Dynamite eyed in dolphin stranding

Alcuin Papa, Philippine Daily Inquirer 11 Feb 09;

MANILA, Philippines -- Experts are looking at dynamite fishing as a possible reason for the beaching of some 250 dolphins in Pilar, Bataan, on Tuesday.

Environment Secretary Jose “Lito” Atienza said he asked Bataan Gov. Enrique “Tet” Garcia in a meeting at the Department of Environment and Natural Resources offices in Quezon City on Wednesday whether there was dynamite fishing in his province.

“I asked him [Garcia] and he confirmed it. He also said he was battling this illegal activity,” Atienza told reporters.

Dr. Lem Aragones of the University of the Philippines Institute of Environmental Science and Meteorology, told reporters the melon-headed whales of the dolphin family could have been led astray by the leader of their pod.

In turn, the leader’s acoustic system, which serves as its guidance system, might have been impaired.

“The causes of the acoustic trauma could have been sound waves caused by dynamite fishing or sounds emitted by passing ships or seaquakes,” he said. But he said they had ruled out a seaquake as the cause.

Dr. Theresa Mundita Lim, director of the DENR’s Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau (PAWB), said they found no lesions or other physical manifestations that the ears of the four dolphins that died had been injured.

“There were no injuries to their ears, like visible lesions, but the possibility of an acoustic problem or trauma is still there,” Lim said.

But she also said more tests, like analysis of tissue samples and MRI tests will have to be done to see if there were other injuries to the animals not visible externally. Lim also said they are sending tissue samples to the University of Philippines in Los Baños, Laguna for analysis.

She said dolphins usually venture into shallow waters to feed.

Joel Palma of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) said dynamite fishing is usually done in shallow waters.

According to Lim, Atienza reiterated his directive to remove stationary fishnets and other obstructions in the sea off Pilar after one of the dolphins was found tangled in nets.

Lim added they are looking at the whole environment in Pilar to determine what might have caused the dolphins to beach.

“If it was something like climate change, then it would be a bigger environmental problem,” she said.

Malcolm Sarmiento, director of the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) said the dolphins would not leave their leader or any member of their pod behind due to their strong social instincts.

But for now, Sarmiento said they had yet to determine who was the leader of the pod that beached in Pilar.

“Usually, it would be male, the biggest among the animals, and the most battle-scarred. He would be swimming in the middle part of the pod,” he told the Philippine Daily Inquirer (parent company of INQUIRER.net).

Aragones said the cause of beaching of marine mammals is not usually discovered. Around the country, there are 12 to 15 incidents of beached marine mammals every year, he said.

Lim also said that a protocol and guidelines for incidents of beaching by marine mammals would be drafted soon.

“In general, what we saw was good cooperation between various stakeholders in a stranding incident. In the past, those animals would have been slaughtered,” Palma said.

Melon-headed whales are considered threatened by the International Union for Conservation for Nature (IUCN) and are protected under Philippine laws.

Read more!

Best of our wild blogs: 11 Feb

Job: Sustainability Executive with NUS Office of Environmental Sustainability
on the AsiaIsGreen blog

To see Labrador for myself
on the wonderful creation blog

Exploring Pulau Ubin and Chek Jawa
on the Running with the Wind blog

Cool and quiet at Tanah Merah
on the wild shores of singapore blog

Parasitic worm on sea urchin?
on the Urban Forest blog

Oriental Pied Hornbill in courtship feeding?
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Pitta watching at the Singapore Botanic Gardens
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Seen on STOMP: Why so many dead fish in Rochor River?
on the Lazy Lizard's Tales blog

Salticid stare
on the annotated budak blog

Eco Warriors Undercover: Bear bile farming
on the Bornean Sun Bear Conservation blog

I’d like to ring their necks
on the MarineBio Blog

FOEI - International Biodiversity Photo Competition
on the Pulau Hantu blog

Read more!

Haze blankets Riau

The Jakarta Post 11 Feb 09;

Thick haze from forest fires has blanketed a number of cities in Riau province on Wednesday morning, while local weather agency has predicted for worse haze in the coming days.

