Category: Climate politics

Two year old turkey for Thanksgiving: CRU emails part deux

In an apparent attempt to repeat the pre-Copenhagen impact of the release of emails stolen from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit in 2009, another batch of private correspondence between climate scientists has been made public via links left at sceptic blogs. UEA has confirmed that the emails appear to be genuine, and to be from the previous theft:

While we have had only a limited opportunity to look at this latest post of 5,000 emails, we have no evidence of a recent breach of our systems.

If genuine, (the sheer volume of material makes it impossible to confirm at present that they are all genuine) these emails have the appearance of having been held back after the theft of data and emails in 2009 to be released at a time designed to cause maximum disruption to the imminent international climate talks.

As you might expect, the usual suspects are out in force, desperately trying to spin these mails into a new scandal, but initial responses from the scientists featuring in the correspondence are that the contents are just the warmed-up leftovers of 2009’s PR beat-up. Michael Mann commented:

“The last time this happened, it turned out to be a hoax, a manufactured scandal. This has all the makings of a yet another fraud, perpetrated once again on the eve of a major climate change summit with the intention of distracting the public and policymakers about the very real threat of human-caused climate change”

Leo Hickman in the Guardian reports that the Norfolk Police — who have been investigating the original server hack for two years with no apparent success — have said that the new release of emails is “of interest” to them. Other reactions here:

For Hot Topic‘s coverage of the original email theft, start here, then go here, where I discuss the framing of the non-scandal. See also Skeptical Science’s excellent overview of 2009’s events and the fallout.

Introduction to Modern Climate Change

I wouldn’t normally seek a text book for review, but a pre-publication recommendation described this one as excellent reading for any lay person interested in the subject. I’d also seen the author, Andrew Dessler, in an television interview which I wrote about, which was further encouragement. The book is An Introduction to Modern Climate Change. Dessler is a climate scientist but he’s also versed in the politics of the matter, having worked as a Senior Policy Analyst during the Clinton administration. His text book, a little unusually, covers both the science of climate change and the policy response to the issue.  It makes excellent sense to consider them together.

The science carries such grave implications for human welfare that it demands policy responses. Dessler sets much store by an electorate educated in both the science of the changing climate and the steps that are needed to avoid its worst consequences in the future.  Not all of the electorate is likely to become as educated in the science as this book allows, but the broad scientific outline on which the book is based is certainly capable of wide dissemination across the community.

Continue reading “Introduction to Modern Climate Change”

NZ needs a bold low-carbon business strategy

This guest post in Hot Topic’s election series comes from Phillip Mills, one of the founders (with Rob Morrison, Lloyd Morrison, Sir Stephen Tindall, Joan Withers, Prof Sir Paul Callaghan, Jeremy Moon, Rob Fyfe, Chris Liddell, Sir George Fistonich, Geoff Ross and Justine Smyth) of Pure Advantage, a group set up to promote green growth strategies for New Zealand. It was first published in a slightly different form in the NZ Herald last week.

We’ve seen during the past two months what this country is capable of when we all pull together. In this election, we should demand that our politicians give the same level of strategy, planning and commitment to our economic future. New Zealand’s environmental reputation continues to be tested. The Rena saga, followed by a second fossil fuel-related blow with the Vector natural gas pipe rupture is feeding public unease about how prepared we are to manage New Zealand’s green brand.

A 2008 study showed that a 5% reputational loss in primary products and international tourism will cost the New Zealand economy more than 22,000 jobs, annual direct losses of $455 million in primary product sales and $155 million in international tourism sales.

However, the long-term damage to New Zealand’s brand will not come from Rena, or even the risks of a tanker accident or deep-water drilling disaster should we decide to go down that track, but from a failure to take up the opportunities we have to shift more of our resources and talent pool into the low-carbon industries that will drive the future global economy.

Continue reading “NZ needs a bold low-carbon business strategy”

We must change the way we think about the future, now

Hot Topic’s NZ election 2011 series continues with an excellent piece by Dr George Laking, an Auckland-based medical oncologist. George is a member of OraTaiao: New Zealand Climate and Health, a group of senior doctors and other health professionals concerned about the effects of climate change on population health. This article first appeared in the NZ Herald on Nov 17th.

This month the International Energy Agency published its latest World Energy Outlook. It says if high-carbon energy investment continues for more than five years, atmospheric carbon dioxide will unavoidably overshoot 450 parts per million and global warming will exceed 2C. The agency’s chief economist says “I am very worried – if we don’t change direction now on how we use energy, we will end up beyond what scientists tell us is the minimum. The door will be closed forever .”

The IEA is not a fringe organisation, and it is not alone in accepting the scientific work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The World Bank says “The countries of the world must act now, act together and act differently on climate change.”

Senior officers from the UK Ministry of Defence identify climate change as “an immediate, growing and grave threat” to global health and security. Leading international medical journal The Lancet calls climate change “the biggest global health threat of the 21st century”. Risks include extreme weather events, loss of food and political security, and increased range of infectious diseases. The World Medical Association has urged doctors to take action to mitigate the effects of climate change.

Continue reading “We must change the way we think about the future, now”

Planting boom hangover on its way: get more trees in the ground, starting now

In the latest episode in Hot Topic’s election coverage, forestry consultant Piers Maclaren looks at a forestry issue that seems to be missed by all the major parties.

New Zealand faces a major carbon problem in the period from 2023-2038, resulting from the imbalanced age-class structure of our plantation forest estate. Let me explain.

Forestry is a cheap and easy way to sequester carbon, but it is not a total global solution because at best it could possibly offset some 10% of the carbon the planet is likely to emit over the next 100 years from the burning of coal. Afforestation is merely the converse of deforestation, which has been responsible for something like 20% of the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide since the industrial revolution. Afforestation can help reverse some of that portion.

Afforestation takes a landscape of low carbon density (for example, pasture or short scrub) and changes it to one of high carbon density – a forest. If the forest consists of an even balance of trees of all ages, then it will be in a steady-state situation — neither a carbon sink nor a carbon source, but
carbon neutral — and will remain in that state in perpetuity. The act of establishing a forest therefore constitutes a sink, but the maintenance of a forest is carbon neutral. This applies to all types of forest, and it is irrelevant whether the trees are felled with a chainsaw or by storm damage; whether the trees are removed from the forest, converted to some product and ultimately oxidised, or whether the biomass decays within the forest; or whether the trees are removed in clusters, or are widely spaced individuals. The point is that the removal of some component of the forest — for example a harvestable block of trees within the estate — is exactly counterbalanced
by the growth of all the other blocks.

Continue reading “Planting boom hangover on its way: get more trees in the ground, starting now”