Here is a letter (or eletter sent by the local(St Kilda), involved and concerned Helen and Jack Halliday to the Women's Environmental Network on the success of two Councils in meeting their (modest) energy efficiency targets contrasted with our very own non-transparent, down right opaque City of Port Philip, which continues in it's own tradition of treating it's rate payers and inhabitants as mushrooms.
Read on Dear WEN Colleagues, I'm attaching an announcement from Moreland Council that they've become the third Australian Council to become carbon neutral. This certification applies to the Council's own emissions, ie, from street lighting, Council buildings and infrastructure, Council fleet, waste etc, (called corporate emissions) . At the same time the City of Yarra has similarly been certified as carbon neutral. These two councils are two of only three in Australia which have achieved this milestone. There are a number of important lessons in this for Port Phillip. Moreland Council has achieved its target of zero Council (corporate) emissions by 2012 .To achieve this goal it created the Moreland Energy Foundation with initial funding in 2000. Since then both Council and Foundation have worked purposefully towards a program of achieving corporate carbon neutrality. A stepped program of annual reductions was developed some 7 or 8 years ago, accompanied by rigorous annual evaluation of measures taken. The Foundation has also worked with surrounding Councils to cooperatively develop programs for carbon reduction. The City of Yarra has achieved its target of zero Council (corporate) emissions by 2012. To assist in achieving its goal it created its own Energy Foundation 2 years ago, with initial annual funding of $350,000. Its model is slightly different, with Council staff working on reducing Council's own emissions while the Foundation is focusssed primarily on communityemissions, (ie, residential, commercial and industrial) with a target of achieving carbon neutrality by 2020, excluding the transport sector. A new program for community engagement has just been initiated by the Foundation. The CoPP has set a 2020 target date for Council emissions to become carbon neutral. It is difficult to obtain information on Council's progress in reducing emissions for a number of reasons.
Again, a number of important lessons here for the CoPP:
The three Council reports cited are: Towards Zero: http://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/default/ATT_1_-_TZ_Progress_Report_Yr4_Final_130312.pdf Council Inventory and Methodology, Draft Greenhouse Plan, Appendix B:http://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/default/GAP_Appendices_B_v1.pdf Council Plan 2009-2013 (Year 3), April to June 2012 Quarterly Report:http://www.portphillip.vic.gov.au/Report_3_-_Attachment_1.pdf
0 Comments
At dinner last night with, amongst others, two eminent medical scientists and practitioners. We are not able to deal with the biggest issue of this or any day, says one, referring to global warming. It is not in human nature to respond properly or in time, he went on. Sadly no-one at the table disagreed with that proposition but we all read and respect the science.
A general discussion ensued about religion being a problem and a major contributor to the culture of denial and optimism in the face of reality with Joe opining that monotheism is to blame for entrenching the idea of the only god with his chosen people to the exclusion of all other people and definitely any other group who felt that they had a special relationship to their god. History is littered with the bodies of the people who fell in the pursuit of such notions. We are looking dangerously like we are about to elect a government led by a man captured by a religious hierarchy that is about to be put through a royal commission for its past and present crimes. Watch this space. Peter Christoff, Associate Professor at Melbourne University, presents the case for Australia winding back coal exports in this chilling piece in The Conversation. What he points out is that while our position globally as a greenhouse gas emitter is bad enough, when we add in the amount of greenhouse that we are exporting via our coal exports we become the international heavyweight of climate vandals and with our big export markets implementing their own solutions and turning their backs on coal the planning for a phasing out of coal, not being done by us now, will be taken out of our hands.
