Clarence Valley Council itself admits that the entire estuary is already under stress in its Report Card 2013:
Showing posts with label environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label environment. Show all posts
Friday 15 February 2019
Clarence Valley 2019: keeping the Clarence River Estuary healthy for future generations
“like other heavy
fabricating sectors shipbuilding involves the use of materials and
manufacturing practices that can impact on the environment, can contribute to
climate change”
[OECD Council Working Party on Shipbuilding
(WP6), November 2010]
“Shipyards are
dangerous construction zones with many worker hazards. Shipbuilding, repair,
cleaning, and coating use toxic chemicals and hazardous or flammable materials.
These activities also can pollute water directly or through runoff. Repairs may
require emptying dirty water from a ship’s ballast and bilge tanks into the
surrounding waters….. Shipbuilding and ship repair use toxic chemicals that
include chromium,
copper, lead,
and nickel. Ship cleaning activities use chemicals that include copper,
hazardous or flammable materials, heavy metals, and solvents.
They release lead, particulate
matter, volatile
organic compounds, zinc, and other air
pollutants.” [NIH U.S. National Library
of Medicine, Boats & Ships, retrieved 18 February 2019]
If it wasn’t
bad enough that barely two years ago Lower
Clarence communities still had a flimflam man and then a set of dodgy
companies (mentioned in a NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption investigation
in 2018) trying to push for large scale industrialisation of Clarence River
estuary – now Clarence Valley Council apparently attracted by the lure of vacant crown land up for grabs appears to be joining the push to industrialise-and-be-damned if these little
gems in its “Clarence Valley Regional Economic Development Strategy 2018 -2022”
are any indication.
These are excerpts from that document:
Clarence Valley’s key
endowments lie in its coastal, riverine and hinterland amenity; arable soils
and favourable climate; access to Sydney and Brisbane via the Pacific Highway;
and the ability to bring new industrial land to market cost effectively…..
Industrial Land -The
Clarence Valley has seven industrial estates open for business and far more
potential development sites compared with neighbouring councils…..
Sustaining a ready
supply of zoned and serviced industrial land is a strategic priority for
supporting growth in these specialisations, with marine precinct proposals……
•Meet emerging
industrial land use opportunities in a timely way •Develop a marine precinct
proposal •Develop a project portfolio of enabling infrastructure for industrial
sites, including the marine precinct proposal…..•Develop a Port of Yamba Strategy…….
Develop a marine
precinct proposal
•Develop a project
portfolio of enabling infrastructure for industrial sites, including the marine
precinct proposal
•Build on the Transport
Precinct Feasibility Final Report to develop road investment priorities
•Review and complete
land use planning through collaboration with neighbouring councils
•Partner with local
industries and training providers to align training courses to industry’s needs
•Advocate for a marine
manufacturing SkillsPoint
•Identify and cost
options for better Pacific Highway connections
•Advocate for progress
on strategic priorities for the Port of Yamba and Summerland Way
•Develop a Port of Yamba
Strategy
•Develop Yamba Road
& Harwood Road business cases…..
The Clarence
River estuary covers an 800 sq. kilometres floodplain and key environmental
indicators for this estuary’s health include water quality, riverbank vegetation, the
number and distribution of fish species, as well as the presence of macroinvertebrates
and plankton.
The estuary is already beginning to struggle under the weight of human
activity, including marine activity. A fact it would seem that Clarence Valley
Council ignores in its development strategy.
It is a fact
that estuary communities cannot afford to ignore if they wish to preserve the
aesthetic, cultural, social and environmental amenity which supports both
community life and the local economy.
In 2016-2017 a
study of six NSW ports was undertaken and published in PLoS One and online in
December 2017 as “Water
quality assessment of Australian ports using water quality evaluation indices”.
With regard
to the Port of Yamba in the lower Clarence
estuary the study recommended regular monitoring and management of port
activities accounting for both biological and chemical toxicological profiles
of the discharging activities.