Riau Natural Resource Conservation Agency said Wednesday that the haze, that has hit the province during the past several weeks, thickened in the morning following increasing number of hot spots in the province.

“Satellite observation record 41 hot spots in Riau, an increase from 11 a day earlier, and 32 of them are in peat lands,” the agency head Rachman Sidik, as quoted by tempointeraktif.com.

Haze has hit Pekanbaru, Pangkalan Kerinci, Bagan Siapi Api, Pasir Pengaraian, Dumai, Duri and Bengkalis. The agency warns that considering the width and thickness of burning peat swamps, haze may get worse in two days time.

Separately, the local Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics Agency said thickening haze may disturb air and river transportation in the coming days.

“Based on wind pattern observation and low chances of rain in the area, the haze is predicted to worse,” said Blutcher Doloksaribu, head of the weather agency. (dre)

Read more!

Government agencies spend millions cleaning up Singapore's public areas

This has to stop
Teh Jen Lee, The New Paper 11 Feb 09;

MR LITTERBUG, if you're caught, you pay a fine of $200.

But do you know that other taxpayers are paying a higher price to clean up your mess?

$37 million, to be precise.

That's the annual cleaning bill of the National Environment Agency (NEA) over the last three years, its spokesman said.

The issue of littering was raised by Minister for Environment and Water Resources (MEWR) Yaacob Ibrahim in Parliament yesterday.

The $37 million is chalked up by just cleaning our roads, pavements, expressways, pedestrian overhead bridges and underpasses, and emptying public litter bins.

It does not include the cost of cleaning public parks, public estates, town centres and state land, as they come under the jurisdiction of other agencies such as PUB and HDB.

Imagine how much higher the figure would be then.

Over the years, NEA has stepped up enforcement efforts against littering - the number of litterbugs caught rose from 4,000 in 2005 to 33,000 last year.

Dr Yaacob said: 'The increase clearly shows that littering remains a concern in Singapore, and we should work harder to tackle it.

'We are mindful of our enforcement limitations, but NEA will continue to focus its enforcement efforts at littering hotspots to achieve maximum effectiveness.'

From 1 Apr, harsher penalties will kick in, Dr Yaacob said. The fines for littering were last revised 10 years ago.

Higher fine

For instance, the composition fine for first-time minor-littering offenders will be raised from $200 to $300.

Dr Yaacob said: 'Apart from sustained enforcement, our penalties must act as effective deterrents.'

He said public areas must be kept clean 'not only to protect public health... (but also) to ensure that Singapore develops sustainably and remains a clean and green city of gardens and water'.

'Each of us must play our part. For instance, while the Government can invest in infrastructure to transform our waterways, residents must keep the waters clean.'

He added that the Government adopts a 'multi-pronged approach' to keeping public areas clean - an 'effective cleaning regime, public engagement, and penalties and enforcement to deter littering behaviour'.

But as the population grows, public cleanliness will become a bigger challenge.

Dr Yaacob said: 'NEA has already committed additional resources to clean up littering hotspot areas such as Little India, Chinatown and Geylang. This cannot continue indefinitely. We must tackle the source of the problem - littering.'

He also announced a new anti-littering campaign for later this year.

'Four decades have passed since the first 'Keep Singapore Clean' campaign was launched by then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew,' he said.

'(The) new campaign will be driven by activities involving key stakeholders such as the grassroots, schools, the youth and businesses.'

To better understand the efforts behind the clean-up of litter, The New Paper team followed a cleaning contractor hired by PUB on their litter patrols last Tuesday.

The contractor, Tong Shing, has nine boats and about 20 cleaners dedicated to retrieving trash from the Marina Reservoir alone.

Between 7am and 6pm daily, rain or shine, they pick up trash washed downstream from the drains into the rivers.

Mr See Ban Seng, 55, Tong Shing's cleaning supervisor, said in Mandarin: 'Sometimes we pick up chairs or tables thrown from thepubs and restaurants along the Singapore River.'

More common items include tissue paper, drink cups, cans and bottles.

Mr Noorazman Noor'ain, a PUB engineer in charge of hiring cleaning contractors, said: 'We work with the river taxi operators, asking them to remind passengers not to litter in the river.'

