You know better than that
CLIMATE CHANGE
I’M not sure exactly how old I was when I first understood what it meant to be “responsible”. A spilled ice-cream, a missed bus, a lost watch — many hard-learned lessons in responsibility spring to mind. It’s a fairly basic concept that we learn as children. So when I hear Melissa Price, our newly appointed Federal Environment Minister, say that it would be “irresponsible” to commit to reducing coal-powered electricity generation to 2 per cent of current usage by 2050, as per the UN IPCC report released on Monday, I wonder if I’ve missed something. The report did not mince words: on our current trajectory, the planet will be 2C warmer by 2060, displacing millions of vulnerable people due to sea level rise, exposing billions to extreme heatwaves, and killing the entire Great Barrier Reef. How is it “irresponsible” to follow expert advice and prioritise avoiding this future, when the technology already exists to do so? A common phrase heard by children who don’t show responsibility is, “you know better than that”. Melissa Price, I think you do too. therefore more rain. What we don’t know is where that rain is going to fall and how warming is going to affect weather. If high pressure systems move farther south, Hobart might move to a more Mediterranean climate with rain predominantly in the winter which would make summers more fire prone. The IPCC scientists could spend more time on modelling this aspect.
No reason to delay
EVERY day around Australia, in many cases whether they want to or not, councils are dealing with and planning for climate change. The life of assets, rising tides, stormwater capacity, road life, bushfire risk, algal blooms and coastal erosion are some of the issues dealt with. In contrast the approach being taken by Liberal state and federal governments is looking more and more like radical ideology with great risks to Australia and its people. There is no reason economic or science based to delay action. As Nobel prize winner for economics William Nordhaus found, the costs of doing nothing are much greater than investments in emissions reduction.
Getting off coal is easy
THE claim by Melissa Price that the IPCC recommendation that we should wean ourselves off coal by 2050 is a “long bow” demonstrates poor understanding of science and economics. Compared to other changes in technology, getting off the stuff by 2050 is a rather leisurely schedule. Considering less controversial changes, Health Minister hits out at private hospital shutdowns as RHH hits peak demand The Royal is there to serve the majority of the community, the private hospitals are not here to take the load from the public health sector. For the past 4 years things have been going downhill and we hit a crisis point long ago. old technologies often become obsolete in little more than a decade: Piston engine aircraft to jets, steam trains to diesel or electric, sailing ships to steam ships, valves to transistors. Even without global warming, coal has become obsolete. By 2050 the world will still need some, for boutique applications like making dyes, or coke, and maybe even liquid hydrocarbon fuels, but coal-fired power stations will make no more sense than valve powered computers.
How reassuring
OUR Deputy Prime Minister and Environment Minister have rejected the advice of 92 eminent scientists about phasing out coal. How reassuring that they know more about limiting global gas emissions than the scientists do.
Impending doom
“ENTIRE nations could be wiped off the Earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.” (1989)
“World faces an ecological disaster as final as nuclear war within a couple of decades unless governments act now.” (1982)
“If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.” (2007)
A small list. All were about impending climate doom. All were completely wrong. But this time …
Speaking out
I AGREE totally with your editorial (“We must talk about China”, Mercury, October 9). It will be interesting to see if you cop the same treatment as Cassy O’Connor and Clive Hamilton have — from those with unquestioning loyalty to the dollar sign.
Censorship
GREG Barns’s suggestion that Clive Hamilton shouldn’t air his views because it may inspire racists ( Mercury, October 8) amounts to the sort of censorship I’m sure he’d abhor. Clive Hamilton’s book is an academic work full of compelling evidence. This is an opportunity for media to educate people about the difference between racism and political reality.
Majors going down
WITH the public’s continued lack of faith in the two major political parties, it’s no wonder there’s a turn-away in support. Maybe it’s time the self-interested politicians learnt they are there to represent their constituents and not there to govern them.
Praise for heroes
I HAVE enjoyed the 100 Days of Heroes in my daily Mercury. I will miss them when they are finished.