LOCAL

1) Media articles written by Tom Powell since the last newsletter. 

19/12/2025 - What we want for Christmas.

"After another year of climate-fuelled weather disasters – flooding in Tasman, damaging wind storms around the country and a huge wildfire in Tongariro National Park - we in the climate community will all have “national climate action” on our Christmas lists.  Unfortunately, this year, we will have to settle for nothing under the Christmas tree.
Perhaps naively, we might have had our hopes up after reading “Blueprint for a Better Environment”, the National Party’s environmental policy statement put out during the last election: 

“National is absolutely committed to New Zealand’s climate change targets, including: 
• Net zero greenhouse gas emissions excluding biogenic methane by 2050; 
• Biogenic methane reduced by 10 per cent by 2030 and 24–47 per cent by 2050 compared to 2017 levels; and 
• New Zealand’s Nationally Determined Contribution under the Paris Climate Agreement to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions to 50 per cent below gross 2005 levels by 2030.”

06/01/2026 - Talking about a resolution.

"Happy New Year!  For those of you keen on New Year’s resolutions, I have a suggestion:  Do something good for our climate, our health, world peace and New Zealand’s prosperity - resolve to use less fossil fuel in 2026.  
We all know the connection to climate; carbon dioxide generated from the burning of fossil fuel is the principal cause of global warming and the accelerating number of destructive weather events we’ve been experiencing.  Our world is becoming less predictable and downright dangerous mostly due to the burning of fossil fuels."

14/02/2026 - Why so wet and cold.

"What a wet and cold summer!  How is this global warming?  I mean, it’s in the name, right?  Where is the warming?  Blenheim had it warmest year on record just last year.  Why so cold now?
Perhaps a better characterisation of our weather lately would be “global weirding”.  Our planet is not only getting generally hotter, global warming is messing with our weather systems in unexpectedly weird and worrying ways. 
The explanation for the “wet” is reasonably straightforward; the seas around New Zealand have been rapidly warming and sea surface temperatures were at record highs last year.  Warmer ocean water evaporates more moisture into the atmosphere and what goes up must come down.  It also doesn’t help that we are in a “La Niña” phase of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, a shift in the winds across the South Pacific that brings wet weather to the western Pacific.  And, when warm moist air from the north hits cold air coming from the south, we can expect a lot of rain."

Here are links to copies of the full articles if you can't access them on The Press website - What we want for Christmas, Talking about a resolution, and Why so wet and cold. 

2) Climate Action Week 2026.

Cath van der Muelen has again applied her considerable energy and passion to the daunting task of organising another Climate Action Week that finished on February 27th. If you didn't participate but are interested in the wide range of topics covered over the 5 days then check out the full agenda. There were a wide range of speakers and contributors with the topics covered being Risk and Resilience, Circular economy & waste, Nature and Biodiversity, Aligning human and ecological systems, Climate leadership from over the hill, Hosted in Nelson. 
  
With the support of Marborough Express Cath, with the help of Tom Powell, also edited and organised a cover to cover edition of the Weekend Express which "pulled together stories from around Aotearoa and the Globe, that reveal how our climate is shifting and how practical action is already underway." 

There are some very good stories to be read. One that drew my attention was about the decline of Stokell's smelt in the Rakaia and other Canterbury rivers. The article explains that the collapse of the smelt population is an indicator of a degrading ecosystem. These calls of desperation from Papatuanuku are unfortunately largely going unheeded while we are distracted by the cost of living and the growing madness of global geopolitics. Unfortunately it is getting too late for many species and ecosystems. The hubris associated with the myth of human supremacy continues to grow while the natural systems that all life depends on collapse in front of our eyes.  

3) "The Story of CO2 is the Story of Everything."

I have recently finished reading this book written by Peter Brannen. It is a fascinating insight into the history of Planet Earth over the last 4.5 billion years and the critical and central role that CO2 has played in the evolution of lifeforms. The author does a good job of explaining how this amazing process has played out and then applies the knowledge gained to the understanding of the global heating resulting from the actions of humanity over the last couple of hundred years.

A couple of quotes will give you a taste of the book - 

“You cannot expect to take fossilised solar energy for three hundred million years and let it off in a bang in a hundred and fifty years and get away with it. It’s ludicrous. Of course it’s going to be awful.” - Geochemist Michael Russell.

“It’s almost like a biblical resurrection story, we’re merely catalysts for the resurrection of the Carboniferous.” - Atmospheric physicist Tim Garrett. 

I have done a summary of one particular chapter titled "CO2 and the Great Age of Coal." In this chapter the author gives a brief synopsis of the history of our planet and the role that CO2 or the lack of it played in the different Ages. I have also included some important points he makes in the conclusion to his book. I recommend the book to anyone who has an interest in the history of our planet and wishes to increase their understanding of the predicament humanity now finds itself in. We have a copy in the CKM library.  

NATIONAL

4) Kia Tika, Kia Pono—For A Just Society.

This conference looks like the sort of event Aotearoa NZ needs in these eventful times. The ongoing efforts to fix and grow the economy by our current government may seem necessary to some but from my perspective this pathway leads to more and more inequality that is unaddressed and unrecognised in many instances. The objective of the conference is to develop "a new way of thinking about Aotearoa New Zealand as a society." 

Here is a brief synopsis from the conference organisers -

"Our task is to imagine a new language with which to address the issues that we are facing and help us move towards a just society and economy.

Following on from work such as Marilyn Waring’s analysis of GDP as a flawed measure to analyse and Matthew Scobie and Anna Sturman’s work on economic possibilities of decolonisation we are inviting people to address new ways of interrogating our multiple and interconnected crises of climate change, ecological destruction, wealth inequality, and poverty.

This is hard work, but the work has started and this conference aims to contribute to a paradigm change that is urgently needed. We know enough of what is wrong—we have the evidence on the causes and harms of pay inequity, poverty, and systemic destructive racism. Now we need to build a new analytical narrative that takes us from an extractive to a just economy and society. The new language we are inviting speakers to contribute to could be the scaffolding we need to get the building blocks for a just society. Setting about creating an Aotearoa New Zealand that is built on notions of comprehensive, holistic justice we need to re-imagine how an Aotearoa with a future would look.
Economists, environmental and medical experts, social scientists, Iwi, and community organisations are warning that the health of our country is eroding. Decades of declining investment in state services and a dominant extractive politics have created an unbalanced country in which an increasing majority is struggling to make ends meet and an environment endangered by continuing exploitative practices and climate change. A reset is needed.
There are concepts emerging internationally and nationally that will help us develop a framework for a society built on equity and justice for all. This conference will be a kōrero of scholars, activists, community builders, economists, and legal experts. To imagine a just society we must be willing to engage in exploration together—the speakers and the audience."

You can view the full agenda and register to attend in person or online if interested. 

5) Landslides are NZ’s deadliest natural hazard. Why does it still tolerate the risk?

"With the cost of landslides mounting, we might expect that when local authorities identify actions to reduce risk that could save money in the long run, these efforts would be welcomed by central government. Instead, they are often met with a phrase we have become too familiar with: we are in a “fiscally challenging environment”.

That may be. But it is also true that the costs associated with natural hazards are only likely to increase. The cheapest time to invest in resilience is now.

When it comes to landslides, we need to consider whether repeated fatalities from a known and worsening hazard are something we are prepared to tolerate. Aeroplane crashes have always been unacceptable to us, but the 2019 Ministry of Transport Road to Zero strategy suggested deaths in car crashes were becoming intolerable as well.

Perhaps now is the time to take a similar approach to landslides. With an election looming, political parties have a chance to put forward credible plans to reduce natural hazard risk or, better still, to agree on a non-partisan path that builds resilience for the long term."

Check out the full article on The Conversation website.

6) The bottle of milk that may have serious implications for NZ -

I have included items before in this newsletter about precision fermentation, particularly for producing milk products, and the claims that it will become so cheap that it will cause the collapse of the NZ dairy industry. This article published on Newsroom re-looks at this possibility and the implications for NZ farmers and the economy. 

Here is an extract - 

"Farmers who recently received a large Fonterra payout may consider investing in non-dairy milk that now actually tastes like milk. Maybe a little bit thinner than I would have expected for the 3 percent fat content advertised on the bottle. But certainly better than other lactose-free milk I’ve tried. Normal lactose-free milk converts lactose into simpler sugars that I find too sweet. Fortunately, I can drink normal milk without problems. Others in my household aren’t so lucky.

This lactose-free milk never had the lactose in the first place, because nobody built it in. The milk had never been through a cow at all. Never touched grass, never saw a milking parlour, did not require irrigation. No cows to create methane or urine patches that leach nitrogen.  In 2019, RethinkX predicted that precision fermentation would displace half of America’s cattle herd by 2030. The prediction seemed, and still seems, bullish. But not as bullish as I had thought. The precision-fermentation milk I drank last week is on store shelves in Israel and is reportedly cost-competitive with plant-based milks on the market. And unlike the plant milks, this one tastes like milk."

I was particularly interested in a couple of the comments at the end of the article which echoed some of my thoughts.

The first is from Ciaran Keogh - 

"What is overlooked in this somewhat excited commentary is that the feedstock for the bacterial fermentation process has to be sourced from some other biological material and google advises that “The best feedstocks for bacterial precision fermentation to produce milk proteins are primarily sugar-based substrates, such as glucose and sucrose, derived from high-yield crops like maize (corn) and sugar beet.” Google also notes that “The choice of feedstock involves balancing cost, sustainability, and efficiency for large-scale production.” so this might work for specific high value milk proteins but it could be a long way from replacing the dairy industry as cows are pretty good at converting low sugar biomass such as grass into milk without much in the way of external energy inputs and less cultivation and from a wider range of land than would be suited to production of fermentation feedstock. Also these industrial processes require quite a lot of electricity – something NZ is not over-endowed with – so this could be just another case of taking a simple well proven process and replacing it with a costly and complex one. I suspect cows will be round for a while yet. Though for specialist protein production it is no doubt a technology NZ needs to be on top of."

and the second is from Bruce Chippindale -

"Whether this specific set of innovations leads to the next destruction of our economic monoculture is questionable. The existence of the economic monoculture means it *will* ultimately face destruction—again. New Zealand has embraced an absurdly exaggerated interpretation of Ricardo’s “comparative advantage” and faces the consequences, no, it ENDURES the consequences, every day.

“We can’t make anything ourselves; the market is too small.” So we export logs and import plywood and furniture. We export apples and import applesauce.

And we create a primary-industry/monoculture economic dependence, robbing ourselves of economic and political independence. We need greater autarky and less need to make “trade deals” that provide greater advantage to some, and less advantage to everyone else, in both nations."

7) For much of 2025, it felt like the climate movement in New Zealand was losing. 

This opinion piece from Newsroom is written by Lawyers for Climate Change executive director, Jessica Palairet. I, for one, am very thankful that groups such as this exist and that they challenge the government regarding their inadequate climate action.

Here is an extract from Jessica's piece - 

"The government cut climate policy after climate policy – from transport, to our domestic 2050 methane target, to companies’ emissions reporting obligations. Rather than focusing on reducing emissions, the government seemed focused on reducing litigation risk, weakening our once-bipartisan climate laws.
The government’s timing was often brazen. Less than a week after the world’s highest court, the International Court of Justice, said that granting fossil fuel exploration licences or providing fossil fuel subsidies “may constitute an internationally wrongful act”, New Zealand reopened offshore oil and gas exploration – and announced a new $200 million subsidy, to boot. 

I am executive director of Lawyers for Climate Action, a charity bringing together 400 lawyers and members across Aotearoa to ensure meaningful action on climate change through strategic litigation and law reform. Driving our work is the concern that New Zealand isn’t doing enough on climate change – and that it’s in our interests as a country, as well as in the interests of future generations, to do better. 

In 2026, I hope New Zealand takes its climate obligations more seriously and demonstrates real leadership on climate change. The scientific imperative to protect our planet couldn’t be clearer,and increasingly, so too is the economic imperative." 

8) The LNG terminal and meeting the Electricity needs of NZ.

I've put this item into the newsletter because I've seen several articles discussing the question of whether a LNG terminal is the best solution to the issue of "Dry Year" electricity supplies. I believe the question cannot be adequately answered without a full analysis of what works and what doesn't work with our current power network. So here's some food for thought and some ideas to consider.

The first article published in Stuff is from Sir Ian Taylor. He presents reasons why a LNG terminal may well not be the smartest idea and offers thoughts on how we could do things differently that don't tie us into international energy market volatility in the years ahead. Anyone who believes as I do that those markets are going to become more and more unpredictable will see the logic of his arguments. 

"Electrification is not a slogan. It is a practical economic strategy.

When a farm replaces diesel irrigation pumps with electric ones, its operating costs fall. When a factory replaces fossil-fuel boilers with electric process heat, its exposure to global fuel prices disappears. When transport shifts from imported fuel to domestic electricity, more of the energy dollar stays in New Zealand.

That is not ideology. It is arithmetic.

But electrification does not mean building ever larger power stations and stringing ever more transmission lines across the country. That approach is expensive, slow, and ultimately paid for by consumers. The smarter path is to use the system we already have more efficiently.

Fast-track distributed electricity generation. Solar on homes. Solar on farms. Solar on commercial buildings. Batteries that allow that energy to be stored and shared locally. Use the existing lines to move electricity within communities, rather than relying solely on large, centralised generation feeding power across long distances.

The cheapest electricity is the electricity you don’t have to move.

Every kilowatt generated where it is used is one that does not need to be transmitted across the country. That reduces losses. It reduces strain on the grid. And it reduces the need for expensive new transmission infrastructure that ultimately pushes power prices higher.

This is not theoretical. It is already happening."

The second article from the Spinoff titled "Big costs, big profits: the state of the electricity sector in 2026" is written by Shanti Mathias and gives "a quick guide to what’s happening in the sector, and who’s paying for it."

The third contribution comes from an opinion posted on the Rewiring Aotearoa online chat group from David. He has done a good job of distilling some of the main issues around what he calls "The Line Charge Smokescreen". I do recommend downloading this document. It's a useful resource if you wish to have a better understanding of the dynamics of the NZ electricity system from a consumer's perspective.

To give you a taste here are the headings in his short paper -

• The "Powering Homes" Mirage: Where the Renewables Actually Go.
• The Structural Rot: An Oligopoly Designed for Profits. 
• The Regulatory Capture: Lobbying by Design. 
• The Expose: What is Really Happening? 

The fourth contribution was published on "the point" website in Australia and is from Ketan Joshi. His two articles are focussed on LNG in the Australian context but there is much to learn for NZ, in particular in regard to the part that batteries are playing in changing the game in Australia. 

The core case for gas plummets into a screaming death spiral - Part 1 AND Part 2

"For decades, fossil fuel advocates have been pushing the line that we “need” to burn methane as a ‘vital component of the energy transition’. It is an ancient talking point, predicated on the idea that integrating wind and solar power can only be done by using fossil methane-fuelled turbines, which can be turned up and down with some degree of flexibility and adjustability. 

A report by the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) shows that gas now spends a lower percentage of the time “setting” the price of electricity (that is: being the final bidder in the real-time electricity auctions that the system relies on. The final bidder wins the right to set the broad price for that interval). This has the effect of directly bringing down the price everybody pays for electricity, simply because gas has been so cripplingly expensive, and that expense has been the primary driver of rising electricity prices over the past few years (particularly in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine).  

To debunk the idea Australia “needs” gas to help wind and solar, I usually refer to the grid operator’s models of the future power sector, which shows full reliability and skyrocketing wind and solar alongside plummeting gas consumption. The objection to this has always been that it is a model of the future, not measured reality. We are well and truly in the demonstration phase of the long-overdue death of power sector fossil gas.

We have already had a good year of data from California, where batteries have enabled the state’s massive solar growth and taken a massive chunk out of gas, resulting in California being the only state in 2025 in the US with falling emissions. Australia is now formally having its California moment. While gas power hasn’t been erased from the grid, it has taken a massive and unprecedented hit, thanks to a battery boom that is unlocking the power of new Australian wind and solar." 

The NZ government's argument that by importing fossil LNG, electricity prices will come down is highly debatable. If we accepted that the climate crisis is real and impacting us all right now then wouldn't we do everything possible to reduce our fossil fuel use. We should be looking forward, not back into the past for the solutions to our power needs. If we look to Australia, who are further along on the path of using batteries to help meet peak loads, it's the price setting of the final bidder in the real-time electricity auctions referred to above that ensures power generators can make huge profits, as long as they always have a small component of expensive generation providing that last small proportion of required supply. There seems to be a good argument that batteries are doing a better job in Australia of lowering that final bidder price than fossil gas. I see no reason why this wouldn't also apply here in NZ.  

9) How do we reform the electricity market? Why can't we get three free hours a day like the Australians?

Lesley and I are fairly regular watchers online of the discussions and presentations hosted by The NZ Fabians Society. They have a session scheduled for March 23rd with guests Geoff Bertram and Scott Willis. I've been interested in Geoff's perspective since the 1980's and anticipate that he will have a lot to offer on this topic, of which he is very knowledgeable.

Here is some brief info about the session.

"Yes, the neoliberal changes begun under Roger Douglas saw electricity shift from a state-run system working for the public good, to a competing market run for short-term corporate profit. Geoff Bertram and Scott Willis look at how we can change the current system to stop prices for us consumers continuing to escalate, and to build a decentralized network especially with wind and solar. Meanwhile our Coalition government has rejected 8 of the top 10 recommendations in the recent review of the sector by Frontier Economics and instead doubled down on fossil fuels.

Check out this report.

Across the ditch, Aussie PM Anthony Albanese is offering all households three free hours of electricity a day, starting in July.
Why have we got things so wrong?

Geoff Bertram is currently Visiting Scholar at Vic Uni and earlier was Senior Lecturer in the School of Economics and Finance.  He continues to publish extensively – see his website https://geoffbertram.com/

Scott Willis is a Green MP and party spokesperson on energy. He previously worked as an energy consultant and as general manager of Blueskin Energy.

The session will be chaired by lawyer and journalist Ollie Neas."

You can subscribe to The NZ Fabians Society and get notice of their talks or you can go to their website and watch recordings of them. 

INTERNATIONAL

10) ‘The dinosaurs didn’t know what was coming, but we do’: Marina Silva on what needs to follow Cop30.

Item number 6 in the November newsletter linked to an article in The Conversation about the COP30 talks held in Brazil last year and highlighted this cynical move by the NZ government - "Delinking the Emissions Trading Scheme – one of the few remaining policy tools for cutting domestic emissions – from the country’s Paris Agreement pledge constructs a pathway for the government to abandon its international obligations, while remaining compliant with domestic law." 

To follow that up I've shared this Guardian article in which Brazil’s environment minister Marina Silva talks about climate inaction and the course we have to plot to save ourselves and the planet.

"The power of extractivist economic interests to delay and reverse climate action has also been apparent in Brazil. Congress, which is dominated by agribusiness interests, overturned several of Lula’s vetoes of a controversial bill to dilute environmental licensing just days after Cop30.

Given these forces, how could governments ever push forward progressive policies on the climate and nature? For Marina, it is necessary to go to a deeper level of values. Ultimately, she said, it is a matter of survival – not just of an individual or a species, but the very conditions in which life is possible.

Compared with the huge efforts to preserve the economic system after the 2008 financial crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic, and the immense military spending under way in Europe, it was incredible how little was going into the campaign to stabilise the climate and nature, she said. “Something is wrong. And it’s not just wrong with the dynamics of multilateralism. It’s wrong with the ethical values ​​that are guiding our decisions.

“Recently we moved to confront the problem of Covid-19. Why are we only able to do this when the harm has already been done? Why don’t we show that ability when the problem has been detected and proven and already sending us its most malevolent ambassadors in the form of fires, heatwaves, ever-more-intense typhoons and hurricanes, loss of areas that were previously used to produce food and reduction in hydroelectric power generation capacity?

“The visits of these sinister ambassadors should be enough for us to make preparations in a way the dinosaurs were unable to do. They didn’t know a large meteor was coming towards them. We know what is coming towards us, we know what needs to be done and we have the means to do it, yet we don’t take the necessary measures.”

Marina is planning to do all she can to change that. The Brazilian government will push forward with a debate on roadmaps to halt deforestation and fossil fuels. It will participate in the first international conference on a just transition away from oil, coal and gas in Colombia next year.

And it will try to lead by example, she says. “I am inspired by the fact we have reduced deforestation by 50% in the Amazon and agribusiness has grown by 17% in the last three years. This demonstrates it is possible to do this,” she said. “If we are not determined to achieve, we will apparently remain in the same place. And I say apparently because we are already heading towards an unthinkable place, where the very conditions of life are diminished.”

11) We discovered microbes in bark ‘eat’ climate gases. This will change the way we think about trees.

This is fascinating stuff. It would be interesting to know how comparable NZ native forest trees are to the Australian trees they've used in their research?

"We all know trees are climate heroes. Now, for the first time, our research has uncovered the hidden world of the tiny organisms living in the bark of trees. We discovered they are quietly helping to purify the air we breathe and remove greenhouse gases.

These microbes “eat”, or use, gases like methane and carbon monoxide for energy and survival. Most significantly, they also remove hydrogen, which has a role in super-charging climate change. What we discovered has changed how we think about trees. Bark was long assumed to be largely biologically inert in relation to climate. But our findings show it hosts active microbial communities that influence key atmospheric gases. This means trees affect the climate in more ways than we previously realised."

The whole article is available on The Conversation website.

12) Another El Nino Already? What Can We Learn from It?

For those readers of this newsletter who like to keep up to date with James Hansen's research, and can handle some in-depth scientific analysis, he has recently posted on his blog the following.  

Abstract. The world seems headed into another El Nino, just 3 years after the last one. Such quick return normally would imply, at most, an El Nino of moderate strength, but we suggest that even a moderately strong El Nino may yield record global temperature already in 2026 and still greater temperature in 2027. The extreme warming will be a result mainly of high climate sensitivity and a recent increase of the net global climate forcing, not the result of an exceptional El Nino, per se. We find that the principal drive for global warming acceleration began in about 2015, which implies that 2°C global warming is likely to be reached in the 2030s, not at midcentury.

You can read or download the full blog from his website.

13) ‘Reimagining matter’: Nobel laureate invents machine that harvests water from dry air.

This article in The Guardian caught my attention. I was encouraged to read about Omar Yaghi’s invention, which uses ambient thermal energy and can generate up to 1,000 litres of clean water every day. The invention uses a type of science called reticular chemistry to create molecularly engineered materials, which can extract moisture from the air and harvest water even in arid and desert conditions.

I was encouraged because I am very aware that the water resources of large areas of our planet are in a state of collapse, as documented in two other recent articles.

Era of ‘global water bankruptcy’ is here, UN report says.

"On Tuesday the UN announced that the world had entered a state of water bankruptcy where deterioration of some water resources had become permanent and irreversible. Prof Kaveh Madani, director of the United Nations University Institute for Water Environment and Health, said poor management of water is frequently the main cause of bankruptcy and that climate breakdown is seldom the sole reason: “Climate change is like a recession on top of bad management of business.”

The World Bank Group has also been sounding the alarm. Global freshwater reserves have plunged sharply over the past 20 years, according to the group, which says the planet is losing about 324bn cubic metres of freshwater every year, enough to meet the annual needs of 280 million people, or roughly the population of Indonesia. The losses affect major river basins on every continent."

AND - Half the world’s 100 largest cities are in high water stress areas, analysis finds.

"Half the world’s 100 largest cities are experiencing high levels of water stress, with 38 of these sitting in regions of “extremely high water stress”, new analysis and mapping has shown.

Water stress means that water withdrawals for public water supply and industry are close to exceeding available supplies, often caused by poor management of water resources exacerbated by climate breakdown."

14) Scottish Parliament Votes to Advance Ecocide Bill.

Here is an update on the continuing introduction of Ecocide law in different countries around the world. Can you imagine the current NZ government taking this step? 

"The Scottish Parliament has voted to advance the Ecocide (Scotland) Bill, placing Scotland on track to become the first UK nation to criminalise severe environmental destruction.
Scotland’s move comes amid accelerating global momentum for ecocide law. At the international level, Vanuatu, Fiji and Samoa, now joined by the Democratic Republic of the Congo, submitted a formal proposal in September 2024 to amend the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to recognise ecocide as a standalone international crime. More recently, the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has adopted a new policy placing environmental destruction and climate-related harm at the centre of its prosecutorial priorities. The African Ministerial Conference on the Environment has also made ecocide law a priority for 2025–2027.

Regionally, the European Union’s Environmental Crime Directive, which includes offences ‘comparable to ecocide’, must be transposed into national law across Member States by May 2026. The Council of Europe’s Convention on the Protection of the Environment through Criminal Law, which includes ecocide-level offences, opened for signature in December 2025 and has already been signed by the European Union, Luxembourg, Portugal, Latvia and Moldova. Nationally, Belgium and France have established domestic ecocide laws, with legislation advancing in Italy, Brazil, the Netherlands, Ghana, Argentina, Peru, Mexico, French Polynesia and India."

You can learn more on the "Stop Ecocide International" website.

I've also included this extract from a conversation with Stop Ecocide International’s CEO Jojo Mehta on the topic of "Criminalizing Ecocide". 

GJIA (Georgetown Journal of International Affairs): "Given the role of corporate actors in large-scale environmental destruction, what approaches have been most effective for engaging private-sector actors in ecocide discussions?"

JM (Jojo Mehta): "In recent years, we have seen, unsurprisingly, growing engagement from the sustainable business sector. Companies that have long invested in responsible practices have been at a disadvantage, because typically money flows towards the cheapest and most environmentally harmful operations. Ecocide law represents a major leveling of the playing field. It ensures that whatever business you are in, your activities must not cause severe environmental harm. Those already operating sustainably are therefore better positioned because they have been preparing for this standard.

What has been particularly interesting is the response from the investment world. For several consecutive years, the International Corporate Governance Network submitted statements to the UN Climate Conferences advising governments to legislate for ecocide. They recognize that environmental degradation is a risk factor. In an increasingly volatile world, investors need to know that their capital will still hold value ten years from now. A company engaged in severe environmental harm represents future liability.

Criminalizing ecocide carries a different weight in the corporate world than regulatory law. Much of existing environmental law is highly technical, detailed, and prescriptive. In practice, companies that can afford it often learn to navigate or manipulate those rules. Effectively, if there is a category of something that is not supposed to be done, then they will recategorize that activity. If the regulation sets an emissions limit, companies will push or just consistently operate at the upper limit.

Criminal law forces decision-makers to ask, before signing off on a major project: is this going to create severe harm? And if so, could I be personally criminally liable? That question is a powerful deterrent. It prompts executives to seek alternative approaches or establish clear operational boundaries. Additionally, the accusation of criminal behavior can damage both a leader’s personal reputation and the company’s value. Stock prices can fall immediately. There is a rational deterrence provided by the criminal aspect that simply does not exist in the regulatory sphere.