Serious litter: Cans, cups

In case you don't know, items such as cigarette packs, food waste, drink cans, cups and tissue paper are considered 'serious litter'.

An NEA spokesman said: 'Drink cups and drink cans can accumulate water that could lead to mosquito breeding.

'Improperly disposed food waste or wrappers and used tissue papers could lead to fly, cockroach and rodent infestation.

'Larger items like cigarette boxes and newspapers would choke up the drainage system if they are blown or thrown into drains, leading to water stagnation and mosquito-breeding.

'Such items may also provide harbourage for vermin.'

Read more!

More government buildings go green

Energy audits done on 22 of 48 buildings; the rest due by March 2010
Jalelah Abu Baker, Straits Times 11 Feb 09;

EMPLOYEES at the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) building probably breathe in fresher air than what their counterparts do in many other government buildings.

Since early last year, the building in Havelock Road has been using a chiller plant that has a pre-cooled fresh air unit which improves the quality of the air indoors, and also saves water.

This new chiller is just one of the many energy-efficient features that the building now boasts after it went through an energy audit arranged by the Environment and Water Resources Minister.

Under an initiative to encourage energy efficiency by March next year, audits are being conducted on all 48 government buildings that have over 15,000

sq m of air-conditioned area - a size nearly equivalent to four football fields.

Environment and Water Resources Minister Yaacob Ibrahim had updated Parliament on Monday on the progress of these audits.

Energy audits have been completed on 12 buildings. These buildings also implemented recommended changes that have resulted in savings totalling $3 million a year. Audits have also been done on another 10 buildings, and these are in the process of implementing recommended energy-saving changes.

Audits on the remaining 26 buildings will be completed by March next year.

The MOM building was the first to undergo the audit. The company which conducted the audit now guarantees that the ministry will enjoy energy and water savings for the next five years.

The MOM now saves $330,000 a year in energy and maintenance costs. The biggest savings came from having a more efficient chiller plant.

'The energy-saving strategy was to put in the right configuration, select higher-efficiency equipment and enhance the flexibility of the system,' said Mr Patrick Foong, an energy auditor from Chesterton International Property, which audited the building.

Previously, the building had three chillers that worked on settings from 20 years ago. These were no longer suitable for the building's current needs.

With the changes, there are now three big chillers and two small chillers that accommodate the different load and usage of the building at different times. Energy is also saved because of the variable speed at which the chillers can operate.

Other cost-saving features include more efficient cooling towers, and fittings in the restrooms that help save almost 1,000 cubic metres of water a month. This is the equivalent amount of water that about 214 people consume in a month.

Adjustments to the lightings in the offices also mean that only half the amount of electricity is now consumed.

New perimeter lights also save energy as sensors detect the level of brightness and can switch the lights off automatically.

A gadget installed in the lifts - which are the second-highest consumer of energy in the building - also helped halve the amount of energy consumed.

Read more!

Singapore Environment Council to help SMEs to go 'green'

Expert help for SMEs to go 'green'
Jessica Cheam, Straits Times 11 Feb 09;

LOCAL small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) looking to make their businesses more environmentally sustainable are set to get a leg-up from the launch of a new partnership.

The Singapore Environment Council (SEC) yesterday unveiled an initiative with Washington-based World Environment Centre (WEC) that will allow local firms to tap WEC's extensive knowledge base to 'green' their supply chains.

WEC, an independent non-profit body founded in 1974 with a grant from the United Nations Environment Programme, has helped advance sustainable practices within businesses such as IBM, Shell, ABN Amro, General Motors and Ricoh.

It is this international network of companies that SEC is looking to access, following the signing of the memorandum of understanding between the two parties. The SEC plans to cull best sustainable business practices from multinational companies and use these to guide the free advice it will give local SMEs.

SEC executive director Howard Shaw told The Straits Times: 'We've found that SMEs don't get much help or advice in terms of greening their businesses, such as in resource or supply chain management, and we want to plug that gap.'

The first to benefit from the arrangement will be the electronics and food and beverage sectors, he said. SEC will focus on educating decision-makers on best business practices and the environmental standards they should demand from suppliers.

