We did it, we can undo it: Thomas E. Lovejoy, Tim Flannery and Achim Steiner

by Thomas E. Lovejoy, Tim Flannery and Achim Steiner
International Herald Tribune 27 Oct 08;

In the course of Earth's history, life collectively has had a strong influence on atmosphere and climate. It has helped shape both, and has been shaped by both. Today atmospheric and climate changes are driven by a single species - ourselves - and they are happening very rapidly.

One of the principal elements in this is carbon, the most basic of the building blocks of living organisms.

When we burn fossil fuels, we release solar energy captured by ancient green plants and carbon goes into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Similarly when current living matter is burned and degraded, as in tropical deforestation, it too converts into carbon dioxide.

Greenhouse gas emissions are central in the climate agenda. But the key question has always been, what is a "safe" concentration of atmospheric greenhouse gases. The pre-industrial concentration was 280 parts per million (ppm). Today the concentration is 389 ppm and emission rates have passed beyond the worst case scenario of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Climate scientist James Hansen has suggested that 350 ppm was the concentration beyond which it was unsafe to go. The rapid retreat as well as thinning of the Arctic Ocean ice is consistent with that conclusion. So, too, Earth's ecosystems and biodiversity are sending multiple signals that essentially confirm 350 ppm as the limit. Unquestionably we are beyond where we should be.

Nature is on the move all over the planet, with species changing their natural history (e.g. earlier blooming) and their geographical location (e.g. often moving northward and up in altitude).

We have also begun to see abrupt threshold change in ecosystems. Coral reefs are being bleached all over the globe as the fundamental coral animal-alga partnership of reef systems breaks down at warmer temperatures. Evergreen forests in western North America and in Europe are experiencing major tree mortality as a longer summer tilts the balance against the trees in favor of bark beetles.

With major additional temperature increase due from current greenhouse concentrations, major ecosystem disruption is surely in store. In addition, the growing acidity of the oceans (as they absorb carbon dioxide) is already affecting some marine food chains. The outlook for the species and ecosystems so fundamental to human existence is truly grim at higher greenhouse gas concentrations and consequent climate change.

Clearly the imperative should be to peak at as low a concentration as possible and then come down to the safe level. Once in the atmosphere, a carbon dioxide molecule will stay there for 100 to 1,000 years. We need ways to remove it and reach the safe level more quickly.

Fortunately Earth's living systems can contribute to that goal in a significant way. That is why forests have been part of the climate change agenda from the outset. But the time has come to scale up to the planet's ecosystems as a whole.

In the last 300 years, the planet's ecosystems have released a staggering amount - between 200 and 250 billion tons - of carbon, as landscapes have been converted for human uses such as agriculture and cities. Were some of that to be recovered, with each billion tons restored to ecosystems the atmospheric concentration would be reduced by one part per million.

It is more complicated than that because of the equilibrium between atmospheric

CO² and that which has been taken up by the oceans, but the potential to remove

CO² from the atmosphere by restoring biodiversity and carbon is clearly of major consequence.

Recent studies suggest that restoring degraded grazing lands worldwide could take up billions of tons of carbon, maybe even as much as the difference between current greenhouse gas concentrations and the "safe" 350. Reforesting degraded rain forest lands has enormous potential also. Both would have biodiversity conservation benefits as well. Restored grazing lands actually would provide improved grazing and there is no reason the forest couldn't be used for forest products. Peat lands would have an important role to play.

There are complications: The climate is still changing and affecting ecosystems, human population is growing, and demands for food and biofuels will command their part of the landscapes. Those are huge factors that could work against the role ecosystems can play in reducing the greenhouse gas climate change threat, but increasing carbon retention by agricultural ecosystems can make a contribution in its own right.

Charcoal from plant waste is a relatively long-term way to add carbon to soils and could conceivably remove a significant fraction of the

CO² from the atmosphere we add annually. In addition, it is essential to integrate concerns for equity in land use and tenure, rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, and livelihoods of farmers and herders.

This in no sense reduces the imperative to redesign the energy base of human societies. It is as urgent as ever. The scale of the change needed is not beyond our abilities. Together the ecosystem and energy approaches both help reduce the peak amount of gases in the atmosphere (and consequent climate change) and can get us back to the safe level as fast as possible.

Nations are already preparing for the upcoming meetings in Poland and then Denmark of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The time has come to look at this as a whole, and at the scale of the problem - namely the entire planet.

Notions of planetary engineering abound, but this is the only one essentially free of potential unintended environmental consequences. We need to turn to the rest of the living planet to influence atmosphere and climate as it has done in the past.

Thomas E. Lovejoy, of the Heinz Center for Science, Economics and the Environment, chairs the science and technology advisory panel for the Global Environment Facility. Tim Flannery is professor of environmental and life sciences at Macquarie University. Achim Steiner is executive director of the UN Environment Program.

Read more!

Australia's Stern review warns of runaway global warming

Carbon emissions are rising so fast that the world has no chance of hitting climate targets, says Australian economist

David Adam, guardian.co.uk 27 Oct 08;

Carbon pollution levels are rising so fast that the world has no realistic chance of hitting ambitious climate targets set by Britain and the G8, an influential report to the Australian government has warned.