We urgently need a taboo around the mass destruction of nature. So, normalizing the language of ecocide contributes to building that cultural boundary.

Overall, developments are moving twice as quickly as we could have predicted. We expect that within five years, most of the world will either be adopting, progressing, or seriously considering ecocide law. What feels hopeful is how basic and common-sense the principle is. Some people say ecocide law is a response to the climate and ecological crisis; we tend to see it the other way around. The crisis exists because this law was not established 50 years ago. Ecocide law is a foundational piece that should always have been there, and now is simply the time to put it in place."

15) Inequality on Planet Earth.

I wanted to finish with two items highlighting the huge difference between the super-rich and most of the rest of humanity and the impact those super-rich are having on our collective future. 

"At the root of all our problems stands one travesty: politicians’ surrender to the super-rich."

"There is one political problem from which all others follow. It is the major cause of Donald Trump, of Nigel Farage, of the shocking weakness of their opponents, of the polarisation tearing societies apart, of the devastation of the living world. It is simply stated: the extreme wealth of a small number of people.

It can also be quantified. The World Inequality Report (WIR) 2026 shows that about 56,000 people – 0.001% of the global population – corral three times more wealth than the poorest half of humanity. They afflict almost every country. In the UK, for example, 50 families hold more wealth than 50% of the population combined.

It is the ultra-rich who benefit most from destruction, in making money and in spending it. The WIR shows that the richest 1% of the world’s population account for 41% of greenhouse gas emissions arising from private capital ownership: almost twice that of the bottom 90%. And through their consumption, another study shows, the 1% produce as many greenhouse gases as the poorest two-thirds."

Check out the full article from the indomitable George Monbiot. 

17) In Davos, the rich talk about ‘global threats’. Here’s why they’re silent about the biggest of them all - Ingrid Robeyns

How refreshing to have someone talking total common sense and telling it as it is, rather than obfuscating and avoiding the obvious! Note the reference in the article to Luke Kemp's book, "Goliath's Curse". I read this book recently and found it fascinating. I've included some info about it in the final item below. 

"This week, hundreds of government leaders, heads of state, and business executives are gathering at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos. They will be discussing solutions to the world’s biggest risks and problems.

But everything suggests that, once more, what will not be addressed at their meeting is the biggest threat to humanity and the planet: neoliberal capitalism.

All forms of capitalism are characterised by extensive private ownership of companies as well as the primacy of the profit motive. But the specific neoliberal form of capitalism that has risen to dominance from the late 1970s onwards has additional features: the privatisation of companies previously in public ownership; a shift in power from workers to capital owners; and reduced taxes on entrepreneurs and the richest.

The transition from mixed economies under social democracies to neoliberal capitalism has led to a notable increase of wealth concentration at the top, which is now eroding (and in some places even destroying) our democracies. The absence of a sustained discussion of neoliberal capitalism in elite circles is illogical, since it is the main cause of the other problems that will be discussed at Davos.

If meetings such as the one in Davos do not even talk about capitalism, how can our leaders start to even question it? The Global Risks Report contains precisely zero references to capitalism (let alone socialism or social democracy or other relevant terms). It says nothing about the extensive knowledge that exists in academic scholarship (and beyond) about the disadvantages of capitalism and the possibilities of alternative economic systems."

18) Goliath's Curse by Luke Kemp.

"A radical retelling of human history through collapse, and what it means for our uncertain future

Why do civilisations collapse? Is human progress possible? Are we approaching our endgame?

For the first 200,000 years of human history, hunter-gathering Homo sapiens lived in fluid, egalitarian civilizations that thwarted any individual or group from ruling permanently. Then, around 12,000 years ago, that began to change.

As we reluctantly congregated in the first farms and cities, people began to rely on novel lootable resources like grain and fish for their daily sustenance. And when more powerful weapons became available, small groups began to seize control of these valuable commodities. This inequality in resources soon tipped over into inequality in power, and we started to adopt more primal, hierarchical forms of organization. Power was concentrated in masters, kings, pharaohs and emperors (and ideologies were born to justify their rule). Goliath-like states and empires – with vast bureaucracies and militaries – carved up and dominated the globe.

What brought them down? Whether in the early cities of Cahokia in North America or Tiwanaku in South America, or the sprawling empires of Egypt, Rome and China, it was increasing inequality and concentrations of power that hollowed these Goliaths out before an external shock brought them crashing down. These collapses were written up as apocalyptic, but in truth they were usually a blessing for most of the population.

Now we live in a single global Goliath. Growth obsessed, extractive institutions like the fossil fuel industry, big tech and military-industrial complexes rule our world and produce new ways of annihilating our species, from climate change to nuclear war. Our systems are now so fast, complex and interconnected that a future collapse will likely be global, swift and irreversible. All of us now face a choice: we must learn to democratically control Goliath, or the next collapse may be our last."

If this piques your interest you can borrow it from the Blenheim library.

LOCAL

1) Media articles written by CKM members since the last newsletter. 

16/09/25 - Fish full of mercury.

"Although there are natural sources of mercury, the largest source of mercury today is coal burning for industrial heat and power generation, which is estimated to release about 2,000 tonnes worldwide per year.  Over most of the planet, the mercury from coal smoke falls from the sky with rain and is washed away and buried in sediments.  In the high Arctic, however, mercury falling from the sky becomes trapped in permafrost – permanently frozen soil.  Today, scientists estimate that some 800,000 tonnes of mercury reside in Arctic permafrost.  And, as the climate warms, Arctic permafrost is melting."

25/10/25 - Tourism destroys what it seeks.

"At the 2025 ITB conference in Berlin, the world’s largest travel trade show, Linnaeus University business professor Stefan Gössling shocked his audience by proclaiming, “We have already entered the beginning of the age of non-tourism”. He argues that the rising cost of everything from food to insurance, due to worsening climate impacts, will soon make international tourism unaffordable for most people."

27/11/25 - Why so windy? 

"By now, most people can appreciate that global warming is making rainfall more intense.  Warmer air holds more moisture as water vapour and what goes up must come down, leading to more intense rainfall.  
But, what about the climate predictions that storms will become more windy and violent?  
Stronger winds are a troubling aspect of global warming because they are damaging in so many ways.  In addition to more destructive hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons, they give us larger ocean waves and rougher seas which erode our coastlines and are a hazard to mariners.  They give us more air turbulence, bouncing passengers around airline cabins.  There is not much to like about the prospect of more violent storms.
It turns out, a major driver is that same increased moisture in our atmosphere." 

Here are links to copies of the full articles if you can't access them on The Press website - Tourism destroys what it seeks, Fish full of Mercury, and Why so windy? 

2) Articles highlighting overtourism.

With Tom's October opinion piece focusing on how tourism destroys what it seeks, I thought I'd include these couple of articles that highlight issues he raised.
 
The first article is written by Robert McLachlan, Professor in Applied Mathematics at Massey University and titled - NZ’s government wants tourism to drive economic growth – but how will it deal with aviation emissions?  You can check it out on the RNZ website.

The second article published on the ABC website in Australia and titled "After deadly floods in Bali, its people want answers. Many are blaming overtourism" has some interesting time lapse aerial views showing the big changes over a period of 22 years with rural land converted largely to high density urban zones with the large increase in hard surfaces resulting in more flooding. 

3) Submission on the Fast Track Approvals Amendment Bill 2025.

Tom has been busy recently doing a couple of submissions for CKM. Some of it is pretty technical stuff and we really appreciate him getting his head around it and submitting for the group.

Here are a couple of extracts from the first submission. You can check out the full submission if interested.

"Members of Climate Karanga Marlborough are deeply concerned about this piece of legislation and request that it be withdrawn in its entirety. It is disingenuous for the government to be proposing such a sweeping amendment to such a highly controversial law passed less than a year ago. It is also disingenuous for the government to justify this law as needed to improve competition in the grocery sector and that it includes only “technical and machinery changes”. The changes proposed in the amendment bill represent an expansive power grab by the Minister and a further erosion of public input project approval."

AND - "We object in the strongest way possible to a decision making process where high value is given to benefits described by the Minister or the applicant and low or no value is given to environmental and community impacts and consequences. We are stewards for the environment and we must take this responsibility very seriously because it is a healthy environment that sustains life. Economic considerations must not be allowed to override environmental ones because the cost is invariably too great in the long run. And it is in the long run that really matters. We must always ask the question, what is best for our descendants? It is too easy to put our own needs and wants first and forget about theirs. If the public are to have any faith in the Fast Track Approvals process it is critical that environmental and community impacts are never ignored or downplayed in favour of economic outcomes."

4) Submission on Amendment to New Zealand’s Second Emissions Reduction Plan 2026-2030.

Here are a couple of extracts from the second submission - "In summary, we are disappointed in the reduction in ambition represented by the changes in this amended ERP2.  There is a large drop in emissions reductions due to the government’s updated policy proposals and we are now on track to overshoot the CCRA (Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act) methane 2030 target. 
In addition, we are alarmed by a significant and unsubstantiated drop of 9.4 Mt in the baseline emissions for the amended ERP2.  This cannot be solely due to updated afforestation and fossil gas decline trends since neither of these can be expected to change that much since last year’s ERP2 report.  In addition, they are not reflected in the Climate Change Commission’s July 2025 monitoring report.  We are worried that the government has resorted to accounting tricks to meet the second emissions budget." 

AND - "It is clear that by dropping the requirement for reporting on-farm emissions and then dropping emissions pricing altogether, agricultural emissions will rise.  This is reflected in the small increase in emissions projected for EB2 and a larger one projected for EB3.  These policies are on track to result in the failure of meeting the CCRA target of a 10% decrease in agricultural methane relative to 2017 methane emission by 2030, as well as increase the projected overshoot of the EB3.
The obvious impacts are to government credibility and to the reputation of our agricultural industries.  By reversing its earlier commitment to price agricultural emissions in the CCRA, the government is undermining its domestic and international credibility that its policies will result in abated GHG emissions.  This then has a flow-on effect to our trade partners, who can then use it as an excuse to slap New Zealand exports with carbon tariffs.
The less obvious impacts are that the government gives cover to other nations wishing to weaken their commitments to reducing GHG, helping to tip the balance of global ambition away from emissions mitigation.  If we do less, other nations will be more inclined to do less, as well.  The end result will be more global warming, more destructive weather, more hardship, more displaced people and reduced global prosperity.  In essence, it is a curse of misery we put on future generations for our own short-term benefit."

Check out the full submission if you're interested in more detail. Item 10 in this newsletter also gives more information about a related legal action being taken against the Minister for Climate Change that is to be heard in March next year. 

5) Wilding pines threaten Kaikōura ranges in 'looming catastrophe'.

I have watched presentations about this problem three times over the recent months. Ket Bradshaw who is Coordinator for the South Marlborough Landscape Restoration Trust spoke at the September, Forest and Bird meeting, then again at the recent Biodiversity Forum. Then Rob Simons, the MDC senior biosecurity officer did a presentation at the November, MDC Environment and Planning meeting. The Trust have been doing stirling work eradicating the different wilding species they are contending with in South Marlborough, especially in the Branch/Leatham catchment, which is a tributary of the Wairau River. But it's an uphill battle due to inadequate funding being available. Somehow those who hold the purse strings have to be convinced that the cost of not getting on top of this problem is far, far worse than the cost of eradicating the trees. They have flown several MP's and others into the Branch/Leatham, which has been out of sight, out of mind for most people. The trees were originally planted by the Forest Service in an attempt to reduce erosion in that area. It is clearly the Crown's responsibility to clean up their own mess. Some areas are now impenetrable by a human being and the high country vistas are disappearing behind pine trees. But one of the biggest issues is the impact over time on water flows in the Wairau and Awatere Rivers reducing water availability for grape growing and for keeping the aquifer in the lower Wairau recharged. John Oswald did not pull his punches when he told Councillors "You can kiss goodbye to the wine industry for a start. There just simply won't be the water coming down the river,".... Conservation Minister Tama Potaka is one of those who's been flown into to see first hand the "looming catastrophe". Hopefully adequate funds will be allocated in the next budget. It's probably an advantage that it'll be an election year so we know the politicians will be looking for ways to buy votes. 

You can read about it in this article by our Local Democracy Reporter, Kira Carrington and also in this recent issue of the MDC online newsletter Marlborough Matters. 

Here is an extract from Kira's article. 

"Wilding pines are threatening to make their way into the Kaikōura ranges, as their rampant spread sparks a renewed call for more central government funding. The Marlborough District Council's Environment and Planning committee heard about the incursion in south Marlborough during an update on the invasive exotic pest on Thursday (Nov 20th).

South Marlborough Restoration Trust chairperson Johnny Oswald told the committee the trust's wilding pine control team had discovered a patch of wilding trees about 3km from the as-yet uninfected Inland Kaikōura Range. The nearest conifers were 25km to 30km away in the Branch-Leatham, so the seeds had travelled quite a distance, he said. The trust's 10-year plan said Marlborough needed at least $10m per year for conifer control, far more than it currently had, Oswald said.

"If we don't do this, the cost to the country is far, far greater than that. "You can kiss goodbye to the wine industry for a start. There just simply won't be the water coming down the river," Oswald said. "I think that we can do this, and that it needs a lot of work and a lot of money, but we're certainly not giving up."

NATIONAL

6) COP30: climate law changes mean NZ could retreat from its international obligations.

This article from The Conversation was published before the recent COP30 talks in Brazil. It is a good analysis of recent back-tracking changes made by the NZ government. 

"As this year’s UN climate summit (COP30) gets underway in Belém, Brazil, the New Zealand delegation will be attending beneath a cloud of scepticism about the government’s seriousness in addressing carbon emissions. In a late-night announcement last week, the government proposed changes to New Zealand’s landmark climate law, including a decoupling of domestic efforts to cut emissions from New Zealand’s pledge under the Paris Agreement.

Delinking the Emissions Trading Scheme – one of the few remaining policy tools for cutting domestic emissions – from the country’s Paris Agreement pledge constructs a pathway for the government to abandon its international obligations, while remaining compliant with domestic law. The retort from the market was immediate. The price of New Zealand carbon units plummeted 10% once trading resumed on the morning after the announcement, and crashed 18% by the end of the day. Having earlier promised to “let the market do its work”, the government’s move was described by Carbon News as “a brutal blow to confidence in an already moribund market”.

The Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019 enshrined long-term targets and established the Climate Change Commission. To secure bipartisan support for the act, implementation of the commission’s advice was made optional. The compromise imposed a requirement for governments to at least seek the commission’s advice when setting targets and to provide the public with an explanation if it chose to depart from that advice. This created transparency about the government’s actions and encouraged accountability to the public. Eliminating some of the commission’s advice has one guaranteed outcome. The public will be less informed on the robustness of the government’s mitigation plans or its progress toward meeting the country’s international obligations. Failure to meet those obligations could do immeasurable harm to New Zealand’s international reputation, while undermining free trade agreements that include clauses requiring those targets be met.

Even if the coalition is no longer in government in 2030, getting the country back on track to meeting its Paris Agreement obligations will be difficult. The loss of bipartisan agreement on climate policy will increase instability well into the future as governments take turns to flip flop on the settings. That could prove costly in the long run. A recent joint report issued by the World Economic Forum and Boston Consulting Group highlights the costs of climate inaction. It calculates the financial penalties of a late, chaotic transition to a zero-emissions world, estimating that investment today in climate adaptation and mitigation will be repaid five to six times over in avoided loss and damage in the future. This is completely at odds with the government’s stated concerns about the transition costs for itself and businesses, and even more at odds with public wellbeing in the face of rapidly worsening risks from climate change."

7) Restoring forests and capturing carbon for a thriving future.

I've been very interested in the landscape scale predator eradication project undertaken by ZIP (Zero Invasive Predators) largely in virgin native forest in South Westland. Lesley and I spent a few days staying with friends in Okarito earlier this year and we saw some of the intensive predator control work happening there. So I was happy to learn about their "Native Carbon Initiative" looking at how removal of pests can boost carbon stocks. 

"New Zealand’s native forests and tussock grasslands are powerful carbon sinks—but introduced wild animals like possums, rats, stoats and deer are damaging them, turning some of these ecosystems into a source of carbon emissions. Data collected by the Ministry for the Environment and Department of Conservation shows that tall growth forests on the South Island’s West Coast could be losing as much as 1 tonne of carbon per hectare every year.

ZIP is pioneering new ways to measure how removing pests can boost carbon stocks (a process known as sequestration). Proving this link could unlock a cost-effective, nature-based solution to climate change—while restoring the health of our natural world. Under the Paris Agreement, New Zealand is allowed to count increases in carbon stored in older forests if those increases come from new management actions. That means we could count the extra carbon stored in forests where we remove animals like possums, rats and stoats, and manage deer numbers at a level that enables and promotes the regeneration of browsed native plants.

We’ve done some early economic calculations to figure out how much extra carbon a new animal control project would need to capture to be worth the cost. The findings showed that, over 25 years, each hectare of forest would need to store just 0.25 tonnes of extra carbon per year. That’s only 25 grams of carbon per square metre annually—about the same as 50 grams of wood. For kāmahi-podocarp forests, this is just a 0.1% increase in carbon each year. Because this change is so small, it’s not surprising that many traditional methods for measuring forest carbon can’t detect it reliably. Even though that’s a very small amount, it could make a big difference if done across large areas of forest. Plus, based on current Treasury estimates, this method would cost about one-third as much as buying carbon credits from overseas."

You can learn more about their work on the ZIP website.

8) NATURE AS SHAREHOLDER -
Who speaks for the Trees? The Opportunities and Challenges of Nature owning shares of Companies.

This sort of initiative interests me a lot. As someone who accepts the evidence that our current dominant economic and political system is completely unsustainable I'm always keen to see someone advocating for new way of doing things. It's an important part of recognising that retaining a viable and vibrant natural world is critical to ensuring our own survival. Steven Moe's argument that if we can grant "personhood" in the law to companies and corporates then why should we not also do it for nature makes perfect sense to me. I learnt about this from a short item in a regular email I get from NZ Geographic that we subscribe to. Thank goodness for NZ Geographic. It's an important part of me keeping my sanity in this world of craziness by helping me stay connected with what's happening in the natural world we are simply a part of.

Steven states in his paper - "What if Mother Earth stepped in and was the owner of companies instead of human flesh flakes like you and me that will be returned to dust in one blink of her eye? Surely that would help to solve the excesses that a misguided belief in Milton Friedman and shareholder primacy has led us stumbling towards, bowing to a golden calf and drinking its bitter water." 

I love it when people step back, take a broader perspective of our shared predicament and recognise humans are not supreme. That our belief in our supremacy is in reality a delusion. Ideas like this one that Steven is sharing give me a little hope that sanity can still prevail.  

Here's the brief item I received in August from NZ Geographic.  

"A couple of days ago Steven Moe, a partner with the Christchurch firm Parry Field Lawyers, released a compelling paper titled Nature as Shareholder. In it, he describes how companies adopted some of the rights of legal persons in the 1800s, powering the Industrial Revolution. Yet, says Moe, “A company does not really exist, is is a fiction. So if we made them up we could reimagine them—or use them as an example to create other legal entity types. What might it mean if we were to grant legal personhood to nature?” 
By the time Moe returned in 2016 from a decade-long stint in London, Parliament had recognised legal personhood for three natural entities in New Zealand—Te Urewera, Whanganui Te Awa Tupua/River and Taranaki Maunga. But why stop there, he wondered... What if nature was a shareholder in our companies and institutions, or shares held by an entity on behalf of nature? “What might it look like if we did want to embrace a more prominent role for nature?” This may be the defining question of our age. Moe ends quoting Seuss’s cautionary tale of The Lorax; “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.”

You can read the first few paragraphs from the paper below. If you're interested you can learn more and download the full paper from the The Global Alliance of Impact Lawyers website.

"More than 50 years ago two influential pieces of writing were released within a year of each other. They could not have been more different in style and approach yet they each unleashed different yet powerful conceptions about the role of companies, shareholders and directors. The first was by Milton Friedman, an economist who in September 1970 wrote the essay, “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits”. This would go on to influence a generation of thinkers and is credited  with justifying a “greed is good” mindset. At its extreme it represents a paradigm of thought where Directors  consider that their main focus is to maximise profits for shareholders (to the exclusion of other considerations). Less than a year after that in August of 1971, another form of thinker - Dr Seuss, published “The Lorax”. In the parable of The Lorax the title character “speaks for the trees” by opposing “the Once-ler”. In this parable, a faceless business owner is destroying nature for profit and the creation of unnecessary and needless “thneeds” by cutting down all the Truffula trees in a paradise for birds, bears and fish. It was Dr Seuss’s favourite book and he said of it: “The Lorax came out of me being angry. The ecology books I’d read were dull ... in The Lorax I was out to attack what I think are evil things and let the chips fall where they might”. It also has a direct bearing on the topic we will explore here – what it might mean if nature itself were a legal person and the resulting possibility of nature owning  shares of a company. It is rare today to find someone advocating that a pure Friedman inspired shareholder primacy holds weight as an approach, as most people would agree there are many stakeholders involved in a company. Ignoring stakeholders like employees, customers, suppliers, government, Iwi, local communities and regulators just won’t work.
Released within a few months of each other these two contrasting philosophical conceptions – representing clashing paradigms of thought about the role of the company - were released. Like magnetic forces propelling against each other and pushing each other away they are significant because which approach you align with most will impact many things – such as how you think about directors and their approach to governance responsibilities. It also has a direct bearing on the topic we will explore here – what it might mean if nature itself were a legal person and the resulting possibility  f nature owning shares of a company. It is rare today to find someone advocating that a pure Friedman inspired shareholder primacy holds weight as an approach, as most people would agree there are many stakeholders involved in   company. Ignoring stakeholders like employees, customers, suppliers, government, Iwi, local communities and regulators just won’t work. How about the other approach though – what are both the opportunities and the challenges of approaching things the way the Lorax might?

Listening to nature sounds great – simple even. But as we will discover in this paper, there are many threads to weave together for it to work well - we need to explore this conception fully and understand the tools at hand available for that to happen. For example, how might we do this without continuing a colonisation mindset of adopting our preferred aspects of a cosmology that are taken from indigenous worldviews? What is the seed of this idea of listening to nature? Well if a capitalist mindset fuelled by the smell of greed and profits have led us to the climate change flood and drought driven era we now live in, then why don’t we change that narrative. What if Mother Earth stepped in and was the owner of companies instead of human flesh flakes like you and me that will be returned to dust in one blink of her eye? Surely that would help to solve the excesses that a misguided belief in Milton Friedman and shareholder primacy has led us stumbling towards, bowing to a golden calf and drinking its bitter water. To honour the positive desire to preserve and protect and give nature a voice we have to do some heavy lifting first. The answer is more subtle, and deeper, than just turning to Mother Earth. But if we can answer this well you will be left with practical ways for you to consider giving nature a voice in the companies or organisations that you are involved with. We have the potential to do this. So in this paper we are going to use the fast evolving and world leading legal framework and context of Aotearoa New Zealand. This is a small and often nimble place where legislative change is possible. The principles developing here will apply anywhere so this could form a template or case study which those of you in other jurisdictions could then look to." 

9) Don’t mention the (environmental) war. Dr Rod Carr - November 2, 2025.

I'm always interested in what Rod has to say because he has a very good ability to get to the core of climate issues and this article in The Post is no exception.

"In my opinion, the mainstream media and elected leaders who fail to become informed and talk about the attribution of increasingly severe and increasingly frequent weather events to global warming induced climate change, are allowing those with vested interests in causing the change, and requiring us to incur avoidable costs of adaptation, to hide in plain sight.
‘Don’t talk about climate change’ cannot be justified in the interests of national security nor can it be justified to avoid reliving the trauma of death, injury and property loss from weather events caused by the increasingly avoidable actions of others. Our high emitting foreign exchange earning sectors such as dairy, red meat, tourists on visiting cruise liners and short stay long haul fly in tourists are vulnerable to changing consumer preferences, foreign regulators and new low emission substitutes. Not talking about climate change does not change the physics, chemistry and biological impacts of avoidable human induced global warming."

10) What’s in New Zealand’s long-awaited climate adaptation plan? And what was left out?

On October 23rd, the government released a National Adaptation Framework, a broad plan for how to deal with the ongoing, worsening effects of climate change. 

“New Zealand faces growing risks from floods, storms and other natural hazards. We need our country and economy to be resilient and well-prepared,” said climate change minister Simon Watts on releasing the plan. The framework will “give us an enduring system that prepares New Zealand for the impacts of climate change, supports economic growth and keeps the overall costs to our society as low as possible”.

So who is responsible for doing what, and who pays for it? Here’s what we know. New Zealand now has a National Adaptation Plan – is it a big boring document? What does it say? Unlike many plans and government documents, it’s pretty short and straightforward – just four pages (two are the title and a message from climate change minister Simon Watts), which you can read here.

There are four sections: risks and response information sharing, roles and responsibilities, investment in risk reduction and cost-sharing pre-and post-event. For “risks”, the basic rundown is that the government will provide more information (through a new national flood map and an existing natural hazards portal) so that climate change risk is fully incorporated in consenting with the new RMA process.

Nick Cradock-Henry, a principal scientist at Earth Sciences New Zealand, was one of many researchers attending the Adaptation Futures conference in Christchurch this week, a global gathering to discuss climate adaptation – from dealing with heat in schools to making plans for disabled people during natural disasters. “The message was clear: there was an urgent need to accelerate effective adaptation now,” he said. But the difficult part is still to come. “We must also continue to confront the difficult trade-offs that lie ahead. We need to ask: Where is adaptation still feasible? When do we need to shift from incremental to transformational changes? And how do we ensure that these transitions are fair and just?” 

While adaptation is important, the other side of the coin is the emissions that continue to create the climate crisis. Decreasing emissions and absorbing those in the atmosphere already will mean adaptation is easier, cheaper and in some cases, not necessary at all. “Adaptation must go hand-in-hand with aggressive and sustained emissions reductions. Every additional degree of warming locks the world into an increasingly unsustainable future, marked by higher temperatures, more frequent and severe storms, and deepening social and economic disruption,” said Cradock-Henry.

You can read the full article in the Spinoff. 

11) Climate litigation: Holding the government to account for delivering an effective climate plan.

Here is an extract from the announcement made recently by the Environmental Law Initiative (ELI) and Lawyers for Climate Action NZ (LCANZI) We should all be very appreciative of the legal actions taken by groups such as ELI and LCANZI on behalf of the general NZ public.  These sort of actions are an essential part of the democratic process if we are to see any accountability from our politicians. 

"With our friends, Lawyers for Climate Action NZ, we are taking legal action against the Minister of Climate Change over ‘glaring holes’ in the Government’s climate plan. We believe in fairness and the rule of law. As a nation, we have high carbon emissions per capita. As a wealthy country, we need to meet our climate targets with real action, as part of the global effort to limit warming to no more than 1.5C this century. Yet, in its first eight months, the Luxon-led Government cancelled 35 climate policies and actions which were part of the first Emissions Reduction Plan - without first consulting the public, as required by law.  