It did so for
the following reasons:
* The Port of
Yamba has standard levels of Dissolved Oxygen according to ANZECC guidelines. However. the amount of
fecal coliforms was significantly higher in the water of the port area than the
corresponding background samples, which clearly indicates the impact of the fishing
fleet and recreational boating on the port environment.
* Very high concentrations of iron were found in the port
water, the maximum concentration of lead in the water exceeded the ANZECC (0.0022)
guidelines with all the background samples had much lower concentration
of lead compared to the port area and, the maximum concentration of
copper in the water was much higher than ANZECC guidelines and exceeded other
international guidelines at (0.04 mg/l) in Port of Yamba.
* The mean concentration of copper also exceeded the ANZECC
guidelines. When it came to zinc levels were low except in the port area which contained
very high concentrations of zinc, which exceeded the guidelines. Concentration
of cadmium and cobalt were within the ANZECC guidelines.
* Overall the Port of Yamba portrayed high contamination for all
standard guidelines when it came to water quality – the port area has water
quality of medium contamination and one site has high contamination.
Clarence Valley Council itself admits that the entire estuary is already under stress in its Report Card 2013:
Clarence Valley Council itself admits that the entire estuary is already under stress in its Report Card 2013:
“Water quality was poor
in the estuary throughout the study, with the region around the tidal limit with
consistently the worst water quality of the Clarence River
reflecting the
freshwater and tidal inputs at these sites. Estuary tributaries, particularly
Swan and Sportsmans Creeks and the Coldstream River were in very
poor overall condition
receiving a grade of F. These systems had consistently poor water quality that
contributed nutrient rich, low oxygen and acid water
to the Clarence River
following flooding.
Concentrations of
nitrogen and phosphorus consistently exceeded the guideline values throughout
the study at all sites. Very high nitrogen concentrations were
recorded in estuarine
reaches following flooding. There were no algal blooms recorded during the
study. However, algal concentrations were consistently
above the guideline
value in estuarine reaches.
The Broadwater and
Wooloweyah coastal lagoons both had very poor water quality, with high algal
and nutrient concentrations and turbidity, and low dissolved oxygen values
consistently exceeding a number of water quality guidelines. The Broadwater had
better riparian condition relative to Wooloweyah that improved its
overall grade.
Riparian condition was
generally low from a poor diversity of native vegetation, reduced vegetation
structure and small isolated pockets that were poorly connected to other native
vegetation. Reaches showed evidence of eroding river banks and sediment
deposited in the channel. Estuarine reaches were often dominated by riverbanks with
little or no vegetation present, leading to very poor condition grades.”
The tidal water exchange will not protect the lower estuary from a spreading loss of water quality and increased levels of pollution once industry begins to expand along its foreshores and clusters of marine businesses such as shipbuilding and repair are further developed.
There will be a tipping point that once reached will be hard, perhaps even impossible, to reverse.
This is something that Lower Clarence communities need to consider before council goes too far down this path which leads away from a healthy estuary for future generations.
Thursday 7 February 2019
Loggers still breaching their environmental obligations in Northern NSW state forests
North East Forest Alliance, media release,
1 February 2019:
EPA ENCOURAGES ILLEGAL
LOGGING BY REPEATEDLY LETTING FORESTRY OFF
The North East Forest
Alliance is claiming there is no justice for forests after the EPA on
Wednesday confirmed numerous breaches of the Forestry Corporation's Threatened
Species Licence in Gibberagee State Forest (east of Whiporie) but yet again issued
useless cautions and warnings rather than fines and prosecutions for these
serial offenders.
"Over the past
decade NEFA have exposed the Forestry Corporation committing thousands of legal
breaches of their environmental obligations, with the EPA confirming hundreds
more breaches in the last few months from NEFA's audits of Gibberagee and
Sugarloaf State Forest", said NEFA Spokesperson Dailan Pugh.