While 'Sandy' is fresh in our minds what madness is it that sees Queensland, itself struggling with reconstruction after their floods, developing huge new coal fields and building coal shipping terminals King Canute Newman blithely looks to the short term game and with a time horizon of two to three years doesn't show any interest in anything more nuanced. There is nothing nuanced about climate tragedies but The Merchants of Doubt have figured out a long time ago how that game is played. Greetings friends, colleagues and people interested in climate change,
A series of stories I've been developing over the past couple of months are coming out this week on how climate change is taking its toll on one of California's largest industries--growing food. From the vast fields of fruits and nuts in the Central Valley to the waterways of the Sacramento delta, California farmers are being hit by a trifecta of converging forces linked to climate change: volatile weather, diminishing water, increasing salt in the fields. Yields are predicted to decline at current rates of warming. Crop insurance payouts are rising significantly due to climate change related factors. As many of you know, this story is based on a chapter of my book-in-progress, which is being written as we speak. On television: watch our documentary HEAT & HARVEST on Friday, September 28, on KQED, a coproduction between the Center for Investigative Reporting and KQED. (With special thanks also to Serene Fang, master producer of the tv doc). And if you miss it on Friday, its airing again on Monday at 7:30. And in print: a series for CIR/California Watch is appearing this week in a string of state newspapers, including the San Francisco Chronicle, Fresno Bee, Modesto Bee and others. And of course, if you miss the stories in their conventional form, they will all be housed on the web, including the print stories in their entirety, at: http://cironline.org/heatandharvest And if you're inclined toward the morning radio, I will be appearing with Craig Miller, KQED's climate correspondent, on KQED's talk show FORUM, at 9 am on September 28th. Pardon the mass email. Hope you enjoy, and/or find it illuminating. yours, Mark Clive Hamilton has written a very sensible piece in The Conversation about the difficulties scientists are having in getting their voices heard. See it here In the discussion that follows you will find the usual trotted out by the Merchants of Doubt and their followers so if you are signed in add your piece to the discussion.
While The Conversation wants to be open to all views and not edit the plainly wrong it has had a worrying number of "climate skeptics" joining into the discussions of late albeit with some reasonably muscular responses. Global action to tackle the climate crisis has taken another important step forwards with South Korea’s legislation overnight to establish an emissions trading scheme similar to Australia’s, the Greens said today.
“When a developing country manufacturing powerhouse like South Korea embraces emissions trading because it respects the climate science, it’s time for the naysayers in Australia to take a good long look at themselves,” Australian Greens Leader, Senator Christine Milne, said. “South Korea’s scheme is similar to ours and its international target is about equivalent to 15% cuts from Australia. “We need to give the space to our independent expert Climate Change Authority to look at moves by South Korea and others, as well as the latest science, in its work to recommend what Australia’s carbon budgets should be. “That’s why our emissions trading scheme starts with a fixed price, leaving three years for the Climate Change Authority to do its work before we adopt full trading. “Accelerating global warming is a very real threat to our quality of life, to our economy and to the environment which sustains us. Many of our neighbours are taking ever more serious action to address it. This is not a political game to toss aside if the going gets tough. “There is no real move to weaken the scheme, but the government should join the Greens in lifting our ambition and talking to the community and business about why tackling the climate crisis is so important and what great opportunities for jobs, investment and innovation come from doing so.” So the (so-called) Baillieu Government in a step backwards scaled back the previous Brumby target for carbon reduction in the state from 20% by 2020 to 5%. At the same time I was pointed at a piece in The Conversation by our friend Janet Clarke Bell by a scientist she met which should be required reading by anyone in a decision making place.
"CLEARING UP THE CLIMATE DEBATE: CSIRO’s James Risbey explains why it’s not “alarmist” to describe the threat of climate change to the public and how the climate system will respond to half measures. With many issues to be considered in setting a climate policy one can end up wondering what the role of climate science is in all this. After all, climate science doesn’t tell us what to do. It doesn’t tell us whether to have a carbon price or where it should be set. Those decisions ultimately involve a range of normative and deliberative issues which are beyond the scope of climatology." Read it here and weep. The tipping point is at hand. On the positive side Beyond Zero Emissions, a network of scientists fanning out around the globe from Melbourne University have put together a fully costed transition to renewables budget, timetable, and discussion of options that is downloadable either as a summary or a complete report. No prizes for guessing who won't read or download it. Canutes will drown too! "The Head of the School of Chemistry in the Faculty of Science at Monash University is Professor Doug MacFarlane. His current area of research, published in the August 2008 edition of the Journal, ‘Science’, focuses on the design of a novel fuel cell with an air electrode. This fuel cell outlasts the platinum cell and is as effective, more economical, and is more easily sourced. His work has been conducted in the Australian Centre for Electromaterials Science (ACES), an Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence, for which Professor MacFarlane is the chief investigator. The breakthrough, where expensive platinum in the fuel cell is replaced by the cheaper but just as efficient air-electrode, will have a huge impact on the next generation of hybrid cars. Monash’s Dr Bjorn Winther-Jensen invented a technique whereby a conductive plastic layer can be deposited on the Goretex membrane from which the air-electrode is constructed. This highly conductive plastic acts as the electrode and the catalyst in the fuel cell. The new design fuel cell has undergone rigorous testing for periods up to 1500 hours. There is no sign of deterioration or wear and tear. The tests also confirmed that O2 conversion rates are comparable with platinum–catalysed electrodes of the same geometry. “The reliance of traditional fuel cells on platinum was making the concept of using them in everyday passenger cars increasingly improbable because of its high cost and scarcity. Current annual production of platinum would be sufficient for only three million 100kW vehicles; that is, one-fifth of the current annual production globally. The cost of the platinum component of current fuel cells for a small car with a 100kW engine has become substantially greater than the total cost of an entire 100kW gasoline engine.” One of Professor MacFarlane’s collaborators, the ACES Director Professor Maria Forsyth, enlarges on this. She confirms it is significant that the electrodes are not poisoned by carbon monoxide the way platinum is. Professor MacFarlane believes that the discovery is possibly the most important development in fuel cell technology in the last 20 years." I was chatting with a friend last night and a mutual friend was mentioned. "Oh X is getting more and more Conservative with his Age". "Yes but Ms X is even more so". It's interesting when views pop out in unexpected places and ways.