It then developed the second emissions reduction plan which is almost devoid of actions or policies that will reduce emissions at their source. Climate Change Minister Simon Watts instead relied heavily on offsetting the country’s emissions with forestry plantations. This was despite warnings from the Climate Change Commission that tree planting is no substitute for reducing emissions at source. It locks-in vast pine plantations for future generations, and falls short of our obligations under the Paris Agreement.  The science is clear that forestry is important, but it’s not a substitute for reducing our combustion of fossil fuels. The Minister has made the pathway for achieving the third emissions budget incredibly difficult. Left unchallenged, it will be a huge burden for the future."

INTERNATIONAL 

12) COP30 Matters.

Many of you will be aware of the totally inadequate outcome from the recent COP30 conference in Brazil. In more than 30 years of annual climate meetings, the need for fossil fuel use to halt has been mentioned only once – in a resolution made two years ago, at Cop28 in Dubai, to “transition away from fossil fuels”. Delegates from the Arab Group of 22 nations, from Russia, and from a sprinkling of others, were determined it would not happen again, even though there was a very strong and well supported push for the final declaration to explicitly state what steps should now be taken to "transition away from fossil fuels." After the usual intense last minute negotiations Saudi Arabia finally agreed to an oblique compromise wording that resulted in the conference being able to close with an agreement, something that looked to be in jeopardy up to that point. Rather than use the words fossil fuels, the agreement referred to “the UAE consensus” from the COP28 declaration. You can read more about what happened in this Guardian article titled ‘Fossil fuel giants finally in the crosshairs’: Cop30 avoids total failure with last-ditch deal.

It says in the article "With this “Belém political package”, the world took another small step towards the phaseout of fossil fuels – a faltering, inadequate step, and one that will barely interrupt the climate’s steady march towards catastrophe. But a significant departure from total inaction nonetheless."

What is much more encouraging is the initiative from Irene Vélez Torres, Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development of Colombia who announced the Colombia Declaration at the conference. She and her delegation decided that they weren't interested in playing  the ongoing games where fossil fuel interests controlled the agenda.

These extracts below are from an informative article published on the Australian website "Renew Economy", which provides a useful assessment of what happened at the conference.

"Irene Vélez Torres, Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development of Colombia announced the Colombia Declaration on Friday morning in Belém, Brazil to a standing ovation and rapturous applause. “We are not asking for a lengthy document. We are not asking for a lengthy discussion,” she said. “We believe there is a consensus rising from the people of the world. “As we governments are responsible for the decisions that will impact future generations, we have a moral responsibility to improve the people’s demand for Climate Justice.”

AND -

"Juan Carlos Monterrey, Climate Envoy for Panama, had earlier criticised the Brazilian COP Presidency for the last minute change to drop the fossil fuel declaration from the office text. “It fails the Amazon, it fails science, it fails justice, and it fails the people we’re here to represent. It simply cannot be recognised,” Carlos said. “Failing to name the causes of the climate crisis is not compromised. It’s denial. It’s criminal.”

Colombia’s initiative follows a separate campaign by Pacific countries to push for a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty launched in 2020. Vanuatu and Tuvalu were the first to endorse the proposal and both countries are signatories to the Colombia Declaration. Ralph Regenvanu, Vanuatu’s Minister of Climate Change, said the cause of climate change was fossil fuels and that it was necessary to act to address this. “We came here to Belem to see the UNFCCC come up with a clear action plan for transitioning away from fossil fuels,” he said. “On this final day, unfortunately, we do not have that yet. We need to build a group of states that will make that happen”

The creation of the group represents a challenge to the COP process where major fossil fuel producing countries such as Russia and Saudi Arabia have sought to block discussion or commitment to working through how to get the world off fossil fuels. Torres later told reporters that the world expected a “substantial result” in Belém and that the initiative was needed because the COP process itself was being used to stop action. “I think what the problem is right now is the methodology of consensus, because this consensus has turned into veto,” Torres said. “So the most ambitious agenda has been eliminated. Veto is what is happening here.” 

If you read the above article you will see that Australia after some uncertainty, was one of the 24 founding countries to sign the declaration. As of November 20th there were 83 countries signed up to the declaration, of which, surprise, surprise New Zealand is not one! I've grown to expect such unethical and unprincipled action (or lack of action) from the current government. 

You can see a list of the countries who have signed in this article from the Earth.org website.  

Colombia also followed up the Declaration by announcing "that it will host the First International Conference on the Progressive Phase-Out of Fossil Fuels, scheduled for April 28 and 29, 2026, in Santa Marta, together with the Netherlands.

This announcement embodies a determined commitment: to take the climate agenda beyond the traditional margins of the UN and to build a concrete roadmap toward a just, unequivocal, and global energy transition.

The announcement was made in the final stretch of a climate summit that, as in previous scenarios, disappointed due to the lack of ambition in the final conclusions, which are still not fully closed in a draft presented by the Brazilian presidency that sparked protests from various sectors."

You can read more about this on the Colombia One website.

Finally I wanted to share about The Global Initiative for Information Integrity on Climate Change declaration launched in Belém on Wednesday (Nov. 12) during the 30th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30). The document was announced with the signatures of 11 countries, including Brazil, and a call for more signatories.

The Global Initiative is a coalition launched by the Brazilian government with the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) during the 2024 G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro. It brings together governments, multilateral organizations, society, academia, and the private sector in actions to tackle climate misinformation and promote public debate based on scientific evidence, transparency, and international cooperation.

“This is the first COP that includes information integrity as a topic on the agenda for action. For the first time, we have two days dedicated to information integrity. And this also applies to the negotiation process,” said João Brant, Secretary of Digital Policies at President Lula’s press office.

“Bringing information integrity to the cooperation process means learning from each other, from both the perspective of climate action and that of information integrity, joining forces to take urgent action,” Brant added.one other positive initiative coming out of COP30. 

The Global Initiative for Information Integrity on Climate Change launched a declaration in Belém on Wednesday (Nov. 12) during the 30th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30). The document was announced with the signatures of 11 countries, including Brazil, and a call for more signatories.  The Global Initiative is a coalition launched by the Brazilian government with the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) during the 2024 G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro. It brings together governments, multilateral organizations, society, academia, and the private sector in actions to tackle climate misinformation and promote public debate based on scientific evidence, transparency, and international cooperation.

“This is the first COP that includes information integrity as a topic on the agenda for action. For the first time, we have two days dedicated to information integrity. And this also applies to the negotiation process,” said João Brant, Secretary of Digital Policies at President Lula’s press office. “Bringing information integrity to the cooperation process means learning from each other, from both the perspective of climate action and that of information integrity, joining forces to take urgent action,” Brant added.

13) The Global Alliance of Impact Lawyers (GAIL).

While researching the earlier item "Nature as Shareholder" I learnt about GAIL and their work on behalf of humanity and our shared planet. They are another example of a group of lawyers using their knowledge and skills on our behalf.

Here are their statements of Purpose, Strategy, Mission and Vision. You can learn more on their website.
  
Our Purpose.

The Global Alliance of Impact Lawyers (GAIL) has been formed to promote, for the public benefit, through legal education, study, standards and conduct:

    knowledge and understanding of how law can be used as a force for positive impact, and ways of practising law and doing          business that maximise the positive impact of law and business on people and the environment.

GAIL advances its purposes for the benefit of the global public and not for any special interest group.

Our Strategy

The Global Alliance of Impact Lawyers is unique in its operation. 

GAIL brings together a community of legal leaders who are using the practice of law to have a positive impact on people and the planet. We believe lawyers are uniquely positioned to advocate for and champion a truly sustainable and inclusive economy in line with GAIL’s purposes. We leverage the expertise of lawyers to accelerate the shift of corporate models and capital to more sustainable and impactful forms which make sure business is truly a sustainable force for good. We also draw learning from across the full spectrum of Impact disciplines in law and business.

We profile, connect, educate, inspire and mobilise Impact lawyers – locally and around the world. Together, we aim to use the practice of law to create a truly sustainable and inclusive economy. GAIL shares learnings that exist within our community widely to equip lawyers with the knowledge they need to take action. Lawyers are powerful advocates, champions and gatekeepers. Through our programming, we identify and showcase examples of some of the most Impactful work lawyers across the world are engaged in. We highlight legal approaches and tools that can be used elsewhere across the world, and that can be scaled up. By distributing insights and practical learnings effectively, we enable lawyers in any part of the world to act on this knowledge.

Mission

To grow the next generation of ‘Impact Lawyers’ who will advocate for and champion a rapid and just transition towards a truly sustainable and inclusive economy.

Vision

Our work will not end until a sustainable and inclusive economy has been achieved – and all lawyers are Impact lawyers.

14) High Seas Treaty Ratification.

"In June 2023, governments adopted the High Seas Treaty to protect ocean life. The Treaty opened for State signatures on 20 September 2023. By signing countries indicate their willingness to ratify and formally consent to the new international law. On 19 September 2025, the High Seas Treaty reached the milestone of 60 state ratifications needed to trigger its entry into force, enabling stronger international efforts to protect our ocean, mitigate climate change, and safeguard the lives and livelihoods of billions of people worldwide. The 60th ratification triggered a 120 day countdown after which the High Seas Treaty will enter into force and become a legally binding agreement."

You can see which countries have ratified the treaty if you're interested. What is just as interesting is to see the countries who haven't ratified it yet, NZ being one of them. When I last checked there were 75 countries who had ratified. 

This Stuff article ‘World’s biggest crime scene’: Historic treaty agreed, but NZ still yet to ratify provides more information saying "Officials say domestic legislation must first be passed, and that this is “well underway and on track” for New Zealand to ratify next year, in time for the first conference of all parties." 

Let's hope our government follows through and doesn't come up with any excuses why they can't ratify. The global ocean is under huge pressure from over exploitation and being used as a dump for waste from human's activities. This treaty is an essential step towards protecting ocean life. 

Greenpeace have provided some useful background info if you want to know more.

Here is an extract -

"In 2022, the 15th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), which aims to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. Target 3 of the GBF is to ‘Ensure and enable that by 2030 at least 30 per cent … of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, are effectively conserved and managed through ecologically representative, well-connected and equitably governed systems of protected areas’. This is known as the 30×30 target. At the current rate of protection, the 30% goal will not be reached until 2107. 

The ocean and seabed in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) – making up 64% of the global ocean – represent Earth’s largest commons and are home to thousands of unique species and a wide range of ecosystems, from dynamic pelagic systems to highly fragile habitats thousands of metres below the surface. Due to the lack of comprehensive governance, less than 1% of ABNJ are fully or highly protected, with the remainder vulnerable to overfishing, habitat destruction, pollution and climate change.

The Global Ocean Treaty has emerged as a potential framework to address these challenges by, among other means, facilitating the establishment of area-based management tools (ABMTs), including marine protected areas (MPAs), in ABNJ. One of the Treaty’s objectives is to create an ecologically representative network of MPAs in ABNJ. It therefore represents a critical new legal vehicle to help achieve the 30×30 target."  

15) ‘Food forests are everything’: creating edible landscapes helps nature thrive in Afro-descendant lands.

"Afro-descendant communities in Latin America have long cultivated “edible landscapes”, which grow in the midst of natural forests and mimic the surrounding flora. Across the region, Afro-descendant peoples manage about 200m hectares (2m sq km or 494m acres) of these agroforestry systems in biodiversity hotspots, of which only 5% are legally recognised as collectively titled territories.

For decades, those communities have argued that they play a critical role in protecting biodiversity and therefore need legal protection over their lands. Until recently, there was little scientific data to support their claims.
New research changes that. A paper published recently in Nature Communications Earth & Environment is the first peer-reviewed study quantifying the role of Afro-descendant peoples’ contributions to biodiversity, carbon sequestration and the reduction of deforestation, says Martha Cecilia Rosero-Peña, a co-author and environmental sociologist."

Check out the full article in the Guardian. 

Here is the Abstract from the original research paper .

"Over 130 million people in Latin America identify as Afro-descendants, many of whom inhabit lands with potential to mitigate biodiversity loss and climate change. Yet, the role of Afro-descendants is not adequately considered in conservation and climate decision-making. Here, we mapped the biological value of Afro-descendant lands in Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, and Suriname, and conducted a matching analysis to estimate the effect of these lands on deforestation. Afro-descendant lands coincide with areas that have high biodiversity and irrecoverable carbon and were associated with a 29%–55% reduction in forest loss compared to control sites. To contextualize these findings, we present a social-historical assessment of Afro-descendant conservation practices. This assessment highlights the adaptation of African knowledge to the American tropics and the development of sustainable environmental practices. Global environmental institutions, multilateral agencies, and governments should include Afro-descendants in environmental decision-making and support research and policies that enable Afro-descendant management practices." 

16) Humble Aussie scientist breathing life into ruined land with unique farming method.

Tony Rinaudo went with his wife to Niger in 1981.  He championed a simple way to re-establish trees in the dry landscapes of the African Sahal that is now being copied in many places around the world. He calls it Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR), which is the process of using existing root networks to regrow trees, instead of starting from seeds. He is now the Principal Climate Action Advisor for humanitarian agency World Vision.

Tony explained, "we worked with farmers and through regenerating the seed stock and the living tree stumps that were already in that landscape, over the next 20 years, across some 5 million hectares, 200 million trees were regenerated. "Gross incomes have increased by about $900 million every year in one of the poorest countries of the of the world and Nigerian farmers, without using fertiliser or irrigation or improved seed, they're growing an additional 500,000 tonnes of grain every year, enough to feed two and a half million people."
"In effect, it's a combined bank account and an insurance policy. If all else fails, the trees are there as a mainstay," he said.

"People who had no hope, couldn't feed their children properly, put nice clothes on them or even send them to school, all of a sudden, here's a simple solution that empowers you and enables you to create that future that you want." The farmers aptly call their trees, "their green gold".

To honour Tony's achievements, he's been awarded the 2025 Luxembourg Peace Prize for Outstanding Environmental Peace.

When asked what the recognition means to him, Tony said, "every time I go back into the villages and see the look on people's faces, that's the actual reward." However, he admits, "an award like that puts it on a pedestal that people can notice." Tony's looking forward to the future, planning to travel back to Kenya and Uganda next year to continue his life's mission. "Our goal is to spread this to at least 100 countries and to regenerate over 1 billion hectares of degraded land," he said. "I've got no doubt that Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration will continue to spread now that it's been released out there."

Check out the full article.

You can also read more about this work on the World Vision website.

17) The sea around Antarctica is much saltier than it should be—and that’s a bad thing.

The information in this item was again something I learned from an NZ Geographic email. 

"As sea ice melts in a warming climate, the Southern Ocean should be getting fresher. That’s what scientists expected to find when they analysed recent satellite data. Instead, they were astonished to find it’s actually getting saltier. It likely means the delicate structure of the ocean has been upset, and relatively dense, warm, and salty water, which is usually held down by a fresher layer on top, is now bursting to the surface—accelerating ice retreat around Antarctica. The researchers speculate that stronger westerly winds, a consequence of climate change, might be to blame. 

“We think this could be a regime shift,” says Alessandro Silvano from the University of Southampton, who led the research. “What the consequences are in the long term is an open question.”

If this interests you then check out The European Space Agency website, which provides more detail about this research.  

Here is an extract highlighting our lack of understanding about the global dynamics we are interfering with. Another example of how human hubris has consequences -

Dr Silvano added, “Our new study has revealed that the Southern Ocean is changing, but in a different way to what we expected.

“We might be closer to passing a tipping point than expected and we have potentially entered a new state defined by persistent sea ice decline, sustained by a newly discovered feedback loop.”

The loss of Antarctic sea ice has far-reaching global consequences. As the ice melts, more heat stored in the ocean is released into the atmosphere, fuelling more intense storms and accelerating climate change.

This, in turn, contributes to extreme heatwaves on land and further melting of the Antarctic ice sheet – leading to rising sea levels around the world. Diminished sea ice also threatens vital habitats for penguins and other species that depend on the ice for survival.

Antarctica is no longer the stable, frozen continent it was once thought to be. It is undergoing rapid and unexpected changes that current climate models didn’t predict. Until recently, these models assumed that a warming climate would lead to increased precipitation and ice melt, freshening surface waters and helping to maintain relatively stable sea ice levels.

That assumption no longer holds true. These new findings reveal a rise in surface water salinity, a breakdown in the ocean’s layered structure, and a much faster decline in sea ice than previously anticipated.

18) Carbon offsets fail to cut global heating due to ‘intractable’ systemic problems, study says -

I've included this item as a good example of human hubris and the serious consequences arising from it.
Isn't "hubris" such an excellent word to describe human foolishness in the face of copious evidence that we must change our economic system and our lifestyles.

HUBRIS - Extreme pride or overconfidence, often in combination with arrogance.

"Analysis of 25 years of evidence shows most schemes are poor quality and fail to lower emissions. The failure of carbon offsets to cut planet-heating pollution is “not due to a few bad apples”, a review paper has found, but down to deep-seated systemic problems that incremental change will not solve.

Research over two decades has found “intractable” problems that have made carbon credits in most big programmes poor quality, according to the study. While the industry and diplomats have made efforts to improve the system, it found much-awaited rules agreed at a UN climate summit last year “did not substantially address the quality problem”.

“We must stop expecting carbon offsetting to work at scale,” said Stephen Lezak, a researcher at the University of Oxford’s Smith School and co-author of the study, in Annual Reviews. “We have assessed 25 years of evidence and almost everything up until this point has failed.”

You can check out the full article in the Guardian. 

19) The world needs peasants -

This long read from the Aeon website is another big picture item challenging those who read it to look at their worldview. Instead of the narrative that we should be helping lift up the lifestyles of the world's peasants to become closer to those of us who live in the developed world, it argues that they should be supported in their lifestyles. It is we in the developed world that must reduce our expectations and simplify our lifestyles, because we are currently using far more than our share of the resources provided by Papatuanuku and producing far more than our share of the pollution and waste She has to try and assimilate.

"Far from being a relic of the past, peasants are vital to feeding the world. They need to be supported, not marginalised.

The peasant way of life is a critical buffer against climate change. Peasant villages recycle biochemical waste back to the land; many peasants also supply their nutritional needs from their own farms. Peasants, who directly manage about 10 per cent of the land on Earth – an area five times larger than all towns and cities – supply a countervailing principle to corporate extractionism and short-termism. They also preserve critical local knowledge of land and weather systems, and the interactions of plants and animals. The peasantry is one of humanity’s most crucial economic, social and ecological resources, and we need to invest in it if we are to flourish. Affluent and innovative, this class will insulate us from more extreme degradation of natural systems. Impoverished and terrorised, it will be forced, in the end, to leave the land en masse, with manifold catastrophic consequences.

In 1979, writing from a remote village in eastern France, John Berger observed that the objective of the peasant was to hand on the means of survival (if possible made more secure, compared to what he inherited) to his children. His ideals are located in the past; his obligations are to the future, which he himself will not live to see. 

We all would do well – survival may depend on – generalising Berger’s apt characterisation of the peasant relationship to life and land. The crisis of the global peasantry sits at the centre of all other crises, and we have to solve it. We must put peasants back at the centre of our worldview. Their struggle to hold on to their vital place and role is our struggle. A species struggle."

20) 2025 State of the Climate Report: Our Planet’s Vital Signs are Crashing.

This article published on the Bioscience website summarises the annual State of the Climate Report, which brings together a range of data on our planet's Vital Signs. It has been shared by a CKM member and includes a series of graphs highlighting how severe the deterioration of the health of the planet really is. My usual process of putting together this newsletter is to accumulate different items I see, or that other people pass onto me, and then put them together every three months.  As I've shared before this is a process I struggle with at times because there is so much information providing evidence of how serious our predicament is and I'm trying to decide what I should share. This time round I've left out several items but decided this one must be included. I certainly understand why people often choose to avoid this sort of information, but inevitably I get back to the point of thinking "it's not going to help if we ignore the signs and pretend our lives are going to continue as we've all become so used to". Do people think we've reached a level of disruption that will level off and not get worse? To me it seems so obvious it can only deteriorate because I know one simple fact. That fact is global CO2 levels are still increasing inexorably. Look at the first graph in the article. The rate of increase of CO2 levels is still climbing. The line on the graph is getting steeper. All the other graphs tell a similar story. Why do we carry on as if this is not happening? Why are we so obsessed with "The Economy" and "Growth" when those things are wholly dependent on the health and ongoing viability of the environment and climate? I guess I could try and put my head in the sand and ignore what is front of me but once you know something it's very hard to un-know it!  

The report presents a lot of critical information but also includes important climate change mitigation strategies. It also addresses the important question of  "Social Tipping Points". In the conclusion of the report the authors state the following. The final sentence, which I have highlighted, gets to the crux of the issue for me - 

"Climate change is a threat to ecosystem and human health, but it is also fundamentally a social justice issue. We are disproportionately harming the vulnerable and marginalized—those least responsible for the crisis. As we confront rising seas, burning forests, and destabilized communities, we must remain guided by a commitment to justice, dignity, and the common good. The future is still being written. Through choices in policy, investment, education, and care for one another and the Earth, we can still create a turning point. It begins by embracing our shared humanity and recognizing the profound interconnectedness of all life on the planet."

Here is an extract from the article. 

A yearly analysis of climate change’s progress and effects shows a “planet on the brink” of ecological breakdown and widespread crisis and suggests that only rapid climate mitigation can avoid the worst consequences. “We felt an ethical responsibility to document this turning point clearly and to speak directly to humanity about where we stand,” wrote William Ripple, an ecologist at Oregon State University and coauthor of the new report, in an email. “What we’re seeing now are signs of systemic distress.”

The sixth annual report, published in BioScience, analyzes global data on Earth’s atmosphere, oceans, energy, ecosystems, food systems, and more. Researchers identified our planet’s so-called vital signs, including ocean temperature, surface temperature, sea ice extent, and carbon pollution. Of the 34 vital signs, 22 were at record levels, indicating a highly stressed Earth system. 

For example, 2024 surpassed 2023 as the hottest year on record. Ocean heat and wildfire-related tree cover loss are both at all-time highs. Deadly weather disasters surged in 2024 and 2025, with floods, wildfires, and typhoons killing hundreds in the U.S. alone. Atmospheric warming is showing signs of accelerating. Ice at the poles continues to melt, contributing to sea level rise. And the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, a global network of currents critical for circulating heat on Earth, is showing signs of weakening, which could trigger further climate disruptions. 

21) I wish we could ignore Bill Gates on the climate crisis. But he’s a billionaire, so we can’t.

This is the title of a recent Guardian article from George Monbiot. George is very good at shining a light on issues that most people would prefer to ignore. I was particularly thankful to see that he addresses the issue of climate tipping points and their unpredictability and calls Bill Gates out for his form of denial. 

Let’s begin with the fundamental problem: Bill Gates is a politics denier. Though he came to it late, he now accepts the realities of climate science. But he lives in flat, embarrassing denial about political realities. His latest essay on climate, published last week, treats the issue as if it existed in a political vacuum. He writes as if there were no such thing as political power, and no such thing as billionaires.

His main contention is that funds are very limited, so the delegates at this month’s climate summit in Brazil should direct money away from “near-term emissions goals” towards climate “adaptation” and spending on poverty and disease.

Yes, the funds available for any good cause are scarce, but that’s not because of some natural law, some implacable truth about human society. It’s because oligarchic power has waged war on benign state spending, leading to the destruction of USAID and drastic cuts to the aid budgets of other countries, including the UK. Austerity is a political choice. The decision to impose it is driven by governments bowing to the wishes of the ultra-rich.

Gates calls his essay Three Tough Truths About Climate. So here’s another tough truth he studiously ignores. If, as now seems likely, crucial Earth systems cross tipping points and suddenly collapse, the effects on human life, let alone the survival of other life forms (a topic he fails, as usual, to mention), would destroy the smooth and steady progress he foresees. Because environmental change is likely to proceed not in gradual and linear ways, but through sudden changes of state, the possible impacts on human wellbeing are extremely hard to predict. His argument that we should align all funding to current “data-based analysis” of improvements in human welfare, while it might sound rational, introduces in the face of systemic change a profound irrationality, prompting us to ignore the greatest threats.

I wish we could ignore Bill Gates. Unfortunately his economic and political power makes that impossible. But unlike him, we can recognise that this power exists and, when it speaks, it does so on its own behalf.


22) Warning! This “Colorful Chart” is Censored by IPCC.

I received this from James Hansen recently. It is a bit technical but for those who are interested in climate forcings it is pretty interesting. The graph is below.

The abstract from the paper states - 

"Abstract. The growth rate of greenhouse gas (GHG) climate forcing increased rapidly in the last 15 years to about 0.5 W/m2 per decade, as shown by the “colorful chart” for GHG climate forcing that we have been publishing for 25 years (Fig. 1). The chart is not in IPCC reports, perhaps because it reveals inconvenient facts. Although growth of GHG climate forcing declined rapidly after the 1987 Montreal Protocol, other opportunities to decrease climate forcing were missed. If policymakers do not appreciate the significance of present data on changing climate forcings, we scientists must share the blame."

Here is a further extract with more info - 

"One implication of the increased growth rate of GHG forcing in the last 15 years is that the goal to keep global warming under 2°C is now implausible. IPCC defined a GHG scenario (RCP2.6) intended to provide a 66% chance of keeping global warming below 2°C. Actual growth of GHG forcing has diverged dramatically from that scenario (Fig. 1), with reality being close to the extreme RCP8.5 scenario. The gap between reality and RCP2.6 could be closed by capturing and storing CO2 (carbon capture and sequestration, CCS), but the annual cost for the gap at January 2023 (the time of the last 60-month mean) would be $2.4-5 trillion with current technology, and the gap and annual cost are increasing.

RCP2.6, in fact, was never plausible, as it relied on assumption of large-scale biomass-burning at powerplants with carbon capture and permanent storage of the captured CO2, a scheme that would ravage nature and threaten food security. We scientists must share the blame, if we allow policymakers to believe that such scenarios provide a realistic projection of climate change."

If you wish to read the full report you can download it from James' website.

LOCAL

1) Media articles written by CKM members since the last newsletter. 

07/06/25 - On the highway to climate hell.

“We are on a highway to climate hell with our foot still on the accelerator.” So said UN Secretary General António Guterres at the opening of the 27th Conference of Parties (COP27) in 2022. Although he was lamenting the lack of global action to abate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, there is a very real climate consequence to actual feet on accelerators.
This is why the planned increases in highway speed limits in Marlborough, recently dictated by central government, are regrettable not just for the obvious impact on road safety; they will also increase GHG emissions. Transport accounts for about a third of New Zealand’s long-lived GHG emissions and the sad fact is, the faster we drive, the greater our fuel consumption and the greater these emissions. Higher speed limits mean our nation’s transport emissions to rise further still."

05/07/25 - The sea is rising.

Most of us have the image in our heads of what sea level rise looks like. We think of pictures of beach side parking lots covered in ankle deep water. While higher high tides are certainly something we can expect as sea level rises, it is not the only thing that will happen. Sea level rise, due to our warming climate, will create a number of changes to coastal environments.