"Yet the EPA have
never taken the Forest Corporation to court, despite commitments to do so, and
in January 2016 they made the political decision not to issue fines.
"With no
consequences for their blatant breaches of environmental laws, is it surprising
that the Forestry Corporation repeat them time and time again?
"If you or I went
around illegally cutting down oldgrowth trees (hundreds of year old), clearing
rainforest, and bulldozing roads through exclusions around threatened plants
time and time again we would be put in jail, but the Forestry Corporation don't
even get a fine.
"The EPA's
regulation of the Forestry Corporation is farcical, though the biggest problem
is that by their refusal to take meaningful regulatory action the EPA are
fostering what Justice Pepper described in 2011 as "a reckless attitude
towards compliance with its environmental obligations" Mr. Pugh said.
"On Wednesday, in
response to a NEFA complaint made 2 years ago the EPA confirmed that the
Forestry Corporation failed to adequately mark the boundaries of 50m logging
exclusion zones around numerous individuals of Endangered heath Narrow-leaved
Melichrus, and undertook logging operations and roading within their exclusion
zones.
"The EPA also
confirmed NEFA's complaints of reckless damage to hollow-bearing trees and
recruitment trees, while also confirming that the Forestry Corporation was not
following the requirements for selection of appropriate recruitment trees.
"Though we can't be
sure the EPA found all the breaches we identified because the EPA won't tell us
how many they found, and when the EPA invited us into Gibberagee to be show them
in March 2017, the Forestry Corporation wouldn't let us show the EPA and
ordered us out of the forest.
"When NEFA made its
first complaint over Gibberagee in March 2017 we hoped the EPA would take
action to stop the breaches, yet when NEFA did another assessment 7 months
later we found the same sort of breaches were continuing unabated. We are still
waiting for the EPA to respond to the last complaints.
"In October last
year the EPA confirmed over 86 breaches of the logging rules identified by the
North East Forest Alliance in Sugarloaf State Forest, south of Tabulam, at that
time the EPA issued the Forestry Corporation with a Warning Letter for 72 and
an Official Caution for 1 offence.
"The confirmed
breaches included roading through a wildlife corridor, nine cases of roading in
exclusion areas along streams, failure to retain the required numbers of
habitat trees, and over 70 cases of serious damage to, and inappropriate
selection of, marked habitat trees.
"While failure to
retain the required number of habitat trees is called one offence, in practice
the EPA found that they had retained 200 less hollow-bearing trees than were
legally required.
"There were
numerous other breaches that the Forestry got off scot free for, for example
the EPA confirmed clearing within the marked boundary of the Endangered
Ecological Community Lowland Rainforest but refused to take action on the
grounds that because the "forest structure and species present at this
location have either been totally removed or severely altered/damaged" it
precluded identifying what it had been like before logging.
"The EPA chose to
ignore that they and the Forestry Corporation had jointly mapped it as Lowland
Rainforest some 6 months before it had been logged and cleared.
"These offences are
a repeat of similar offences we reported a year earlier in the nearby Cherry
Tree State Forest. Despite the EPA's assurances they were going to take legal
action there for logging and roading 4.5ha of mapped Lowland Rainforest and
recklessly damaging hundreds of habitat trees, they let the Forestry
Corporation off scot-free.
"NEFA estimated in
that operation around 1,000 habitat trees were likely to have been damaged or
had excessive debris left around their bases, though the EPA justified their
refusal to take any regulatory action on the grounds that while it was "likely"
the damages "were as a result of harvesting operations", they
were not able to prove "beyond reasonable doubt ... that the damage was
[not] caused by some other means".
"There is no justice.
The EPA's sham regulation is encouraging the Forestry Corporation to repeatedly
break logging laws with impunity" Mr. Pugh said.