The SEC-WEC partnership will also see a series of roundtable discussions focused on engaging 'movers and shakers' within industry and government agencies, as well as international speakers, said Mr Shaw. The first will be held in August.

The SEC is also working closely with the Singapore Manufacturers' Federation in a separate sustainability initiative, which will help firms cut costs and improve resource and energy efficiency, he said.

Dr Terry Yosie, the WEC's chief executive, said yesterday that the crisis was 'a terrible thing to waste' and was the 'perfect opportunity' for firms to take a hard look at their models and practices and restructure to achieve better efficiency.

Greening businesses is not just about recycling, added the SEC's chairman, Ms Isabella Loh. 'It's about gaining a competitive edge by having a holistic approach to your business model, which considers factors such as energy, waste and water management to save costs. This, in turn, boosts the bottom line.'

Read more!

Companies at Sarimbun Recycling Park welcome 15% rental rebate

Channel NewsAsia 10 Feb 09;

SINGAPORE: Tenants of the Sarimbun Recycling Park have welcomed the government's 15 per cent monthly rental rebate to help green businesses there tide through the economic crisis.

The one-year rebate will translate into savings of S$187,000 for the businesses.

The park accounts for a fifth of all recycling done in Singapore.

Recycling volume there rose 36 per cent last year over 2007.

From only three tenants in 1995, the park now has 12, with the last two vacant plots to be taken up soon.

- CNA/yt

Read more!

Wanted: green thumb for the invisible hand

One option for governments to help clean-tech initiatives is to subsidise and invest in them
Carlos Nichloas Fernandes, Business Times 11 Feb 09;

DISRUPTIVE innovations are frequently driven by low-cost, good-enough solutions that change the economics of delivering a product or service. By delivering value in a more cost-effective manner than existing technologies, these innovations exploit the natural behaviour of free markets to rapidly build traction and enable the transformation or creation of an industry. It is this opportunity to economically capture the value of these innovations that excites entrepreneurs and venture capitalists alike.

In his 1776 book Wealth of Nations, the conceptual builder of free-market theory, Adam Smith, articulated that though human motives were driven by self-interest, the invisible hand of free-market competition would tend to benefit society as a whole by keeping prices low.

Free markets consequently form the pillar on which disruptive innovation stands. But what happens when a disruptive innovation has a substantial social component that cannot be captured by the entrepreneurial pioneers without government intervention to correct market inefficiencies?

Just about six months ago, as oil prices skyrocketed towards US$147 per barrel, venture capitalists were delighted at the prospect of clean technologies becoming a competitive alternative to fossil fuels.

However, with the price of oil today hovering at around US$45 per barrel, the prospects of clean technologies being a viable substitute to oil in the near to medium term have largely evaporated. This has resulted in a 25 per cent fall in investment in clean technology projects in the third quarter of 2008 to US$18 billion, according to New Energy Finance.

Market players today pay only US$45 per barrel of oil and externalise the social and environmental costs of each barrel. Free-market principles apply only if the market participants - producers and consumers - experience the consequences of their actions. In the case of polluting carbon emissions arising from the use of fossil fuels, future generations pay the cost for today's participants.

In order to prevent this massive market failure, governments have recognised that they need to intervene.

Government intervention can essentially take two forms - First, governments can implement policies that help consumers internalise the true costs of fossil fuels by introducing a Pigovian tax or a cap and trade system to allocate 'pollution rights' to correct the negative externalities of market activity.

Second, governments can take a more direct approach by subsidising and investing in clean technology initiatives to compensate for market failure, thus enabling innovators to financially capture some of the social value of their innovations.

Of the two forms of intervention, economists favour the former, with free-market fundamentalists opposing the latter.

Proponents of laissez-faire capitalism argue against the direct approach involving government investments and subsidies. Their views are bolstered by two examples: The US government's over-investment in ethanol that resulted in the bio-fuels bust and Germany's generous subsidisation of solar panels, despite receiving little sunlight relative to the rest of the world.

While it is true that government investments may distort market forces and the US and German governments may have made some bad bets on clean technology projects, this anecdotal evidence merely encourages a simplistic view of a complex problem.