First, a little background. Globally, sea level is currently rising at about half a centimetre per year – more along some coasts due to land subsidence and ocean currents and less in others, due to tectonic uplift of land and those same ocean currents. As a consequence of global warming, sea level has risen about 25cm since 1880.
Unfortunately for us, the rate of sea level rise is accelerating, i.e., getting faster as our planet heats up, glaciers melt and warmer sea water expands. Some climate model predictions suggest as much as 1 metre by the end of the century.

02/08/25 - Will we be on our own in managed retreat?

“In principle the government won’t be able to keep bailing out people in this way.” This is a quote from Prime Minister, Christopher Luxon regarding possible government compensation for losses incurred due to recent flooding in Tasman. With central government now in the process of formulating a framework for climate adaptation, Luxon’s statement perhaps shows the way central government is leaning on the contentious issue of managed retreat.

Managed retreat, or perhaps more descriptively, “planned relocation”, is the process of moving homes out of harm’s way from anticipated natural hazards. The “red zones” evacuated due to liquefaction during the Christchurch earthquakes are an example of this. In each of these cases so far, a combination of local and central government has compensated people for the loss of their homes.

But, Treasury has said that compensation for these losses is not sustainable long term; there are simply too many properties threatened by flood and sea level rise.
So, how do we, as a society deal with this situation in the face of mounting losses due to steadily worsening climate disasters?

29/08/25 - The Amazing Blue Machine.

The total mass of humans on Earth is around 0.4 gigatonnes. If you lump together all the biomass in the ocean larger than 10 grams then about 60% is missing. We know where it went. Humans are responsible for removing about 2.7 gigatonnes of life from the ocean. Now, if you can grasp the concept that the ocean is a machine through which life, energy and raw materials flow then you can get a glimpse of the implications of our actions. Once that life is out of the ocean it is unavailable to bigger predators or smaller scavengers and can’t be digested by marine microbes in the depths. All that life has been lost to the energy flows of the ocean. Humans, not being content with removing 60% of the larger lifeforms, are now starting to commercially harvest zooplankton, one of the critical foundations of the ocean ecosystem. This does not seem like a wise action to take.

Here are links to copies of the articles if you can't access them on The Press website. On the Highway to Climate Hell, The Sea is Rising, Will we be on our own in managed retreat? and The Amazing Blue Machine. 

2) MDC submissions on the updating of the Resource Management Act national direction - 

I attended the MDC Environment and Planning Committee meeting on August 28th. There was one report of particular interest where Sarah Pearson reported on the Council’s submissions on updating Resource Management Act (RMA) national direction for Packages 1 & 2 - Infrastructure and Development, and Primary Sector and Package 3 - Freshwater. Sarah and a range of other Council staff have worked on the submissions to Central Government. I was impressed by the analysis, thought, effort and commitment shown by those staff in putting together the submissions. The report is complex and covers a lot of matters. If you are interested you can access full copies of the agenda with reports, submissions and the comprehensive Information Package on the MDC website. 

Below are a few words from the Executive Summary of the report. 

New and amended national direction are part of the Government’s active programme of resource management reform. Government publicly released for consultation three packages of proposals on national direction on 29 May 2025, with the submission period closing on 27 July 2025. These packages proposed the introduction of four new national direction instruments and amendments to 12 existing national direction instruments. Two Council endorsed submissions were made, these were focused on parts of the proposals that had relevance in the Marlborough context.

One particular National Policy Statement that Council submitted on that is of interest to CKM is Natural Hazards (NPS-NH). 

Here is a summary of the main points. 

    • As a first step towards more comprehensive national direction in the future, Council supported the need for the NPS-NH. However, the narrow scope of the proposal, primarily focusing on consenting matters (subdivision and land use), was of a concern to Council through potentially limiting its effectiveness in addressing long-term resilience and adaptation.
      
    • The exclusion of infrastructure from the NPS-NH was also a Council concern. Significant time, costs and resources are required for new infrastructure which should warrant the inclusion of infrastructure within this instrument. More generally, the proposed NPS-NH lacked alignment with the precautionary principle embedded in the current RMA which is seen as critical for managing uncertainty in hazard risk.
      
    • Regarding the proposed standard risk assessment, Council suggested further clarity was required in respect to the risk matrix including national guidance on thresholds, mitigation standards and climate scenarios. To ensure consistency and legal robustness Council recommended the proposed risk assessment process be embedded in legislation.
      
    • Council also highlighted that while the proposal allows councils to manage risk proportionally, many councils, including Marlborough, currently face gaps in hazard data and have not undertaken formal risk assessments at regional, local, or site-specific levels. The proposal also didn’t provide clear timeframes or resourcing commitments to support implementation, placing unrealistic burden on councils to deliver new obligations. 
      
    • Clarity was requested by Council on the definition of terms such as “new development” and “best available information”. 
      
    • Regarding implementation of the NPS-NH, Council requested this be delayed at least until other national direction instruments were finalised, but preferably until Phase 3 of RMA reforms were stood up to ensure alignment and integration. Notwithstanding timing, Council requested clear implementation timeframes as well as funding and technical support be available to councils. 

3) Environmental Compliance and Monitoring page launched on MDC.

A useful new resource is now available to access on the MDC website. 

"The Environmental Compliance and Monitoring site officially launched on 3 April 2025. This platform is designed to facilitate better engagement with the Marlborough community while offering a comprehensive hub for information and resources related to environmental compliance and monitoring. The site serves as a critical tool for enhancing the dissemination of information, fostering community engagement and supporting interactions between the public and Council staff."

4) Earth+ Resilience and Emissions Reduction workshop.

This workshop is scheduled for September 17th in Blenheim. Below is some information about the event. 

The Terra Nova Foundation is a socio-environmental charity, working with individuals, communities and decision-makers to align human behaviour with environmental wellbeing, through collective action and positive human connection. In partnership with the Rātā Foundation, we have been running the Earth+ Resilience and Emissions Reduction Programme since early 2024, supporting over 100 participants from not-for-profit organisations across Canterbury, Tasman and Marlborough, to develop resilience and change readiness plans, to deepen understanding of climate change and our role as kaitiaki, and to build action plans to reduce our environmental footprint and give back to our planet.
 
You can find more information and register for the event on the Terra Nova website.

5) Marlborough council holds too many secret meetings, Ombudsman says.

The Chief Ombudsman has reprimanded Marlborough District Council's use of public-excluded briefings and workshops, saying they should be "open by default". Two years ago, councils were given a dressing-down for holding workshops behind closed doors too often and for invalid reasons, but Marlborough's council boss maintains they are well within the law and it's important to discuss complex information without scrutiny. Chief Ombudsman John Allen made his critiques in his official opinion on the council's compliance with the Local Government Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA), which was presented to councillors on 4 August.

All councillor briefings and workshops, which were held to inform councillors about complex regional issues, were automatically public-excluded. Allen said the council had "acted unreasonably" in their lack of record-keeping, and he believed all workshops and briefings should be open to the public by default. "We understand that there may be occasion to partially or fully close specific briefings and workshops."

Check out the full article on the RNZ website.

NATIONAL 

6) No future climate adaptation assistance would leave NZers 'on their own'.

This item has more information related to the topic of Tom's, August Marlborough Express article from above. This is a critical topic and one that I believe New Zealanders need to think very carefully about. I'm not surprised by the direction the current government is taking but unfortunately I think it is a simplistic approach that doesn't address some of the real issues in our society. As climate impacts increase we need to find better ways to work together as a community to help each other . Leaving people to try and manage on their own and blaming them for being in the wrong place fails to recognise that the poorest in our society will be the ones most impacted. Some people may live in high risk locations who have plenty of warning and could have moved but I suspect many will live there because they can't afford the low risk locations and a vulnerable home is better than no home at all. 

An independent reference group set up by the Ministry for the Environment recently released a suite of recommendations to help the government shape climate adaptation legislation. Following a 20-year transition period, homeowners whose houses are flooded or damaged by weather events should not expect buy-outs, the group recommended. The group also recommended that funding for adaptation measures such as flood schemes, sea walls and blue-green infrastructure, should follow a 'beneficiary pays' approach in most cases.

Victoria University emeritus professor Jonathan Boston, who was part of a previous expert working group on climate adaptation, said the message from the latest report to New Zealanders was clear: "You are on your own." The report rightly recognised the need for urgent action on climate adaptation, and to make consistent, reliable information about climate hazards available, Boston said. However, the recommendations to withdraw financial assistance for both property buy-outs and adaptation measures, and to leave decision-making up to individuals, were "fundamentally flawed". "One of the core responsibilities of any government is to protect its citizens and to deal with natural disasters and so on. That is above almost anything else." To put an end-date on that was "morally bankrupt and highly undesirable", he said. The report wrongly assumed that people would act rationally if they were properly informed of the risks, he said. "We know from vast amounts of literature that people suffer from all kinds of cognitive biases... and that these have a profound influence on whether people make sensible decisions or not. "And quite apart from cognitive bias, lots of people lack choices. They lack the [financial] resources to make good decisions."released a suite of recommendations to help the government shape climate adaptation legislation.

Environmental Defense Society policy director Raewyn Peart said the report seemed to be moving away from the concept of "managed retreat", where communities moved out of harm's way in a coordinated fashion. "The approach seems to be unmanaged retreat, where we'll give people information and a transition period - they're on notice - and at that point, people can make their own decisions about whether to move or not." That would be unworkable, Peart said. "Some people will move, some won't, councils [will have] to provide services to a community that's gradually emptying out, people there who can't afford to move will be trapped into a risky situation - they may be facing regular floods of their properties. "I just don't think it's in the best interests of the country to essentially leave it to the market and people's individual decisions."

You can check out the full article on the RNZ website.

Here is more on this topic published in The Conversation.

Our imagined future scenario can be avoided if governments take a broader view of adaptation. Treating climate risk as an individual responsibility may reduce short-term government liability. But it will not reduce long-term social and fiscal liability. The risk of failing to act systemically is that the country pays in other ways – in fractured communities, rising inequity and preventable harm. Adaptation to climate change has to be about more than limiting the upfront costs of buyouts or infrastructure repairs. Ignoring the wider impacts will only shift the burden and increase it over time. Real economic and community resilience means planning with people in mind, investing early and making sure no one is left behind. That work must begin now.

Newsroom also published an article written by Jonathon Boston which has some interesting discussion in the comments section. 

7) Wetland restoration is seen as sunk cost – but new research shows why it should be considered an investment.

This article written by Wei Yang a Senior Scientist in Environmental Economics at Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University is a good analysis of the benefits of seeing wetlands as an investment. It highlights again, the need to have a long view on the climate challenges facing humanity and to avoid the temptation to always go for the short term gain at the expense of the future. 

As part of a major reform of the Resource Management Act, the government is reviewing the environmental rules governing the work of local and regional councils, including policies on freshwater. The law review and freshwater policy consultations present both opportunities and challenges for wetland valuation. 

The amendment to the Resource Management Act regarding freshwater proposes:

   "quick, targeted changes which will reduce the regulatory burden on key sectors, including farming, mining and other primary industries."

While this may reduce the regulatory burden, it highlight the need for robust valuation tools that can weigh long-term benefits against immediate development returns. With sea-level rise accelerating and extreme weather becoming more frequent, wetlands represent critical infrastructure for climate adaptation. Unlike built infrastructure (stop banks, for example) that depreciates, wetlands appreciate, becoming more valuable as they mature.

The current policy consultation period offers an opportunity to embed this thinking into New Zealand’s environmental frameworks. Rather than viewing wetlands as regulatory constraints, dynamic valuation could reveal them as appreciating assets that increase resilience for coastal communities. Restoring coastal wetlands is not just about repairing nature. It’s about investing in a living, compounding asset that ameliorates climate impacts and protects our coasts and communities.

8) Native forests sink more carbon than expected. 

A NIWA-led study has found New Zealand’s native forests are absorbing more carbon dioxide (CO2) than previously thought. Study leader, NIWA atmospheric scientist Dr Beata Bukosa, says the findings could have implications for New Zealand’s greenhouse gas reporting, carbon credit costs, and climate and land-use policies.  She says forests – both native and exotic – play a vital role in absorbing CO2 through photosynthesis, but previous studies may have underestimated the amount of carbon taken up by New Zealand’s mature indigenous forests, which were thought to be roughly carbon neutral.  

Using advanced modelling and NIWA’s supercomputer, the researchers examined a decade of atmospheric data, from 2011 to 2020, to better estimate the amount of CO₂ absorbed by New Zealand's land ecosystems. The NIWA team worked with collaborators at GNS Science and Manaaki Whenua as well as other New Zealand and overseas universities and institutes. 

You can read more about it on the NIWA website.
 
9) Climate Change Commission 2025 Monitoring Report summary.

You can read the report or download a one page summary from the Climate Commission website. I found the graph in the one page summary showing the overall risk to meeting the next two emissions budget very interesting. The third emissions budget for the period 2031 - 2035 shows a large proportion in the category "significant risk to delivery" and a smaller proportion even above that risk level rated as "gap in emissions plan".  

10) Think like a Forest. 

On August 15th at the Beehive, Pure Advantage premiered their new climate action film, Think Like A Forest as a part of their "Recloaking Papatūānuku" initiative. 

They say: It was extraordinary presenting Think Like A Forest at the Beehive for many reasons, not least because this is where decisions are made, trajectories altered. And to create the conditions for Recloaking Papatūānuku to become a reality, we need levers pulled at the government level. So, alongside the film, we also presented a Policy Brief document, which we’re delighted to share with you. It outlines the issues we face, presents Recloaking Papatūānuku as a cornerstone for a new, more meaningful climate action approach, and highlights the core opportunities for policy change. For those unfamiliar with our kaupapa, Recloaking Papatūānuku is an ambitious environmental restoration proposition aimed at restoring our indigenous forests and wetlands at scale. It’s an initiative which envisages a strategic policy shift from Aotearoa New Zealand's current singular focus on short-term carbon offsetting, which fails to deliver integrated solutions and co-benefits across climate mitigation and adaptation, landscape resilience, and biodiversity. 

Here is a summary of the four key opportunities they are calling for from the Government: 

1. Create a national climate and landscape infrastructure resilience plan.

2. Transparently account for climate liabilities. 

3. Reform the Environment Trading Scheme (ETS). 

4. Scale investment by redirecting ETS revenue.

If you're interested you can download a full copy of their Policy Brief document from their website.

11) MethaneSat down: how New Zealand space ambitions fell off the radar.

Satellite built to track emissions fails just as New Zealand scientists about to take control and reap returns of NZ$29m government investment.

For scientist Sara Mikaloff-Fletcher, the news that a methane-tracking satellite was lost in space last week left her feeling like the air had been sucked from her lungs. It happened just days before New Zealand was due to take control of the spacecraft, known as MethaneSat, which was designed to “name and shame” the worst methane polluters in the oil and gas industry.
The satellite’s primary goal was to detect methane leaks from oil and gas production worldwide. But in New Zealand, Mikaloff-Fletcher leads a complementary project to explore if the satellite could also track the release of the potent greenhouse gas from agriculture. Methane from livestock accounts for almost half of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions.

You can check out the full article in The Conversation. We are learning some amazing new information from satellites designed to monitor and measure environmental changes. Losing the MethaneSat is disappointing to say the least! 

12) Opinion: Recrafting the narrative of mining in New Zealand: Is Shane Jones a closet post-structuralist?

Have you heard the term "post-structuralist"? I hadn't till I read this article published on the Massey University website.  

Essentially post-structuralists argue that the way we see and know the world is socially created – and it is socially created through words, narratives and the meanings that sit behind them. We each make the world through the way we talk about it...and hence each of us, and each of the societies and the cultures we are part of, will see the world differently through the different ways we express ourselves and the knowledges we have. What is important for post-structuralists is the way in which some people (those with power) are able to shape these meanings and social ‘realities’ in ways that suit their values, ethics and interests over those of others. So, how does this gel with the blunt, belligerent rhetorical style of Shane Jones? Words shape and make the world – quite literally – and as a consummate politician and orator, Jones know this. Since coming into Government he has been persisting in shaping a new narrative about the nation and the place of mining. Guided by a neo-liberal logic (although Jones appears far more pragmatic than his coalition partner ideologues), beliefs, ethics and values, he is creating new meanings and narratives about mining and the future of the country. And through this have flowed policy change to facilitate access to the country’s mineral resources for – mostly – foreign investors. He is not talking about an objective ‘truth’, but rather how he wants the world to be.
 
13) More Climate Litigation. This time a challenge to the Emissions Reduction Plan. 

I feel a little more optimistic when I read about actions through the courts that challenge whether the government is doing enough to meet it's responsibilities on our behalf. The citizens of NZ expect our government to be proactive and fair when delivering an Emissions Reduction Plan. In this particular case it is Environmental Law Initiative (ELI) and Lawyers for Climate Action NZ (LCANZI) v Minister of Climate Change. We should be thankful we have committed and principled lawyers such as those in these two groups that are motivated to take action where they identify "glaring holes" in the Government's climate plan. 

Below is an extract from the article on the ELI website where you can also access more information about the details of the case and the relief being sought. Suffice it to say ELI and LCANZI lawyers are claiming that the Government's actions are unlawful and "that the plan’s reliance on offsetting, which treats forestry offsets as equivalent to actual emissions reductions at source, is based on a fundamental error of fact, and the Minister failed to have regard to the potential for that assumption to result in an emissions reduction plan that is inconsistent with New Zealand’s obligations under international law."  

Here is the extract - 

With our friends, Lawyers for Climate Action NZ, we are taking legal action against the Minister of Climate Change over ‘glaring holes’ in the Government’s climate plan. We believe in fairness and the rule of law. As a nation, we have high carbon emissions per capita. As a wealthy country, we need to meet our climate targets with real action, as part of the global effort to limit warming to no more than 1.5C this century.

Yet, in its first eight months, the Luxon-led Government cancelled 35 climate policies and actions which were part of the first Emissions Reduction Plan - without first consulting the public, as required by law. It then developed the second emissions reduction plan which is almost devoid of actions or policies that will reduce emissions at their source. Climate Change Minister Simon Watts instead relied heavily on offsetting the country’s emissions with forestry plantations. 

This was despite warnings from the Climate Change Commission that tree planting is no substitute for reducing emissions at source. It locks-in vast pine plantations for future generations, and falls short of our obligations under the Paris Agreement.  The science is clear that forestry is important, but it’s not a substitute for reducing our combustion of fossil fuels. The Minister has made the pathway for achieving the third emissions budget incredibly difficult. Left unchallenged, it will be a huge burden for the future.
 
You can also read more about the case in two further articles. One was published in Newsroom and focuses on the fact that "More than 80 percent of the CO2 reductions in the Government’s new climate plan come from planting trees, not reducing emissions at their source."

The other is in the Guardian.

14) Now that we've reached 1.5C, what next? 

"Our Climate Declaration" organised a webinar on August 27th where David Spratt, who is the Research Director for the Breakthrough National Centre for Climate Restoration in Australia discussed his most recent report.

He has "concluded that global warming has reached 1.5°C, the rate of warming is accelerating, and emissions reductions are unlikely to reduce the rate of warming in the near term. While much of the climate community remains committed to the 1.5°C Paris goal, this target is fundamentally flawed: it does not represent a safe boundary, will not prevent large-scale Earth system elements passing tipping points, nor does it mark a point of system stability. Exploring the limits of current strategies, the discussion set out an alternative: a three-lever approach combining zero emissions, large-scale carbon drawdown, and urgent research into safe short-term cooling."

You can watch the full webinar on their website if you're interested. 

The Breakthrough Centre has also released a new publication titled "Collision Course", which provides more detail about the matters discussed in the above webinar. You can download a copy from their website.

15) Dr Ratu Mataira on entrepreneurship and the potential of nuclear fusion.

This recent interview on Nine to Noon on RNZ caught my eye and ear. It's a fascinating insight into a New Zealander who is doing some ground breaking research into Nuclear Fusion. Yes, I know about the old chestnut that nuclear fusion is always about 10 years away but putting that aside it's worth listening to Ratu, just to get a feel for who he is and how he got to where he is now. Building a nuclear fusion plant in Ngaranga Gorge! 

The summary on the RNZ website says - 

The efforts of physicist Ratu Mataira to deliver almost limit less energy through nuclear fusion have been recognised by Victoria University in Wellington in its Distinguished Alumni awards for the brightest and boldest innovators. Dr Mataira, Ngāti Porou and Ngāti Kahungunu, completed his PhD in Applied Superconductivity at the Victoria's Robinson Research Institute at bit over three years ago.

He leads OpenStar Technologies a Wellington-based start-up working with nuclear fusion - as opposed to nuclear fission - in an attempt to capture a source of almost limitless clean energy. Multi-national groups have been trying to achieve this same goal for decades, but with massive teams and enormous budgets. 

For anyone who wishes to learn more about nuclear fusion and the different research projects currently happening this fact sheet published on the Clean Energy Wire website provides a comprehensive overview, which I found balanced and helpful.

INTERNATIONAL

15) Half the tree of life’: ecologists’ horror as nature reserves are emptied of insects.

Many of you will have read or heard about the growing crisis for the global insect population and the consequences for the biosphere, as we lose large numbers of them. This article from the Guardian shares the alarming information that populations of insects in what appear to be relatively pristine ecosystems are not immune to this declining trend. 

Last month, the journal BioScience published new research examining how the five biggest drivers of biodiversity loss were affecting the US’s endangered creatures. For the first time – albeit by a very slim margin – the climate crisis emerged in front, driving the decline of 91% of imperiled species. Heat-driven declines could have repercussions far beyond their immediate surroundings. In the past, even if pesticides wiped out insects over an agricultural region, as long as healthy populations remained elsewhere, species could return if the spraying stopped.
“Climate change is impacting all those different little spots at the same time. It doesn’t just affect one particular spot that gets a pesticide dose or gets a tree cut down,” Janzen says. “If the insect population collapses and it happens everywhere, you don’t have a residual population.”

Today, as well as being an ecologist Wagner feels he has taken on a second role – as an elegist for disappearing forms of life. “I’m an optimist, in the sense that I think we will build a sustainable future,” Wagner says. “But it’s going to take 30 or 40 years, and by then, it’s going to be too late for a lot of the creatures that I love. I want to do what I can with my last decade to chronicle the last days for many of these creatures.”

If you are interested in more information about this crisis then I recommend this very good webinar with Nate Hagens and Oliver Milman.

They discuss the alarming decline in insect populations in the past few decades and the far-reaching consequences this has for ecosystem stability, human well-being, and the overall health of the biosphere. From pollination and nutrient cycles to being the base of food webs for countless other animals, the loss of insects has cascading effects beyond what we could imagine. Oliver outlines the human activity that is driving the worst of these trends, including how accelerating global heating is amplifying these ecological pressures. How would a major collapse of insect populations immediately disrupt our everyday lives — and are we already starting to see those impacts? How do various sectors of human activity, from industrial agriculture to urban development, influence insect health? And ultimately, would supporting thriving insect populations require us to fundamentally rethink our relationship with the creatures with which we share the biosphere?

16) International Court of Justice ruling marks new era in climate accountability.

This ruling is the culmination of many years of effort initiated by a group of students from the campus of the University of the South Pacific in Vanuatu. The ICJ’s advisory opinion for the first time gives the Pacific and all vulnerable communities a legal mechanism to hold states accountable and to demand the climate action that is long overdue. My heart goes out to this group of youths who decided they would make a bold plan and follow it through. Seeing their immense efforts being rewarded is wonderful.

In the opinion piece co-written By Professor Regina Scheyvens and Professor Glenn Banks and published on the Massey University website they say -

"The ICJ ruling is blunt: the multilateral climate change and environmental agreements and treaties that countries–including New Zealand–sign-up for, do contain binding obligations for states in relation to protecting the climate system from greenhouse gas emissions. From this flow state obligations to prevent significant harm to the environment by abiding by the agreements, as well as the duty to cooperate in good faith to prevent significant environmental harm. Where states do not meet these obligations, legal action and claims for repatriations and compensation can flow. There can be – indeed we can now predict that there will be - real costs associated with our non-compliance with the agreements that we sign up to."  

You can read more about this important court ruling in this Guardian article - We were heard’: the Pacific students who took their climate fight to the ICJ – and won. and in this item from the NZ Lawyers for Climate Action website. 

17) Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Preventing Destruction of Nature is a Global Legal Duty.

This parallel and related court ruling is also of great importance and together this and the ICJ rulings provide some much needed impetus to the urgent requirement for countries around the globe to be held accountable for their activities that impact the climate and the environment that we all share.

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights made public its Advisory Opinion on the climate emergency and human rights on 3 July, following more than two years of deliberation. Advisory Opinion No. 32, requested by the States of Chile and Colombia in 2023, affirms that the international obligation to prevent irreversible harm to the environment and the climate constitutes a jus cogens norm — that is, a peremptory norm of international law.

In addition to emphasising the obligation of cooperation between states in environmental matters, the Advisory Opinion addresses the right to a healthy environment and the recognition of nature as a subject of rights. Although the Advisory Opinions are not binding, this marks the first time a human rights court has recognised preventing irreversible harm to nature as a legal duty no state can avoid, comparable in weight to bans on slavery or genocide. While this interpretation currently comes from the Inter-American Court, it signals a legal paradigm shift and is expected to influence jurisprudence across Latin America and support the growing global recognition of environmental protection as a cornerstone of international human rights law.

You can see more information and access the full Advisory Opinion if you wish on the StopEcocide website.

18) Recent blogs from James Hansen.

A Formula to Keep the Science Flame Burning - July 8th.

For those readers of this newsletter who appreciate the views of James Hansen on current climate issues his blog from July is of interest. In it he discusses the challenges to scientific inquiry in the US under the Trump administration and the impacts on the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).  He also continues the ongoing discussion about climate sensitivity and the global energy imbalance and whether the IPCC assessments of these are faulty. 

Why is the Trump Administration trying to kill a small space science institute in New York City? Explanation begins with Galileo’s method of scientific inquiry and ends with the role of special interest money in the United States government.

Science itself is under threat today, in a way that I thought was no longer possible. Scientists who see and understand the threat must speak out. The next 5-10 years are crucial for policy decisions to define a course that provides energy to raise global living standards, while allowing climate policies that cool the planet enough to avoid locking in irreversible effects such as shutdown of the ocean’s overturning circulation and large sea level rise. These objectives require knowledge of ongoing climate change and the drives that cause change. We scientists must stand up against the forces of ignorance, fight for the collection of data, and work with young people to help them find a path to a healthy climate that benefits all humanity.

And here is the issue humanity is doing their best to ignore. Earth's energy imbalance has doubled since 2005. This is not good!