Labels:
#standup4forests,
environment,
flora and fauna,
forests,
Northern Rivers,
trees
Thursday 24 January 2019
Hard right ideology has so blinded the Morrison & Berejiklian Coalition Governments that water sustainability is at risk in yet another part of New South Wales in 2019
This particular coal mining project below has a long history and each step of the way Liberal and National politicians at state and federal level have supported the interests of foreign-owned mining corporations over those of local communities and ignored the need for intergenerational equity.
The O'Farrell & Baird Coalition Governments went to bat for the coal mining industry in New South Wales in 2014 after Wyong Coal Pty Ltd neglected to gain consent from a landowner, the Darkinjung traditional owners:
Wyong Coal are
not, however, the owners of the land the subject of the DA. Rather, the DA
partially covers land owned by the applicant, the Darkinjung Local Aboriginal
Land Council ("Darkinjung"). Moreover, the DA partially covers land
over which a land rights claim has been made by Darkinjung under the Aboriginal
Land Rights Act 1983…..
The proposed development
is State Significant Development under Section 89C of the Environmental
Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) as it is 'development
for the purposes of coal mining', as specified in the State Environmental
Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011. The Minister for
Planning and Infrastructure is the consent authority for the project. However,
the Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) will determine the application under
delegation. In addition to approval under NSW legislation, the project is also
a controlled action requiring assessment and approval under the
Commonwealth's Environment
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The Commonwealth will
undertake a separate assessment and determination under its legislation.
The Berejilian Coalition Government in 2018 carried the flag for an amended Wyong Coal development application which bypassed the need for Darkinjung LALC consent:
Environmental Defender’s Office
NSW, November
2018:
Wyong Coal Pty Ltd,
which trades as Wyong Areas Joint Coal Venture, and Kores Australia Pty
Limited, are co respondents. KORES Australia Pty Ltd, a fully-owned
subsidiary of Korea Resource Corporation, is the majority shareholder of Wyong
Coal Pty Ltd.
The case is being fought
on four main grounds: climate change, flooding impacts, compensatory water and
risks to water supply for farmers in the region.
Wallarah 2 involves
construction and operation of an underground coal mine over the next 28 years,
until 2046. It would extract five million tonnes of thermal coal a year. The
total greenhouse gas emissions over the life of the mine will be 264+ million
tonnes of CO2.
In approving the
Project, the PAC chose not to take into account emissions which come from the
burning of coal mined at Wallarah 2. Our client argues that the law wasn’t
followed with respect to climate change impacts. The key ground with respect to
greenhouse gas emissions is that the PAC failed to consider an assessment of
downstream emissions from the project. Under the EP&A Act, the PAC was
required to consider the public interest. ACA argues that in 2018, considering
the public interest for projects such as coal mines mandates the consideration
of principles of ecologically sustainable development, particularly
intergenerational equity and the precautionary principle.
In addition, our client argues that the PAC unlawfully
failed to consider the risks of the flood impacts and the potential loss of
water occasioned by the mining project.
The Project, located within the Central Coast water
catchment, would have significant impacts on the Central Coast water supply and
residents in the surrounding areas.
It would permanently alter the landscape, causing
flooding events that will only increase over time as the impacts of climate
change are realised. The PAC approval proposes dealing with these devastating
flooding events by first requiring the mine to try mitigation measures like
putting people’s houses on stilts, relocating homes or building levees. If
those measures don’t work, then the mine would be required to pay the owners of
the properties for the harm. Our client says this simply is not a lawful way to
mitigate harm from flooding. There is no evidence that the mitigation measures
will work or that compensation is an effective way to remedy harm caused by
flooding.
The mine is also likely to impact upon the Central Coast
water supply and access to water for farmers in the surrounding region.
The mine proposes to construct a pipeline to deliver compensatory water to the
Central Coast Council and provide emergency and long-term compensatory water
supplies to farmers if they lose access to water on their properties. If
compensatory water cannot be provided, the mine can agree to buy those farmers
out. The approval does not cover how the pipeline and the compensatory water is
to be provided. ACA argues that the mitigation measures proposed by the PAC in
the conditions of approval are not lawful, primarily because they go beyond the
power of the PAC to deal with environmental impacts of the Project.