The report, from economist Ross Garnaut, says existing carbon goals, such as those in Britain's climate change bill, are based on out-of-date emissions figures, and are so ambitious that they could wreck attempts to agree a new global deal on global warming.

Garnaut says that nations must accept a greater amount of warming is inevitable, or risk a failure to agree that "would haunt humanity until the end of time."

The report, billed as the Australian Stern review, uses recent estimates of booming carbon emissions that were not included in last year's report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), or the 2006 report from Sir Nicholas Stern on the economics of the problem.

Since 2000, the Garnaut report says, global carbon emissions from fossil fuel use have grown by 3% each year, as economies of developing countries including China have boomed. This compares to annual growth rates of 2% through the 1970s and 1980s, and just 1% in the 1990s.

The report, published today, predicts that carbon dioxide emissions will continue to rise by more than 3% each year until 2030.

The worst case considered by the IPCC was that world carbon dioxide emissions would rise by 2.5% each year — a scenario often criticised as too pessimistic. Most government projections and discussions are based on the milder IPCC "median" scenario, which sets an annual growth rate of just 2%.

Garnaut says the recent spike in emissions reflects a "platinum age" for the world economy, with growth exceeding the "golden age" of the 1950s and 1960s. And he says the trend raises "serious questions" about suggested climate targets.

Britain and Europe are pushing for the world to agree to limit carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere to 450 parts per million (ppm), which they say could avoid dangerous climate change. The level is currently more than 380ppm, up from 280ppm before the industrial revolution, and rising by more than 2ppm each year.

The framework for such an agreement was established at UN negotiations in Bali last year, and will be discussed in Poland this December. Analysts say a new treaty must be agreed at a meeting in Copenhagen, late next year, for it to enter into force in 2012, when the existing Kyoto protocol expires.

The Garnaut report says developed nations including Britain, the United States and Australia would have to slash carbon dioxide emissions by 5% each year over the next decade to hit the 450ppm target. Britain's climate change bill, the most ambitious of its kind in the world, calls for reductions of about 3% each year to 2050.

Garnaut, a professorial fellow in economics at Melbourne University, said: "Achieving the objective of 450ppm would require tighter constraints on emissions than now seem likely in the period to 2020 ... The only alternative would be to impose even tighter constraints on developing countries from 2013, and that does not appear to be realistic at this time."

The report adds: "The awful arithmetic means that exclusively focusing on a 450ppm outcome, at this moment, could end up providing another reason for not reaching an international agreement to reduce emissions. In the meantime, the cost of excessive focus on an unlikely goal could consign to history any opportunity to lock in an agreement for stabilising at 550ppm, a more modest, but still difficult, international outcome. An effective agreement around 550ppm would be vastly superior to continuation of business as usual."

Experts say that a 450ppm goal could limit temperature rise to 2C, while 550ppm would commit the world to 3C warming, which the IPCC warned would inflict drought and famine on hundreds of millions of people and devastate wildlife.

Friends of the Earth said: "A target of 550ppm of carbon dioxide is a recipe for disaster and even the lower target of 450ppm will mean we will face runaway climate change. The Arctic sea ice and Himalaya glaciers are already disappearing and the permafrost bomb is looming. We need much deeper cuts. Professor Garnaut has described strong targets as delusional, but he continues to feed a delusional policy debate that recognises the problem but doesn't want to implement the solution."

The report, which was released by the Australian government last month, comes after climate scientists criticised carbon targets as having no scientific basis and potentially leading to "dangerously misguided" policies.

Kevin Anderson and Alice Bows at the Tyndall centre for climate change research at Manchester University say global carbon emissions are rising so fast that they would need to peak by 2015 and then decrease by up to 6.5% each year for atmospheric CO2 levels to stabilise at 450ppm, which might limit temperature rise to 2C. Even a goal of 650ppm - way above most government projections - would need world emissions to peak in 2020 and then reduce 3% each year.

Read more!

Geo-engineering: Can Smoke And Mirrors Ease Global Warming?

Alister Doyle, PlanetArk 28 Oct 08;

OSLO - Backers of extreme technologies to curb global warming advocate dumping iron dust into the seas or placing smoke and mirrors in the sky to dim the sun.

But, even though they are seen by some as cheap fixes for climate change when many nations are worried about economic recession, such "geo-engineering" proposals have to overcome wide criticism that they are fanciful and could have unforeseen side effects.

"We are at the boundaries, treading in areas that we are not normally dealing with," said Rene Coenen, head of the Office for the London Convention, an international organisation that regulates dumping at sea.

The London Convention, part of the International Maritime Organisation, will review ocean fertilisation at a meeting this week.

Among those hoping for approval for tests is Margaret Leinin, chief science officer of California-based Climos, a company that is looking at ways to use the oceans to soak up greenhouse gases.

"The world has not been able to get carbon emissions under control" Leinin said. "We should look at other options."

Climos is seeking to raise money to test adding iron dust to the southern ocean to spur growth of algae that grow by absorbing heat-trapping carbon dioxide from the air. When algae die, they fall to the seabed and so remove carbon.

Other short-cut ideas include spraying a smoke of tiny particles of pollutants into the sky to dim sunlight, or even deploying a vast thin metallic barrier in space, with 100 space shuttle flights, to deflect the sun's rays.


"CHEMICAL SOUP"

The UN Climate Panel has said world greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, mainly burning fossil fuels, rose 70 percent between 1970 and 2004.

