Starting the Dialogue on Climate Engineering Governance: A World Commission

Climate engineering can, if appropriately governed within a coherent overall climate change strategy, reduce risks beyond what mitigation and adaptation can achieve alone, and is probably essential to achieve the Paris Agreement temperature targets. Climate engineering also poses significant new risks, and needs expanded research and scrutiny in climate assessments.

Starting the conversation on
climate engineering governance.

Both types of climate engineering — carbon removal and solar geoengineering — also pose significant challenges to governance. The governance challenges of solar methods are particularly novel and severe, and urgently need international examination and consultation, both to learn how (and whether) climate engineering can deliver societal and ecosystem benefits, and to prepare for the likelihood that some states, facing mounting climate change impacts, will pursue climate engineering, and the international system will have to respond.

The needed international dialogue on geoengineering governance will have broad international participation; engage high-level expertise in international policy and institutions; draw closely on parallel advances in scientific knowledge and technical capability, while keeping governance the central focus; and facilitate open, exploratory investigations of governance needs and potential responses, rather than pursue specific decisions, at least in initial stages. Present institutions are not well equipped to support these needs.

Read the Centre for International Governance Innovation by Edward A. Parson - “Starting the Dialogue on Climate Engineering Governance: A World Commission.”

(Read the "Conclusion" closely and you will see that such an idea is not without its challenges - Robert McLean)

Rushing through the china shop the bull avoids all the expected catastrophes, pirouettes and exits

Rushing through the china shop the bull avoids all the expected catastrophes, pirouettes and exits taking all the real answers to climate change mitigation with it.

That thought entered my mind sitting through the hour-long webinar - “How can business and sport join forces to accelerate low-carbon technologies across different sectors?”

Much discussion in the Sustainable Innovation in Sport 2018 webinar, although worthy, well thought through and relevant to encouraging sustainability in sport, it seemed to skirt the intricate and implanted social issues that must be addressed if climate change is to be adapted to, and so mitigated.

The wedinar, the organisers argued, redefined the role of business and sport and highlighted examples of proven collaborations that would lead to tangible climate action. 

“This webinar”, they added, “Discusses approaches to overcome barriers in the introduction of lower-carbon solutions and decarbonisation of value chains and describes how voluntary economically viable approaches can support the Paris Agreement.”

Little to be questioned there, except our want to rush to all points of the earth, indulge in extravagant social events we link to sport and if we can mitigate the fringes of carbon emissions in doing so, we celebrate.

As aforementioned, most of the ideas discussed during the webinar were worthy and considered sustainability, but did not address the perverse social need we appear to have to pit our sporting prowess against others, even when we know this carnival of sport is caving up Earth’s atmosphere.

So the question is more fundamental - can we continue with this carnival of sport, with its associated carnivals and festivals that encourage millions of people to criss cross the world in polluting aircraft?

The answer, I would suggest is probably “no” and the so the idea of sport on an international basis needs a significant rethink.

Two scientists' concerns over years of climate inaction

Precisely how the incoming Trump administration will deal with climate change remains uncertain. But Donald Trump’s statements during the campaign and since his election – and also his Cabinet nominations and his immediately purging the whitehouse.gov website of climate science information – signal, at a minimum, that he will not make addressing climate change a priority.

And that the administration likely will move to shelve federal government mitigation efforts.

Throughout his campaign and during the transition leading up to his January 20th inauguration, Trump frequently had been dismissive of the science and bullish on coal and fossil fuels generally. Proponents for aggressive action and many in the climate science research community have expressed increasing concerns.

In recent months, two climate modelers – Ben Sanderson, of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, in Boulder, Colorado, and Reto Knutti of ETH Zurich, Switzerland – examined how Trump administration inaction and actions might influence future planetary warming. They concluded that a four- or eight-year delay in mitigation could lead to substantially exceeding global temperature limits for dangerous levels of emissions and concentrations, perhaps indefinitely.

Read the Yale Climate Connections story - “Two scientists' concerns over years of climate inaction.”

