In
May, NSW's Eden export woodchip mill was also spruiking
the great benefits gained by flattening thousands
of hectares of forest and turning it into paper
and greenhouse gases.
Jill
/ Philip Hopkins at The Age (who else would write
this stuff?) 12.3.0
Don't
be CO2 nned
Offsets
equals guilt free pollution
As
a cheap and easy option to reduce their contribution
to global warming, many companies and governments
have been looking at 'carbon offsets'. But offsets
in the form of planting new trees only helps cancel
out emissions from forest destruction and fossil
fuel burning that's already occurred - carbon that's
already in the air. They are wrongly portrayed as
'offsets' that allow more logging and burning of
fossil fuels. This method of carbon accounting is
easy to manipulate to benefit the polluters.
We
must approach this problem with a fence at the top
of the cliff as opposed to an ambulance at the bottom.
We are now beyond worst case scenario figures in
temperature forecasts, so we should not be CO2nned
by the 'tree planting option' and ignore forestry's
massive contribution to emissions. The most effective,
easy and fast- acting solution is to stop clearing
and burning our 'land lungs' immediately.
The
clearing of forests for farming, which has been
done over the past 200 years in Australia, has released
large amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
These are still out there, creating the warming
we are now experiencing. Most greenhouse gases remain
in the atmosphere for 200 years, so planting thousands
or even millions of trees is only replacing a tiny
part of the tip of the iceberg. Millions upon millions
of hectares of forest have been destroyed; millions
upon millions of tonnes of coal and oil have been
burnt in just the last 50 years, let alone since
European arrival. Reabsorbing the historical carbon
loads released from clearing, logging and burning
by planting relatively limited areas of trees is
a start, but the incentive should not be to give
polluters permission to keep producing CO2.
Tree
planting and revegetation are a necessary part of
the urgent work we need to do, but must never be
seen as an easy fix-it tool that allows us to increase
our carbon debt in other areas.
Sarah
Rees/Jil
Carbon
horse trading
We
have to be very careful of applauding carbon-trading
schemes as the solution to reducing emissions. The
NSW government's greenhouse gas emissions trading
scheme is so flawed some participants are rewarded
for 'cutting pollution' when their emissions have
in fact increased.
Researchers
at the University of NSW showed two Queensland coal-fired
power stations earned millions of dollars under
the scheme, even though they spewed forth an extra
9 million tonnes of pollution a year.
This
highlights how a poorly designed trading scheme
could not only let the polluters off the hook but
reward them as well, while claiming that action
is being taken.
In
another sign of dodgy deals with the coal industry,
the NSW government approved a massive expansion
of Newcastle's coal export capacity in early April.
The new loading facilities will be responsible for
exporting coal that will produce more than 160 million
tonnes of CO2 each year.
The
mine is so big it will be responsible for up to
530 million tonnes of CO2 pollution over the mine's
21-year life. That CO2 will remain in the atmosphere
for 100 years.
Then
in early June, Morris Iemma approved a huge new
coal mine near Newcastle at Anvil Hill. The emissions
would exceed the emissions the Government plans
to curb by 2030 by using renewable energy.
But
Morris Iemma is hoping that he can find a crack
in the ground somewhere, down which to pump the
gases for safekeeping (also called geosequestration).
Industry experts and the IPCC both say the technology
is in its infancy and could be 40 years away.
Jill/SMH
9.6.0
Howard
- cautious about
putting out the planet's fire
The
Prime Minister's stacked Emissions Trading Task
Group is comprised of airline, coal, banking, aluminium
and mining interests, as well as hand-picked bureaucrats.
What's missing is any objectivity - there was not
a single scientist, enviro rep. or independent person.
The terms of reference required the group to protect
the coal and uranium industries at any cost, so
it was no surprise that their report recommended
protection for the biggest polluters. This was dressed
up as 'caution' on climate protection.
Dithering
for the last 11 years is bad enough, but John Howard
and his big polluting mates have actively worked
to undermine global and national efforts on climate
change since before Kyoto in 1997. With mounting
evidence of climate damage and pressure from all
quarters, he still plans to go slowly, do 'assessments'
and waste time we can't spare.
Howard
generously offered to bring in targets by "as
early as 2012"! If he finds he is forced to
take action, his back-up plan is to shelter and
compensate the big polluters. There would be massive
windfall gains to fossil fuel companies through
free emissions permits. His Task Group also recommended
that money made by selling emissions permits during
the first phase of the carbon trading scheme be
given to the big polluters. The explanation was
so that they could look into 'low emissions technology'
- code for the unproven, expensive and high-risk
approach of geosequestration.
Howard's
band of industry advisers has used crooked economics
to allege pollution abatement will be costly. But
many economists have shown that the costs will be
hardly perceptible.
The
'economy overboard' lie
Stringent
targets for reducing emissions would be an economic
winner in the long run. It might scratch a bit of
paint off projected economic growth but won't be
the fearful road crash that Howard is scare mongering.