Confirmation of our analysis is provided by precise monitoring of Earth’s energy imbalance – the difference between absorbed solar radiation and heat radiation emitted to space. Because of the change from increasing aerosols in 1970-2005 to decreasing aerosols, Earth’s energy imbalance – which is the drive for global warming – has doubled since 2005, from 0.6 to 1.2 watts per square meter averaged over Earth’s surface. The latter value is equal to the energy in 800,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs per day (220 per second), with 90 percent of this excess energy going into the ocean. Because of the massive size of the ocean, warming is gradual but relentless. In the absence of effective policy intervention, regional climate extremes will grow in coming decades, and there will be effects that are practically irreversible, such as rising sea level.

You can download a full copy of the blog from his website.

Seeing the Forest for the Trees - August 6th.

This blog has more very interesting information on climate sensitivity and climate forcings if you're into that sort of thing. Fascinating if you're into the science!

Climate sensitivity is substantially higher than IPCC’s best estimate (3°C for doubled CO2), a conclusion we reach with greater than 99 percent confidence. We also show that global climate forcing by aerosols became stronger (increasingly negative) during 1970-2005, unlike IPCC’s best estimate of aerosol forcing. High confidence in these conclusions is based on a broad analysis approach. IPCC’s underestimates of climate sensitivity and aerosol cooling follow from their disproportionate emphasis on global climate modeling, an approach that will not yield timely, reliable, policy advice.

James also included some relevant comments on "Communication of the climate situation". I'm interested to note regarding "communication of the climate situation" how their scientific work has been sidelined and discussion about their recent papers been shutdown on the grounds that their analysis was “too simple” and their conclusions were “outside the mainstream.” I am one person who places a lot more weight on James Hansen's scientific work than those who downplay it. You can make you own decisions about that. 

He also includes information about his input to the International Court of Justice decision covered in Item 16 of this newsletter.

You can download a full copy of the blog from his website.

The Venus Syndrome & Runaway Climate - August 27th.

James has been writing a book for sometime now called Sophie's Planet. Sophie is his granddaughter. This follows his earlier book called "Storms of my Grandchildren" published in 2009. He has posted a draft of chapter 10 of Sophie's Planet for his blog readers to see. It is on the topic of "The Venus Syndrome & Runaway Climate."  

In the chapter he says - 

The “runaway climate” threat is the danger of passing a “point of no return,” with enormous, irreversible, consequences for today’s young people and their descendants. I depicted the danger of rapid ice sheet collapse and sea level rise as a “tipping point” twenty years ago, but also as a “point of no return.” The latter terminology is now more appropriate, as Lenton et al. use “tipping point” for a broader range of amplifying climate feedbacks, many of which are reversible, if the forcings driving global warming are removed or replaced with global cooling.

The runaway climate threat and danger of passing a point of no return are taboo with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the organization that we should expect to be most protective of the rights and the future of young people. This reticence of IPCC is a cause for concern, which deserves to be pointed out and vigorously debated. We have presented evidence that the millennial time scale of ice sheet changes in the models that IPCC relies on are much slower than indicated by real-world data, even when ocean and ice sheet changes are driven by very slowly changing paleoclimate forcings. Specifically, paleoclimate data, global modeling, and ongoing ocean and ice sheet observations raise concern that rapid shutdown of the ocean’s overturning circulation could occur within decades, which can affect ocean/ice sheet interactions and the rate of sea level rise.

The potential of passing the point of no return is cause for concern, but no reason to panic. The climate system’s delayed response to human-made drivers of climate change – which gives rise to the runaway climate threat – also provides time to take preventive actions, if the climate science is understood well enough to define realistic, effective, policy actions. It is incumbent on us to help define the research that is needed to better assess the threat of shutdown of ocean overturning circulation and large sea level rise because of their irreversible nature.

There is a more mundane, slowly growing climate threat, which the public is beginning to recognize. Extremes of the hydrologic cycle are amplified on a hotter planet. Where rainfall occurs, it includes more extreme rainfall, floods, and stronger storms driven by a warmer ocean, greater latent energy in water vapor, and larger temperature gradients. High temperature causes dry times and places to have more extreme heat waves, droughts and fires. Some tropical regions – and the subtropics in summer – can become so warm that the human body is unable to cool itself and survive in the outdoors. If we allow global climate to go down that path, pressures for emigration from low latitudes would dwarf the emigration pressures of today, which would likely make the planet ungovernable.

Again you can download a full copy of the blog from his website.

19) Experts: Which climate tipping point is the most concerning?

As a follow on from the previous item you may wish to read the brief opinions of 14 global experts in their fields on this topic. 
You can check it out on the Carbon Brief website.

In July, hundreds of scientists, policymakers and journalists flocked to the University of Exeter to attend an international conference on “tipping points”. The conference saw experts discussing the dangers of a range of Earth system tipping points, including the dieback of the Amazon, the melting of the Greenland ice sheet and the shutdown of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). On the sidelines of the conference, Carbon Brief asked a wide range of delegates which tipping point concerns them the most. 

20) NASA study on storm cloud reduction of 1.5 to 3%/decade.

This scientific paper is from the above-mentioned GISS institute. I find obscure research papers like this fascinating, as they can give us glimpses of aspects of global heating that most of humanity are completely ignorant about. And yet the consequences are existential. We're a funny old species aren't we? We behave in ways that are destroying our life support systems and at the same time act as if there is nothing to be concerned about. We're too busy GROWING and consuming to take notice.

Here is the plain English summary of the paper - 

Analysis of satellite observations shows that in the past 24 years the Earth's storm cloud zones in the tropics and the middle latitudes have been contracting at a rate of 1.5%–3% per decade. This cloud contraction, along with cloud cover decreases at low latitudes, allows more solar radiation to reach the Earth's surface. When the contribution of all cloud changes is calculated, the storm cloud contraction is found to be the main contributor to the observed increase of the Earth's solar absorption during the 21st century.

21) Game-changing projects for Australia's clean energy industry.

Kidston Pumped Storage Hydro - This first item is on pumped storage which has been a topic for discussion in NZ over the last few years. This Australian project utilises an old gold mine pit in Northern Queensland and is a first-of-its-kind natural battery storage facility for Australia. When completed it will provide 250 MW of rapid response (30 seconds) renewable energy. It required 4 years of design development and technical optimisation and is providing 800 jobs during construction. The short video clip and summary of the project on the McConnell Dowell website provides an interesting look at the project.

Two large Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) in Australia are further examples of game changers with batteries large enough to play an important role in stabilising a power grid. The Waratah battery on the Central Coast in N.S.W. has a maximum output of 850 megawatt (MW) and storage capacity of 1680 megawatt hour (MWh with the Collie plant in WA having a maximum output of 560 megawatts (MW) and a large 2,240 MWh storage capacity.

Maybe NZ needs to be installing large scale batteries such as these instead of chasing after more gas reserves? The best NZ comparison is the Ruakākā Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) which was completed by Meridian Energy in May this year, which has a maximum output of 100MW of electricity and storage capacity of 200MWh, enough to power around 60,000 average households during winter for a two-hour period. They are also developing a new BESS in Manawatū of the same size.  

22) The world's largest sand battery just went live in Finland.

This is another very interesting item. A battery that can effectively store electricity from renewable sources such as wind and solar, as heat, in a large insulated storage tank full of sand.  

Finland has inaugurated an industrial-scale sand battery this week in the southern town of Pornainen, where it'll take over heating duties from an old woodchip power plant for the municipality. It's set to reduce carbon emissions from the local heating network by as much as 70%, and is the largest one of its kind in the world.

Developed by Finnish Firm Polar Night Energy – which also built the world's first commercial sand battery a few years ago – this battery is about 42 ft (13 m) tall and 50 ft (15 m) wide. It serves as a storage medium for up to 100 MWh, with a round trip efficiency of 90%. That makes it about 10 times larger than the first-ever sand battery, and capable of storing enough heat for the whole town to use for a week.

This Thermal Energy Storage (TES) reservoir is a critical tool for places like Finland, which intermittently generate vast quantities of wind and solar electricity, but also face variations in energy demand and supply. The sand battery charges up when electricity is cheaply available and can hold a charge for months at a time, helping balance the energy grid during periods of high demand.

Check out the full article and a video about it.

23) How to run the world - We need new forms of global diplomacy to transcend the current pathetic bargaining of national and commercial interests.

This is a long read published written by David Van Reybrouck, Philosopher Laureate for the Netherlands and Flanders and published on the Aeon website.  It is for those who are interested in some of the history behind this predicament we now find ourselves in and looks at ways whereby people around the world can have improved opportunities to contribute to discussion and decision making that affects the future of all life on our Planet.

Here is an extract from the article to give you a taste - 

The reason why tools from the past won’t suffice is that the task involved has become dramatically different. The planetary polycrisis we are facing is not a regular war, nor even a world war or a global nuclear threat. We are talking about an entirely new form of complexity here, well beyond classical intrahuman conflict. The polycrisis is anthropogenic in its origin, but it cannot be anthropocentric in its solution. It has become a physical reality of its own, with its own ever-accelerating dynamics, its own centrifugal forces catapulting the more-than-human consequences away from its human causes.

And here lies the heart of the problem: the Earth system is in deep crisis, but we confront it with the usual solutions of the human world. No wonder that the existing concepts – national sovereignty, raison d’état, multilateral diplomacy, and so-called stakeholder engagement (a polite term for consultations with lobbyists) – fall so painfully short. The UN was founded to manage conflicts between countries, not to resolve the conflict between humanity and the planet. A flat organisation cannot solve a vertical problem.

How can national sovereignty remain the bedrock of international relations when we are faced with colossal planetary challenges? What can be ‘foreign’ about ‘policy’ when on the most existential of issues the world is more deeply interconnected than ever? The whole notion of ‘foreign policy’ feels increasingly meaningless in the age of planetarity. The clearcut distinction between foreign and domestic affairs comes from a time when the geophysical fiction of borders largely shaped historical societies. But extreme weather patterns, biosphere integrity, ocean acidification, sea level rise, freshwater change, mass migration, global pandemics and runaway machine intelligence laugh at the political boundaries between nation-states. This does not mean that we have to do away with borders altogether – they still structure part of our lives – only that we have to start thinking about levels of diplomacy that are not sovereignty-driven. Beyond the logic of raison d’état, we urgently need to develop the principle of raison de Terre – an encompassing approach that prioritises the interests of the Earth system above all national considerations.

Suppose such a global citizens’ assembly were to become an integral part of the COP meetings. After a pre-conference online phase, which could involve several million participants, a random sample of 1,000 of them, doing justice to the diversity and demography of the world, would participate. And suppose they were allowed to deliberate, not just in the Green Zone where visitors and activists stroll, but in the Blue Zone, the heart of the congress, where the official proceedings take place. And suppose this assembly had access to the best available science on climate change and its causes. They would also hear from national politicians, civil society organisations, private sector actors, religious leaders and Indigenous communities. At the end, they would deliver their recommendations to the leaders of the world. Would they need almost 30 years to state the obvious, namely that we have to get out of this fossil nightmare as soon as we can? Most probably not. They would take planetary custodianship to an entirely different level, well beyond the pathetic bargaining of national and industrial interests at the annual COP conference. They would show that, above bilateral and multilateral diplomacy, another level is possible: planetary diplomacy.

The question is easy: how on earth are we going to save Earth? Do we content ourselves with quietly continuing to watch the painful spectacle of the past decades, believing that this protocol is the only one possible? Or do we draw hope and inspiration from global opinion polls and fascinating experiments that show that everyday people want so much more action and can play a crucial role themselves?

24) Climate Change Kills Capitalism. 

In my humble opinion this is a must-read article from Robert Hunziker published on the "Counterpunch" website. Robert is commenting on an important article published in March this year. The article is repeating what many who read this newsletter already know but the critical thing is that it is being stated by a leader in the global insurance industry.  

Capitalism, like Antarctica and like the Amazon rainforest, is under threat of destruction by excessive levels of CO₂ emissions which cause radical climate change. Risk of some level of extinction of capitalism goes to the heart of a recent article written by Gunther Thallinger, Member of the Board of Management of Allianz Group (est. 1889, Munich) the world’s largest insurance company.

Mr. Thallinger spells out the risks: “These extreme weather phenomena drive direct physical risks to all categories of human-owned assets—land, houses, roads, power lines, railways, ports, and factories. Heat and water destroy capital. Flooded homes lose value. Overheated cities become uninhabitable. Entire asset classes are degrading in real time, which translates to loss of value, business interruption, and market devaluation on a systemic level.”

If this is how a board member of the world’s largest insurance company views risks to capitalism’s asset structure, then the world’s capitalist’s chieftains should seriously consider altering the destructive nature of climate change asap by omitting CO₂ emissions. Thallinger explains the risks to capitalism’s markets: “The insurance industry has historically managed these risks. But we are fast approaching temperature levels 1.5˚C, 2˚C, 3˚C where insurers will no longer be able to offer coverage for many of these risks. The math breaks down: the premiums required exceed what people or companies can pay. This is already happening. Entire regions are becoming uninsurable.”

Accordingly, “This is not a one-off market adjustment. This is a systemic risk that threatens the very foundation of the financial sector. If insurance is no longer available, other financial services become unavailable too. A house that cannot be insured cannot be mortgaged. No bank will issue loans for uninsurable property. Credit markets freeze.” Thallinger goes on to explain how excessive climate change damages capitalism to “climate-driven market failure.” Nothing could be a weirder coincidence than capitalism self-destroying via the genesis of industrialization powered by oil.

Solutions to climate change are difficult beyond halting fossil fuel emissions, full stop. For instance, state support where insurance fails to cover damage is not a realistic option as multiple climate-related disasters strain public budgets beyond acceptance by taxpayers. Consequently, multiple climate disasters ultimately lead to either governmental austerity or collapse. There is no in-between and neither option is satisfactory for a vibrant capitalistic economy. As for adaptation to climate change, Thallinger does not see any easy ways out, claiming “the false comfort of adaptation” as one more downside to the global warming complexity. “There is no way to ‘adapt’ to temperatures beyond human tolerance.” And adaptation, by definition, is limited with mega fires and cities built on flood plains. There are no easy answers.

And this article by Nick Feik published on the Aussie "Crikey" website looks at the implications in the Australian context. 

25) ‘Self-termination is most likely’: the history and future of societal collapse.

This is an interesting analysis of 5,000 years of civilisation, which argues that a global collapse is coming unless inequality is vanquished. I liked the authors positive statement about our predicament when he says - “Today, people find it easier to imagine that we can build intelligence on silicon than we can do democracy at scale, or that we can escape arms races. It’s complete bullshit. Of course we can do democracy at scale. We’re a naturally social, altruistic, democratic species and we all have an anti-dominance intuition. This is what we’re built for.”

Here is an extract from the article in the Guardian by Australian Damian Carrington. 

“The three most powerful men in the world are a walking version of the dark triad: Trump is a textbook narcissist, Putin is a cold psychopath, and Xi Jinping came to rule [China] by being a master Machiavellian manipulator. Our corporations and, increasingly, our algorithms, also resemble these kinds of people,” he says. “They’re basically amplifying the worst of us.”

Kemp points to these “agents of doom” as the source of the current trajectory towards societal collapse. “These are the large, psychopathic corporations and groups which produce global catastrophic risk,” he says. “Nuclear weapons, climate change, AI, are only produced by a very small number of secretive, highly wealthy, powerful groups, like the military-industrial complex, big tech and the fossil fuel industry.

“The key thing is this is not about all of humanity creating these threats. It is not about human nature. It is about small groups who bring out the worst in us, competing for profit and power and covering all [the risks] up.”

If citizens’ juries and wealth caps seem wildly optimistic, Kemp says we have been long brainwashed by rulers justifying their dominance, from the self-declared god-pharaohs of Egypt and priests claiming to control the weather to autocrats claiming to defend people from foreign threats and tech titans selling us their techno-utopias. “It’s always been easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of Goliaths. That’s because these are stories that have been hammered into us over the space of 5,000 years,” he says.

26) The National Security Risks We’re Not Prepared For: Adapting In an Age of Actorless Threats.

This item is a one hour YouTube discussion between Nate Hagens and Rod Schoonover. I recommend it for those who are interested in the bigger picture issues arising from the current global environmental and geopolitical developments. 

National security concerns have been the invisible hand guiding governance throughout recorded history. In the 20th century, it was defined by a country versus country dynamic: whichever nation was the strongest and most strategic was also the safest. But today, our biggest national security threats don’t come from opposing nations – they are “actorless threats” that emerge from the breakdown of the complex systems we all depend on – from the stability of our planetary systems to our intricately complex and fragile global supply chains. In this unprecedented landscape, what is required of us in order to keep our citizens safe? In this episode, Nate is joined by Rod Schoonover, an expert at the intersection of Earth systems stress and national security, where they discuss the need for the evolution of national defense to address the systemic (and diffuse) threats of the 21st century. Rod emphasizes the need for a reformed security sector that addresses contemporary challenges, like global heating that leads to extreme climatic events, urging immediate action to mitigate risks and enhance stability. Importantly, they also delve into the need for political leadership to embrace complexity and local resilience when tackling these pressing issues. How do we unite against ‘actorless’ threats, even when we don’t have someone to blame for their damages? Where have leadership and governance already begun to adapt to address these existential concerns, and where are we seeing failures? Finally, how could incorporating more cooperative principles at every level of society transform our ability to bend – not break – under the weight of our human predicament?

LOCAL

1) Media articles written by CKM members since the last newsletter. 

01/03/2025 - Is growth, growth, growth really the way to go?

"It is common for people to think of the climate and environmental crises as being problems to be solved. Unfortunately it is not that simple. The situation is better thought of as a predicament. A predicament does not have clear answers or ways to be resolved. This is the quandary we find ourselves in now. Do we want to face the reality of our predicament?
Can we choose to discourage tourism and helicopter flights to view the vineyards, or the multitude of other high emissions discretionary activities we can manage without?
Can we have an informed debate about what an ecologically and socially sustainable future might look like? If this is too big a step to take, then we will be left with the consequences of our collective actions and unfortunately that means increasing extreme weather events, environmental breakdown and damage to our social fabric."

15/04/2025 - We will be tested: Rising to the challenge of global warming.

"Outdoor programmes like Girl Guides, Scouts Aotearoa and Outward Bound teach many of the needed skills and help develop a young person’s confidence and resilience. They also teach teamwork, which will help future communities work together to rescue, resource and rebuild after the disasters that will be all the more frequent in the coming years.

This last point – working together - bears emphasis. People will need to put aside their differences and work together and care for each other, in order for humanity to have the best chance of making it through to a sustainable future. We need to resist the influences that would polarise us into antagonistic social and political camps. In the testing years ahead, we would be wise to heed the ancient wisdom: “United we stand, divided we fall.”

This is a test humanity can’t afford to fail."

09/05/2025 - How to define success as the cost of climate disruption rises.

"A growing number of writers and thinkers have proposed that the way to remain happy in the face of economic loss is to change our story – change it from one of individual prosperity to one of collective support and meaning. What if we planned and worked toward a situation of community well-being, where we each did our part to support our community and our community, in return, supported us? What if, instead of savouring the pride in a new possession or position, we savoured the pride of a meaningful community contribution, helping to make ours and our neighbour’s lives just a little bit better?

In the coming years, survival may actually depend upon a story of community care and collective action. The growing community of climate crisis ‘preppers’ – people preparing for climate disasters - are taking a different tack than the usual doomsday preppers. Instead of guns and bunkers, they talk about the need for strong, close-knit communities. We will be far better off facing the difficult times ahead together rather than on our own. This new story might not just give us fulfilment in the difficult times ahead, it might keep us alive, as well."

I have just accessed Tom's May article, which was published on "The Press" website, and found that I can't get full access to it without subscribing. I have though been able to access the March and April articles with no problem. If you have the same problem here are links to the full articles. "Is growth, growth, growth really the way to go?" , "We will be tested," and "How to define success as the cost of climate disruption rises." .

2) Marlborough Council Tackles Next Stage Of Climate Action.

MDC recently completed a review of the 2020 Climate Action Plan and a report titled, "Marlborough Climate Change & Adaptation Action Plan",  was presented to the Environment and Planning Committee on March 13th. It is impressive. Considerable effort has gone into producing it and it is far more comprehensive in its scope than the original Plan.

The review - ....details the coordinated actions underway across the Marlborough region related to the following four key topics:

• Climate Change, and Natural Hazards exacerbated by Climate Change.
• Natural Hazards.
• Adaptation, Vulnerability, Risk, and Resilience.
• Emissions, Renewable Energy and Waste.

It has many commendable aims such as -

• Considering how best to assess the intersection of hazards referred to as ‘cascading risk’ across multiple climate change or hazard projects,
• The action plan intends for consistent lines of communication and that all outcomes are shared with key stakeholders, and to the wider community in a clear and concise manner, recognising the highly technical nature of the work, the embedded risk, and at times the uncertainty that accompanies the work. 
• The updated action plan presents an opportunity for strategic and structured responses to how we understand, approach and tackle climate change considerations now and into the future.
• Strategic opportunities are identified by the action plan, a key focus of the action plan is not just the collection of information but also strategically do something with it. The challenge in this space is to integrate ongoing climate change considerations into existing Council processes.

If you wish to read my full summary report presented to the CKM April meeting you can download a copy.

If you wish to view the video here is the link to the presentation to E&P committee. The relevant item starts at 28 minutes -

If interested you can also check out this informative article about the updated Action Plan written by Maia Hart.

Jamie Sigmund was the lead staff person who worked on the report with input from all levels of staff from management down. Tom and I met with him and had a good discussion for about an hour and a half. The Plan identifies information gathering as the first priority in their program. In our discussion Jamie focussed quite a lot on sea level rise (SLR) and the extra work MDC is planning to do to refine SLR projections particularly in the Lower Wairau, including the hydro-dynamic modelling referred to below. This is part of a wider Risk Assessment that is seen as an important first step in any longer term planning for Climate Change impacts and adaptation strategies.

Some of you may remember the Marlborough District Sea Level Rise Assessment that was presented to Council in October 2023 by NIWA. For approximately 90% of the Marlborough assessment area (including the Marlborough Sounds and the East Coast south of White Bluffs / Te Parinui o Whiti) NIWA have high confidence that the report and spatial modelling is an appropriate representation of future SLR scenarios.

The NIWA assessment uses a “bathtub” model to produce inundation maps that show the spatial extent. The inundation data is generated by projecting an extreme sea level value across land, with any land that lies below the extreme sea level deemed to be inundated. However, this simplified bathtub approach does come with caveats. Storm-tide peaks may typically last for only 1 to 3 hours around the time of high tide. This duration may not provide sufficient time to inundate large land areas, particularly if seawater ingress rates are affected by narrow constrictions, such as drainage channels and culverts. Therefore, bathtub type models do not fully capture the dynamic and time-variant processes that occur during an inundation event, and usually result in an over estimation of coastal inundation. For the Lower Wairau Plain (including Blenheim, Rārangi to Te Pokohiwi / Boulder Bank) NIWA recommends undertaking further refinement work. This is because both the Wairau and Opaoa rivers and Vernon Lagoon heavily influence the tidal ebb and flow and more robust hydro-dynamic modelling is expected to greatly improve the confidence in representing future SLR scenarios.
 
There are two initial pieces of work that a budget is being sought for, thru the 2025/26 annual plan process.  
 
1) Environmental Monitoring Network Resilience Improvements. This is to assess how council can continue to deliver an effective flood warning network to the community under the current and future effects of climate change.
 
2) The second is a wider risk assessment where "First Pass" assessments for each climate change and natural hazard project in the Action Plan are undertaken.

This budget is for staff time and Environmental Science work. Initially Jamie advised us there was to be an opportunity for public input, but later he let us know a new process and approach was used, which did not follow the process he was more familiar with.

He has let us know -

"The positive news to come out of the process used was that both papers I presented were verbally approved for funding. This included the first pass risk assessment for each climate change and natural hazard project. More on this to come, pointing out I must also wait for the formal acknowledgment of approval. Movement in the positive direction."

3) Freshwater management and the Marlborough economy.

This report, released in the middle of May, describes how primary production depends on our region’s freshwater and land. It was commissioned for the Council’s implementation of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM) 2020. It says this is an important way that Council continues to increase its knowledge base while the Government works on the latest version of the NPSFM 2020.

I noted the important following statement from lead author Emma Moran, in the Council media release -

"One critical insight from the report is the correlation between changing climatic conditions and water availability. Climate forecasts predict more extreme weather, which could significantly alter the local economy. Understanding these dynamics is crucial in considering policy changes for fresh water”.

If you wish to see more you can download the full report from the MDC website.

4) Proposed Waste Fees and Charges for 2025-26.

MDC posted this information on May 26th which will affect all users of the Marlborough waste disposal service. I was interested to note that over half the proposed increase is due to government requirements and in particular to the increase in the cost of carbon credits. You can read the overview document and access the full consultation document on the MDC website.

For 2025-26 Council has set a new fee structure for the Bluegums Landfill to ensure costs are recovered for each waste stream. Council has determined a weighted average pricing structure as the fairest and most accurate system to use.

The proposed average increase from 1 September 2025 at the Bluegums landfill is 17.82% for all waste types except for grass clippings and green waste. It is proposed that the price for grass clippings remains the same as it is currently and green waste will increase more to help realign these two types of waste.

Almost half of the increase is related to Government requirements, including an increase in the Waste Levy, a change in the method of calculating of the Unique Emissions Factor (UEF) and an increase in the cost of carbon credits to offset the greenhouse gas emissions that the landfill produces. These increases are outside of Council’s control.

The balance is made up of increases in landfill aftercare and reserve provisions including operational and capital costs and post closure expenses.

Council has budgeted $22M for the 2025-26 year to cover the costs of Marlborough’s waste services.

NATIONAL

5) Kiwi citizens’ assembly succeeds in ‘experiment’ to find climate solutions.

A citizens’ assembly of 100 Porirua locals has provided the city council with more than a dozen recommendations about how to tackle climate change and make sure the region is resilient to worsening extreme weather events. Ranging from expanding access to renewable energy and incentivising the planting of native trees through to the establishment of a Youth Council and creating a marae resilience programme, the recommendations go beyond just the environment to social and economic considerations as well.

Ngāti Toa Rangatira chief executive Helmut Modlik, who helped create the Porirua Assembly, hails it as a successful demonstration of the power of deliberative democracy. “It was a journey for everybody of increased awareness of each other as fellow citizens in our city, we have a shared interest in our people and our place. In particular, a highlight was seeing the young people, the rangatahi who embraced really passionately this opportunity for their voice to be heard,” he says.

You can check out the full article by Marc Daalder on the Newsroom website.

6) As insurance gets harder to buy, NZ has 3 choices for disaster recovery – and we keep choosing the worst one.

This article in The Conversation was particularly interesting, as I believe insurance companies substantially increasing premiums in high risk areas or even pulling out altogether, will accelerate in the next few years. Our whole economic system relies on insurance to function effectively. Without property insurance home buyers can not secure mortgages and that is just one of the outcomes of this trend.

Ilan Noy and Belinda Storey have done a very good job of identifying the major issues facing policy makers.

