Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Archives for January 2007

Global Warming and the Statistics of Record-Breaking Temperatures: S. Redner and Mark R. Petersen

By

“Almost every summer, there is a heat wave somewhere in the US that garners popular media attention.

During such hot spells, daily record high temperatures for various cities are routinely reported in local news reports.

A natural question arises: is global warming the cause of such heat waves or are they merely statistical fluctuations?

Intuitively, record-breaking temperature events should become less frequent with time if the average tem-
perature is stationary.

Thus it is natural to be concerned that global warming is playing a role when there is a proliferation of record-breaking temperature events. In this work, we investigate how systematic climatic changes, such as global warming, affect the magnitude and frequency of record-breaking temperatures.

We then assess the potential role of global warming by comparing our predictions both to record temperature data and to Monte Carlo simulation results…

Read the full article at Cornell University Library here: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0509/0509088.pdf

A Critique of The Stern Report: Part 1, The Science

By

Some months ago I suggested that media coverage of The Stern Report — an assessment of the economics of climate change by a British economist for the British government — was completely over the top. I also commented that from a quick scan there were some obvious errors of fact.

Now the journal World Economic has published a lengthy critique of The Stern Report. Part 1 of the critique deals with ‘The Science’. Written by Robert M. Carter, C. R. de Freitas, Indur M. Goklany, David Holland and Richard S. Lindzen it concludes:

“The Stern Review is biased and alarmist in its reading of the science. In particular, it displays:

• a failure to acknowledge the scope and scale of the knowledge gaps and uncertainties in climate science

• credulous acceptance of hypothetical, model-based explanations of the causality of climate phenomena

• massive overestimation of climate impacts through an implausible population scenario and one-sided treatment of the impacts literature, including reliance on agenda-driven advocacy documents

• lack of due diligence in evaluating many pivotal research studies despite the scandalous lack of disclosure of data and methods in these studies

• lack of concern for the defects and inadequacies of the peer review process as a guarantor of quality or truth.

These and other related problems arise because the Review has relied for advice almost exclusively on a small number of people and organizations that have a long history of unbalanced alarmism on the global warming
issue. Most of the research cited by the Review does not, on inspection, make a convincing case that greenhouse warming constitutes a major threat that justifies an immediate and radical policy response. Contrary research is consistently ignored, as are basic observational facts showing that alarm is unwarranted. The Review fails to present an accurate picture of scientific understanding of climate change issues, and will reinforce ill-informed alarm about climate change among the general public, the bureaucracy and the body politic. HM Government will need to look elsewhere for a balanced, impartial and authoritative review of the current climate change debate. “

The complete document from World Economics, Volume 7, Number 4, October-December 2006, can be downloaded here:

http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/WE-STERN.pdf

A Report on 10 Years of Genetically Modified Agriculture in Argentina

By

Dear All,

Please find below a link to a report entitled ’10 years of GM Crops in Argentina’ by Eduardo J. Trigo and Eugenio J. Cap, published by the Argentine Council for Information and Development of Biotechnology, released this week regarding the Argentine experience with GM soybean, maize and cotton.

The website is not in English but scroll down and you will find the report and media release in English.

The authors evaluated the economic and social impacts of the ten years of adoption of GM crops in Argentine agriculture, and concluded that this process of incorporation of new technologies has had a deep impact on the transformation of the Argentine agriculture, and beyond this, in the country’s economy as a whole.

The link is http://www.argenbio.com/h/nuevo_estudio/10anos.php

Happy reading,

Larissa

Let’s Not Cancel Games to Save on Greenhouse Gases

By

Sydney will turn off its lights for one hour at 7.30pm on Saturday March 31, 2007. According to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) this will be: “a major step towards reducing the city’s greenhouse gas pollution”.

The WWF, with the support of The City of Sydney and the NSW Government, have nick-named the event “Earth Hour” and determined that it “will be the highlight of a major campaign to encourage businesses, communities and individuals to take the simple steps needed to cut their emissions by 5 percent in 2007”.

I wonder what is special about 5 percent. Furthermore, one hour in one day of one year is not going to provide a saving of 5 percent.

If WWF was serious about a 5 percent saving then they might propose Sydney turn off all its lights for 18 days this year?

And this word “major” keeps being repeated. But it hasn’t even been suggested that football games be cancelled.

In yesterday’s The Australian it was just suggested they be rescheduled.

Now how is that going to save electricity?

It would be just like me taking a nap from 7.30pm to 8.30pm on March 31st and then stay up until say 11.30pm instead of going to bed at say 10.30pm?

Not that the sporting clubs are prepared to even go along with the idea of rescheduling with an NRL spokesman claiming: “It would be impossible for us to reschedule or fit our fixtures into this scheme”.