But it said that fertilising the oceans or dimming the sun "remain largely speculative and unproven, and with the risk of unknown side-effects."

"More evidence has been coming in since then, but it's far from making a reliable case for geo-engineering," said Terry Barker, head of the Cambridge Centre for Climate Change Mitigation Research and one of the leading authors of the UN panel report.

The seas are already suffering enough from a "chemical soup" of pollution from humans, he said. "There's no need to add to the mess."

With fears of recession and amid the deepest financial crisis since the 1930s, some governments may find cheap geo-engineering attractive compared with reducing carbon emissions. "It would be shortsighted," Baker said.

Last year, the London Convention said that "knowledge about the effectiveness and potential environmental impacts of ocean iron fertilisation currently was insufficient to justify large-scale operations."

Those doubts were "still valid," the Convention's Coenen said.

Firms such as Australia's Ocean Nourishment, Atmocean in New Mexico and Climos are working on varying sea-based projects. Another start-up, Planktos, indefinitely suspended operations in February after failing to raise cash.

Some like Climos hope that sucking carbon into the ocean, if it works, could qualify for credits as carbon trading.

"It is possible to design experiments to avoid harm to the oceans," said Leinin. Climos wants to test iron fertilisation in the southern ocean, at the earliest in January 2010 in a test that could $15-20 million, she said. If it works, Leinin said it could be one of the cheapest ways to combat global warming.


LESSER RISK

Among objections are that carbon makes water more acidic and could undermine the ability of shellfish, crabs or lobsters to build shells. That in turn could disrupt the marine food chain.

Backers of geo-engineering say the risks are slight compared to far bigger disruptions from climate change, stoked by human emissions of greenhouse gases, which could lead to heatwaves, floods, droughts, more disease or rising seas.

"We are already bludgeoning nature," said Victor Smetacek, a professor at the Alfred Wegener Institute in Germany, who is planning an iron sulphate fertilisation experiment off Antarctica in early 2009.

His institute will cooperate with India to disperse 20 tonnes of iron sulphate near South Georgia over 300 sq kms (115 sq miles).

"Iron has a very positive effect. Added to the ocean it's like water in the desert," he said. "We don't have space to store the carbon we are producing on land," he said of proposals including planting more forests.

They will study how far algae grow and absorb carbon. The extra algae, as food, might help a recovery of stocks of shrimp-like krill, a species on which penguins and whales depend.

Among other schemes, Nobel chemistry prizewinner Paul Crutzen has floated the idea of blitzing the upper atmosphere with sulphur particles to reflect some sunlight back into space.

"The price is not a factor...it's peanuts," he told Reuters in Nicosia earlier this month. "The cost has been estimated at some 10, 20 million US dollars a year."

Similar smoke is released naturally by volcanic eruptions, such as Pinatubo in the Philippines in 1991 or Tambora in Indonesia in 1815. The Indonesia eruption led to a "year without a summer," according to reports at the time.

Other proposals reviewed by the UN Climate Panel include installing a metallic screen covering a 106 sq km (40.93 sq mile) patch of space 1.5 million kms (930,000 miles) away from earth in the direction of the sun.

The 3,000-tonne structure could be put in place over 100 years by 100 space shuttle flights. "The cost has yet to be determined," the panel said.

Another idea is to spew more sea spray into the air -- a natural process caused by waves. The plan would make low-level clouds slightly whiter and bounce solar rays back into space.

Advantages are that the only ingredient is sea water, and production could be turned off. But the UN panel said "the meteorological ramifications need further study."

(Reporting by Alister Doyle; Additional reporting by Michele Kambas in Nicosia; Editing by Eddie Evans)

Read more!

China's hidden coal cost equal to 7% of GDP: green groups

Yahoo News 27 Oct 08;

BEIJING (AFP) – China's dependency on coal as its major energy source is creating hidden environmental and other costs worth more than seven percent of its annual gross domestic product, green groups said Monday.

A report entitled: "The True Cost of Coal", jointly commissioned by Greenpeace, the Energy Foundation and conservation group WWF, said taking into account the real expense was vital to the nation's future energy security.

The unaccounted costs equate to an estimated 1.7 trillion yuan (249 billion dollars), and would be even higher if the impacts of climate change were included, according to the report.

"Environmental and social damages are underestimated while using coal in China as a result of market failures and weakness in government regulations", said Mao Yushi, an economist and lead author of the report.

By accounting for the hidden annual costs, China could wean itself off its coal dependency and better address ecological degradation and global warming concerns, the report said.

"The government of China has the opportunity to make a real improvement to the environment by reforming the current coal pricing system," the report said.

"If all the external costs of coal are genuinely reflected in the coal price, this will provide a non-distorted price signal for the whole energy market."

The report said the external and unaccounted costs to China of using coal included air and water pollution, ecosystem degradation, damage to infrastructure, human injuries and loss of life.

It also takes into account the distortion of government regulations which keep the cost of coal down such as distorted land ownership policies, and inadequate worker safety and worker compensation systems.

China depends on coal for about 70 percent of its booming energy needs, which is one factor in its huge increase in greenhouse gas output in recent years.

China now ranks alongside the United States as one of the world's two biggest emitters of the gases that are blamed for climate change.