With the retreat of insurance companies a future certainty in some communities, the government must decide how to respond. In our new research, we developed the “trilemma” framework, outlining the policy trade-offs governments face in adapting to climate change.

We found effective adaptation policy needs to achieve three goals:

• incentivise risk reduction
• be fiscally affordable
• increase equity and wellbeing and reduce hardship.

But any policy can satisfy only two of these three goals. The government has to make trade-offs.

When it comes to responding to the retreat of private insurance, the options include:

• doing nothing and letting “the market” adjust (with sharp price declines for affected properties)
• replacing private insurance with a publicly-funded alternative
• offering government-funded defences (for example, stopbanks) or buyouts to properties that can no longer be insured.

Each one of these options involves giving up on at least one of the three policy goals.

For a fuller explanation of this trilemma check out the full article.  

7) Climate target failure would bring overseas scrutiny, government warned.

The next two items are must read articles from the wonderful Eloise Gibson if you wish to understand where NZ currently stands with it's Paris climate commitments. Thank goodness there are still some dedicated journalists who are committed to putting in the legwork to provide such damning information that highlights the government's absolute obfuscation and dishonesty about NZ meeting it's 2030 emissions commitments. It is clear there is no intention to meet the target either onshore or offshore and we can be sure that, as we approach 2030 there will be multiple reasons given for kicking the can down the road yet again. I confidently predict this is exactly what will happen, not just in NZ but all over the world as 2030 gets closer. This quote from Simon Watts is evidence it seems! "You have to have the intent to meet it and if you don't meet it, no one sends you an invoice - and that's why it's not a liability on the government's books,"

The government was warned to expect overseas scrutiny over a huge shortfall in plans for meeting the country's international climate target.
The 84 million-tonne gap is because the current government has not committed to buying carbon credits from overseas. Although Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says he is committed to meeting the target of cutting emissions by 50 percent by 2030, the country is currently more than a whole year's worth of emissions short of that.

This was highlighted late last year, when New Zealand was preparing its first-ever report on its progress at meeting its Paris Agreement commitments. Environment officials warned Climate Change Minister Simon Watts that countries were expected to explain how they would close their emissions gaps. New Zealand had not announced a plan then, and still has not. Its shortfall was also large when compared with other countries, officials told Watts. They said this was "an area where New Zealand can expect to receive some scrutiny".

They also presented Watts with a list of decisions by previous Cabinets dating back to 2015, agreeing to use offshore carbon credits. They invited him to get the current Cabinet to either confirm this or make a different decision - however it's not clear how that worked out. The briefing was released to RNZ under the Official Information Act.

Check out the full article on the RNZ website.

8) What are New Zealand's international climate targets and do we really have to meet them?

This article published on March 20th is again from Eloise Gibson and is a very comprehensive analysis of the issue covered in the previous item. Highly recommended if you wish to get a fuller understanding of the current situation regarding our Paris climate commitments. The important fact to keep in mind is that our efforts to cut emissions here in NZ are "only about one third of the picture when it comes to meeting the Paris target."

Both the Key-era and Ardern-era versions of the target had two parts: cutting emissions here at home, and buying help from overseas. Politicians tend to confuse the two as often as the rest of us. Generally, if you hear about how the country is faring at meeting its "emissions budgets" from, say, 2021-2025 or any other five year period, that is probably a reference to action that's happening inside New Zealand to achieve the domestic part of the target. That means things like retiring coal boilers, encouraging people to buy clean cars, getting better public transport, planting truckloads of pine trees etc, or failing to do those things.

However that activity close to home is only about one third of the picture when it comes to meeting the Paris target - sometimes called our international climate target. Fully two thirds of that work was always expected to be done overseas... that is, until after the last election. It is no secret that National resented the size of the target, and the heavy reliance on buying in help, despite the fact that previous National governments planned to buy help too. Watts pointed out New Zealand has an unusually high reliance on international trading - possibly the highest in the world. Yet that reliance has been built-in to our targets since 2016, meaning it is now too late to turn around to the domestic economy and tell it to deeply decarbonise in four years. Even planting trees at home would be much too slow to make any real dent in the problem.

While Singapore, Switzerland and others have signed international deals, New Zealand hasn't started. That is despite officials warning Watts the cost per tonne could quadruple if he waits until closer to 2030. With coalition partner NZ First openly opposed to such spending and some in National barely less so the current government seems unwilling or unable to move forward. Yet with its UK and EU Free Trade deals explicitly mentioning abiding by its Paris targets, it does not want to say it is willing to renege, either.

That leaves Ministers repeating three seemingly incompatible things.

Yes, the government is committing to meeting its Paris agreement target for 2030, but, no, it is "unrealistic" spending large sums on overseas help ... but, yes, it admits New Zealand cannot meet the target without overseas help. It is beginning to look like the coalition has nowhere to go, unless it has a secret plan that is unknown to voters. Expert opinion appears to be split on whether the government will be forced to shell out eventually, or whether it plans to curl into a ball and run down the clock until 2030, when it will claim it cannot meet its target despite best efforts.

Check out the full article on the RNZ website.

9) Economic and environmental vandalism as foreign companies convert farms to forests.

A recent article related to the previous two items was written by Murray Horton from Campaign against foreign control of Aotearoa (CAFCA) and addresses the issue of productive farmland being converted into pine plantations.

Here are a couple of extracts from the article - "New Zealand’s commitment to the flawed Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) is causing environmental, economic and social damage as foreign companies buy up productive farmland to plant pine forests. The Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa (CAFCA) says the sale of farmland to overseas interests who aim to convert it to forestry is by far the most common type of consent that the Overseas Investment Office issues. CAFCA Secretary Murray Horton says foreign companies are eager to convert hill country farms to forests it in order to make a quick buck by selling carbon credits to polluters under the ETS.

“Flogging off Aotearoa’s New Zealand’s forestry rights goes back to the 1980s, when the Rogernomics Labour government sold cutting rights to overseas companies. It was only the Treaty of Waitangi that stopped them from selling the Crown land that the forests grew on,” Horton says. “Since the creation of the ETS in 2008, however, the Government has approved the sale of a huge amount of private agricultural land to overseas companies – much of it sheep and beef farms in eastern regions of the North Island".

I also note this quote in the article saying - "Manufacturers, airlines and other businesses can offset carbon dioxide emissions by purchasing carbon credits, which allows them to escape sanctions and carry on polluting,” he says. “Because of this the European Union now says companies that rely on carbon offsetting cannot claim to be carbon zero.”

You can check out the full article on the Daily Blog website. 

10) Our plan for the planet can’t be the lesser of two evils. 

If you didn't catch up with Mike Joy's excellent article published on the Newsroom website recently I highly recommend it. As usual Mike doesn't pull his punches and goes right to the heart of the debate around "Green Growth" - When will we shape our lives around what the planet can support rather than try to make it give us the lifestyles we have become accustomed to?

Below is an extract. 

The vexed issue of the mining and material requirements for a renewable energy transition has been making the news.

The well-known green growth and clean energy champion Hannah Ritchie claimed that clean energy requires substantially less mining and material use than our existing fossil fuel energy systems. This made the news globally and was picked up in New Zealand with similar claims appearing in LinkedIn posts, blogs and social media posts from Rewiring Aotearoa.

This is one of these messy lesser-of-two-evils arguments I usually try to steer clear of because I can see that ‘less harm’ (and I will argue here that the ‘less harm’ claim is far from settled) is turned into a ‘better for the planet’ meme on social media. This lesser-of-two-evils meme is often used by companies as a greenwashing tactic.

The point missed when this argument is used is that growth, regardless of its colour (green, black, or purple) requires taking ever more from a stressed finite planet and this is no longer an option. The historian and philosopher Hannah Arendt nailed my thoughts when she said: “Those who choose the lesser evil forget very quickly that they chose evil.”

Behind the whole debate around materials is the all-pervasive assumption that we must do everything and anything – no matter the risk – to maintain status quo, which is ever-increasing consumption.

So are we going to dig up what’s left of the planet and threaten the very life supporting systems we can’t live without to power ever more gadgets? Will we jeopardise our futures for the sake of artificial intelligence and data centres to hold our pet and family holiday pictures? When will we shape our lives around what the planet can support rather than try to make it give us the lifestyles we have become accustomed to?

Instead of trying to keep up supply, surely we must look at the energy and material demand side and reduce consumption to a level that the planet can support. The fossil fuel-powered lives of excess we in the wealthy world see as normal are not. The reduction in consumption required in the wealthy world is radical – but also necessary to meet biophysical limits. This will not be convenient, but we must realise that how we in the wealthy world live is radical.

INTERNATIONAL

11) To solve climate change, we need to restore our Sponge Planet.

CKM member Catherine van der Muelen shared this article with the comment "I just read this great article relating to water and how our approach all along may not have been the right one."
 
Climate strategies focus primarily on carbon, largely ignoring the destabilized water cycle that’s amplifying disasters and accelerating climate change. Slow Water projects can reverse this trend. Getting off fossil fuels is undeniably a critical step in slowing climate change. But even if  we did that tomorrow, it would not be enough. Agriculture, forestry, grazing, mining and building has degraded 75% of land on Earth, significantly altering the water cycle. That’s a problem because a healthy water cycle plays a key role in stabilizing the climate. Yes, water vapour is a greenhouse gas that can amplify the impact of excess carbon dioxide. But water is also the primary way the planet cools itself, via the reflection of solar energy off clouds and via its phase change from gas to liquid, which releases heat high in the atmosphere, where some escapes to outer space.

Sponge Planet is climate adaptation. In absorbing high flows, it reduces upstream and downstream flood risk. In recharging groundwater and storing it locally, it increases the water released into streams during the dry season 7,8 . Sponge Planet is also climate mitigation because ecosystems such as wetlands and mangroves store carbon at rates higher than many terrestrial forests.

Decision makers or engineers will sometimes say that nature-based approaches are “nice, but can’t be a significant part of the solution”. That is a fundamental misunderstanding of scale. Because humans have degraded 75% of the land on Earth, thereby altering the water cycle, we need Slow Water projects distributed across watersheds, countries and continents, ultimately recreating a Sponge Planet. Slow Water strategies are unique to each place, working with local geology, hydrology, ecology and cultures. Because they are distributed, rather than centralized, they avoid the ‘tragedy of the commons’ in which many governments shirk their responsibility for climate change. Instead, local communities or even individual families are motivated and empowered to undertake projects to protect themselves from water extremes. This decentralized approach is cheaper, nature water lowers waterborne disease risks, and fosters community engagement in sustainable practices. It also increases food and water security amidst unpredictable climate patterns.

While climate change is ramping up floods and droughts, development choices, including grey infrastructure designed to control water, have made these disasters worse. And sooner or later, water always wins. To reduce human losses and suffering, it’s time to change our relationship with water: rather than trying to control it, we must collaborate. In so doing, we can reduce impacts from floods and droughts, store
carbon, support other forms of life, and create more liveable spaces for ourselves. Measuring the value of these projects’ multiple benefits — and tallying the harm caused by traditional grey infrastructure — can show the cost-effectiveness of such investments. The toll of mounting climate disasters while global leaders stall can feel overwhelming and hopeless. But Slow Water projects empower people to collaborate with their neighbours and with water to make their own communities more resilient. Family by family, community by community, the success of their local projects inspires others, and piece by distributed piece, we can restore a Sponge Planet.

The full article is well worth a read. It is some very interesting research.

12) Food and Environment Myths.

Long time CKM member James Wilson shared some information on Food and Environment myths in response to the above article.

James says -

"...having matured from a heavily stocked livestock farmer, through to an organic one and finally to a committed vegan, I really appreciate the Sponge Planet article introduced by Catherine.  It has long been my contention that almost all agricultural land in NZ has been disastrously modified and on a per-head basis, we are perhaps more culpable for land damage than even the despoiling of the Amazon.

The sooner we, as a nation, recognise this the better.  In fact, I presently hold to the belief, emphasised by many scientists, that dairying will be in severe decline by 2040 and given my perception of the damage wrought, I cannot wait to see this happen. 

Thus I was coincidentally reading another email that emphasises the importance of eliminating livestock farming and thought that the statistics shown in these articles are equally worth sharing."

13) Welcome to the Chaoscene.

The climate crisis is here. In order to thrive in these dangerous and precarious times, we must build resilient communities.

This essay published on the Aeon website expands on the theme of climate preparedness and the importance of community solidarity as the best way of building resilience. 

Our society became individualistic to some extent simply because it was able to, because of a fossil-fuel pulse in the stable conditions of the Holocene. In the rough times that are coming, the fate I term the Chaoscene, that atomisation will be seen clearly as an increasingly unaffordable luxury. Strong ties within community will often make the difference, henceforth, between flourishing and failing and even, gradually but increasingly, between living and dying. As stretched states creak, as commercial insurance withdraws, we will need each other again – not least as first responders, as a safety net, and as mutual meaning-makers.

Whatever you do to rebuild community solidarity is an act of climate preparedness.

Once adaptation is taken seriously, we can admit the hard truth that climate policy thus far has largely failed.

But too much of the climate policy space and of the ‘climate movement’ has failed to register or announce these points. For too long, it has been assumed that humanity would, at some point, suddenly start acting in a fully rational, long-term, ethical manner on climate, and ‘fix’ the ‘problem’. Either that or, somehow, a radical technological ‘solution’ would emerge. Neither was ever going to happen. So we have lost precious time, and the potential of adaptation to mobilise more effectively has been almost completely missed. Until now: now, we are having to cope with the results of our collective failure to date.

14) Net Zero and Other Delusions: What Can't, Won't and Might Happen.

This twenty minute presentation was the topic for one of Nate Hagen's regular "Frankly" sessions. These are relatively short videos addressing a range of topics associated with humanity's predicament. 

Language is one of humanity’s most unique and powerful tools. We are amazingly good at imagining the pictures created through words - almost to the point that even the most fantastical things can seem real. But how might this extraordinary ability backfire as we try to chart the course for the 21st century? In this Frankly, Nate explores the limitations of using our imaginations to shape our understanding of what's possible through the use of three categories: what can’t happen, what won’t happen, and what might happen. Nate demonstrates how this framework can be used by going through one example of the many hurdles standing in the way of humanity - as we currently consume today - reaching Net Zero carbon emissions by 2050. How are today’s societal goals shaped by unrealistic expectations of what’s possible under our current biophysical reality? What ‘bottlenecks’ constrain the possibilities of the future, and how might these change our expectations and preparations for what’s to come? Finally, how can we use the logic of aggregate probability in our own lives to push the initial conditions of the future towards the best likelihoods for all life on Earth?

"Why the World feels like it's falling apart"

Here is Nates's most recent "Frankly". It's only ten minutes long and an excellent summary of Nate's concept of the Superorganism and why we need to greatly simplify our lives to reduce the impacts on te taiao. 

In a world grappling with converging crises, we often look outward – for new tech, new markets, new distractions. But the deeper issue lies within: our relationship with energy, nature, and each other. What if we step back far enough to see human civilization itself as an organism that is growing without a plan? In this week’s Frankly — adapted from a recent TED talk like presentation (called Ignite) — Nate outlines how humanity is part of a global economic superorganism, driven by abundant energy and the emergent properties of billions of humans working towards the same goal. Rather than focusing on surface-level solutions, Nate invites us to confront the underlying dynamics of consumption and profit. It’s a perspective that defies soundbite culture — requiring not a slogan, but a deeper reckoning with how the world actually works. These are not quick-fix questions, but the kinds that demand slow thinking in a world hooked on speed. What if infinite growth on a finite planet isn't just unrealistic – but the root of our unfolding crisis? In a system designed for more, how do we begin to value enough? And at this civilizational crossroads, what will you choose to nurture: power, or life?

15) All Hail the Planet.

I wanted to give people a heads up about the "All Hail the Planet" series broadcast on the Al Jazeera channel. This series is fronted by Ali Rae who says it is a program dedicated to explaining the social, economic and political forces that hold power in our everyday lives. She covers a wide range of topics in the half hour programs and some of the recent ones are well worth checking out. They have titles such as "We are part of nature, not apart from it," "Green tech can't save us from climate change," and "Why we can't offset our way out of climate change". They are well researched and presented and if you're interested you can access them on the Al Jazeera website.

16) Mine copper without destroying the planet? London-based project gives scientists hope.

I have previously posted items in this newsletter on the global limits we are hitting, as we attempt to source the huge quantities of critical minerals required to feed the renewable energy revolution. One of those critical minerals is copper and this article from The Guardian proposes a new way of accessing copper resources. 

One key project is seeking new ways to mine copper. “We typically extract it from minerals that have crystallised out of very saline, copper-rich brines,” said Professor Matthew Jackson, chair in geological fluid dynamics at Imperial College. “However, this process requires huge amounts of energy to break open the rocks and bring them to the surface and also generates a lot of waste as we extract copper from its source ores.”

To get round this issue, Jackson, working with international partners, has been searching for underground sites where copper-rich brines are still in liquid form. These brines are created by volcanic systems which can, crucially, provide geothermal energy for extraction.

“That means we can extract the copper by pumping the brines to the surface via boreholes – which is relatively easy – and also use local energy to power the mine itself and possibly provide excess energy for nearby communities,” Jackson said. “Essentially, we are seeking to build self-powered mines and have already pinpointed promising sites in New Zealand, and there is potential to explore conventionally barren areas such as Japan.”

This statement from the article confirms my previously expressed concerns. How humans seriously think they can maintain our current trajectory of accelerating resource use is a marvel to me. MORE COPPER IS REQUIRED IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS THAN HAS BEEN MINED IN THE WHOLE OF THE LAST CENTURY. I think it's called "putting your head in the sand!"

“The world will need more copper in the next 10 years than has been mined in the whole of the last century. Currently, we do not have enough in circulation to meet this demand. We therefore need to both reduce our demand for copper and work out how to extract it in the most sustainable way possible, and that is what we aim to help to achieve at the centre.”

17) Greenpeace NZ$1.1b damages ruling shocks global NGOs.

Civil society groups are condemning a US court order that Greenpeace pay over US$660 million (NZ$1.1 billion) in damages to an oil pipeline company as a chilling attack on climate action around the globe. Environmental defenders rallied behind Greenpeace after the shock ruling by a North Dakota jury fuelled concerns that courtrooms were increasingly being used to smother critics.

"It sends a dangerous message: that fossil fuel giants can weaponise the courts to bankrupt and silence those who challenge the destruction of our planet," Anne Jellema, executive director of advocacy group 350.org, said.

Check out the full article on the RNZ website.

AND this article from the Guardian -

I was an independent observer in the Greenpeace trial. What I saw was shocking.

What we observed was shocking. Greenpeace lost, not because it did something wrong, but because it was denied a fair trial. The legendary US human rights attorney Marty Garbus, a member of our team who has practiced law for more than six decades and who represented Nelson Mandela and Václav Havel, said it was the most unfair trial he had ever witnessed. This is precisely why many of us on the monitoring team believe there is a good chance Greenpeace will not pay the first dollar of the judgment and might actually recoup significant damages from Energy Transfer in a separate case in Europe. That case, currently being heard in Dutch courts, would entitle Greenpeace to compensation based on a finding that the North Dakota case is an illegitimate attempt to squelch free speech.

18) Sea level rise will cause ‘catastrophic inland migration’, scientists warn.

Rising oceans will force millions away from coasts even if global temperature rise remains below 1.5C, analysis finds.

I've included this article because I believe it is worth noting it in the context of James Hansen's recent work, which I've gone into in some detail in the final item. If James is indeed correct about the IPCC climate sensitivity calculations being incorrect then the implications of this article are greater than the authors say.

Check out the full article in the Guardian.

19) Council of Europe Assembly Advances Historic Ecocide Treaty.

The information below from the Stop Ecocide website gives the detail of another of the slow but incremental steps being taken globally to have Ecocide added to the Rome statute. 

• In a historic move, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), the deliberative body of Europe’s foremost human rights organisation, has adopted a resolution endorsing the Draft Convention on the Protection of the Environment through Criminal Law. 
• If adopted and ratified by member states, the Convention would become the first legally binding international treaty to criminalise severe and large-scale environmental destruction — “conduct that many term ecocide.”
• The Assembly also recommends including the  definition of ecocide proposed in 2021 by the Independent Expert Panel to help guide states in shaping national legislation. 
• The resolution — passed on 10 April 2025 with 79 in favour, 11 against and 1 abstention — signals strong support within the Council of Europe’s parliamentary body, but is not a final approval. The decisive next step will be the Convention’s formal adoption by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe due on 14 May 2025, after which it will be open for signature and ratification by member states.

Yuliia Ovchynnykova, Member of Parliament of Ukraine (Servant of the People), and Member of the Ukrainian Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), said: 

“I believe it is essential not only to acknowledge ecocide as a profound harm to both nature and humanity — we must call for its codification in both domestic and international law. With this resolution, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe takes a significant step toward that goal, endorsing a Convention that explicitly includes particularly serious environmental offences — conduct that many term ‘ecocide’ — and aims to ensure robust and inclusive protection for the natural world. By tackling such offences alongside illegal logging, unlawful fishing, and the destruction of all forms of biodiversity — including fungi — the Assembly sends a clear and decisive message to governments: environmental crimes can no longer, and will no longer, be tolerated.”

For those who need a small reminder of the importance of this initiative here is a statement from the Stop Ecocide website. 

While we wholeheartedly support ecocide legislation at national and regional levels, our work aims ultimately to support recognition of ecocide as a standalone crime in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. At present, the Statute lists four crimes: Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes and the Crime of Aggression. The Statute can be amended to include a fifth crime of Ecocide.

20) Oil and silence: Time to champion ecocide law and hold power to account.

This article written by Voke Ighorodje is a call for Nigeria to take a stand and support the inclusion of Ecocide on the Rome Statute.

He says -

Supporting ecocide legislation is not just an act of justice; it is a move toward a future where Nigeria helps shape the legal and moral boundaries of global civilisation. Across continents, ecocide is being recognised for what it is: a crime that strikes at the heart of human and planetary wellbeing. By championing this law — nationally and internationally — Nigeria can move from the exploited periphery to the vanguard of legal transformation.

21) Where EV batteries go to die – and be reborn.

The Altilium company based in the UK have developed technology to fully recycle EV batteries. We will have to wait and see if this technology can be scaled to the level where millions of batteries can be processed. There are challenges but this method does look promising.

Check out the full article on the BBC website.

22) Godfather of climate science decries Trump plan to shut Nasa lab above Seinfeld diner: ‘It’s crazy’

Nasa’s top climate and space monitoring lab, called the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (Giss), has been housed in six floors of a leased building owned by Columbia University on Manhattan’s Upper West Side since 1966. Since then, it has launched the career of a Nobel prize winner, aided missions to Venus and Jupiter, mapped the Milky Way and alerted the world to global heating by creating one of the first climate models. The climate model ran on an IBM computer, the fastest in the world in the 1970s and so gargantuan it took up the entire second floor.

But this storied history has meant little to the Trump administration, which is ending the lab’s lease on 31 May, releasing 130 staff to work from home with an uncertain future ahead. Donald Trump, who has called climate science “bullshit” and a “giant hoax” in the past, wants to slash Nasa’s Earth science budget in half. “They are trying to kill the messenger with the bad news, it’s crazy,” said Dr James Hansen, known as the godfather of climate science and previously director of Giss for more than 30 years.

Check on the full article on the Guardian website. 

23) Important recent postings from James Hansen.

I've put this item last as it contains a lot to digest and is only for those, who like me are science nerds and consider that the work of James Hansen and his colleagues should be taken seriously. The implications if they are correct is great. They have posted four papers during April and May, which contain important research and conclusions. It is sobering stuff and challenges the IPCC view of our predicament. Essentially their research concludes that climate sensitivity is 4.5 ± 0.5°C. The IPCC states that is it 3.0 ± 0.5°C. If you understand climate sensitivity you will know this is a big difference and has very big consequences. If not, read the papers, which explain it well.

I have noted before in this newsletter what I believe is the inherent problem with the IPCC. That is the fact that any conclusions reached by them must first gain the consensus of a wide range of scientists from many different countries. If consensus cannot be gained then the material is excluded. I give a lot of credence to the work from James and his small team and highly recommend checking it out.  Full copies of each of the postings can be downloaded from their website. 

I was interested to note this statement at the end of the second paper - It is difficult to develop and present an alternative perspective – alternative to that of IPCC – when such an organization has been granted overwhelming authority and has grown a global army of disciples. We much appreciate support of our organization.

Here are Abstracts and extracts from the four papers - 

Global Warming Acceleration: Impact on Sea Ice.

Abstract. Global warming has accelerated.[2] Warming melts sea ice, but it also melts ice sheets, ice shelves, ice caps and glaciers, which affects sea ice cover. Injection of cold freshwater and icebergs into the ocean tends to increase sea ice cover during a transient period until the climate forcing stabilizes and a new climate state is approached. Sea ice melt due to the warming ocean has the upper hand over freshwater injection in both hemispheres today, and thus global sea ice cover is near a historic low (Fig. 1). Arctic sea ice has been relatively stable for the past 10-20 years while Antarctic sea ice has declined, but global warming acceleration may alter both cases. In the Arctic, warm Atlantic water is intruding under the cold Arctic surface layer and warm Pacific water is spilling over the Aleutian sill into the Arctic Basin. Paleoclimate data show that warming at depth can lead to sudden loss of sea ice near Greenland, with consequences for the Greenland ice sheet. In the Antarctic, accelerated ocean warming increases melting of ice shelves and freshwater injection, which can cause temporary growth of sea ice cover. Global climate models employed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have failed to account well for the freshwater effect on sea ice cover, thus contributing to IPCC’s underestimate of climate sensitivity. Overall, accelerated global warming does not bode well for stability of the ice sheets, the ocean’s overturning circulations, and global sea level in coming decades – despite the complexity of sea ice changes and uncertainty about the growth rate of ice sheet mass loss.

Here is an extract from the first paper.

Recently, we concluded that climate sensitivity is high, ECS = 4.5 ± 0.5°C (1σ) for doubled atmospheric CO2, based on three independent analyses (glacial-interglacial climate change, 1850-2024 global warming, and Earth’s darkening during 2000-2024). High ECS changes everything: it fundamentally alters expectations for continued climate change. Why? Because “fast” feedbacks are not really fast: they come into play in proportion to temperature change, not in direct response to climate forcing. Thus, climate response time is approximately proportional to climate sensitivity squared. One consequence is that the “fast” feedback response to ship aerosol reduction is still growing significantly after five years, which is the reason we expect 2025 global temperature to be about as high as in 2024, despite the El Nino having faded to the ENSO-neutral state. A second result is that we must simultaneously consider “fast” and “slow” feedback effects because their timescales overlap.

Reading this paper I realised I did not understand why sea ice melt is freshwater, so I did a little research to improve my understanding.

Sea ice melt is a freshwater injection into the ocean because when sea ice melts, the fresh water from the ice is released into the seawater, which is different from the salty water that already exists in the ocean. This added freshwater lowers the salinity and density of the surface water, impacting ocean circulation and other ocean properties.