There is an important variable to the cost-benefit analysis of the government's role that is not appropriately considered - that variable is the temporal dimension of the global warming crisis.

Fanatic free-market thinking is not the only reason for the opposition to direct government investment and subsidies in clean technologies. The thesis that global warming is real, caused primarily by humans, has catastrophic consequences, and needs to be fixed quickly has often been erroneously presented by the media as an idea that is still disputed in the scientific community.

In reality, a study of 1,000 articles in peer-reviewed journals published between 1988 and 2003 noted that not a single article questioned global warming, its causes and the necessity of immediate action. On the other hand, in a similar study of articles published in mainstream news media it was found that 53 per cent questioned these facts.

Open debate

The reason for unanimous consensus among scientists having been presented as an open debate in the media is the result of a herculean effort by oil companies to fund pseudo science and frame global warming as an uncertainty in an attempt to preserve the status quo and restrict new clean technologies and business models that may be disruptive to their entrenched interests. Deep pockets buy the best marketers and copywriters. Solid science does not.

One of the key word wizards behind these efforts was Frank Luntz, a corporate and political consultant who helps in the selection of words and language that helps his clients turn public opinion on an issue. Because 'global warming' and 'oil drilling' had alarmist or negative connotations, he suggested the use of terms such as 'climate change' and 'energy exploration' to replace them.

In a memo to former US president George W Bush, he stated: 'Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate.'

Scientists believe that global warming will reach a tipping point after which its catastrophic consequences will be irreversible, unless clean technology projects are implemented within the next decade. With credit being as tight as it is, many companies are focusing on cash preservation for the purposes of survival, and are simply unable to invest in greener and cleaner technologies.

Faced with the lofty choice of saving the planet tomorrow, against the goal of mere existence today, most companies will choose the latter.

The notion that carbon taxes and cap and trade systems are the only appropriate solution to global warming is naive. The world needs every tool at its disposal to fight global warming and one approach to the fight should not necessarily preclude another.

With the drop in private investment in clean technologies, governments must jump in to fill the gap in order to stall global warming. The cost of action is high, but the cost of inaction is higher.

The author is the CEO of RecordTV and occasionally teaches courses and seminars on Innovation at INSEAD and the National University of Singapore

Read more!

India firm in driver's seat at Island Power

Its interest is shown in bids for Tuas and Senoko Power in '08
Ronnie Lim, Business Times 11 Feb 09;

INDIA'S GMR Infrastructure - the new 50 per cent shareholder of Intergen - is understood to be spearheading the international power group's push to restart its long-stalled $1 billion Island Power project on Jurong Island, sources said.

GMR's interest in having a Singapore presence was clearly reflected in its bids last year for Tuas Power and Senoko Power, two of the biggest generating companies here that were eventually sold by Temasek Holdings to China Huaneng Group and Lion Power, a Japanese/French consortium, respectively.

'Island Power is still actively reviewing various options for taking the development opportunity forward. We still believe the Island Power project has merit and is important to Singapore's energy future,' a spokesman for US-headquartered Intergen told BT yesterday when asked about the latest project status.

His statement clearly reiterates that Intergen - now backed by GMR - is still keen to try to move forward its 785-megawatt cogeneration project here, stalled since 2002.

BT understands that Island is still trying to negotiate a new gas supply deal, while awaiting a response to its appeal made last October to Singapore's Trade and Industry Ministry.

This was regarding the decision - which unfortunately came too late for Island - by electricity and gas regulator Energy Market Authority that it cannot have access to the gas pipeline network here unless it has a natural gas deal in hand.

It was a Catch-22, as Island saw its earlier agreement to buy 110 million standard cubic feet of gas daily from a Sumatran gasfield being cancelled by BPMigas, Indonesia's oil and gas regulator, following its inability to gain Singapore pipeline access due to legal wrangles involving the incumbent parties here.

Sources said that GMR is now 'taking the lead' in the Island project, after completing late last year its US$1.1 billion acquisition of a 50 per cent stake in Intergen from AIG Highstar Capital II.

The deal marked the largest-ever acquisition of a global energy utility by an Indian company.