Hidden Cost Of China's Coal Is $250 Bln – Survey
Emma Graham-Harrison, PlanetArk 28 Oct 08;

BEIJING - China's dirty and dangerous coal mining industry cost the country a hidden $250 billion last year in lost and damaged lives, wasted energy and environmental devastation, according to a survey launched on Monday.

Pollution affected water, land and air around mines, thousands died and many more were hurt in mining accidents, and acid rain-causing sulphur dioxide and mercury were among dangerous emissions when coal is burnt in factories and power plants.

None of this is reflected in low coal and power prices, according to "The True Cost of Coal", researched over three years by Chinese economists and environmentalists.

"Behind China's large production and consumption of coal ... lie expensive and worrying environmental and social costs," their report warns.

Tariffs would need to rise by around a quarter to reflect the real burden for Chinese society, which in 2007 was 1.7 trillion yuan (US$254.9 billion), they say.

"Currently these costs are paid by the people in China suffering from the damage," Mao Yushi, one of the report's authors and chairman of the Unirule Institute of Economics, told a news conference at the launch of the report.

Experts from the coal heartland of Shanxi province, Peking University, the government's top energy think-tank and the Chinese Centre for Disease control also contributed research.

Last year nearly 3,800 miners died in explosions, flooding and other underground accidents. Although that marked a 20 percent decrease from 2006, it is still the most dangerous mining industry in the world.

For a country short of water and struggling to keep its food and air safe, it is also an environmental liability, said Yang Ailun from Greenpeace, who helped coordinate the report.

Each tonne of coal produced means 2.5 tonnes of water are polluted, while coal mining waste makes up some 40 percent of the country's solid industrial waste, she said.

NO END TO COAL

The key problems identified by the report are government regulations that distort prices and weak oversight that allows miners to get land cheaply, dodge safety and environment laws and ship their coal in dirty, dangerously overloaded trucks.

Extra taxes, stricter enforcement, and an end to the price caps that have kept electricity temptingly cheap would make coal prices more realistic and curb waste, deaths and the worst pollution, the report said.

The good news for a country that relies on the dirty fuel for more than two thirds of its energy is that the big price increase it calls for in the long term would mean only a tiny hit to the economy as efficiency soars and green energy firms prosper.

But for those who dream of a future powered only by windmills and dams, they warn that coal will not lose its dominance in China for decades. The report says the 23 percent price rise it recommends would cause only a 7 percent fall in consumption.

China is already the world's biggest producer and consumer of coal, which provides a cheap, domestic energy source at a time when volatile global oil markets have exacerbated worries about tight supplies.

Demand is growing so fast that its miners have to produce an extra 200 million tonnes a year to keep up, or the equivalent of the entire coal mining industry of major producer Indonesia.

A slight decline in consumption, in place of this frantic expansion, might give the industry room to improve their standards without starving the country of energy.

(US$1=6.845 Yuan)

China pays high environmental and social price for reliance on coal
Pollution, emissions and mining accidents cost £160bn each year, say Greenpeace, WWF and energy campaigners

Tania Branigan, guardian.co.uk 27 Oct 08;

China's main source of power is so destructive that its social and environmental impact costs £160bn annually, warns a new report from green campaigners.

The country is the world's largest producer and consumer of coal, relying on it for more than 70% of energy production, compared with a global average of around 40%.

The True Cost of Coal, published by Greenpeace, the World Wildlife Fund and The Energy Foundation, says by-products ranging from water pollution to mining deaths cost China an additional 1.7 trillion yuan, or more than 7% of annual GDP.

"From extraction to combustion, every step in the process of using coal damages the environment," warns the report.

"To ensure its energy security, environmental protection and healthy economic and societal development, China must reduce its reliance on coal."

The report catalogues the effects of the industry across a wide range of areas. According to official figures, coal is responsible for 70% of soot, 85% of sulphur dioxide, 67% of nitrogen oxides and 80% of carbon dioxide emitted in the country — leading to respiratory diseases and contributes to global warming.

Thousands die annually in the country's mines, despite a safety drive in recent years. Wastewater and solid residue damage water systems and agricultural land.

Land subsidence caused by mining damages road, railway lines and power lines and results in the relocation of 2,000 people for every 10m tonnes of coal produced.

Each tonne of coal consumed in 2007 cost China an extra 150yuan in environmental damage, the study shows.

The authors — from well-regarded research institutes in China — show how the government could ensure those costs are internalised, suggesting the price of coal would rise by 23%.

They accept that would reduce GDP by 0.07%, but argue it would increase China's long-term international competitiveness and increase social wealth by 940bn yuan.

"Environmental and social damages are underestimated while using coal in China, as a result of market failures and weakness in government regulations," said economist Mao Yushi, lead author of the report.
The report suggests that imposing environmental taxes, improving compensation schemes and other restructuring the coal industry could all slash coal use.

"Recognising the true cost of coal would create incentives to developing cleaner, sustainable energy sources. The government should introduce an effective price signal for coal, which would ensure a massive improvement in energy efficiency and large-scale implementation of renewable energy.

"This would reduce China's environmental pollution and show its leadership in fighting climate change," urged Yang Ailun, climate and energy campaign manager of Greenpeace China.

Read more!