Here's a more detailed explanation:

Sea ice formation and brine rejection: When sea ice forms from seawater, salt is excluded from the ice as it freezes. This process, called brine rejection, concentrates the remaining seawater and makes it denser and saltier. This dense, salty water sinks, contributing to deep ocean circulation.

Melting sea ice and freshwater input: When sea ice melts, it releases fresh water (water with a low salt content) into the surrounding seawater. This fresh water is less dense than the surrounding seawater and tends to stay at the surface, creating a layer of less dense freshwater.

Impact on ocean circulation: The influx of fresh water from melting sea ice can disrupt the normal patterns of ocean circulation, particularly in high-latitude regions where the formation of dense, salty water is a key driver of deep-ocean currents. The reduced density due to the freshwater input can affect the sinking of cold, salty water, potentially slowing down or even interrupting the global conveyor belt of ocean currents.

Consequences for global climate: Changes in ocean circulation can have significant consequences for global climate patterns, including regional temperature variations, sea level rise, and the distribution of heat and carbon dioxide in the oceans.

2025 Global Temperature.

Abstract. Global temperature for 2025 should decline little, if at all, from the record 2024 level. Absence of a large temperature decline after the huge El Nino-spurred temperature increase in 2023-24 will provide further confirmation that IPCC’s best estimates for climate sensitivity and aerosol climate forcing were both underestimates. Specifically, 2025 global temperature should remain near or above +1.5C relative to 1880-1920, and, if the tropics remain ENSO-neutral, there is good chance that 2025 may even exceed the 2024 record high global temperature.
Global temperature in February and March 2025 fell below the record highs for those months in 2024 (Fig. 1) and such relative decline is likely in most of the next few months. However, the decline has been modest and the 2024 vs 2025 ranks of several months later in the year might be reversed.

Large Cloud Feedback Confirms High Climate Sensitivity.

Abstract. Earth’s albedo (reflectivity) declined over the 25 years of precise satellite data, with the decline so large that this change must be mainly reduced reflection of sunlight by clouds. Part of the cloud change is caused by reduction of human-made atmospheric aerosols, which act as condensation nuclei for cloud formation, but most of the cloud change is cloud feedback that occurs with global warming. The observed albedo change proves that clouds provide a large, amplifying, climate feedback. This large cloud feedback confirms high climate sensitivity, consistent with paleoclimate data and with the rate of global warming in the past century.

Our analysis puts equal emphasis on information on climate change extracted from (1) observations of ongoing climate change, (2) global climate models (GCMs), and (3) Earth’s long-term climate history (paleoclimate data). We used all three of these methods in our paper to arrive at three independent analyses of climate sensitivity, with each method concluding that climate sensitivity is high, much higher than the best estimate (3°C for doubled atmospheric CO2) of IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).

We have lamented the absence of scientists with the breadth of understanding of say Jule Charney or Francis Bretherton, or our beloved, sometimes crotchety, former colleague, Wally Broecker. However, the truth is that there are many scientists out there with a depth of understanding at least as great as the clique of scientists that the media rely on. Given the success of this clique in painting us as outliers, we are dependent on the larger community being willing to help educate the media about the current climate situation. For that purpose, we will discuss – one-by-one in upcoming communications – several of the matters that are raised in our papers. Thanks for your attention.

End of an Era.

I've included this final posting from May 22nd. It has a very personal touch to it, which I appreciated. James and his wife have made the big decision to move from their longtime rural home in Pennsylvania to live in an apartment at Columbia University, so he can continue on with the critical research he leads. He recently turned 84 so making such a move at this time of his life says a lot about his commitment to continuing this work for the benefit of all of humanity and our amazing planet.

Remarkable new data has advanced and refined understanding of global climate sensitivity and the path that humanity is on with current climate policies. We must do a better job of communicating the climate story, given current attempts to kill the message. Reality of climate change is becoming obvious to most people and there are a huge number of capable scientists supporting the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which advises the United Nations. IPCC reports contain a great amount of useful information. The problem, as I see it and will describe in detail, is that the process of communicating the climate situation with the public is hindered by the combination of an undue role of something described as “scientific reticence,” and a small clique of self-appointed spokesmen for the climate research community, whom the media has chosen to give voice to as if they had unquestioned, superior, expertise.  

Download the full postings on their website. 







.

INTRODUCTION -

I have thought long and hard about this newsletter, about what I should include and exclude. Everything is a value judgement formed by our view of the world and my perspective is no more valid than anybody else's. Each three months between newsletters I keep a record of different items that I come across or that get sent to me by others and then I have to choose what to include in the newsletter that might be of value to those who read it. At this point in time I'm acutely aware of the growing disruption, conflict and polarisation happening around our planet. It appears to be quickening and feels like a boil coming to a head ready to burst. With Donald Trump and his entourage of loyal courtiers openly and defiantly abandoning any semblance of efforts to address the impacts of the growing environmental polycrisis, and with shifting geopolitical alliances in many parts of the globe it seems that we are becoming more and more preoccupied with building empires and power rather than focusing on more important matters. There are many who know and understand that the maintenance and saving of our planetary life support systems must be our first priority but so often those people don't hold the power to effect the necessary changes. So, in a perverse way I see people like Donald playing a critical role in this struggle for survival. If the boil has to come to a head and burst before we truly face the magnitude of the predicament we need to confront urgently, not sometime in the near future, then so be it. Who am I to question how this drama will play out?

Some CKM members have read and discussed a book written by Dougald Hine called "At Work in the Ruins" in which Dougald challenges the readers to face up to the reality of the existential emergency glaring us in the face. We have exceeded six out of nine identified planetary limits. We may not want to face this reality but there are indeed Limits to Growth and for those who wish to see, the proof is evident all over our living planet. I believe we no longer have time to fix the economy first or improve our standard of living first.

Dougald says -

"...we don’t get to choose whether or not there is an ending. We only get to choose what kind of ending we have, and therefore what we have left to build from."

You can find in item 17 below a quote from a recent discussion between Dougald and Nate Hagens and the YouTube link, if you wish to listen to the full discussion.  

Item 13 is about a report from "risk managements experts" and therefore is from a totally different perspective to Dougald Hine but a quote from the article gives a very similar warning. "[They] do not recognise there is a risk of ruin. They are precisely wrong, rather than being roughly right.”

In Item 15 George Monbiot expresses some of my thoughts better than I can so I recommend checking out that item.

Budyong.

LOCAL

1) Media articles written by CKM members since the last newsletter. 
 
07/12/2024 - Climate change: Expect to get angry.

"We are going to need to be strong and united in order to deal a world of ever worsening weather, and its economic and geopolitical consequences. As history teaches us, divisiveness and destitution often lead to conflict and conflict can lead to failed government and societal breakdown. For many around the world, their way of life is already threatened, leading to migration and conflict, ripping the social fabric of communities.

So, before we get angry, let’s think about how best we, as a community and a country, can prepare for the disasters yet to come. What would we do if we were hit by flooding, like hit Auckland, Hawke’s Bay and Tairawhiti during Cyclone Gabrielle? What about a wildfire, like the 2000 Wither Hills Boxing Day fire? Are we ready?

Rather than get angry, we need to get prepared."

01/02/2025 - Are we smarter than yeast?

"Some might say we have an advantage over yeast in that we can think (the “sapiens” part of Homo sapiens). Whereas yeast will blindly consume available sugar until their waste poisons themselves, we can see what’s coming and change course. We’ve done it before, banning pesticides like DDT and ozone-eating CFCs in refrigerants, and cleaning up acid rain. Humanity, working together, across borders, has fixed a number of environmental problems. We can do it again. Even though yeast regularly poison themselves in their own waste, they have one advantage over us.

When their home gets too toxic to live in, their offspring can blow in the wind to the next piece of rotting fruit. For us, there is no Planet B. We need to address these environmental crises head on and the sooner the better. The future of humanity depends upon it."

28/02/25 - Is growth, growth, growth really the way to go?

"It is common for people to think of the climate and environmental crises as being problems to be solved. Unfortunately it is not that simple. The situation is better thought of as a predicament. A predicament does not have clear answers or ways to be resolved. This is the quandary we find ourselves in now. Do we want to face the reality of our predicament? Can we choose to discourage tourism and helicopter flights to view the vineyards, or the multitude of other high emissions discretionary activities we can manage without? Can we have an informed debate about what an ecologically and socially sustainable future might look like? If this is too big a step to take then we will be left with the consequences of our collective actions and unfortunately that means increasing extreme weather events, environmental breakdown and damage to our social fabric."

2) CKM submission on Treaty Principles Bill.

Thanks goes to Don Quick and others for their efforts in putting together our submission. Below are a couple of extracts from it. You can download a copy of the full submission if interested.

"CKM submits that the Treaty Principles Bill be withdrawn and scrapped at the earliest opportunity.
Our reasons for so submitting are multifold. We are in unanimous agreement that in itself and in the context of the many changes proposed by the current Coalition Government the Bill will contribute adversely to the changes that are essential for Aotearoa New Zealand, both as a land and as a society as we know it, to adapt to the overheating of our planet.
For the present and Immediate future effects of climate change to mitigate and perhaps reverse, it will take much more and much longer than our present and immediate future technology will manage. We cannot keep going as we are or as the present government proposes.
CKM opposes the Bill in its entirety from legal, social, environmental and climate justice viewpoints and in recognition of the need for a cohesive and resilient society the better to face the challenges of climate adaptation ahead."

AND - "Climate Karanga Marlborough vigorously opposes the Treaty Principles Bill, including the stance adopted by the leader of the National Party. We see his stance as one of political expediency, not wanting to upset his coalition partners, placing more importance on a temporary political coalition agreement than on the Waitangi agreement at the foundation of our nation.
Historically, Westminster-style governments have treated te Tiriti o Waitangi expediently, ducking the issue whether the land and waters belong to us or we belong to the Land and Water. Climate breakdown is adding urgency to the matter of our belonging."

3) Climate Action Week.

Climate Action Week organised by Climate Action Marlborough this year was from February 24 - 28. The focus for the week was "Resilience in Action: Building Regenerative Communities through Climate Innovation and Nature-Based Solutions." Catherine van der Muelen and her team at Climate Action Marlborough organised a wide range of speakers and immersion experiences for the participants with the topics for the five days being -

• FINANCING OUR TRANSITION TO A CLIMATE POSITIVE ECONOMY, 
• RENEWABLE ENERGY FOR IMPACT, 
• NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS,
• CIRCULARITY, 
• CLIMATE POSITIVE FUTURES: the BIG shifts we need to take to take action.  

The International Keynote Speaker was Jonathan Foley, sustainability scientist and Executive Director of Project Drawdown. His topic was Global food production — from meat to grains. Food production accounts for a third of all greenhouse gas emissions. He presented a portfolio of data-backed solutions to build a better food system world-wide, starting with four key steps to cut emissions.

Tom attended 4 of the 5 days and has very helpfully put together a summary of the week for us.

Catherine also worked with the local Marlborough Express again this year who dedicated a whole edition to Climate Action Week with 14 different Opinion pieces published on the topic of resilience.

4) NDC2 announced.

The announcement at the end of January of the government's second Nationally Determined Contribution was pretty underwhelming. This statement is from the Ministry for Environment website.

Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) are at the heart of the Paris Agreement. NDCs are how countries contribute to the global temperature goal of the Paris Agreement, to hold the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C.

The Ministry for the Environment sought feedback to inform the Government’s decision on its international climate change target (second Nationally Determined Contribution, or NDC2) for 2031–35. The Government announced NDC2 in January 2025.

New Zealand's NDC2:

•     Aims to reduce emissions by 51 to 55 per cent compared to 2005 levels by 2035
•     Covers 2031 to 2035,  the same period as our third domestic emissions budget
•     Is a progression on NDC1.

This brief analysis from Lawyers for Climate Action NZ gives a stark appraisal of the complete lack of ambition from our current government. They conclude by saying - "The climate does not care about our clever accounting choices, it cares about actual emissions reductions. And our failure to walk the talk will be apparent to our trading partners, some of whom are already adopting much more ambitious targets."

Tom put in a submission on behalf of Coal Action Network Aotearoa, which you can check out if interested.

5) Restoring the Marlborough Sounds: An Ocean Reform Case Study.

A presentation was given to the MDC Environment and Planning Committee on January 30th by Raewyn Peart from the Environmental Defence Society (EDS). She provided a summary of their report entitled ‘Restoring the Marlborough Sounds: An Ocean Reform Case Study’ that they completed late last year.

“In 2021, the Environmental Defence Society (EDS) embarked on a project to explore options for reform of Aotearoa New Zealand’s oceans  management system. Phase 1 was completed in May 2022 and examined the current system, identified problems with it, and developed  options for reform. EDS is currently undertaking Phase 2 of the project which is focused on developing concrete recommendations for oceans  reform. As part of that work, the Society is undertaking a series of case studies. This report sets out the findings of the Marlborough Sounds case study which is based on an extensive literature review and discussions with 40 people with associations with the area.”

You realise just how important this very thorough and detailed report (100 pages) is once you hear and see what is covered in it. It does leave  me feeling thankful once again to NGO’s like EDS who do such important work advocating for Te Taiao. It seems that the really critical  investigation and analysis required for such a comprehensive report, which government departments should really be doing, has to be  undertaken by NGO’s. The plus side of that is NGO’s usually have their priorities more aligned with those of CKM and place high value on  the needs of the environment and nature. At the beginning of Raewyn’s presentation she summed up the urgency of the situation with this statement - “there is a small and shrinking opportunity to halt decline and build resilience...”.  Where have we heard that before I wonder?

Here is the summary from the report, which makes very clear what the challenges are, if the health of the Sounds ecosystem is to be improved.

“The Marlborough Sounds is an iconic and unique marine system, which has a long and fascinating history of Māori and European  occupation, and is suffering severe and ongoing degradation. Key stressors are high levels of sedimentation, damage to seabed habitats from bottom trawling and dredging, over-harvesting of fish stocks and climate change. Reversing this long-term degradation will require a concerted and integrated effort which includes passive marine restoration, active marine restoration and land-based efforts. All users of the Sounds will need to play their part, in a combined effort, if the current situation is to be turned around. This report seeks to identify some ways in which this might be achieved.”

Listening to the report brought home the reality that without some big changes to management of the land and the ocean environment we are headed towards the likelihood of complete collapse of the marine ecosystem in the Sounds. Raewyn made the point that building back from its very fragile current state is at least a better option than trying to restore an ecosystem that has collapsed. Current natural beds of green lipped mussels are about 3% of their historic coverage and the severely depleted pilchard population is an example of the long term damage the  Sounds have sustained. In the early 1940s, there were enough fish to supply a pilchard cannery in Picton, but catches dropped quickly from almost 300 tonnes in 1942 to 11 tonnes in 1949 and the cannery closed. Pilchards play a critical role in the marine ecosystem being one of the main links between plankton and fish higher up the foodchain. Raewyn made the very salient point that managing fisheries as single stock units completely fails to address the cumulative stressors on the marine environment in general and particularly in the Sounds. I was interested to hear from her that MDC is seen as a leader in Aotearoa with its active support for research to learn more about the issues facing the Sounds and what solutions there might be. The Council’s policy of making the results of research that they have contributed to open source, is sensible and wise. I understand the EDS work on NZ’s oceans management system was jointly funded by MfE and some philanthropic money. She emphasised how essential a good plan is if trying to attract philanthropic funds. A regional “State of the Sounds” report driven by Council would be an important part of getting consensus from all Sounds users, commercial and recreational, and that this consensus would be a critical component of getting political buy in, to make the major management decisions required to achieve sustainable improvement. She also referred to the possibility of eventually getting a Local Act of Parliament to consolidate those changes.

Several Councillors made heartfelt statements after the presentation and the committee chair, Gerald Hope made a plea for there to be a long term forward focus on what might be the best solutions. He noted, over the last hundred and fifty years there had been large economic rewards for NZ from the Sounds, and that now is the time to get a future focus on restoring them to their former glory. Long-term committed funding will be critical if that is to happen. Nadine stated that “at scale” restoration work is clearly required and to tackle this will require a collaborative effort from all interested parties.

For anyone interested in more detail you can download the meeting agenda and/or the full report from the Council website.

There is also a very informative article from NZ Geo in 2020 that is worth checking out if you’re interested in this topic. It’s titled “How to fix the Marlborough Sounds”.

NATIONAL

6) Climate Action Campus.

"The Climate Action Campus Ōtautahi is the first of its kind in the country. It’s designed to help students understand, know about and take action on climate change. As a children’s rights issue, the Climate Action Campus aims to support children and young people in their response to the climate crisis.

Climate change places an incredible responsibility on all of us; we are the ones who can ensure the planet remains livable for people and all other living things. For children and young people in particular there is a clear sense of urgency. They face unprecedented changes in the climate that will affect every aspect of their lives. This reality can induce a sense of hopelessness and despair, a sense that there is no future- a sense of climate anxiety or angst.

It is essential there are opportunities for children and young people to not only understand climate change, but to be part of the collective response to its impacts through participation in climate change planning, decision making and action. There is a need for children and young people along with their whānau, kaiako and wider community to be aware of possibilities and actions."

You can learn more about this innovative campus on their website.

Climate Action Campus is satellite campus of Ao Tawhiti school. If you're interested you can also listen to a brief interview between Jesse Mulligan school and director, Anita Yarwood.

7) David Seymour floats pulling out of Paris Agreement after 2026 election.

"Act leader and senior minister David Seymour has floated taking a policy of pulling New Zealand out of the Paris climate agreement to the next election, potentially making Paris withdrawal an Act election promise. Labour’s Climate Change spokeswoman Megan Woods has called on Prime Minister Christopher Luxon to recommit to the deal and not allow Seymour to pull New Zealand out of it. Luxon has been approached for comment.

Last week, the Government published its target for the second Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) — the name given to a target under the Paris Agreement. The new NDC will commit New Zealand to reducing emissions by 51% to 55% below 2005 levels by 2035. The current NDC is for a 50% cut by 2030. The call disappointed observers on both sides. Energy and climate expert Christina Hood described the target as “shockingly unambitious” in a post to LinkedIn, while Federated Farmers meat and wool chairman Toby Williams said the new target signed New Zealand up to a decade of planting pine trees on productive farmland."

Check out the full article in the NZ Herald.

8) Methanexit – Should NZ be subsidising our largest gas user?

This is an informative analysis provided by 350 Aotearoa. It clearly explains the folly of using gas to make methanol at the Methanex plant in Taranaki.

"The Methanexit report focuses on one major player in the New Zealand energy sector, a company called Methanex New Zealand Ltd, which is the biggest user of fossil gas in New Zealand. Throughout the last decade, Methanex used between 30 per cent and 45 per cent of all gas produced in the country. Methanex uses the gas to produce methanol, a product which is used to create other chemicals, such as formaldehyde and plastics.

Methanex New Zealand Ltd has a parent company in Hong Kong and the main Methanex Corporation is headquartered in Vancouver (British Columbia). Both places receive an eye-watering amount of money from Methanex NZ each year. The New Zealand branch appears to have used complex transactions to shift $257.4 million profit offshore, reducing income tax paid to the government by more than $46 million over the last decade. All the while, it is now operating a more emissions-intensive plant in New Zealand than the rest of its portfolio, to the detriment of the climate.

To make matters worse, Methanex gets a lot of help from our government to maintain its business model in the form of subsidies. Methanex received $60 million worth of free carbon credits last year under the Emissions Trading Scheme to subsidise its pollution. These are like special coupons the government gives companies to make pollution cheaper for them. We estimate Methanex’s free carbon credits over the last decade add up to about $300 million. That’s $300 million that our New Zealand government is giving to a wealthy overseas company to continue their polluting industry and shift profit offshore- outrageous!"

You can check out the full article on the 350.org website if you want to know more.

9) All of Govt’s 2024 coal earnings spent treating damages at a single mine.

"New Treasury figures show last year the Government spent more than $3 million treating damage caused by coal mining at a single site on the West Coast – more than it collected in royalties for all coal mining nationwide the same year. The Stockton mine is the country’s largest open-cast coal operation, and a fast-track listing would see its licence continue for another 25 years. Remediation efforts for historical mining are still underway.
Despite efforts by the mine’s operators to restore the health of nearby waterways, acid mine drainage poses a lingering and considerable threat to the freshwater ecosystems. According to the company’s annual report, DNA data appears to show “spectacular recovery” in nearby waterways. But publicly collected data from the surrounding area paints a different picture."

You can check out the full Newsroom article for more info.

INTERNATIONAL

10) The Acid Test: Global Temperature in 2025.

Readers of this newsletter will know that I follow the occasional reports produced by James Hansen and his team. They are always fascinating if you're interested in the latest science and their take on it. Their analysis and conclusions are sometimes seen by others in the science community as being a little extreme but in my humble opinion I think it highly likely they are closer to the reality than many others. Their latest report released on February 23rd has the following to say.

"The unprecedented leap of global temperature in 2023 and early 2024 exceeded 0.4°C (Fig. 1). We and coauthors interpret that uniquely large warming as being due about equally to a moderate El Nino and reduction of ship aerosols, with a smaller contribution from the present solar maximum. An “acid” test of our interpretation will be provided by the 2025 global temperature: unlike the 1997-98 and 2015-16 El Ninos, which were followed by global cooling of more than 0.3°C and 0.2°C, respectively, we expect global temperature in 2025 to remain near or above the 1.5°C level. Indeed, the 2025 might even set a new record despite the present weak La Nina. There are two independent reasons. First, the “new” climate forcing due to reduction of sulfate aerosols over the ocean remains in place, and, second, high climate sensitivity (~4.5°C for doubled CO2) implies that the warming from recently added forcings is still growing significantly.
What is the importance of these high global temperatures and the acceleration of global warming? Along with growing impacts on society and ecosystems caused by increasing climate extremes, our main concern is the danger of passing the point of no return, when the warming induces shutdown of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) and that, in turn, locks in sea level rise of several meters. If accelerated warming (Fig. 1) is not arrested, it will accelerate ice melt and freshwater injection onto the North Atlantic. Such increased freshwater injection, rising temperature of the ocean surface layer, and increased rainfall over the North Atlantic Ocean – all certain to occur if accelerated warming is allowed to continue – are the elements that are predicted to drive AMOC shutdown within 2-3 decades."

In their report they address the issue of climate sensitivity and how using different sensitivities has significant impacts on the conclusions reached using different climate models. They say -

"Why are we confident that climate sensitivity is high? We have shown that in three independent ways: (1) climate sensitivity 4.8°C ± 0.6°C based on comparison of glacial and interglacial climate states, (2) sensitivity of 4.5°C ± 0.5°C based on temperature from 1750 through 2024, (3) the large “darkening” (reduced albedo) of Earth between 2000 and 2024, which implies a strong cloud feedback – and strong cloud feedback implies high climate sensitivity."

If you wish to get into further detail of why James and his team are convinced climate sensitivity is higher than the IPCC uses then check out the previous two reports on their website dated February 6th and 12th, as well as this latest one dated February 20th. You can download the full pdf files from their website.

11) New Research Led by James Hansen Documents Global Warming Acceleration.

This article from "Inside Climate News" discusses their reports and also has a very good global temperature animation, which shows how the average annual global temperature increases above the pre-industrial average have increased in recent years, especially in 2023 and 2024, at the end of the video, when the annual jumps were the biggest on record.

Kevin Anderson, a professor of energy and climate change at the University of Manchester in the United Kingdom, who was not involved in the new paper, also emphasized that it’s important to look at the science within the political context.

“Otherwise it’s just an interesting academic discussion,” he said.

“Whether we align with the more conservative forecasts of the IPCC or the more challenging warnings of Jim Hansen, the policy implications are strikingly similar,” he said. “We are rapidly blasting through the 1.5-degree Celsius commitment.”

The IPCC’s path to stay well below 2 degrees Celsius of warming requires 7 percent emissions cuts annually worldwide, starting now, he said, which would be an even bigger drop than occurred during COVID lockdowns.

“In this context, the policy process has abdicated its responsibilities, opting instead for short-term acquiescence with business as usual, rather than offering strong, transparent and cogent leadership,” Anderson said. “After decades of half-truths, delusion and outright lies from those in positions of power, and often from their advisers as well, we now find ourselves facing severe risks of disastrous outcomes.”
Much climate damage has already been done, he added, mostly to people who didn’t cause the problem.

“We are not sleepwalking into the apocalypse, we’re charging toward it with full awareness of what’s at stake,” he said. “Even more damning, we can already see the devastating effects of our actions tearing apart the livelihoods, and even the lives, of vulnerable, often poor, low-emitting communities far from the high-emitting areas where we live, and frequently comprised of people of colour.”

12) The world has been warming faster than expected. Scientists now think they know why.

This paper is related to the previous two items as it addresses "darkening of Earth", the third way James Hansen and his team have shown climate sensitivity is higher than the IPCC believe. It also addresses the issue of reduced sulfate aerosols because of the reduction in emissions from shipping over the last few years, which is a significant contributor to the current increased warming rate according to the Hansen reports in the previous item.

"Last year was the hottest on record, oceans boiled, glaciers melted at alarming rates, and it left scientists scrambling to understand exactly why. They know the extraordinary heat was fueled by a number of factors, predominantly planet-heating pollution from burning fossil fuels and the natural climate pattern El Niño. But those alone did not explain the unusually rapid temperature rise.

Now a new study published Thursday in the journal Science says it has identified the missing part of the puzzle: clouds. To be more specific, the rapid surge in warming was supercharged by a dearth of low-lying clouds over the oceans, according to the research — findings which may have alarming implications for future warming. In simple terms, fewer bright, low clouds mean the planet “has darkened,” allowing it to absorb more sunlight, said Helge Goessling, a report author and climate physicist at the Alfred Wegener Institute in Germany."

You can read the full article on the CNN website

13) Global economy could face 50% loss in GDP between 2070 and 2090 from climate shocks, say actuaries.

This article from the Guardian discusses a report released in January by risk management experts at the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries (IFoA). I've believed for some time now that we can learn plenty about our predicament by observing what insurance companies are thinking and what they are concluding from their constant assessment of the risks their businesses face from increasing environmental disruption.

The report states -

"The climate risk assessments being used by financial institutions, politicians and civil servants to assess the economic effects of global heating were wrong, the report said, because they ignored the expected severe effects of climate change such as tipping points, sea temperature rises, migration and conflict as a result of global heating.

“[They] do not recognise there is a risk of ruin. They are precisely wrong, rather than being roughly right,” the report said. If these risks were taken into account the world faced an increasing risk of “planetary insolvency”, where the Earth’s systems were so degraded that humans could no longer receive enough of the critical services they relied on to support societies and economies.

“You can’t have an economy without a society, and a society needs somewhere to live,” said Trust.

“Nature is our foundation, providing food, water and air, as well as the raw materials and energy that power our economy. Threats to the stability of this foundation are risks to future human prosperity which we must take action to avoid.”