What Can Bamboo Do About CO2?

An INBAR project in Ecuador, financed by the
World Bank, builds flood-resistant houses using a
native species of bamboo.

Efforts to thoroughly study the role that plants play in climate change mitigation are increasing.

Most researchers focus on the promise of large, leafy forest trees to help remove carbon from the atmosphere; for example Lal (1998) in India, Chen (1999) in Canada, Zhang (2003) in China, and Monson ( 2002) in the United States.

This is because, generally speaking, the bigger the plant, the more CO2 it absorbs – click here to see how plants do this – and trees are the most obvious large plant species.

However, there are some very large non-tree plants in the world and increasing evidence points to a surprising grassy climate change warrior: bamboo.

Read the Development Roast story - “What Can Bamboo Do About CO2?”

Climate change abatement efforts will only change when the government changes

E

fforts of abatement, mitigation or the slowing of climate change cause in Australia will not alter until the people vote to change the government.

Coal is the unequivocal villain in the worsening of the world’s atmosphere and yet Tony Abbott and his coalition cohorts continue to ignore that reality and through its Budget continue to back coal projects.

A Sydney Morning Herald story by Lisa Cox tells readers that, “Coal projects in the Galilee Basin and on the door step of the Great Barrier Reef could receive government financing under a $5 billion loan scheme in the federal budget.”

Her story - “Abbott government budget boost could help controversial Galilee coal projects” – says, “Coal projects in the Galilee Basin and on the door step of the Great Barrier Reef could receive government financing under a $5 billion loan scheme in the federal budget.”

'Lukewarmers' frustrate strong mitigation policies

T

he “lukewarmers” who don’t deny, but pay lip service to climate change are probably the biggest obstacle to the implementation of strong greenhouse gas mitigation policies.



Tamsin Edwards -
"knee-deep"
in climate change.

Tamsin Edwards discusses the emergence of this definitive class in a Guardian article, “The lukewarmers don’t deny climate change. But they say the outlook’s fine”.

She writes: “Lukewarmers have much more mainstream views than the easy stereotype of the denier.

“They agree carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, that the world is warming, and that a significant fraction of this is down to humans

“In terms of policy, they typically support adaptation to climate change. But they differ from mainstream views because they’re not convinced there’s a substantial risk that future warming could be large or its impacts severe, or that strong mitigation policies are desirable.”

Good governance leads to climate change mitigation

C

limate change mitigation hinges entirely on governance and democracy appears to be the best avenue to changes so urgently needed.

Neil deGrasse Tyson - he's concerned we
are becoming an ill-informed democracy.

However, despite the protestations of many, democracy in its ideal sense is under threat and little by little, piece by piece, oligarchy is replacing it.

Elite rule is becoming pre-eminent, inequality is becoming even further entrenched and what exists favours a few, while most scramble for the scraps.

American astrophysicist and author Neil deGrasse Tyson’s new show StarTalk

in the hope that people will get a regular dose of science as pain-free as possible.

He thinks that by embedding discussions about science between pop culture discussions and entertaining asides, the science will go down easy, and even leave you wanting more.

deGrasse is concerned, however, that the practice of politicians denying science will be the end of an informed democracy.

The ClimateProgress story, “Neil deGrasse Tyson: Politicians Denying Science Is ‘Beginning Of The End Of An Informed Democracy’” discusses this along with a trusty cast of comedians and science-minded folks like Bill Nye.

Appointment of 'adaptation mentors' suggests mitigation is officially forgotten

Victorians are being subtly introduced to a process that could eventually become serious geo-engineering.

It seems that officialdom has abandoned the idea of climate change mitigation and had embarked on adaptation.

That, at least, is one interpretation that could be put up the appointment of three “Local government adaptation mentors”.

Although they are not in the title, the missing words are “climate change”, indicating, mitigation is a lost opportunity and now we are looking at adapting to whatever comes.