I see strange criticisms of Wayne Swan from people who say knowingly and meaningfully that "he is a hopeless Treasurer without a clue." Now if International and unconnected bodies with some demonstrated expertise declare that he is the globe's best Treasurer and Australia avoids the major economic problems that the rest of the developed world has been going through and there has been an improvement in the standard of living for most Australians doesn't that mean anything? Every strategy enacted by this Government to shield Australia from the ravages of the GFC was loudly and roundly rejected by the do-nothing, she'll-be-right-mate midgets on the Opposition benches. As a friend commented to me, "the technique made famous by Goebells is now part of the playbook of the Coalition. Tell a lie often enough and it becomes the conventional wisdom. Where is our Fifth Estate in all this? With the 24 hour news cycle we now have a graphic report of every fire with no analysis on how it started or why. Politicians can look straight at the camera and lie with a smile without intervention from a journalist or even a different oint of view from another party. "Climate change is crap", "we don't need to do anything about the so-called Global Financial Crisis" and so on. In times of War we have had Unity Governments. Sadly not now. Wayne has been out there talking about the unequal access to the media lately and what he has been saying is obvious to all observers of the media landscape. Federal Court judge Ray Finkelsteins thoughtful review of the media gets savaged by people like Clive Palmer in full page ads that only go to prove Wayne's point. The outrage stirred and AGREED WITH that Finkelstein is suggesting a Soviet style regime doesn't square with the facts of his recommendations. To have an independent umpire, funded from the Budget doesn't mean whichever way you try and spin it Government control. It replaces the cosy ineffective voluntary system we have now of a Press Council overseeing, well themselves, with an arms length body that will, if it ever happens, be charged to be fair to all sides. The idea that you can have a reasonable discussion without gross exaggeration, invective, character assassination and plain old lies is becoming an adolescent fantasy and pipe dream. When an Immigration Department official comes out with a reasoned commentary on a divisive debate with some facts learned over years of trying to implement various Government policies he gets little media space, invective and innuendo thrown on him by the mad monk and once again the so-called debate goes to the lowest common denominator that the inappropriately called Liberal Party can throw at it. Whatever happens desperate human beings are used as political fodder by both sides and the outcome for the people is dire. For the refugees it is pitiful but what few realise on the other side is that for the lucky ones like us it is dehumanising and makes us less and less than we could and should be. Australia is a country of refugees and transported peoples living in a land stolen from the first peoples here and we demonise each wave of newcomers until the next wave and then it goes on. My family came as refugees in 1949. I have good friends who came as refugees more recently. It should not be so hard to give a welcome to people who have risked all to come to a land of plenty in need of people. When global warming effects are more fully felt the march of populations looking for a safe home will dramatically increase. Open your hearts. In case you haven't heard yet, we thought you would appreciate learning about VCAT's HRL decision asap.