The Morrison Coalition Government by the hand of Minister for the Environment, Liberal MP for Durack and former mining industry lawyer Melissa Price, gave the stamp of approval on 18 January 2018:
This is the second time in the space of days NSW residents have learned that Liberal-Nationals politicians have allowed a new coal mine to progress towards operational capability in New South Wales.
Both of these new coal mines Shenhua Watermark and Wallarah 2 represent threats to regional water security.
Monday 7 January 2019
Australia In Decline: hearing nature's death rattle
The
Guardian, 26
December 2018:
More than 50 Australian
plant species are under threat of extinction within the next decade, according
to a major study of the country’s threatened flora.
Just 12 of the most
at-risk species were found to be listed as critically endangered under national
environment laws – the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act
– and 13 had no national threatened listing at all.
The scientists behind
the research, published in the Australian Journal of Botany this month, say the
results point to a need for re-evaluation of Australia’s national lists for
threatened plants.
It is the first major
assessment of the status of Australia’s threatened flora in more than two
decades.
Plants account for
about 70% of Australia’s national threatened species list, with 1,318 varieties
listed as either critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable.
Among those
on the list are acacia pharangites (wongan gully wattle), banksia
vincentia, caladenia amoena (charming spider-orchid), caladenia
busselliana (Bussell’s spider orchid), calochilus richiae (bald-tip
beard orchid) and eremophila pinnatifida (dalwallinu eremophila).
The research team
assessed species that met criteria for either a critical or endangered listing
at national or state levels to track their rate of decline.
They did this by
reviewing all available literature on the plants – including recovery plans,
conservation advice and peer-reviewed research – and conducting interviews with
125 botanists, ecologists and land managers with expertise on particular
geographic regions or species.
The study examined 1,135
species, including 81 that were unearthed through the interview process as
being eligible for a critically endangered or endangered listing but did not
have one.
It found 418 plants had
continued declines in their population and a further 265 species had
insufficient monitoring information available to determine their status.
The scientists concluded
that 55 species were at high risk of extinction within the next 10 years, with
fewer than 250 individual plants or only a single population remaining. They
found just 12 of the most imperilled species were listed under the EPBC Act as
critically endangered and 13 had no listing at all.
They said there were
also 56 species of plants currently on the critically endangered list that they
assessed as having no documented declines or that were stable or even
increasing.
“This points to a clear
need for re-evaluation and standardisation of current lists, and consistent
application of IUCN listing guidelines,” the study states.
“There is also a need to
collect systematic, repeatable field data for most of [the] species, to back up
suspected and projected declines and provide a stronger basis for investment in
recovery actions.”…..
Labels:
environment
Sunday 9 December 2018
Loss of nearly every wild oyster in the Richmond River estuary more than two years ago became a catalyst for action
Echo
NetDaily, 5
December 2018:
Recently Rous County
Council voted unanimously to prepare a proposal for a $150 million bid to the
State’s Snowy Hyrdo Legacy Fund to ensure long term water security, natural
flood mitigation and improved river health for the Northern Rivers region.
Rous County Council
Chair, Cr Keith Williams, said the idea for the Northern Rivers Watershed
Initiative was born with the realisation that flood risk and river health are
interrelated. ‘Slowing water flow in strategically selected streams by
revegetating and fencing off stream banks, can reduce downstream flood peaks,
improve water quality and provide habitat,’ said Cr Williams after the vote.
‘Similarly, by better understanding ground water flows and recharge zones, we
can target efforts to revegetate and increase soil moisture retention and
improve infiltration rates in important ground water source areas.
‘By having a wholistic
view of water within the combined Northern Rivers catchments the Initiative can
deliver multiple benefits from the same dollar of investment.’
‘It would be a fitting
legacy of the Snowy River Scheme to restore some of the natural function of the
Northern Rivers of NSW and ensure a sustainable water supply for the region.’