Much potential for geothermal growth in Asia

Michael Richardson, Straits Times 28 Oct 08;

IN THEIR quest for energy security, Indonesia and the Philippines are planning to develop nuclear power to buttress their electricity generating systems.

However, the possibility of accidents and deadly radioactive releases from nuclear power plants - particularly those in countries like Indonesia and the Philippines which are peppered with active volcanoes and subject to earthquakes and tsunamis - worries neighbouring nations. Such plants would be sited on coastlines so they can draw water from the sea for cooling purposes.

Instead of going nuclear with its risks, Indonesia and the Philippines could expand what they are already doing: tapping the virtually limitless heat from deep underground.

The two countries are the world's biggest geothermal electricity producers, after the United States. This form of renewable energy supplies just over 23 per cent of the electricity generated in the Philippines and 5 per cent in Indonesia. Unlike solar and wind, geothermal fields do not stop producing energy at night or when the wind ceases to blow.

Coming from the earth's molten core and from the decay of naturally occurring elements such as uranium and thorium, the heat energy in the uppermost 10km of the planet's crust is vast - 50,000 times greater than the energy content of all known oil and natural gas resources. Among countries with the richest geothermal resources are those that lie atop the so-called Pacific Ring of Fire, a geologic zone encircling the Pacific Ocean. They include the western US, Canada, Mexico, Chile, Peru, Russia, Japan, China, the Philippines, Indonesia and New Zealand.

Globally, hydropower is by far the most important renewable energy source, accounting for 19 per cent of global electricity production. Wind generates just one per cent. Though both geothermal and solar each provide well under 1 per cent now, they have the potential to supply much more.

Indonesia is the world's third biggest producer of geothermal electricity. Yet it supplies barely 1,000 megawatts of an estimated 27,000MW potential from its geothermal resources. It plans to develop new capacity of nearly 7,000MW over the next decade, equivalent to ten nuclear power plants and equal to nearly 30 per cent of its current electricity-generating capacity from all sources. The Philippines, the number two producer, aims to increase its installed geothermal capacity by over 60 per cent by 2013, to just over 3,100MW.

But first impediments in both countries to expanded geothermal investment must be removed. In Indonesia, a presidential decree earlier this month offered tax incentives for expanded production from existing fields and development of new resources. However, political bickering in the Philippines has blocked passage of a renewable energy Bill. In both countries, red-tape, difficulty in gaining access to public and private land for development projects, and disputes over the price offered for geothermal electricity going into state-owned power supply networks has slowed progress. Now the global squeeze on credit and the recent fall in prices of fossil fuel energy sources, are putting additional barriers.

Still, the potential for growth remains promising. According to a recent survey by the Earth Policy Institute in Washington, geothermal energy is being tapped in 24 countries, five of which used it to produce 15 per cent or more of their total electricity. In the first half of this year, world installed geothermal power capacity passed 10,000MW, enough electricity to meet the needs of 60 million people. By 2010, capacity could increase to 13,500MW in 46 countries.

Most geothermal plants in operation around the world tap into underground pockets of high-temperature water or steam to drive steam turbines. These ventures need high capital investment for exploration, drilling and pipeline construction, compared to coal or gas-fired electricity plants. However, operation and maintenance costs are relatively low.

New geothermal technologies enable electricity to be generated at much lower temperatures. They use liquids with lower boiling points than water in heat exchange systems, opening a vast new frontier for geothermal power.

The writer is an energy and security specialist at the Institute of South East Asian Studies.

Read more!

Nuclear Power No Panacea For Poor Nations - IAEA

Louis Charbonneau, PlanetArk 27 Oct 08;

UNITED NATIONS - Nuclear energy is undergoing a worldwide renaissance, but poor nations yearning to develop need to realize that it is no panacea to profound poverty, the head of the UN nuclear watchdog said on Monday.

After the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in the former Soviet republic of Ukraine, many governments questioned the value of nuclear power. Some European countries, like Austria and Germany, decided to wean themselves off nuclear energy.

But issues like global warming and the environmental damage caused by fossil fuels have brought the nuclear reactor, which emits virtually no "greenhouse gases", back into vogue.

According to Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel Peace Prize-laureate head of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency, many developing states see atomic energy as a key source of the power they need to combat poverty.

"It could be part of the energy mix in many of the large developing countries, but I always continue to lower expectations," he told Reuters in an interview after addressing the UN General Assembly.

"It is not a panacea by itself and many countries will have to understand that it will take 10 to 15 years before they can use nuclear (power)," he said. "They'll have to prove it's economically competitive, a good part of the energy mix."

While nuclear power plants can bring many benefits, they are expensive to build, and require strict adherence to safety and security requirements, ElBaradei said.

"There's a lot of over-expectation," he said. "We think everybody has the right to use it but there are certain parameters you have to fulfil."

There is a downside to the nuclear renaissance -- the more nuclear material there is worldwide, the greater the risk that some of it could be diverted to make nuclear weapons, he said in his speech to the General Assembly.

"Countries that master uranium enrichment and plutonium separation become de facto nuclear weapons-capable states," he said. For this reason, he said it was time to consider creating multinational nuclear fuel centres to ensure all countries have access to atomic fuel while minimizing proliferation risks.


WORRIES ABOUT IRAN

Western countries suspect Iran wants enrichment to produce fuel for atom bombs. Tehran denies the charge but has rejected UN Security Council demands that it halt enrichment work.