Ontario Teachers Pension Plan owns the remaining half of Intergen, which has ownership interest in 12 power plants with a total net capacity of 12,766 megawatts.

GMR's leadership of the Island Power project also follows the resignation of Michael Reading, Island's former managing director, who has been involved with the project from the outset.

Island has since appointed a new project manager in Mark Iamonaco, a spokesman said.

The Island project has seen as many changes in its ownership as the numerous hurdles it has run into.

Malaysia's Sime Darby which had acquired a 50 per cent stake in Island Power itself in late-2003, withdrew from the delayed Island project in 2005.

When the Island project was first mooted, parent Intergen was originally owned by Shell and the Bechtel Group.

But they eventually sold out to the partnership of Ontario Teachers Pension Fund and US private equity fund AIG, with the latter recently selling its stake to GMR.

Read more!

Hundreds of whales rescued in Philippines

Cecil Morella Yahoo News 10 Feb 09;

BALANGA, Philippines (AFP) – Fishermen and volunteers in the Philippines managed to rescue more than 200 beached whales on Tuesday by guiding them back into deep water, officials said.Residents of seaside towns west of Manila raised the alarm early in the day when they saw a large pod of melon-headed whales in shallow water.

Three of the whales were later found dead and authorities feared others would die unless they could be guided into deeper water.

The head of the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Malcolm Sarmiento initially said on local radio and television the stranded mammals were dolphins, but experts told AFP they were in fact melon-headed whales.

Mariel Flores, a veterinarian, said melon-headed whales were "easily mistaken for dolphins because of their size and their teeth, which resemble those of dolphins."

Government marine biologist Rizza Salinas said the mammals, which travel in pods of 100 or more, may have been disorientated by damage to their hearing caused by illegal dynamite fishing in the area.

Another theory was that they reacted to a major underwater earthquake.

Authorities said they had managed to guide most of the stranded mammals back into deeper water and away from the shore.

The whales were said late Tuesday to be heading back into open water, although one was taken to a nearby marine park for observation by veterinarians.

Senator wants probe into stranding of dolphins in Bataan
GMA News 11 Feb 09;

MANILA, Philippines – The Senate’s recent drift into doing probes on a wide range of anomalies may not spare the stranding off Bataan of hundreds of melon-headed whales – also known as many-toothed blackfish, or electra dolphin.

Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri on Tuesday asked experts to investigate the cause of the sudden appearance of more than 300 electra dolphins near the shores of Pilar town in Bataan province Tuesday morning.

Zubiri said the small whales must have acted abnormally for swimming in shallow water, as these are known to be deep-sea species.

The senator suspected the dolphins’ habitat must have been disrupted, forcing them to flee and seek refuge in shallow waters.

Zubiri wanted the experts to look into the possibility that an earthquake study in the South China Sea by the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (L-DEO) - a collaborator of Columbia University in the US - caused the abnormal behavior of the small whales.

He said that the L-DEO undersea experiment involves blasting, which might have annoyed the dolphins.

“The earthquake study is a sea floor investigation project in the exclusive economic zone that includes Taiwan, China, Japan and the Philippines for its earthquake research," he said.

Washington-based animal rights group Wild at Heart Legal Defense Association (WaH) had been reported protesting to halt the L-DEO study as it is destructive to marine ecosystem.

Based on a statement of Robin Winkler, founder of WaH, the multi-beam echo sounder air gun, which will be used in the experiment, could produce a noise equivalent to 265 decibels (dB), almost as deafening as the atomic-bomb blast that could scale up to 300 dB.

Zubiri also cited an International Union for Conservation of Nature study saying that the melon-headed whales may have been distracted by the South China Sea study, forcing the dolphins to wander in the shallow waters.

“On top of saving stranded dolphins, we should find the cause for the tragedy in order to avoid them in the future and to be prepared when it occurs again," Zubiri said.

According to Wikipedia, the Melon-headed Whale [Peponocephala electra; other names are many-toothed blackfish and electra dolphin] is a cetacean of the oceanic dolphin family [Delphinidae]. It is closely related to the Pygmy Killer Whale and Pilot Whale, and collectively these dolphin species are known by the common name blackfish. The Melon-headed Whale is widespread throughout the world's tropical waters, although not often seen by humans on account of its preference for deep water. - GMANews.TV

Read more!

