“Hundreds of new kinds of animal species, including 130 colourful corals, have been discovered. The extraordinary creatures were found by researchers systematically exploring waters off two islands on the Great Barrier Reef and a reef off northwestern Australia.” Read more from the UK Telegraph here.
News
Drop in Rainfall, But Not Wheat Harvest
Since the 1970s, there has been a drop in rainfall in the wheat growing region of Western Australia, but this has not translated into a decline in wheat production. Indeed wheat production in Western Australia peaked in 2003 at 11 million tonnes.
The 2003 season was a good one for winter crop production across Australia with record production of just over 43 million tonnes.
Data on crop production from ABARE.
A new paper* in the journal Climate Change indicates that wheat production in Western Australia has not been greatly affected by the drop in rainfall because most of the reduction in rainfall has occurred in June and July, a period when rainfall often exceeds crop demand.
Indeed farming systems, like natural systems, are complex.
___________________________
*Impacts of recent climate change on wheat production systems in Western Australia, by Fulco Ludwig, Stephen Milroy and Senthold Asseng, Climate Change, 2008.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m10h53183l763734/fulltext.pdf
Hat tip to Paul Biggs for the reference.
Paul’s new blog is now up and running, have a look http://climateresearchnews.com/
Things Caused by Global Warming
More than 3,000 flying foxes dropped dead, falling from trees in Australia. Giant squid migrated north to commercial fishing grounds off California, gobbling anchovy and hake. Butterflies have gone extinct in the Alps. But there is more. Click here for a very comprehensive list of of things caused by global warming.
Bankrupt Lehman Brothers Promoted ‘Global Warming’
The now bankrupt merchant bankers, Lehman Brothers, invested heavily in the politics of climate change. The bank released two reports last year on the issue broadly embracing and promoting the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Agenda including emissions trading.
The second report entitled, ‘The Business of Climate Change ll’, went as far as to suggest that it will be possible to reach an international agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions; indeed within five years.
The following extract gives an insight into the flavour of the report:
“The introduction of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS), which covers a little under half of the industrial carbon emissions in Europe, has triggered discussion and concern about the impact of such a carbon trading scheme on (European) industrial competitiveness. The concern is that, by acting unilaterally, European firms may be disadvantaged, and the economy thereby damaged relative to non-EU firms and economies.
“As considered in the chapter Emissions trading: grandfathering vs auctioning, any scheme – be it cap and trade, a carbon tax, or whatever – that limits emissions thereby raises the (relative) price of carbon, a proportion of which is in turn passed on to intermediate and final prices. Depending upon whether the emissions permits are issued free or auctioned, firms may or may not experience a decrease in profit. Either way, however, firms stand to be disadvantaged relative to competitors abroad which do not face the increased marginal cost of carbon.
“This loss of international competitiveness could be resolved by the region (Europe in this case) imposing a border tax on imported goods according to their carbon content; or by other economies raising the relative price of carbon, whether by joining the carbon trading scheme or otherwise. The risk with a border tax is of retaliation, and the potential for a trade war.
“More likely, we judge, is that some sort of global scheme to limit carbon emissions, and quite possibly a global cap-and-trade scheme, will be in place within the next five years.”
On the issue of the Stern report and the associated controversy over discount rates, Lehman Brothers again come down on the side of those promoting immediate action against global warming backing “the correct ethical position” over what many would consider prudent economics.
The Lehman Brother’s report acknowledges the assistance of Dr. James Hansen, Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and advisor to Al Gore.
********
The Business of Climate Change ll: Policy is accelerating, with major implications for companies and investors. By John Llewellyn and Camille Chaix, Lehman Brothers, September 20, 2007
The Fight Against Global Warming Justifies Criminal Action: UK Jury Clears Greenpeace Activists
Last week a UK jury decided that the threat of global warming justifies breaking the law; or at least they condoned the painting of the word ‘Gordon’ on someone else’s chimney stack.
The jury at Maidstone Crown Court cleared six Greenpeace activists of criminal damage accepting defence arguments that they had a “lawful excuse” when they vandalised the chimney stack because the carbon dioxide emissions from the Kingsnorth power plant are harmful to the environment of the Hoo Peninsula.
Under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 damage is condoned if it will prevent even greater damage.
This is surely an unusual interpretation of a law meant to allow, for example, someone to break down the door to a burning building?
It does suggest the pubic are very concerned about global warming and see a link between a protest against a power station and saving the environmental. Furthermore it creates precedence, at least in the UK, the idea that it is OK to destroy property to save the environment from climate change.
Writing in The UK Independent Geoffrey Lean claimed that:
“The jury in effect sat through a six-and-a-half-day seminar on global warming, in a forum where lying was illegal, and every statement could be challenged by top barristers. And, at the end, they decided that the danger was so immediate and serious that it justified taking extreme – and normally illegal – action against it.”
NASA’s James Hansen gave evidence in defence of the Greenpeace activists at the trial and according to Kent News when asked what his message to Prime Minister Gordon Brown would be, Dr Hansen replied:
“I would ask him to make a clear public statement for a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants that do not capture CO2.”
It is unlikely the case will have significant implications for activism in Australia.
In New South Wales (and all other States of Australia), juries are only available in criminal case for serious offences (indictable offences) such as sexual assault, murder, armed robbery and other serious crimes against a person. Since graffiti is a summary offence that would be heard by a magistrate, it is unlikely that a magistrate would find climate change a justification for the offence.
Secondly, the legal argument that graffiti to prevent climate change is damage to prevent greater damage in the future is not a very good legal argument. The main problem is that it is just as likely that the graffiti will make no difference what so ever to climate change that it fails to prevent the future damage.
Thirdly, in NSW criminal law, there is not similar provision that damage to property is permissible to prevent greater harm. If a similar case was brought in NSW, the magistrate would be likely to rule that the evidence on whether climate change is damage, which would be key to the case, would be ruled to be irrelevant and dismissed.
The damage to the Kingsnorth power station was estimated at £35,000.
***************
Comment on legal implications for Australia from Nichole Hoskin. This post is based on news reports and opinion pieces, does anyone have a link to, or copy of, the actual judgement.
Residents of Adelaide Waste Water?
The Queensland Farmers’ Federation have suggested that residents of Adelaide should use less water rather than continually demanding that more water be sent to South Australia. According to ABC Online:
“Executive officer John Cherry says 55,000 megalitres of water a year would be saved if Adelaide residents lived under the same water restrictions as Brisbane.
“Last year, Adelaide households used an average of 235 litres per day compared with 153 litres in Brisbane.”
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD has worked in industry and government. She is currently researching a novel technique for long-range weather forecasting funded by the B. Macfie Family Foundation.