Russia offered to host an enrichment joint-venture with Iran on Russian territory. Tehran never officially responded but made clear it wanted to enrich uranium on Iranian soil.

In the interview, ElBaradei said the number of nuclear reactors in the world would double in coming decades to between 850 and 900, though the proportion of nuclear energy to other power sources would remain steady at the present 14 percent.

"It will help with climate change, energy independence, fluctuation in prices, but one has to take it in perspective."

In his speech, ElBaradei said there was a tremendous energy imbalance between the developed and developing worlds.

For example, he said the developed countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) consume on average 170 times more power than African states.

This is why many nations are eager to get nuclear energy, he said.

Nuclear plant technology is much safer than it was at the time of the Chernobyl disaster. But this does not mean the risks associated with reactors had vanished, ElBaradei said.

"Vulnerabilities remain. We can never be complacent about safety. A single nuclear accident anywhere in the world could undermine the future of nuclear energy everywhere," he said.

(Editing by Philip Barbara)

Read more!

Crisis? No excuse to neglect climate change issue: Expert

Jessica Cheam, Straits Times 28 Oct 08;

THE financial crisis should not be an excuse for policy-makers and businesses to delay acting to fight climate change, a carbon markets expert said last week.

In fact, the crisis offers an opportunity for carbon markets to grow in tandem with the consolidated and restructured financial markets worldwide, said Mr Jeremy Wilcox, managing director of Britain-based Intelligent Carbon, at a forum here last week.

The general sentiment is that the imperative is to secure the economy, with climate change taking a backseat, he added.

But in reality, carbon trading being a finance instrument, can learn from the mistakes of the financial system and grow alongside it once markets bottom out, he said.

Mr Wilcox also shared the findings of a survey on a snapshot of executive views on Asia's climate change market.

The survey was conducted ahead of the annual United Nations climate change conference in Poznan, Poland, next month.

The online survey, conducted by Intelligent Carbon, polled 31 executives from Asia, Europe, Middle East and North America.

It showed that 96.7 per cent felt that carbon trading helps mitigate climate change.

About two-thirds of the participants believe Asia has the most important role to play in achieving a global climate deal.

But those polled were divided on what realistic global emission targets are. The most popular was a reduction target of 50per cent by 2050.

Many also felt that Asia should develop its own carbon market, similar to Europe's cap-and-trade system, which restricts emissions on certain industries and allows the trading of carbon credits between firms in different countries.

Singapore emerged as the top destination for an Asian carbon market hub among those polled.

Mr Wilcox told The Straits Times that this was not surprising, as Singapore already 'has the necessary infrastructure'.

But Tokyo, Hong Kong and Shanghai are also potential locations, and 'whichever market attracts the most liquidity will become the natural hub', he said.

He told a 40-strong audience at the Asia Carbon Forum at the Raffles City Convention Centre last week that while there is a lot of awareness of climate change issues, there is a lack of direct action in the market in Asia.

'It is like everyone is a believer but no one is going to church. There are not enough people practising their beliefs,' he said.

This sort of practice will develop as Asia becomes part of the global agreement to come out of climate change talks in Copenhagen next year. There is no legal requirement yet so not many companies are taking action, he said.

Europe has led the way in showing how the rest of the world can move towards a carbon-constrained economy and still be competitive, he added.

Other findings include bullish sentiment of businesses on renewable energy technology.

'There's a learning curve, and companies in Asia seem keen on learning from the European experience and technology,' said Mr Wilcox.

Read more!

Risks Of Global Warming Greater Than Financial Crisis - Stern

James Pomfret, PlanetArk 28 Oct 08;

HONG KONG - The risks of inaction over climate change far outweigh the turmoil of the global financial crisis, a leading climate change expert said on Monday, while calling for new fiscal spending tailored to low carbon growth.

"The risk consequences of ignoring climate change will be very much bigger than the consequences of ignoring risks in the financial system," said Nicholas Stern, a former British Treasury economist, who released a seminal report in 2006 that said inaction on emissions blamed for global warming could cause economic pain equal to the Great Depression.

"That's a very important lesson, tackle risk early," Stern told a climate and carbon conference in Hong Kong.

As countries around the world move from deploying monetary and financial stabilisation measures, to boosting fiscal spending to mend real economies, Stern said the opportunity was there to bring about a new, greener, carbon-reducing world order.

"The lesson that we can draw out from this recession, is that you can boost demand in the best way possible by focusing on low carbon growth in future," Stern said, including greater public spending on mass public transport, energy and green technologies.

Stern's warning comes on the heels of last week's Asia-Europe or ASEM meeting in Beijing, where China indicated in talks it was committed to seeking a climate change pact in vital end-game talks in Copenhagen at the end of next year.

Leaders at the summit also urged countries not to use global economic upheaval as a reason for delaying a deal. Partly as a result of the darkening global economic outlook, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi recently warned that 10 other EU nations backed his efforts to block an EU climate plan, prompting further doubts over European action on global warming.

Yet Stern remained optimistic, saying while talks would be "very tense" the likelihood of a deal in Copenhagen to reduce carbon emissions by 50 percent by 2050 remained "very high".

Any deal would have to iron out differences between the United States, historically the largest greenhouse gas emitter, and rapidly developing countries like China, which by some accounts has surpassed the United States on emissions.