As we aim to unite community voices as quickly and effectively as we can, we encourage you to post your thoughts on Environment Victoria's HRL decision response page http://www.facebook.com/environmentvictoria In terms of where to now, all objectors are considering their options and we will keep you posted. With thanks for your support, Deborah, on behalf of the LIVE committee 29 March 2012 This is just one battle in our fight against coal LIVE is deeply disappointed with VCAT’s ruling in favour of HRL’s proposed new 600MW coal fired electricity generator in Victoria’s La Trobe Valley. “As every legitimate science agency in the world is calling for drastic cuts to greenhouse gas pollution, we are devastated that a project that would add hundreds of millions of tonnes of global warming gases to our atmosphere over decades to come could win legal support in a so called advanced state like Victoria” said Deborah Hart, Founder and Safe Climate campaigner for LIVE*. During the VCAT hearing evidence was presented to demonstrate that HRL’s plant would not be ‘best practice’ electricity generation and that a myriad of safer, cleaner energy solutions are available and affordable. “By every measure, whether it be human health, a safe environment or new, sustainable jobs, HRL’s project will fail Victorians.” In making its decision VCAT overturned the Environment Protection Authority’s approval of a permit for only half of the plant’s capacity (300MW), along with what meagre environment restrictions had been applied to the project. Big questions remain around the social and economic viability of HRL’s unpopular project, and who will ultimately bear the costs of the new coal plant. “Having sat through 22 hearing days and read the transcripts, we can tell you that there was evidence presented that HRL’s project is not economically feasible, even with the $150 million of taxpayers money promised by the state and federal governments. Yet, as we all know, according to mainstream science, the real damage from this plant will be borne by the community now and in the future as we experience further extreme weather events.” “If this project goes ahead, the community’s interests will be sacrificed in favour of a corporation seeking to profit from a project that will have enormous short and long term impacts on all of us.” LIVE acknowledges Environment Victoria and our highly dedicated legal team for their extraordinary support throughout this long and complicated legal challenge. CONTACT: Deborah Hart, Founder, LIVE, www.live.org.au 0458 44 77 02 or deborah.hart@live.org.au After 22 hearing days, the community’s legal challenge to HRL’s proposed new brown coal plant concluded this week. This case was particularly important for being the first time that Victoria’s environmental laws (not just stated principles and broken election promises!) were applied to a major proposal that will emit significant amounts of greenhouse gases, in the context of climate change.It goes without saying that running a case against a government agency and a well-resourced company is a significant challenge. We submitted that Dual Gas did not provide enough information to show that their project was economically viable or that it would displace dirtier brown coal fire power stations. And, having watched the hearing and read the transcripts, we can tell you that there was evidence presented that the Dual Gas plant would not be economically feasible. Doctors for the Environment argued a strong case centered on the air pollutants that HRL’s plant would generate. The Doctors presented evidence showing that cumulative emissions from coal power stations can have serious health impacts on members of the community. In order to demonstrate the social and economic impacts that the HRL plant would have on all Victorians, Martin Shield (an individual objector) sought to demonstrate the many ways in which climate change impacts from the plant would affect him personally. Shield earned the respect of all parties for the intelligent, measured way in which he represented his case. With Environment Victoria leading the case, and on behalf of LIVE, the Environment Defenders Office, along with a committed team of pro bono barristers, ran what I believe was the best case that could have been brought at this time. Our case relied on evidence that the Environment Protection Authority has approved a permit for a project (300Mw) that is inconsistent with:
We are not likely to hear the Tribunal’s final decision before the end of March at the earliest. In the meantime, the Federal government has extended HRL’s period to meet the conditions of its $100 million grant (to complement its $50 million from the State government) until 30 June 2012. You may have heard that, on the eve of the hearing’s conclusion, Michael Danby MP, the local member for Melbourne Ports where LIVE is based, addressed Parliament to defend the government’s decision to give HRL more time. (see our press release here). Indeed it’s been an eye-opening, time warping adventure. On behalf of LIVE, an enormous thanks goes to our tireless friends at Environment Victoria, our wonderful legal team, the great Doctors for the Environment, and the amazing Martin Shield. Credit must also go to the three Tribunal members who patiently presided over this long and complicated case. Finally, we’ve also very much appreciated the encouraging well wishes from so many of you, stay tuned! Fingers crossed everybody! Deborah Hart PS: For those of you who live in the City of Port Phillip, and particularly those who live in ELWOOD, and were affected by the floods a year ago, LIVE will be hosting an ELWOOD FLOODS FORUM on Monday 26 March. Preliminary details are here. . . http://www.live.org.au/elwood. |