To
keep climate change down to 2 - 2.4oC warming (on
1990 levels), the cost would be less than 3% of
global GDP. That's assuming a doubling of economic
growth up until 2050.
A
group of 250 economists have modelled the cost of
acting on climate change. They predict it will have
minimal cost. Taking limited or no action will cost
vastly more in the long run. The government's own
chief modeller, the Australian Bureau of Agriculture
and Resource Economics (ABARE), agrees that fast
action on alternative energy strategies will reduce
any costs by one third.
Another
recent report initiated by AGL, Frontier Economics
and WWF Australia, concluded that reducing greenhouse
emissions is affordable and achievable in Australia.
Their findings suggest the cost could be as little
as between 43c and $2 per week per person to achieve
a 40% emissions reduction.
That
40% reduction from current emission levels (7% reduction
from 1990 levels) can be achieved in the electricity
sector by 2030. Realistically, we need to aim for
a much lower level than that, and much sooner. We
need a year-by-year timetable not promises out into
the political never-never.
If
John Howard had started taking action in 2000, the
nation would be six years ahead and better off economically.
The major hitch is that decisive action on CO2 reduction
would hit the profit margins of the fossil fuel
industries, which have a history of mutual back
scratching with governments.
Jill
/ C Milne 4.5.07, 4.6.07/Sydney Morning Herald 1.6.07
Jobs
for the boys
There
were 233 bulldozers out there pushing our forests,
streams and mountainsides around during the peak
of last summer's fires.
The
bulk of these massive clearing operations did naught
to slow or stop the drought-fuelled fires, but it
did give the impression that something important
was being done by lots of blokes on big machines.
Fires
leave the structural framework of a forest still
standing and the soil undisturbed, but not so the
army of 233, 30 tonne tanks with blades and tree
pushers. There are hundreds of kilometres of ridgelines
entirely cleared of their vegetation, ecologies
and hollow-bearing trees.
What's
needed is a cost-benefit analysis of this type of
'management'. I have a sneaking suspicion that in
many instances it was a matter of the old 'dig a
hole and fill it in again' job creation scheme.
The cost of hiring these machines for three months
would have been astronomical.
Plausible
hearsay suggests that it was such a lucrative activity
that some contractors and dozer drivers were deliberately
making more mess than needed because they knew they
would get employment for months afterwards doing
rehabilitation work.
Scott
Gentle from Timber Communities Australia has since
been pressuring the government to employ logging
industry blokes on a secure basis, because they
do such a beaut job. However, Ewen Waller from the
DSE stated that the DSE has adequate numbers of
operators and machines from outside the logging
industry.
Jill/ABC
Drive show - 7.6.07
That burning desire
Of
the million-plus hectares of forest that burnt in
last summer's fires, DSE's Chief Fire Officer, Ewan
Waller, admitted they lit up 100,000 ha of that
area in back burns. Many of which got away and threatened
the towns of Bruthen, Tambo Crossing and Swifts
Creek.
This
autumn, another 100,000 ha of forest that didn't
burn over summer were burnt in large scale 'control
burns'. This type of 'management' means that forests
that escaped the wildfire are being dried out and
burnt with no regard to lost habitat, flora, wildlife
or the scientific evidence that disputes the need
for these huge burns. Some forests immediately adjoining
townships could need mild burns, but the rest is
just bureaucratic pyromania.
Jill
/ Four Corners - Firestorm, 12.3.07
Back
to news archive
Logging
still on welfare
The Victorian
Government classifies logging the bejeezuz out of
killed or semi-scorched ash forests recovering from
fire as 'bushfire recovery'. As part of its 'Bushfire
Recovery Package', it has handed over $34 million
of our taxes to help the logging and woodchipping
industries fast track so-called 'salvage' logging
of ash at ten times sustainable rates.
(page
8 of the Potoroo Review a picture of a massive slash
pile)
One
of the massive slash piles heaped up from logging
the so called fire breaks in the Central Highlands.
These haphazard mass clearings created a huge fire
risk. The so-called 'fire breaks' breached multiple
government regulations and processes, not least
was the illegal sale of logs from the Yarra Ranges
National Park. Many of these breaks were punched
into valuable areas of wet Mountain Ash forests.
$200 million to countries that
illegally log
The
Prime Minister's $200 million offer in late March
to slow logging in South East Asia may be a useful
offer if effective, but at the same time is hypocrisy
in neon lights.
Certainly,
forests are being destroyed in South East Asia,
but whether you call forest logging legal or illegal,
it has the same impact on carbon emissions. While
John Howard's handing out money, he should do something
about forest destruction in his own back yard. Australia's
Regional Forest Agreements cost at least $300M to
stage manage the appearance of agreements ten years
ago. This gave legal rights to mutilate our own
forests, primarily for woodchips, for the next 20
years. The states then went about their destructive
business as usual.