Labels:
environment,
Northern Rivers,
Richmond River
Tuesday 18 September 2018
When a prime minster fails to grasp the basics of climate change policy.....
The
Australian Prime Minister for Fossil Fuels and Liberal MP for Cook, Scott Morrison, has been repeatedly insisting
since he came to office on 24 August 2018 that Australia is on target to meet
its Paris Agreement greenhouse gas emissions targets.
Apparently he
is telling journalists that “the
business-as-usual model gets us there in a canter”.
Business-as-usual of course includes those cuts to climate change mitigation programs Morrison made as federal treasurer - including no further funding for the Abbott Government's Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) which has so far failed to purchase enough abatement to outpace Australia's emissions growth.
Those agencies outside of Morrison's ‘magic circle’ are quite frankly contradicting his prediction of success.......
The COAG
Energy Security Council’s Energy Security
Board expects that Morrison’s refusal to revive National Energy Guarantee
legislation will see the electricity sector “fall short of the emissions
reduction target of 26% below 2005 levels”.
According to
Dept. of Environment and Energy total
annual emissions for the year to December 2013 fell by 0.8%.
No report was issued for the year ending December 2014, however annual
emissions rose by 0.4% for the year ending December 2015 and annual
emissions for the year to December 2016 rose by 1.4%.
While the Dept.
of Environment and Energy's, Quarterly
Update of Australia’s National Greenhouse Gas Inventory: December 2017 stated:
Annual emissions for the
year to December 2017 are estimated to be 533.7 Mt CO2 -e. This represents a 1.5% increase
in emissions when compared with the previous year. Over the year to
December 2017, there were increases in emissions from the stationary energy
(excluding electricity), transport, fugitive emissions, industrial processes
and product use, waste and agriculture sectors. These increases were partially
offset by a decline in emissions from the electricity sector. The annual
increases in stationary energy (excluding electricity) and fugitive emissions
were largely driven by an increase in LNG exports. [my
yellow highlighting]
The
independent Climate
Works Australia reported on 6 September 2018:
Australia is not yet on
track to meet its emissions reduction targets under the Paris Agreement but
there are many opportunities to still get there, according to new research
released today.
The ClimateWorks
Australia report, Tracking Progress to net zero emissions, found Australia
needed to double its emissions reduction progress to achieve the federal
government’s target of 26-28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, and triple
progress to reach net zero emissions by 2050.
The report found
Australia’s emissions were 11 per cent below 2005 levels in 2017 but have been
steadily increasing since 2013. If Australia sustained the rate of improvement
in emissions intensity it had achieved between 2005 and 2013, it could meet the
government's 2030 target. But progress has stalled in most sectors and reversed
overall. [my yellow highlighting]
Climate Works’
latest report, Tracking
progress to net zero emissions: National progress on reducing emissions across
the Australian economy and outlook to 2030, was released in September
2018 and although cautiously optimistic it doesn’t suggest that a Morrison
Government would be able to just canter towards the commitments given in Paris:
This report uses
findings from the Deep Decarbonisation Pathways Project (DDPP) and compares
these with the Australian Government's emissions data and projections to
examine whether Australia is on track for a net zero pathway and for its first
commitments under the Paris Agreement on climate change to reduce emissions by
26 to 28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. It assesses recent progress since
2005 and the outlook to 2030.
In common with 179 other
countries who ratified the Paris Agreement, Australia has committed to keeping
global warming well below 2 degrees, aiming to limit warming to 1.5 degrees and
to reach net zero emissions. For developed countries like Australia, a 2 degree
limit is generally accepted to mean reaching net zero emissions by 2050 – the
majority of states and territories have agreed to this goal. Limiting global
warming to well below 2 degrees or 1.5 degrees would require an earlier date.
Australia’s current
emissions reduction target is 26 to 28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. This
is less ambitious than the Climate Change Authority’s recommended target range
of 45 to 65 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 for Australia’s contribution to
a 2 degree goal (CCA 2015). To make sure the world is on track, all countries
in the Paris Agreement have been asked to consider whether their current target
is ambitious enough.
