacrificed to. They don't have a voice, they don't have traditional economic value and they certainly don't have anyone putting up significant or costly barriers to their resumption and/or development. There isn't anyone else but the general public and caring souls to defend these areas. Commercial activities/industries, schools, churches, recreation facilities all have significant groups of interested people attached to them and thus will always have a voice and someone defending their interests till the last battle. This doesn't seem to be the case for most environmental areas.

It is important to realise we are the voice of the environmental reserves, national parks, conservation reserves, wildlife, threatened plants and animals, marine parks, remote locations, environmental water allocations, groundwater quality, etc, etc. If we don't stand up and put our voice forward and express our concerns about particular developments within these area, the developments will also win and the environment will continue to lose. Economic interests will always prevail and our land will end up being over-developed, over-utilised, degraded, without recognition of the public's concerns for these areas and values.

Speak up! If there is a chance to put your view forward it is important to do so. And if there isn't an invited comment period take the first step and engage in the process. You can contact your local politicians, the infrastructure developers, the general land developer or the agent of land use change. Stand up and be heard! Take action now or it will be too late! Pin It

Is investing in residential solar power worth it?

Presently we have a gas hot water system and because this isn't an electricity consuming appliance I haven't really entered into the whole debate as to whether it would be better (both financially and/or environmentally) to invest in solar power/hot water. However, today a plumber informed me that my gas hot water system is soon to crumble and die, so I thought now is the time to start to think about it.

My primary concern is that if I invest what to me is a significant amount of money into this residential solar technology, will I still have to 'pay' for electricity. I understand that I would still get an electricity bill because my solar panels will just in effect be feeding into the grid and not actually providing me the electricity directly. However will the amount of energy I pump into the grid offset the amount that I take from the grid, given the loading times and different tariffs for those times. That is, I will be generating most power during the day and taking most power during the mornings and evenings, so my generated solar power would in effect have to be greater than the amount I take from the grid to negate the difference in tariff rate.

Anyone, know whether it is financially appropriate to think solar for the investment you have to make or am I better off investing in a new on-demand gas hot water system?

I guess my thoughts are I have happy to some degree to make a significant outlay to purchase a solar electricity system but don't also want to still be slugged with a significant electricity bill each quarter. Pin It