On March 31, at least 60,000 fans are expected to watch a rematch of last year’s Sydney Swans-West Coast Eagles AFL grand final at Telstra Stadium under big lights. While at the Aussie Stadium the NSW Waratahs and New Zealand’s Canterbury Crusaders will compete as part of rugby’s Super 14 series and at Parramatta Stadium rugby league fans will be watching the Eels take on the Wests Tigers also under full illumination.

“We are always happy to talk about ways of being more environmentally efficient but the matches must go ahead,” said the NRL spokesman.

So how could our sporting heroes be more “environmentally efficient”?

Perhaps more home games and a ban on interstate and particularly international competitions given travel is considered to be so energy inefficient?

In the media release announcing the Earth Hour, Greg Bourne, CEO of WWF-Australia, was upbeat about the importance of Sydney. He claimed that Sydney is renowned across the globe for its ability to make things happen citing the 2000 Olympic Games.

It got me thinking wouldn’t an Olympic Games be a huge source of greenhouse gases? There is all the air travel to the event from every corner of the globe by officials, athletes and all the spectators. Then there is all the lighting of many venues, heating of swimming pools, air conditioning, fast food, advertising, plastic mascots and the list goes on.

But of course we are not going to cancel the Beijing Olympics because like so much that uses energy the Olympic Games is about community, it’s about culture and its about excellence.

So why is Sydney going to turn off its lights for an hour on 31st March?

Is it also about community, a new culture of austerity and perhaps being better than everyone else?

It is certainly not about making any significant difference to the city’s greenhouse gas emissions this year or into the future.

Let Us Keep Harvesting Timber: Media Release from NSW Private Native Forests Group

By

“The sustainable management of native timber on private land is an important income stream for many farming families struggling to survive the current drought,” said Andrew Hurford, spokesperson for the New South Wales Private Native Forests Group.

“For decades, [Australian] farmers have managed small forest holdings for times such as these – to help put food on the table for their families.

“Calls by Sydney-based greens to increase restrictions on the harvesting of private timber is a cruel blow to many farming families across the state,” said Mr Hurford.

Not only do private native forests provide a living for farmers in these times of stress, but, just as importantly provide work for thousands of timber workers.

“The money generated by private native forestry during times of drought helps to keep small, struggling country towns afloat.

“When the wheat crop fails and you have to sell your livestock because of a lack of rain, income sourced from the sustainable harvesting of timber is a life-saver,” said Mr Hurford.

On the Mid-North Coast, private native forestry generates a staggering $120 million each year to drought stricken communities and employs over 850 workers.

In the Riverina, in south west NSW, the industry contributes approximately $16.5 million each year and over 180 jobs.

“The flow-on effects to the rest of the community cannot be underestimated. It’s the shop keeper, teacher and the local mechanic who are forced to pack-up as well,” added Mr Hurford.

In August last year, the NSW Government was forced by angry farmers, timber mill owners and workers to shelve its plan to introduce a ‘Code’ that would have seen 60 per cent of forests on private land ‘locked-up’ into de facto National Parks.

Mr Hurford fears that if the ‘Code’ goes ahead dozens of communities will suffer the same fate as the Pilliga community in north-west NSW where the State Government ‘locked-up’ the Pilliga Forest into a National Park.

“It was devastating, over $40 million was stripped from local economies, six timber mills were forced to close and over 400 jobs lost. Now the towns have been left to die,” Mr Hurford said.

“With green preferences up for grabs at the next State election, the industry is fearful that an adverse decision restricting timber on private land could result in the loss of 3,000 jobs and $300 million from the NSW regional economy.

“Sound forest management can continue to provide multiple outcomes for the environment, regional communities and the economy. Forestry management actually stimulates the growth of healthy trees, healthy environments and healthy communities,” said Mr Hurford.

————————–
This is the text from a media release from the NSW Private Native Forests Group issued on 9th January 2007.

Jen’s Back from Seal Rocks

By

I’m back from a week’s holiday including a visit to Seal Rocks about 300 kms north of Sydney.

The sleepy fishing town gets its name from the rocky outcrops occasionally inhabited by Australian Fur Seals, Arctocephalus pusillus ssp. doriferus. This is about as far north as the animal ventures in Australian waters.

sealrocksjan07.JPG
View from the Sugarloaf Point Light House, 11th January 2007

I didn’t see any seals during my visit.

The main population of Australian Fur Seals apparently breeds on islands in the Bass Strait between Tasmania and Victoria. That’s a long way from the mid north coast of New South Wales.

There is a second subspecies, the Cape Fur Seal (A. p. pusillus), with a southern African distribution including the west coast of South Africa and Namibia.

Seals are apparently still hunted in southern Africa, hunting has been banned in Australia since 1923.

———————————-
Many thanks to Neil Hewett for looking after the blog in my absence.