We already know
Australia can reach net zero emissions by 2050. The Pathways to Deep
Decarbonisation in 2050 (DDPP) report (ClimateWorks et al 2014) identified the
emissions reductions potential to put Australia on a pathway to net zero in 2050
while the economy continues to grow…
In 2017 Australia’s
emissions were around 11 per cent below 2005 levels. This is an increase from
their lowest point in 2013. Overall progress was due to strong reductions in
the land sector, while emissions rose in most other sectors. Although there
were improvements at the whole of economy level and in some sectors,
improvements on average were not equivalent to the pathway to net zero
emissions by 2050.
Emissions are higher in
buildings, industry and transport than they were in 2005. Emissions are lower
in the land sector, with the reduction being larger than increases in other
sectors. Electricity emissions fell slightly…
There were times of
reasonable emissions intensity improvements in industry and buildings but, as
with the electricity sector, these improvements then slowed or reversed. This
occurred alongside the repeal of the carbon price and related policies. Energy
intensity improved in these sectors, suggesting better energy efficiency, but
not at the rate needed for net zero. And in industry, some of this improvement
was driven by declines in energy-intensive manufacturing….
Without further policies, Australia will not be on track
for the net zero pathway or the Government's 2030 target. ClimateWorks’ research previously
identified potential emissions reductions on the net zero pathway and this
report shows where this potential is not yet being unlocked. The national
process of developing Australia’s long term emissions reduction strategy
provides an opportunity to unlock this remaining potential and get on track to
achieving net zero emissions by 2050, as do similar processes in many state and
territory governments. [my yellow highlighting]
Sunday 12 August 2018
Anthropomorphic Global Warming in Australia 2018
Australians have been told repeatedly that global warming leading to climate change is real.
The continent is becomng dryer, record air and ground temperatures are no longer novel, heavy rain events are predicted to become more destructive, mass flora and fauna extinctions are expected and the coastline is beginning to erode faster than at the historical rate.
It's not just happenng in Australia, other continents are also experience climate change and, the one factor most have in common is generations of ever increasing greenhouse gas emissions produced by both households and industries in metropolitan, regional and rural areas.
Everyone bears some responsibility for where the world finds itself......
In the first
quarter of 2018 Australia’s total greenhouse gas emissions will be over MT 7.3 CO2-e higher than the national Paris ERT commitment made on our behalf by the Australian Government.
Over one
quarter of Australia’s CO2-e budget for 2013 to 2050 has already been
spent in the last 4.75 years.
AUSTRALIA’S ANNUAL
EMISSIONS, CALENDAR YEAR TO SEPTEMBER 2017*
* This graph includes both published Government NGGI data and Ndevr Environmental projections for Q4/FY2017 and Q1/FY2018
BY SECTOR 2005-2017
~~~~~~~~~~~
World-wide, land
used for non-animal and animal-based agriculture in 2017 was estimated to
produce 24% of all global greenhouse gas emissions.
In Australia agriculture
was responsible for est. 85.03 CO2-eMt or about 16% of Australia’s total greenhouse gas emissions in 2013:
66.3%
from enteric fermentation in ruminant livestock (eructation and flatulence)
15.5%
from agricultural soils
10.8%
from prescribed burning of savannas
3.9%
from manure management
2.4%
from liming and urea application
and
the remainder from rice cultivation and field burning of agricultural residues.
Total
greenhouse gas emissions from world-wide food systems in 2012 contributed between
19% to 29% of all global greenhouse gas emissions. By
2030 the combined greenhouse gas emissions from global food production is
expected to double.