Geo-engineering is a natural extension of adaptation processes and while embraced by many of the fossil-fuel enthusiasts, it takes little, or no account, of unintended consequences, the acidification of our oceans, the survival of other species upon which man depends or our intergenerational responsibilities, that is to people we haven’t met yet, because they are not yet born.

Just recently, three new Local government adaptation mentors were appointed in Victoria, one in Warrnambool, one in Melbourne and a third in Wangaratta.

Narelle Martin has been at work in Wangaratta for nearly four weeks and is responsible for local governments in whole northern section of Victoria.

Appointment of the three mentors is state-based pilot project. Narelle can be contacted at 0477 313 911.

Cutting carbon pollution saves money, makes people healthier

Pursuing climate mitigation policies might appear costly, but they are not and they actually make the world a better place to be.

Climate Progress considers this from a health point of view and writes about in a story headed: “Cutting Carbon Pollution Saves More Money Than It Costs By Making People Healthier”.

Beyond making people healthier, cutting carbon pollution also makes people happier and those in a better frame of mind are also more productive, better citizens and simply better people to be about.

The spin-off from cutting carbon pollution is manifest and answers most every aim of those who prefer” business-as-usual”, a paradigm that will ensure catastrophic climate change, along with a serious decline in individual and societal health.

Climate crisis leaps out of the shadows and is ready to stare us down

The climate crisis has leapt out of the shadows and is about to stare us down.

Prof Roger Jones and Prof Lesley
 Hughes at the Melbourne event.

It was just on Thursday night that a panel of acutely qualified people talked about difficulties for humanity arising from the impacts, adaptation and vulnerability discussed in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change fifth assessment report when another paper was released on Monday.

Thursday’s event, presented to a packed Sunderland Theatre at the University of Melbourne, was organized by the Australian Meteorology and Oceanographic Society.

The five speakers – a Professorial Research Fellow at the Victoria Institute for Strategic Economic Studies (VISES) at Victoria University, Coordinating Lead Author (Chapter 2: Foundations for decision making), Professor Roger Jones;

Ecologist at the Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Councillor, Climate Council, Lead Author (Chapter 25: Australasia), Professor Lesley Huges; Professor and Australia Research Council Future Fellow in the Department of Resource Management and Geography, Melbourne University, Lead Author (Chapter 12: Human security), Professor John Barnett; Associate Professor in Environmental Earth System Science and Associate Director of the Center on Food Security and the Environment, Stanford University, Lead Author (Chapter 7: Food production systems and food security), Dr David Lobell; and Dr Kathleen McInnes – Research Scientist, CSIRO, Lead Author (Chapter 5: Coastal systems and low-lying areas), Dr Kathleen McInnes – each discussed their role in the compilation of the fifth report.

 

MC for the evening was Environmental Entrepreneur and Chairman of UNESCO Western Port Biosphere, Chair of Wildlife Victoria, Advisory Board Member Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute, Mr Rob Gell, who asked the speakers for a one minute summary of the evening touching on their “light bulb moment”.

Naturally all those “moments” were different, but there appeared to be a theme about encouraging all those listening initiate conversations that would lead to mitigation.

Hard on the heels of the Melbourne event is the release of the report discussing the mitigation of climate change.

This report ends four years of intense scientific collaboration by hundreds of authors from around the world responding to a request from the world’s governments for a comprehensive, objective and policy neutral assessment of the current scientific knowledge of mitigating climate change.

The report has been extensively reviewed by experts and governments to ensure quality and comprehensiveness. The quintessence of this work, the Summary for Policymakers, has been approved line by line by member governments at the 12th Session of IPCC WG III in Berlin, Germany (7-11 April 2014).

Is a disappearing sign a 'sign of the times'

The “carbon counter” that appeared on our Beneath the Wisteria blog for a few weeks is gone.

Well, it had stopped working when I accessed the page and it appears as if it has been dumped completely by the Deutche Asset and Wealth Management.

Searches of their website, the original source of the carbon counter widget drew a blank.

Subsequently, it has gone and if someone can find a replacement please let me know.