Here
are just three samples of Howard Hypocrisy:
1)
The millions in Australian subsidies and packages
that assist logging and burning of Australia's forests
will help reduce any gains made overseas.
2)
Minister Turnbull, who proudly made the announcement,
was exposed as having been a director of a smash
and grab Hong Kong-listed company, Axiom Forest
Resources, which logged the Solomons in the early
90s.
3)
Howard refuses to crack down on suspected illegal
timber imports. His reasoning was that it could
damage the other country's economy.
Jill
/ The Age, 30.3.07 / AAP 29.3.07
Fewer
kids will cool the planet
The
subject of limiting population growth is taboo amongst
both environment groups and politicians at present
- it brings with it thoughts of social control,
the one child policy and Big Brother. But this topic
will have to be tackled soon as part of the climate
debate.
The
Optimum Population Trust says that the lifetime
emissions of the predicted population increase could
far outweigh any energy-saving measures we adopt
now. It has estimated that the lifetime CO2 emissions
for each person in the UK is nearly 750 tonnes-equal
to 620 return flights between London and New York.
The extra CO2 produced by every new person has to
be accounted for, making real reductions quite difficult
unless we also look at population growth.
Age
7.5.07/ Jill
Australia
obliged to make higher cuts per capita
Australia
has relatively unreliable weather patterns and so
it's in a precarious position with water supplies
and food production. Given these fragilities, we
have a lot to lose in the climate stakes, yet our
greenhouse emissions are increasing faster than
the global average, and at nearly twice the rate
of the USA. (cartoon of Howard - sometimes we LEAD.)
Across
the world, the rate of increase in CO2 emissions
from fossil fuels was three times greater between
2000 and 2004 than in the 1990s.
The
global average for CO2 emissions is 4.3 tonnes per
person per year, while the USA produces 20 tonnes
per person a year. Australians get the silver medal
in the 'world's biggest polluters' category, with
19 tonnes of CO2 each.
China's
per capita emissions were 3.7 tonnes a year in 2004.
However, the country's total emissions are far higher
than Australia's because there are 65 Chinese for
every Australian. So when it comes to CO2 reductions,
Australia is obliged to make a bigger proportional
reduction than China in any global strategy.
Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences/The Age 22/5/2007
Critically endangered plants found in logging area
Two
critically endangered plants have been found in
a controversial area that was left out of the new
East Gippsland reserved areas before last year's
state election. The State Herbarium has verified
their identity.
The
exciting discovery of the small stand of about 100
plants was made during our Forests Forever Easter
camp. These understorey shrubs were found in an
unusual forest of River Peppermint and Silvertop
Ash.
They
are Pomaderris virgata (Upright Pomaderris) and
Pomaderris costata (Veined Pomaderris). P. virgata
is listed by DSE as vulnerable whilst P. costata
is listed as rare in Victoria. Both are restricted
to remote locations in NSW and Victoria. However,
if we use the International Union for the Conservation
of Nature (IUCN) criteria, both plants could be
worthy of listing as Critically Endangered in Victoria.
P. virgata and P. costata are the Orange-bellied
Parrot of East Gippsland's plants and grow up to
6 metres tall.
Recognised
as a species as recently as 1988, Pomaderris virgata
was then thought to only live in several remote
NSW locations. In 1989, it was unexpectedly discovered
at two ridgeline locations in East Gippsland's Goongerah
district, during a pre-logging biological survey.
The survey results have been withheld for the last
15 years but we are currently trying to obtain them.
Pomaderris
normally grow in wetter fire resistant areas, but
these two species have adapted to extremely harsh
dry conditions. Strangely, they are still very fire
sensitive and only survive by growing in dry areas
that don't have much understorey so still generally
escape fire.
The
Bracks Government clearly has no idea what natural
values are lost by clearfelling. These plants show
up yet more failings of our government's environmental
claims: firstly, the areas marked for protection
don't always correlate with rare and valuable species,
and secondly, their claim of sustainable 'world's
best' management is a farce.
The
dry spur where the plants were discovered is north
west of Goongerah in the Stony Creek catchment.
Part of this catchment now makes up the strip of
old growth forest that links the Errinundra with
the Snowy National Park. When Premier Bracks agreed
to link the parks (as an election promise in November),
he allowed only half of the catchment to be used
as the link. The plants are in the half that was
not protected.
Before
this area is clearfelled, detailed assessments need
to be made if the Department of Sustainability and
Environment wants to live up to its name. Mr Thwaites
has not given any assurances that decent sub-catchment
protection will be given, but has said the new discovery
will be used to determine any final boundary changes.
Jill
The
logging industry is currently in overdrive trying
to make logging look like a positive effort in the
fight against global warming.
A
NSW logging industry group dug up part of a rubbish
tip. This gave them the 'research' to show paper
can last for donkey's years once buried. But even
Jaakko Poyry (logging industry analysts) released
a document "Analysis of Wood Product Accounting
Options for the National Carbon Accounting System"
which showed the carbon in paper and packaging was
released after three years on average.