~~~~~~~~~~~
National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting, Australia’s highest 10 greenhouse gas emitters 2016–17
Labels:
business,
climate change,
energy,
environment,
extinction,
farming,
industry,
mining
Wednesday 8 August 2018
Great Barrier Reef Foundation: waiting for the inevitable crash
Mainstream
media reports that Australian Prime Minister & Liberal MP for Wentworth Malcolm Turnbull (former director Goldman
Sachs), Minister for Environment and Energy & Liberal MP for Kooyong Josh Frydenberg (former director Deutsche
Bank Australia) and Chair of the Great Barrier Reef Foundation & Member of
the Business Council of Australia John
Schubert (former chair Commonwealth Bank) met on 9 April 2018 to discuss the
allocation of a grant valued at in excess of AU$487.6 million to the
foundation.
It was also
reported that no
officials from the Department of the Environment and Energy were present at
that meeting when the grant offer was made and apparently accepted.
Less than ten weeks later the grant was formally approved
without meeting all relevant provisions in the Commonwealth
Grants Rules and Guidelines 2017.
The Great Barrier Reef
Foundation with a staff of only six full-time employees now has no more
than 6 financial years to spend this large sum, which represents est. 69.66 per cent of funds held in the federal government operated Reef Trust since 2014 and 97.52 per cent of additional funds received by the trust on 29 April 2018.
Leaving the Reef Trust with an unspecified amount to fulfil other commitments over the next six years.
Due to obvious time constraints, the Great Barrier Reef Foundation’s board and corporate 'advisers' need to have
a detailed financial and project action plan for 2018-19 immediately - if not
sooner.
I suspect that I am not alone in waiting for waste of resources, duplication of effort, poorly targeted projects, lack of verifiable outcomes and other instances of mismanagement to emerge over time, given the
slapdash way this grant was put together.
Australian Government, GrantConnect:
GA ID: GA9190
Agency: Department of the Environment and Energy
Approval Date: 20-Jun-2018
Publish Date: 12-Jul-2018
Category: Natural Resources - Conservation and Protection
Grant Term: 27-Jun-2018 to 30-Jun-2024
Value (AUD): $487,633,300.00 (GST inclusive where applicable)
Ad hoc/One-off: Yes
Aggregate Grant Award: No
PBS Program Name: DoTE 17/18 Program 1.1: Sustainable Management of
Natural Resources and the Environment
Grant Program: Reef Trust
Grant Activity: Reef Trust grant to the Great Barrier Reef
Foundation
Purpose: The project will deliver activities which are consistent
with the purposes of the Reef Trust Special Account Determination to achieve
the Reef Trust Objectives and assist to protect the Great Barrier Reef World
Heritage Area.
Internal Reference ID: 100000001841
Confidentiality - Contract: Yes
Confidentiality Reason(s) -
Contract: Other: Aspects of the
Co-Financing Plan and the Communication and Stakeholder Engagement Plan
Confidentiality - Outputs: No
Grant Recipient Details
Recipient Name: Great Barrier Reef Foundation
Recipient ABN: 82 090 616 443
Grant Recipient Location
Suburb: Brisbane
Town/City: Brisbane
Postcode: 4000
State/Territory: QLD
Country: AUSTRALIA
Grant Delivery Location
State/Territory: QLD
Country: AUSTRALIA
Australian Government, Department of the Environment
and Energy - Marine:
Third
Sector, 7
June 2018:
The Great Barrier Reef
Foundation (GBRF) has confirmed one of its board directors will step down as he
faces criminal charges for cartel conduct.
Stephen Roberts, an
investment banker and GBRF board director, has been charged by the Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) for allegedly playing a part of a
criminal cartel during a $2.5 billion deal.
ACCC Chairman, Rod Sims,
said: “These serious charges are the result of an ACCC investigation that has
been running for more than two years.”
The charges, which
included other banking chief executives and senior staff, were laid by the
Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions and will be determined in court.
Criminal
charges relating to an alleged cartel by Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and the ANZ
have been formally laid in relation to alleged cartel arrangements relating to
trading in ANZ shares following a $2.5 billion institutional share placement in
August 2015.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)