Thread: Climate Change and our Land of Fire, Flood and Drought.

Originally Posted by Tombie

Doesn’t work like that at all...Mathematically...

7.53 Billion x 100 (as a percentage) 753 billion “units”
Let’s drop each persons average emissions by 10%
677.7 billion “units”

By 2030 it’s 8.5 billion people at 90% emissions level
That’s 765 billion “units” of emissions. Or just shy of a 2% increase in emissions.

Considering current practice and assuming no changes occurred in outputs per person (avg) it’s even worse 11% increase.

Currently we are 0.003% of global population. Our impact isn’t worth squat.

We're 0.3% of world population, but contribute 1.07% of emissions, so we're punching well above our weight in harmful emissions, about three times our share of population.
If the coal we export to be burnt overseas is included we cause about 5% of world emissions.
Our bushfires alone are predicted to emit about 20% of total annual world emissions this year, according to the UK Met Office. We are a world leader in harmful emissions.
If we refuse to act responsibly, then we will be condemned even more in the future.

But it doesn't have to be that way. We have the resources to be a world leader in renewable energy, convert our industries to run on cheaper renewable power and use that advantage of cheap renewable hydro, solar and wind power with battery storage to manufacture many products here for export, creating jobs and making us even richer.
Over the next 2-3 decades we can easily recreate the 40,00 jobs in coal mining in other industries. We have done it before. Shutting down vehicle manufacturing cost about 100,000 jobs and caused a lot of unemployment, but the jobless rate is back down again.
We just have to be smart about it, stop thinking of Australia as just a colonial quarry and start to be a leader rather than a follower.
Don't mean to sound like I'm preaching again (I know I do), but it's just seems bleeding obvious this is the smart way forwards.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

We're 0.3% of world population, but contribute 1.07% of emissions, so we're punching well above our weight in harmful emissions, about three times our share of population.
If the coal we export to be burnt overseas is included we cause about 5% of world emissions.
Our bushfires alone are predicted to emit about 20% of total annual world emissions this year, according to the UK Met Office. We are a world leader in harmful emissions.
If we refuse to act responsibly, then we will be condemned even more in the future.

But it doesn't have to be that way. We have the resources to be a world leader in renewable energy, convert our industries to run on cheaper renewable power and use that advantage of cheap renewable hydro, solar and wind power with battery storage to manufacture many products here for export, creating jobs and making us even richer.
Over the next 2-3 decades we can easily recreate the 40,00 jobs in coal mining in other industries. We have done it before. Shutting down vehicle manufacturing cost about 100,000 jobs and caused a lot of unemployment, but the jobless rate is back down again.
We just have to be smart about it, stop thinking of Australia as just a colonial quarry and start to be a leader rather than a follower.
Don't mean to sound like I'm preaching again (I know I do), but it's just seems bleeding obvious this is the smart way forwards.

Solar and wind power are a fantastic way to produce electricity, Even I rely on solar/batteries when I go away on my trips BUT they are Not the "Magic Bullet" we are looking for because the storage of that power is still too expensive and the disposal of all those batteries and panels when they get to the end of their service life is just another environmental disaster waiting to happen Not to mention the ecological damage being done to produce those panels and batteries in the first place .
Hydro is another fantastic way to produce and store electricity But where are we going to find all that water, infrastructure and suitable geology to be able to provide power for the entire continent when we are struggling to supply our basic household water needs as it is.
Tidal and wave power generation is yet another option for those of us living on/near the coast.

Nuclear power is one of the Obvious answers especially now that the new breed of power plants are Far superior to the old tech.

At the moment though the ONLY truly "Reliable" source of electricity that works 24/7 is coal, gas or diesel generators and until we can work out how to replace these safely and economically we cannot simply dump them without replacing them.

Simply jumping up and down Demanding that we cease the use of fossil fuels to produce the electricity we need before we can come up with alternative and more importantly Reliable power production is NOT the answer even though it does make some people feel all warm and fuzzy inside

Interesting to see the suggestion that as a small population we can make no odds when it comes to carbon mitigation. Australia takes pride in ‘punching above our weight’ when it comes to sport, to joining peace-keeping efforts and of course to global conflicts such as the two Iraq wars and numerous other US-led adventures. Whenever our fearless leaders co-opt Australians’ self of national identity to justify their latest frolic, however ill-advised or worthy, most nod sagely and enjoy the warm inner glow of knowing that while we may be a small country, goodness we are terrific global citizens. So why does that argument not apply to what is arguably the greatest threat to our continuing existence? Unless the weight of scientific evidence is to be dismissed. Or of course the sheer weight of money is what is setting the agenda. Follow the money by all means, but observe where the smart money is going - it is not into coal unless you’re a bottom feeder taking advantage of short-term opportunities presented by the utter lack of coherent policies coming from the Federal and state governments.

I thought this was an interesting piece on when hazard reduction was useful and when it had little effect. It's not as simple as just 'light her up'.
Areas which had previously been hazard burned burnt again during the bushfire emergency.
Main value of hazard reduction seems to be to burn around areas to be protected, not to burn the areas themselves, according to the experts.

Hazard reduction burning had little to no effect in slowing extreme bushfires

Hazard reduction burning had little to no effect in slowing extreme bushfires | Environment | The Guardian

Keen readers of Australian literature from the pens of the likes of Lawson, Patterson, Steele Rudd, Ion Idriess who wrote much of country life from the 19th century to WW2 will note the continuing theme of recurring drought. They wrote of the effects of relentless recurring droughts on the squatters, settlers, selectors, ballot blockys, soldier settlers. How droughts broke their health, spirits, finances. Of the struggle to cope with and survive drought and to recover. How drought left them at the mercy of the money lenders and middlemen. Even great squatters were sent broke and left their once huge and prosperous stations. McPherson left Dagworth after 34 years with their entire possessions in a one horse dray. One mob of cattle saved Sid Kidman's empire.

An elder of the numerous Elliott clan of Winton told me once that he expected one "real good year" in seven. A real good year is one in which both the season and prices were good. A good year has one or the other but not both. He said western graziers should plan and budget for one real good year in ten and you would not be disappointed.

I hope the doomsdayers talking about per capita emissions do realise that because of the size of our country Australia is a net carbon dioxide sink.

That is correct . In total Australia provides a reduction in global carbon dioxide emissions.

Thanks heavens for our trees and deserts hey.

Regards PhilipA

Originally Posted by Bigbjorn

Keen readers of Australian literature from the pens of the likes of Lawson, Patterson, Steele Rudd, Ion Idriess who wrote much of country life from the 19th century to WW2 will note the continuing theme of recurring drought. They wrote of the effects of relentless recurring droughts on the squatters, settlers, selectors, ballot blockys, soldier settlers. How droughts broke their health, spirits, finances. Of the struggle to cope with and survive drought and to recover. How drought left them at the mercy of the money lenders and middlemen. Even great squatters were sent broke and left their once huge and prosperous stations. McPherson left Dagworth after 34 years with their entire possessions in a one horse dray. One mob of cattle saved Sid Kidman's empire.

An elder of the numerous Elliott clan of Winton told me once that he expected one "real good year" in seven. A real good year is one in which both the season and prices were good. A good year has one or the other but not both. He said western graziers should plan and budget for one real good year in ten and you would not be disappointed.

Gerald Gooch, who owned Thargomindah Station, basically stated the same thing albeit with sheep. I remember in the 60s, his daughter Joan, 'Miss Joan' to the men, telling about the seven year old son of one of the ringer's, who was quite bemused when he encountered his first drops of rain.

Would’ve have been better to have had one of those old style droughts, 50-100% more rain than we had last year