Should they have scrapped it completely, that unnerves me somewhat as it seems that the 2009 (that’s when it was first posted) urgency surrounding climate change has abated somewhat.

Rather than signs, we need climate change abatement.

-       Robert McLean.

Putting adaptation and mitigation together to tackle climate change

Adaptation and mitigation are rarely considered together when people discuss a response to climate change.

Learn about life in Australia
 in a four degree world.

However, they are in fact complementary, one and the same thing for if you apply mitigation processes correctly adaptation will follow.

Human-induced climate change has arisen, primarily, because humanity discovered fossil fuels and worked out a ways to employ them for humanity’s benefit, but failed to recognize that in the burning they would be dumping inordinate amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Initially all was well for there were relatively few people on the earth (about one billion in 1800) and aided by the fossil fuels that brought the agricultural and industrial revolutions, along with marked increases in public health, we began to live longer and healthier lives.

Being better fed and educated, along with becoming much smarter, we learned how to exploit those fossil fuels and in making life far more comfortable, our numbers began to expand and in the past 40 years our population has more than tripled to an alarming seven billion plus.

However, those who study such things argue population growth is slowing and although there are more people living on the earth now than in the whole of human history, we will see fewer than 10 billion people on earth by the end of this century.

Of course, the numbers are in a sense irrelevant to how we adapt to a mitigate climate change.

The die, it is important to note, is already cast.

The amount of carbon dioxide dumped into out atmosphere as an unaccounted for externality is such that what is now a nearly one degree increase in the earth’s surface temperatures above pre-industrial times will soon become two degrees.

Writing in the 2013 book, “Four Degrees of Global Warming: Australia in a Hot World”, there was consensus among the many authors, the Australians would need to learn to adapt to living all the shortcomings and difficulties associated with a four degree increase in temperature.

The two degree increase is unavoidable and roaring down the pipe toward us is a four degree increase and so we need not just adaptation, but mitigation if we are to have any serious likelihood of surviving these quite different circumstances.

People need to educate themselves, read the literature and learn about what is ahead.

Population numbers have soared, but are
expected to plateau at less than 10 billion.

What we are facing is so different from what has existed that it escapes the comprehension of most and the outcome is of such complexity, that to attempt an explanation here would do a disservice to all, short to say that the world of tomorrow will be different, damnably difficult and effectively a step into the unknown.

Let’s talk about adaptation and mitigation – first we must throw off the human created economic shackles and create a new life that is people focussed rather than one the emphasises that human-created construct of money.

Work, a process that enslaves many and benefits just a few, needs to be relegated to a position of lesser importance and so rather than be “working for the man”, we need to be in a position of working for the greater wellbeing of all.

Subsequently a four-hour work day would still see us produce more than enough to ensure our comfortable survival and yet allow each of us sufficient time in which to work with and for our respective communities.

An inherent part of such an approach would see us all poorer, in brutal economic terms, and so less able to consume “stuff” and so society’s use of and consumption of fossil fuel-powered energy would drop dramatically.

Freed from the “need” to work most of our waking hours, each of us would be in a position to use that time, energy and skill to help make our neighbourhoods, communities, towns and cities better places in which to live.

Places that because of the work/life balance would be less energy intensive, more resilient in a changing world and a way of life that would be more adaptive to the emerging difficulties associated with climate change and actually mitigate the cause of our declining atmospheric conditions.

Candidates invited to join discussion Beneath the Wisteria

Murray seat candidates for the September 7 federal election are being invited to join discussions at Shepparton’s Beneath the Wisteria.

The candidates are being invited to join those who gather Beneath the Wisteria and discuss their view about climate change mitigation.

Along with the candidates, the public are also invited to join the discussion and talk about how individuals and the community should respond to the dilemma emerging from our damaged climate.

The next gathering Beneath the Wisteria in Shepparton’s Maude St Mall will be held at 11:30am on Saturday, August 31. There is no cost and those attending should bring their own folding chair.

People eager to know more about the August gathering Beneath the Wisteria should contact organizer, John Pettigrew, at (03) 5826 9557.