Australian bushfires: when two degrees is the difference between life and death

Scientist Tim Flannery recalls the long, wet Victorian winters now replaced by a drier and dangerous climate
Comments (71)

Tim Flannery, guardian.co.uk 10 Feb 09;

The day after the great fire burned through central Victoria, I drove from Sydney to Melbourne. For much of the way – indeed for hundreds of miles north of the scorched ground - smoke obscured the horizon, entering my air conditioned car and carrying with it that distinctive scent so strongly signifying death, or to Aboriginal people, cleansing.

It was as if a great cremation had taken place. I didn't know then how many people had died in their cars and homes, or while fleeing the flames, but by the time I reached the scorched ground just north of Melbourne, the dreadful news was trickling in. At first I heard that 70 people had died, then 108. Then 170. While the precise number of victims is yet to be ascertained, the overall situation at least is now clear. Australia has suffered its worst recorded peacetime loss of life. And the trauma will be with us forever.

I was born in Victoria, and over five decades I've watched as the state has changed. The long, wet and cold winters that seemed so insufferable to me as a young boy wishing to play outside vanished decades ago, and for the past 12 years a new, drier climate has established itself. I could measure its progress whenever I flew into Melbourne airport. Over the years the farm dams under the flight path filled ever less frequently, while the suburbs crept ever further into the countryside, their swimming pools seemingly oblivious to the great drying.

Climate modelling has clearly established that the decline of southern Australia's winter rainfall is being caused by a build-up of greenhouse gas, much of it from the burning of coal. Ironically, Victoria has the most polluting coal-fed power plant on Earth, while another of its coal plants was threatened by the fire. There's evidence that the stream of global pollution caused a step-change in climate following the huge El Niño event of 1998. Along with the dwindling rainfall has come a desiccation of the soil, and more extreme summer temperatures.

This February, at the zenith of a record-breaking heatwave with several days over 40C, Melbourne recorded its hottest day ever – a suffocating 46.1C, with even higher temperatures occurring in rural Victoria. This extreme coincided with exceptionally strong northerly winds, which were followed by an abrupt southerly change. This brought a cooling, but it was the shift in wind direction that caught so many in a deadly trap. Such conditions have occurred before. In 1939 and 1983 they led to dangerous fires. But this time the conditions were more extreme than ever before, and the 12-year "drought" meant that plant tissues were almost bone dry.

Despite narrowly missing the 1983 Victorian fires, and then losing a house to the 1994 Sydney bushfires, I had not previously appreciated the difference a degree or two of additional heat, and a dry soil, can make to the ferocity of a fire. This fire was quantatively different from anything seen before. Strategies that are sensible in less extreme conditions, such as staying to defend your home or fleeing in a car when you see flames, become fatal options under such oven-like circumstances. Indeed, there are few safe options indeed in such conditions, except to flee at the first sign of smoke.

My country is still in shock at the loss of so many lives. But inevitably we will look for lessons from this natural tragedy. The first such lesson I fear is that we must anticipate more such terrible blazes in future, for the world's addiction to burning fossil fuels goes on unabated, with 10 billion tonnes being released last year alone. And there is now no doubt that the pollution is laying the preconditions necessary for more such blazes.

When he ratified the Kyoto protocol, Australia's prime minister Kevin Rudd called climate change the greatest threat facing humanity. Shaken, and clearly a man who has seen things none of us should see, he has now had the eye-witness proof of his words. We can only hope now that Australia's climate policy, which is weak, is significantly strengthened.

After ignoring the Kyoto protocol for years, just months ago we committed to a reduction in pollution of a mere 5% by 2020 over 2000 levels, with the possibility of increasing that to 15% if a successful treaty comes out at Copenhagen later this year. Our national goal is a 60% reduction in emissions by 2050, but such targets are easy to articulate if the bulk of the work must be done by future governments.