China, with its bulging output of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas behind global warming, was singled out by Stern along with the US as pivotal in the talks, with the next US president likely to be much more proactive than George W. Bush.

"The US and China will be the key leaders for a global deal. Either one of them could kill it, and I don't think either one of them will kill it."

Fresh from a trip to China, Stern said China's next national economic blueprint or five-year plan would acknowledge its key role to stave off a big rise in global temperatures, the melting of ice-caps and destructive rises in sea levels the world over.

"I think we'll see the 12th five-year plan focus on low carbon growth," he said.

(Editing by Jeremy Laurence)

Top economist talks up risks of climate inaction
Yahoo News 27 Oct 08;

HONG KONG (AFP) – Nicholas Stern, one of the world's leading environmental economists, said Monday that the global economy will face a more severe downturn than the current crisis if it fails to halt climate change.

Stern, the author of a key climate change report and a former World Bank chief economist, said moves towards a low carbon economy should not be stifled by the fallout from the current economic downturn.

"One thing we should have learned from this experience of the financial crisis is if we ignore risk building in the system, that risk will get much more difficult to manage than if we recognise it and tackle it early," the British economist told reporters in Hong Kong.

"We have seen the consequences of ignoring risk in the current economic and financial crisis. It has already led to negative growth in rich countries.

"The risk consequences of ignoring climate change will be very much bigger that the risk consequences of ignoring risk from the financial system."

Stern, whose 2006 report estimated the effects of climate change could cost up to a fifth of worldwide gross domestic product if no action was taken, said that countries should try and grow out of the current recession by focusing on low carbon growth.

Stern added that failure to act could lead to a temperature rise that would have severe consequences for global stability.

"These kinds of changes will transform the physical geography of the planet. They will transform where people will live," he told reporters at an event for HSBC, a bank where he is a part-time policy advisor.

"You will see movements of billions of people, the result of that will probably be extreme conflict."

Earlier, Stern addressed a group of business and political leaders at a conference organised by the Climate Group, a non-governmental environmental group, where he stressed the opportunities for firms that adapt early to a low carbon model.

Read more!

Best of our wild blogs: 27 Oct 08

Butterfly Photography at Butterfly Hill, Pulau Ubin
on the Butterflies of Singapore blog

The other side of St John's Island
on the wonderful creations blog

A handicapped Blue-winged Leafbird
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Read more!

Jurong Lake will be developed sensitively

Straits Times Forum 27 Oct 08;

WE REFER to the letter, 'Will new Jurong Lake be eco-friendly?' (Oct 14).

We would like to assure Ms Charlotte Leong that, in realising our vision for Jurong Lake District as a unique lakeside destination for business and leisure, we are working to ensure that any new developments around Jurong Lake will not seriously affect the natural ecosystem and water quality.

As part of the Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters (ABC Waters) project for Jurong Lake, PUB is carrying out dredging works to deepen the lake. The dredging works have stirred up sediment and caused the water to turn muddy. This is temporary and we will remain sensitive to the environmental impact of such works. A silt curtain has also been installed around the area being dredged, to minimise the amount of silt polluting the surrounding water.

Under the ABC Waters programme, a waterfront promenade, water feature deck and boardwalks will allow people to get closer to water. A geyser in the main water body of Jurong Lake will help to aerate and circulate the water. This will not disturb or affect the natural habitats in the area. Wetlands will be introduced along certain stretches of the banks to soften the shoreline, as well as create a conducive habitat for birds and other aquatic life to thrive. There will also be storyboards to showcase the development of Jurong Lake.

When completed, the ABC Waters project will not only enhance the aesthetics of Jurong lake, but also allow water-based activities such as kayaking to be conducted in the main water body.

As the Jurong Lake plan is still conceptual, we will continue to work closely with other government agencies such as the National Parks Board and the private sector to ensure that Jurong Lake will be developed in a sensitive and sustainable manner. We will also consider the necessary mitigating measures to minimise any potential impact to the ecosystem when the final plan is implemented.

Tan Nguan Sen
Director, Catchment and Waterways
PUB

Lim Eng Hwee
Assistant Chief Planner & Director (Physical Planning)
Urban Redevelopment Authority

Read more!

Australia's wetlands are drying up

ScienceAlert 27 Oct 08;
Charles Sturt University

Australia has failed to deliver on its obligation under the international Ramsar Convention to protect its wetlands, according to a senior wetland ecologist and environmental scientist at Charles Sturt University (CSU).

Professor of Ecology and Biodiversity and Director of CSU’s Institute for Land, Water and Society, Max Finlayson, declared that since the Australian Government signed the convention in 1975, the condition of the nation’s wetlands have continued to decline while some have vanished.

“Australia played a big role in developing Ramsar. By signing the Convention it agreed to look after all its wetlands, not just those listed as internationally important under the Convention. Australia’s governments have failed dismally,” Professor Finlayson said.

The Wetlands for Our Future report, published on 22 October by the Australian Conservation Foundation and the Inland Rivers Network, highlights the pallous state of wetlands around Australia, particularly in the Murray Darling Basin.

“According to the report, nearly 90 per cent of wetlands in the Basin have disappeared since Australia signed up to Ramsar, while the remainder are in poor or critical condition, including some Ramsar sites,” he said.

