Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Archives for September 10, 2007

Victorian Environment Assessment Council Set to Flood Murray River Communities: AEF Media Release

By

“Proposals for 4,000GL ‘overbank’ floods of the Murray River by the Victorian Environment Assessment Council beggar belief” said the chairman of the Australian Environment Foundation, Don Burke.

Mr Burke’s comments came at the conclusion of the foundation’s annual conference in Melbourne where a taskforce of scientists experienced in water, forestry and land management issues was appointed to investigate the VEAC recommendations.

“These draft proposals make recommendations that will see many Murray River communities under floodwaters if they were adopted by the Victorian government”, he said.

The Australian Environment Foundation will investigate the scientific robustness of these recommendations that underpin widespread and radical changes to land and water use along the Murray River.

Mr Burke commented that “Proposals such as these must address the needs of the people as well as the environment to be effective.

“The Australian Environment Foundation is focused on ensuring outcomes for the environment based on science and evidence. It is evident that obtaining 500GL for the Living Murray proposals for environmental flows have not eventuated as planned so we have real concerns about recommendations for either 2,000GL or 4,000GL to underpin these current proposals” concluded Mr Burke.

The Australian Environment Foundation (AEF) is a not-for-profit, membership-based environment organisation having no political affiliation. The AEF is a different kind of environment group, caring for both Australia & Australians. Many of our members are practical environmentalists – people who actively use and also care for the environment. We accept that environmental protection and sustainable resource use are generally compatible. For more information about the AEF visit www.aefweb.info

What Peer Review? A note from John McLean on the IPCC

By

Hi Jennifer,

Bob Ferguson of the Science and Public Policy Institute has just asked me to draw your attention to the fact that he’s published my analysis of the IPCC review.

It’s titled “Peer Review, What Peer Review” and can be found at http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/sppi_originals/peerreview.html

A key finding in the document is that the WG I chapter that attributed warming to human activities had 62 reviewers but many had a vested interest (chapter authors, IPCC editors, researchers whose work was cited). Just FOUR reviewers without any vested interest explicitly endorsed the principal claim. Not thousands of researchers, not even hundreds, just 4.

Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters has picked up on the article and written about it at length (and with lots of quotes) at http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/09/09/what-media-won-t-tell-you-about-u-n-climate-panel

You might also be interested in another of my documents that Bob Ferguson has just published. It’s titled “Fallacies about Global Warming” and can be found at http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/sppi_originals/fallacies_about_global_warming.html.

Cheers,
John McLean

The Sydney Climate Change Declaration: Who Cares?

By

Paul Kelly writing in today’s The Australian has suggested that

“The Sydney climate change declaration is a success for John Howard, a good outcome for APEC and an incremental step on the long journey to find global agreement on a post-2012 emissions policy.

“The leaders’ declaration is exactly what the APEC forum was established to do – confront the big issues and strike a regional position to influence global outcomes…

“It is the first time so many nations from the developed and developing worlds have backed this concept [a long-term aspirational global emissions reduction goal]. It is also the first time the APEC region has embraced aspirational targets for energy efficiency and forest expansion.

“This is the first such agreement involving the major polluters, the US, China and the Russian Federation,” Howard said at APEC’s conclusion.

A friend of mine in Washington emailed this morning:

“APEC and the ‘Sydney Declaration’ got ten sentences at the bottom of page 14 in today’s New York Times. There was a story above it by a staff reporter that commented that the Australian media were more interested in what the President ate than his policies – it made us look like complete hicks – unfortunately it’s true. And then the article went on to explain that ‘Bums for Bush’ was not a campaign by hobos – but rather a nude protest.”