As the worst greenhouse polluters, per capita, of any developed nation, there is an urgent need for Australians to reduce our dependency on coal. I believe that if we want to give ourselves the best chance of avoiding truly dangerous climate change, we should cease burning coal conventionally by around 2030. No such policy is currently being contemplated. Instead, as perhaps anyone would, Australians have been focusing on the immediate cause of some of the fires.

Rudd has said that the arsonists suspected of lighting some fires are guilty of mass murder, and the police are busy chasing down these malefactors. But there's an old saying among Australian fire fighters — "whoever owns the fuel, owns the fire". Let's hope that Australians ponder the deeper causes of this horrible tragedy, and change our polluting ways before it's too late.

Tim Flannery is a scientist at the University of Macquarie and author of The Weather Makers: The History and Future Impact of Climate Change

Read more!

Australia Fires A Climate Wake-Up Call: Experts

David Fogarty, PlanetArk 11 Feb 09;

SINGAPORE - Weekend bushfires in Australia that killed 173 people are a climate change wake-up call for the public and politicians and a window to the future, experts said on Tuesday.

With the death toll still growing from the nation's deadliest fires, some analysts say the sheer scale of the tragedy might prompt industry to back-off calls to weaken the government's emissions targets or delay a carbon-trading scheme set for 2010.

"What the bushfires might do is suck the oxygen out of the debate. I think public awareness has been focused now on climate change again. We knew what the scientists had predicted and we've actually seen it in action," said Matthew Clarke of Deakin University in Melbourne.

"It may be very difficult for those who want weaker carbon reduction scheme targets or those who want to see it delayed to put those arguments into the public sphere. The atmosphere might be more hostile to those arguments," said Clarke, associate professor at the School of International and Political Studies.

The fires tore through communities on the outskirts of Melbourne, fueled by heatwave conditions and strong winds. Melbourne's temperature on Saturday hit 46.4 degrees Celsius (115.5 degrees Fahrenheit), a record for the city.

The Australian government released a policy document, or White Paper, in December outlining its plans for carbon trading as part of its strategy to fight climate change.

Under the scheme, the government set a target to cut carbon emissions by 5 percent in 2020 from 2000 levels and 15 percent if there is global agreement at the end of this year on a broader pact to fight climate change.

But the Greens, citing the fires and severe flooding in northern Australia, are calling for tougher targets.

The Greens and two independents hold the balance of power in the Senate and the government of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is expected to face a tough time getting the emissions trading legislation passed by the Upper House later this year.

BIG AGENDA

Industry and particularly big coal-fired power generation firms, say the trading scheme will be too costly. The liquefied natural gas industry, which earns billion of dollars in exports, has said the scheme could force them to move offshore.

"Climate Change is a big agenda that should be considered in its own space and it would be irresponsible to find cover for a climate change argument in the bushfires," Heather Ridout, Chief Executive of the Australian Industry Group, told Reuters in a statement.

Some analysts say the fires were predictable and that climate scientists have been warning for years about Australia's vulnerability to rising temperatures and declining rainfall across much of the nation's south.

"I would compare this current bushfire event to one of the ghosts in Dickens' Christmas Carol that visits Scrooge and showed him what his future would be like if he didn't change his ways," said professor Barry Brook, director of the Research Institute for Climate Change and Sustainability at the University of Adelaide.

"The government should be taking an international leadership role. They are not listening to the ghost whispering in their ear saying this is your future," said Brook, who called for an emissions cut target of 40 percent by 2020 if there is a global climate agreement.

"The real danger in the White Paper is not the 5 percent target, it's the 15 percent target. So that's what the Greens should be advocating, changing the international negotiating target and make it as hard as possible."

But there was also a risk to investors if the government kept changing the targets because of financial or climate shocks.

"The fundamental flaw with the policy of the White Paper is that it's a political compromise, not a clear plan. And a political compromise will be blown in the wind, depending on what shock comes along," said leading climate change policy analyst Warwick McKibbin.

"It's very important to have a clear, transparent plan that builds constituencies and clarity about the future so that when something comes along, the policy doesn't fall over," said McKibbin, executive director of the Center for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis in Canberra.

(Editing by Bill Tarrant)

Read more!