“We need to look again at how we manage our wetlands, including the ecosystem services that wetlands provide to people, those surrounding the wetland and further afield.

“Wetland managers have tried and at times succeeded in maintaining the biodiversity of some wetlands, but to maintain the ecological character of a wetland, we must also maintain the ecosystem services, whether it is providing food or timber for local people, regulating storm water and floods or recharging groundwater.”

Professor Finlayson has called for more consultation and involvement of wetland users and those who benefit from them.

“We will still need to make major trade-offs – make some real decisions about wetland use, benefits and values. For example, many river regulation and flood plain levees have been built without conscious and open consultation with those that are negatively affected. Just ask graziers downstream of the Queensland water harvesters of the need for consultation and the need to consider their needs and livelihoods!”

The call by the ‘Wetlands for our Future’ report for a National Wetland Initiative echoes demands by scientists to establish a national authority that cuts across state boundaries, that can rapidly improve wetland management, support private wetland managers, advise on policy and legislative changes to support these actions and to make effective use of the best available knowledge and expertise.

“And we should also add the need to identify ecosystem services and its wider values to Australian society to the initiative, which means better information to enable us to make the hard decisions about the values and trade-offs needed in working with landholders and community groups,” the professor said.

“To do this, I believe we need to move out of our environment or agricultural or water resource ‘boxes’. We need to consider land, people and biodiversity together – we need to consider conservation issues in agricultural management and agricultural issues in conservation management.

“We must not only halt the loss of our wetlands, but we need to support our land, our agriculture and our people in the process,” he concluded.

Read more!

Longlines kill endangered loggerhead sea turtles, report confirms

Terry Tomalin, St Petersburg Times 26 Oct 08;

ST. PETERSBURG — Commercial fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico are catching endangered loggerhead sea turtles at an alarming rate, according to a new federal report.

Protected by federal law, the turtles are drowning when they get hooked on longlines, sometimes extending a mile or more along the ocean floor.

"The numbers are pretty alarming," said Tom Wheatley of the Marine Fish Conservation Network. "This is definitely an issue that will require action."

Most of the grouper landed in Florida are caught by boats that lay miles of monofilament fishing line, baited with thousands of hooks, across the sea bottom. This fishing method is effective but controversial.

Recreational anglers and conservationists charge that bottom longlines kill indiscriminately, catching everything from undersized grouper to protected species such as loggerhead sea turtles.

Until now, there was little data to support those charges, typically disputed by longliners.

But beginning in 2006, the National Marine Fisheries Service began placing official observers aboard longline vessels used in fishing for sharks and grouper.

During the study, which lasted a year and a half, federal observers went along on 34 fishing trips and documented 18 hooked sea turtles. Some of the turtles were dead, some comatose and some alive but injured.

Based on these numbers, federal officials estimate that each year, about 974 sea turtles are caught on longlines. Of those, 433 were released alive, 325 were released dead or unresponsive, and the remaining 216, were listed as unknown.

The results of this report, compiled by the fisheries service's Southeast Fisheries Science Center in Miami, will be presented to the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council when it meets this week in Mobile, Ala.

"This is a serious issue," said Dr. Roy Crabtree, administrator for the service's Southeast Region. "We will have to determine if this is going to have an impact on the continued existence of the loggerhead sea turtle."

David L. Allison, as senior campaign director for the environmental group Oceana, has asked Thomas McIlwain, the gulf council's chairman, to take immediate action.

"The newly available observer data from the fleet reveals that virtually one out of every two longline sets has at least one loggerhead sea turtle take, and furthermore, the mortality level of these takes may be equal to or greater than 50 percent," Allison wrote in a letter dated Oct. 13. "The estimated longline takes are nearly 8 times the level authorized."

The federal report comes at a particularly sensitive time for loggerhead sea turtle populations. The species suffered greatly in the 1980s, when more than 10,000 sea turtles were killed each year in shrimp trawls. The federal government eventually required the shrimp industry to begin using "turtle excluder devices" that eventually cut down on mortality.

About 90 percent of the world's loggerhead sea turtles nest on Florida's beaches. But in recent years, the number of documented sea turtle nests has steadily declined.

The final numbers for the 2008 nesting season will not be ready until December, said Blair Witherington, a biologist with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. But preliminary data shows the number of nests may have increased from 2007, one of the worst years in more than a decade.

Witherington bases this on reports from 33 beach sites, which account for 72 percent of the state's nesting sea turtles.

Last year, those sites reported 28,073 nests, compared with 38,643 this year.

"The numbers zig and zag a little, but in general, they have been going down" since 1998's peak of 59,918, Witherington said.

Conservationists blame many factors, including development and Red Tide, for the downward trend. But now, many believe longlines may be contributing to this decline.

"Longlines are adding to the problem," Witherington added. "The number of loggerhead sea turtles killed in fisheries is significant enough to affect population trends, and lo and behold, we are seeing declining numbers of sea turtle nests. It is a smoking gun, and we have a dead body."

Bob Spaeth, a commercial fishing boat owner who often represents his industry in dealings with the federal government, said he was surprised by the extent of the problem.

"We don't know why all of a sudden we are seeing all of these sea turtles on our lines," he said. "But we need to find a solution. Nobody wants to be out there killing sea turtles."

Read more!