The report, named Planetary Solvency – finding our balance with nature, criticises the dominant economic theory used by governments in the UK, US and across the developed world, which focuses on what humans can take from the planet to create growth for themselves and fails to take into account the real risks from nature degradation to societies and economies."

14) Street art.

I recently came across a piece of street art done by an Italian artist called Blu in 2015. I thought some of you might like to check it out on this street art website. It gives some food for thought about our current predicament and how, after four and a half billion years of Planet Earth we have ended up where we are right now.

15) There are many ways Trump could trigger a global collapse. Here’s how to survive if that happens.

George Monbiot had this article published in the Guardian recently, which expresses well some of what I've attempted to address in my introduction to this newsletter.

In the article George says - "Though we might find it hard to imagine, we cannot now rule it out: the possibility of systemic collapse in the United States. The degradation of federal government by Donald Trump and Elon Musk could trigger a series of converging and compounding crises, leading to social, financial and industrial failure.

There are several possible mechanisms. Let’s start with an obvious one: their assault on financial regulation. Trump’s appointee to the US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Russell Vought, has suspended all the agency’s activity, slashed its budget and could be pursuing Musk’s ambition to “delete” the bureau. The CFPB was established by Congress after the 2008 financial crisis, to protect people from the predatory activity that helped trigger the crash. The signal to the financial sector could not be clearer: “Fill your boots, boys.” A financial crisis in the US would immediately become a global crisis."

He goes on at the end of the article to talk about what we might do to prepare ourselves better for the growing challenges resulting from our unsustainable lifestyles and expanding geopolitical upheaval.

"Every government should hope for the best and prepare for the worst. But, as they do with climate and ecological breakdown, freshwater depletion, the possibility of food system collapse, antibiotic resistance and nuclear proliferation, most governments, including the UK’s, now seem to hope for the best and leave it there. So, though there is no substitute for effective government, we must seek to create our own backup systems.

Start with this principle: don’t face your fears alone. Make friends, meet your neighbours, set up support networks, help those who are struggling. Since the dawn of humankind, those with robust social networks have been more resilient than those without. Discuss what we confront, explore the means by which we might respond. Through neighbourhood networks, start building a deliberative, participatory democracy, to resolve at least some of the issues that can be fixed at the local level. If you can, secure local resources for the community. From democratised neighbourhoods, we might seek to develop a new politics, along the lines proposed by Murray Bookchin, in which decisions are passed upwards, not downwards, with the aim of creating a political system not only more democratic than those we currently suffer, but which also permits more diversity, redundancy and modularity.

Yes, we also – and urgently – need national and global action, brokered by governments. But it’s beginning to look as if no one has our backs. Prepare for the worst."

16) Outcry as Trump withdraws support for research that mentions ‘climate’.

I've included this article because it highlights the incredibly simplistic and basically irrational decisions being made by the Trump administration, the consequences of which all inhabitants of Planet Earth have to live with. I have no doubt that there will be plenty of people and organisations that double down and put more effort into trying to bring about the changes we need to maintain a liveable planet but the extreme polarisation and overbearing distraction resulting from actions such as this make the task so much more difficult.

"The Trump administration is stripping away support for scientific research in the US and overseas that contains a word it finds particularly inconvenient: “climate.” The US government is withdrawing grants and other support for research that even references the climate crisis, academics have said, amid Donald Trump’s blitzkrieg upon environmental regulations and clean-energy development.

Trump, who has said that the climate crisis is a “giant hoax”, has already stripped mentions of climate change and global heating from government websites and ordered a halt to programs that reference diversity, equity and inclusion. A widespread funding freeze for federally backed scientific work also has been imposed, throwing the US scientific community into chaos."

You can check out the full article if interested.

This Guardian article titled 'Cruel and thoughtless’: Trump fires hundreds at US climate agency Noaa, (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) is another example highlighting the theme of this newsletter.

17) Art and Storytelling for Systemic Change with Dougald Hine.

"How can we foster emotional resilience in the face of ecological overshoot and the death of modernity? What role do art and storytelling play alongside science and data in responding to our collective human predicament? And how can we strengthen our communities and plant the seeds for a different way of life, starting in our own small corners of the world?"

If this quote has any meaning for you and you wish to put aside some time to listen and learn then I recommend watching the YouTube discussion between Dougald and Nate Hagens from February 13th.

"When we started Dark Mountain what we were doing in a sense was creating a campfire around which is possible to gather if you had got to the point where the story you had been inhabiting no longer made sense to you, the things you were saying in your speeches or articles or whatever it was no longer rang true to you and you didn't know what was worth saying or worth doing and here was a space to which it was possible to come where you could wait for a while, being in conversation with others, not be judged for or feel rushed into action or to answers and for a lot of people who I worked with in those years it felt like Dark Mountain was a journey to the far side of despair. Sometimes despair is not a thing to be fought of at all costs but a dark night of the soul you need to go through but you go through it and the answer is not be stuck doom scrolling for the rest of your life, the answer is actually that you let yourself be changed by that and as you say you come through and emerge with your world view reconfigured, reshaped. Things that you weren't taking seriously before are marked on the map now. There's other kinds of work worth doing and that's why this book is called "At Work in the Ruins", the sort of two claims in the title. On the one hand there are ruins around and ahead of us that's not a thing that can be avoided if we make the right choices, on the other hand there is work to do. I say near the end of the book I don't think any of us know and I don't think it's helpful to talk as if we could know exactly how all of this plays out. We know enough to have a sense of how deeep the trouble is, but it may worth working on the assumption that what we're in, what's around and ahead of us is one of those great bottlenecks within the history of this living world and that in different ways we may have a chance of affecting how much comes through that bottleneck and in what shape including how much humanity and in what shape, what forms, what ways of being human together."

LOCAL

1) Media articles written by CKM members since the last newsletter. 

13/09/24 - The ‘bearers of civilisation’ and the crises we created.
It is worth noting that this article written by Don Quick was chosen to be included on Stuff's Forever Project page on their website.

13/10/24 - The right to repair is a climate issue too.

09/11/24 - The faster you go, the bigger the mess.

2) Marlborough Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Plan 2025-2030.

The CDEM Plan went out for public consultation in September. CKM made a submission to the plan which you can read if interested.

Here is an extract from our submission - 

Objective 1: Managing risks states:
“Where we want to be: Marlborough is a risk-aware District that takes all practicable steps to identify, prioritise, and manage risks that could impact the wellbeing and prosperity of all those who live, work, or visit here.”

We fully support Objective 1. We do though, wish to offer some words of caution regarding interpretation of the definition of this objective. Being "risk-aware" is a laudable aim but begs the question - How are those risks defined and who defines them?

We are aware at central and local government levels of a tendency to downplay the potential risks arising from the consequences of global heating and biodiversity loss and degradation. There is a wide body of scientific evidence available that informs us that the actual risks we face are higher than our politicians would want us to believe. Even when assessment of the risks is realistic, invariably the actions required to meaningfully reduce those risks fall short. It is certainly clear that central government decisions over multiple governments indicate a downplaying of the risks and a prioritising of economic needs above the needs of Te Taiao. This blinkered view of the world we live in fails to fully recognise the critical importance of maintaining the viability of the biosphere if we are to succeed in retaining a liveable planet. Accepting this predicament is an important component of achieving a truly "risk-aware" plan.

The Mayor Nadine Taylor also wrote an opinion piece for the local paper titled "You could be your neighbour’s first responder" where she said - "We are, as a region and nation, exposed to more hazards than ever before, particularly with the effects of climate change now upon us. Marlborough has seen the impact of the increased intensity of weather events firsthand in 2021 and 2022, with many homes evacuated for safety."

3) National Gravel Bed River (GBR) project’s final findings out.

The final report from the Gravel Bed Rivers National Project was presented to Council at the Environment and Planning meeting on October 3rd. Check out the MDC media release for more info. If you're interested in the science detail you can download the pdf files of the Final Report and view the presentation given to a Council workshop on September 10th. They are both available on the "Reports and Presentations" page of their website under the heading "Yearly Reports 2024".

The main findings of the report were:

• Braided rivers should be considered as a “river system”, comprising their river channels, gravel beds and the water stored within those gravel beds.
• Braided rivers have their own distinct aquifer (braidplain aquifer) formed by movement of bed sediments during flooding, and which temporarily store water which is exchanged with river channels.
• Braided river systems can be hydraulically perched above the regional groundwater table or hydraulically connected as is the case for the Wairau River system.
• Recharge to the Wairau Aquifer from the Wairau River system is dynamic and depends on channel-aquifer head differences. The Wairau River provides recharge at an average rate of 6.65 m 3 /s to the Wairau Aquifer (range 4 to 26 m 3 /s).
• The most permeable gravel layer beneath the Wairau River and forming the Wairau Aquifer on the river berms is very thin (<8 metres) and sensitive to changes in levels in either water body.
• Braiding distributes water more evenly across the braidplain aquifer and promotes higher groundwater levels. Channelisation increases water level fluctuations and scoring compounds it, allowing groundwater levels to fall to very low levels during low flow periods.
• Wairau River flood protection works have reduced the degree of braiding since 1960 leading inadvertently to lower channel levels relative to the Wairau Aquifer and reduced exchange with groundwater, all other factors being equal.
• Continued lowering of the Wairau River bed would reduce security of supply for irrigators and cause further spring recession. Bed raising would increase cost of gravel, increase security of supply for irrigators and reduce spring recession.
• Widening of the Wairau River bed would potentially provide a one-off gravel source, decrease the depth of scouring, and promote braiding.

MDC groundwater scientist Peter Davidson says -

“The latest research from 3 case studies around NZ is being applied in a discrete reach of the Wairau River to enhance aquifer recharge to provide future certainty for irrigators, the environment and municipal supplies. MDC won’t compromise the flood protection of the Wairau but is using world class research in a practical way to optimise the net change in gravel and may trial some fine tuning of river control approaches."

Peter also presented the latest groundwater quantity State of the Environment (SoE) report at the November 14th committee meeting and says -
 
"This is the precursor to the Marlborough Environment Plan (MEP) limits review which is a much larger exercise and won’t be ready until next year as there is aquifer modelling involved which is taking longer than expected.”

Points to note from the report are –

1) That the Riverlands aquifer allocation is not likely to be sustainable. I would say this is a definite as sea levels rise.

2) That the declining trend in the Wairau aquifer is largely caused by long term external factors, not abstraction, though abstraction was a clear contributing factor last summer with the drought conditions causing the aquifer to fall to its lowest ever recorded levels. It goes without saying that increased incidence of droughts will exacerbate the aquifer decline. The completion of the hydrological review next year, which will make recommendations for managing water allocations from the Wairau aquifer, will be interesting to see. There will have to be changes to the current management regime.

You can read a summary of the Groundwater Quantity SoE report in the November 14th meeting agenda. It is item number 12 or you can download a copy of the full report if interested.

4) Marlborough Biodiversity Forum maps.

Over the past few months organisers of the Marlborough Biodiversity Forum have been collating information on where conservation restoration work is being undertaken across Marlborough. Thanks to MDC we now have resulting maps for the Sounds and South Marlborough.
 
5) VEGAN Convergence Of the Peoples (V-COP) presentation by James Wilson.

Long time member of CKM James Wilson, who many of you will know, recently gave a presentation to the world V-COP conference in Arizona. James says -

"I know that my views can be seen as too strong, but I am now convinced that 10,000+ years of human de-wilding has built up a huge reservoir of CO2, to which we are now adding fossil derived carbon. Sailesh Rao, shows clearly that eliminating livestock is more immediately necessary than curtailing fossil fuel burning.  We are presently blinded by the focus on fossil fuels that we, nation-wide, regard meat production and eating as sacrosanct.  Things have to change."

If you're interested please check out the full paper.

NATIONAL

6) Free labour: how bird poo is helping replant our native forests.

Now, here's a positive idea for improving biodiversity and native forest cover by working with nature. There are many areas around NZ where natural regeneration of native forest occurs and this simple idea can speed up that process by proactively planting native fruiting trees to attract birds to spread plant seeds.

"What if the solution to restore our native forests more effectively, efficiently, and cheaply has been flying around us all along? That’s the question being explored at Waikereru, a 120-hectare haven for native plants and animals. Located along a winding inland gravel road just nine kilometres from Gisborne, Waikereru is one of the country’s biggest ecological experiments. The latest hypothesis being put to the test is ‘seed islands’.

• Step one: Plant an area of native fruiting trees to attract local bird populations.
• Step two: Let nature do its thing.

The idea is simple enough and seems to work – even if it was initially unintentional. Long-lived trees in temperate rainforests across the country and at Waikereru are among the best in the world for storing carbon dioxide. Their intertwined root networks also hold the land together, providing much better erosion control than pine plantations. “You have indigenous forest instead of pine plantations, lots of biodiversity, clean streams, beautiful landscapes, microclimates, and not all that sediment and forestry waste going downstream and ending up in the ocean.” Waikereru is now home to a multitude of creatures, including insects, butterflies, moths, lizards, and long-tailed bats."

Check out the full article on the Predator Free NZ website.

7) Electrification could save NZ $95 billion by 2040: report.

This is a follow up to item number 18 in the August newsletter about the "Rewiring Aotearoa" organisation and its chief scientist Saul Griffith. You can listen to the full interview with Kathryn Ryan on the RNZ Nine to Noon programme for more info.

"New Zealand households could save as much as $95 billion dollars by 2040 if the country fully electrifies the economy, according to an international renewable energy advocate. Dr Saul Griffith founded Rewiring America, and Rewiring Australia - and is in New Zealand presenting a report pushing the case that electrification is ultimately cheaper than using fossil fuels. Dr Griffith and his co-authors, including the Reserve Bank chief economist Paul Conway, say there should be a systemic approach to adopting solutions like widespread rooftop solar uptake. Tax incentives and Government finance would be tools to be used, but also addressing workforce change, and consenting. Dr Griffiths' 'Investing in Tomorrow' report says New Zealanders are spending about $20 billion a year on imported fossil fuels but could save over four times that by swapping out fossil fuel burning cars and appliances - for electric equivalents."

If interested you can also listen to an interview with Saul by Jack Tame on TVNZ Q&A programme.

8) More rooftop solar in cities would help solve NZ’s energy crisis – and build disaster resilience.

More on electrification. I'm particularly interested in the opportunity to build disaster resilience to help lessen the inevitable impacts globally of climate breakdown and environmental degradation. 

"New Zealand’s current electricity supply crisis requires immediate solutions. But we argue the government’s emphasis on importing natural gas and construction of centralised solar farms is a missed opportunity. The case against gas has been highly publicised because of its greenhouse gas emissions and substantial costs. But the government’s focus on large solar infrastructure in rural areas, away from our main centres, misses a chance to address two urgent issues at once – the need to cut emissions and to adapt to climate impacts. Instead, we should plan local renewable energy generation, integrated into communities, to improve New Zealand’s energy security and disaster preparedness."

You can read the full article in The Conversation.

9) What’s the point of the Fast-Track Bill?

I thought this article published in NZ Geographic asking about the point of the Fast-Track Bill is well worth a read. They point out that the Bill is set to green-light projects that clash with local council planning, the government’s future goals, and our international agreements.

Richard Capie, general manager of advocacy at Forest & Bird is quoted saying -

"You’ve got the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment raising major red flags, and the Attorney-General warning against bad lawmaking. You’ve got the Auditor-General saying he has deep concerns about this. So, how many heavyweights do we need to wade in and say, ‘Look, this needs to get fixed?”.

Another article was published on the Scoop website and titled "Fast-Tracking Wealth Accumulation And The War On Nature". In it the author Ian Powell says -

"The official description of the bill is that it aims to provide a more efficient and certain pathway for projects to seek approvals. This is to be done by consolidating multiple approval processes that are typically required for large or complex projects, in a one-stop-shop arrangement.
The reality is that it is that is about prioritising economic development by removing any so-called ‘red tape’ that gets in the way. This includes environmental protections and safeguards, including for clean water and preventing extinction."

10) Hope or Alarmism? Messaging and Planetary Boundaries.

I've put this blog from Graham Townsend in the newsletter because, as readers will know I'm seriously concerned about the impacts of exceeding Planetary Boundaries. His article is thought provoking and some of you may appreciate his forthright views, some of you may find them challenging? He starts the blog with this quote from a recent academic paper outlining our current situation.

"We are on the brink of an irreversible climate disaster. This is a global emergency beyond any doubt. Much of the very fabric of life on Earth is imperiled.... Despite these warnings, we are still moving in the wrong direction; fossil fuel emissions have increased to an all-time high...current policies have us on track for approximately 2.7 degrees Celsius peak warming by 2100... Tragically, we are failing to avoid serious impacts, and we can now only hope to limit the extent of the damage."

Graham makes the following observation -

"It seems to me that if we want results, the only lever we can pull is to ask people to care about their kids’ future. What we can still do is to prevent the global mean temperate rise from going much above +3oC. And if we want to fight for our kids’ future, we have the tools to do that: sharply cut personal GHG emissions, and get political.

We can and must offer that much hope. The best recipe, I suspect, might be:

• DON’T hide the truth.
• DON’T sell delusional optimism.
• DO point out the options we still have - IF we all work together, now."

I do understand that there is a very fine line to walk when it comes to the issue of optimism versus pessimism in the context of the climate and environmental challenges we all face. It's something I think about quite a lot because we need to have hope that together we can find ways to adapt and change our excessive consumer driven lifestyles. Recognising that we are exceeding six of the nine planetary boundaries as defined by the Stockholm Resilience Centre is an essential first step in the process in that process. "Delusional optimism" is certainly not going to help. Honesty is required.  

Here's another blog from Graham on the same topic - PLANETARY OVERSHOOT and THE THREAT OF FASCISM

"A rudderless society crying out for strong leadership is a happy hunting-ground for populists in the Trump mould. Their seductively shallow ‘solutions’ appeal to the desire for a return to certainty, to the good old days of economic security, and to a father figure, a fuhrer, who will do our thinking for us. No matter that such populists tend to be narcissists and morally dubious; or that they are frequently beholden to corporate backers whose main aim is to boost their own wealth and influence. No matter that history shows how swiftly populists can become autocrats once in power. No matter that they typically increase inequality and poverty by boosting deregulation and the dismantling of social security and environmental controls. No matter that they damage democracy by cracking down on diversity and dissent. No matter that — by pandering to polluting industries — they accelerate ecological overshoot and further damage the economy. When people feel insecure and anxious, it’s all too easy for critical thinking and compassion to be drowned out by the cult of leadership and the promise of salvation.

WHAT CAN WE DO?

The answer — if there is one — lies in ending complacency. That means:

• Encouraging wider participation in open democracy. Citizens’ assemblies appear to be a constructive model for this.
• Educating the public to understand and accept the reality of planetary boundaries, and
• Encouraging people to see that their kids’ future depends on voluntary economic constraint, especially by the wealthiest 10% of humanity."
  

11) So what is ‘realistic’, minister? Simon Watts says buying more offshore climate credit is ‘unrealistic’. Pat Baskett looks at what that could mean – and what we should be doing to address our emissions.

I found this opinion piece written by Pat Baskett and published on the Newsroom website very interesting. I had heard of the Motu report referred to in the article but had not looked into the detail. This article highlights an issue that I have felt strongly about for sometime now. I believe that the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC's) that individual countries committed to at the Paris climate talks and updated further since have very little chance of being met by the great majority of countries. I expect that the closer we get to 2030 the more noise we will hear about why countries will have to postpone or cancel their commitments. The economy invariably takes precedence over the livability and future of our home - Planet Earth. One of the commenters to the article made a succinct analysis, which I agree with, when she said - "I think the Government is banking on no other country meeting its targets either and all reneging on off shore credits or on shore reductions. Austerity and hoping for the best being their playbook."

Here is an extract from the article -

Climate Change Minister Simon Watts is in an interesting position. He knows we’re 100 million tonnes of CO2e short of meeting the emissions reductions target we signed up to at the Paris COP in 2015. Known as our Nationally Determined Contribution, this target was designed to keep global temperature rises to 1.5C. It’s due in 2030.

We signed up knowing the only way we could meet the target was by paying another country to do what we couldn’t – reduce emissions – and adding their saved tonnes to our account.

The figure of 1.5C is now tragically out of date. The fact we’re looking at 3C by century’s end ought to have us panic-stricken and trebling our efforts to quit fossil fuels. But Watts has ruled out buying offshore climate credits. At the Sustainable Business Council’s conference in September on climate change and business he described the suggestion as “unrealistic”.

“We need to do everything possible in order to reduce our domestic emissions at a profile that doesn’t decimate our economy.”

And how much would that be? Scandalously little is the answer. Granted, total annual emissions fell a miniscule 1.8 percent over the year to June 2023 when compared to the previous year. ‘Downward drivers,’ according to Stats NZ, are in electricity, gas, water and waste services. Emissions from transport, postal and warehousing continue to rise – at 38 percent.

We’re not the only ones to fail. The latest World Meteorological Organization’s Greenhouse Gas Bulletin showed that all three main greenhouse gases (CO2, methane and nitrous oxide) reached record levels last year. In the past 10 years CO2 has risen 11.4 percent and is now at 420 parts per million.

Motu, the economic and public policy research institute based in Wellington, recently held a webinar titled Think globally, act Cooperatively: Progressing Offshore Mitigation for Aotearoa New Zealand. Their work has considerable international standing and their research analyses this issue from multiple aspects. The paper that preceded the webinar opens with a bias that confounds the minister’s stance. Its lead paragraph says the paper’s aim is to show how we could work with other countries “to accelerate global climate progress, by funding offshore mitigation to help meet (our) 2030 target … The world is off track to prevent dangerous climate change”.

INTERNATIONAL

12) COP29 — This Year’s Global Climate Summit. What happened — or rather, didn’t — at the annual climate talks.

The COP climate talks continue with the usual pattern of lots of talking and little action of any substance. In this article from the Global Citizen website they state - "When you consider that Fossil fuel lobbyists were granted more COP29 passes than delegates from the 10 most climate-vulnerable countries, strongly suggesting that their presence may have had an impact on the failed negotiations."

Why am I not surprised that no meaningful decisions were made. Here is an extract from the article -

"Over the last two weeks, more than 65,000 delegates came together to work on the next global climate agreement at COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, the UN’s annual climate conference event. Held from Nov. 11 to Nov. 22 and unofficially dubbed as the “Finance COP,” many hoped that negotiations would result in an ambitious climate funding package for the world. Unfortunately, the goal of getting richer countries to agree to commit sufficient funds to alleviate climate impacts faced by vulnerable nations was nowhere near met.

COP29 is ending on a somber note. Stumbling so drastically at the finish line has left many disheartened with how discussions went — and even questioning if it’s worth coming to the negotiating table at all. “No deal is better than a bad deal,” commented Fadhel Kaboub, Senior Advisor at Power Shift Africa. As lower-income countries express outrage at the $250 billion proposition, COP29 wraps up with no clear consensus. With financial negotiations dragging on until the very last hours, countries on the frontlines of climate change made it clear they will not accept “breadcrumbs.” Baku wraps up with little success at bridging the enormous climate finance gap that many hoped it would."

This further article from the Guardian gives more detail about the final outcome at Baku. The decision was made to pledge US$300 billion, an increase of US$50 billion and still a totally inadequate amount to help meet the challenges of those countries most impacted by climate disruption.

Early on Sunday morning, ministers and high-ranking officials from nearly 200 countries gathered in Baku’s Olympic stadium to witness the drama of fossil fuel wealth battling with science, which says that continuing to burn oil, gas and coal will bring havoc and destruction to the planet if temperatures are not limited to a rise of 1.5C above preindustrial levels. Most observers would say that science lost.
At stake in Baku was the money needed to help poor countries shift to a low-carbon economy and adapt their infrastructure to the impacts of extreme weather. About $1.3tn (£1tn) a year will be needed by 2035 for countries to achieve this, and for the world to stay within the 1.5C limit.

A deal on how to get some way to reaching that target was struck in that hall, but it was one so hedged, loose and half-hearted that many cried betrayal. Representatives of the least developed countries (LDCs) negotiating bloc said: “[We are] outraged and deeply hurt by the outcome of Cop29. Once again, the countries most responsible for the climate crisis have failed us. This is not just a failure. It’s a betrayal.”
Only $300bn of the promised total will come directly from the budgets of developed countries and public finance institutions, such as the World Bank. The great majority of that money should be in the form of grants and low-interest loans, but loose wording means even that commitment is hedged – the cash could come from “a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral and alternative sources”.

13) A Global System Growing Itself to Death—and What We Can Do About It.

This article is written by H. Thomas Johnson who is professor of business at Portland State University and Distinguished Consulting Professor of Sustainable Business at Bainbridge Graduate Institute. This is another look at the impacts of unlimited growth on planetary life support systems.

"Undoubtedly no one seriously believes that the defining feature of the human economy should be the destruction of life. And yet today our economic activity is destroying Earth’s capacity to support life. To alter this condition, we must thoughtfully scrutinize our reasons for advocating continuous growth in production and consumption. If we should continue to pursue unlimited economic growth, the unanticipated consequences may exceed our most fearful imaginings."

This quote in his article is from Eco-philosopher Thomas Berry who in 1988 powerfully described this devastating transition in human history:

"In our times . . . human cunning has mastered the deep mysteries of the earth at a level far beyond the capacities of earlier peoples. We can break the mountains apart; we can drain the rivers and flood the valleys. We can turn the most luxuriant forests into throwaway paper products. We can tear apart the great grass cover of the western plains and pour toxic chemicals into the soil and pesticides onto the fields until the soil is dead and blows away in the wind. We can pollute the air with acids, the rivers with sewage, the seas with oil — all this in a kind of intoxication with our power for devastation at an order of magnitude beyond all reckoning. We can invent computers capable of processing ten million calculations per second. And why? To increase the volume and the speed with which we move natural resources through the consumer economy to the junk pile or the waste heap. Our managerial skills are measured by the competence manifested in accelerating this process. If in these activities the topography of the planet is damaged, if the environment is made inhospitable for a multitude of living species, then so be it. We are, supposedly, creating a technological wonderworld (Thomas Berry, The Dream of the Earth, Sierra Club Books, 1988)."

Here are two more quotes from the article -

"When we view economic activity through the lens of financial numbers such as profit, cost, income, and GDP, it becomes a quantitative abstraction, completely separated from the concrete activities that produce such numbers. Indeed, corporations are seldom held accountable for the true social and environmental costs of their actions, including polluted air and rivers, toxic food, scarred landscapes, scarce or tainted water, discarded human lives and communities. Seen in this light, it is hardly an exaggeration to say that the modern industrial economy has been growing itself to death."

AND - "Endless growth in the human economy makes it impossible for Earth’s remarkable life system to flourish over the long run. However, almost all present-day programs to promote “sustainability” or “sustainable development” fail to question the assumption that growth is a necessary condition of human economic activity. Thus, they do no more than treat symptoms of the underlying disease; they do nothing to prevent the disease itself. And by simply alleviating, temporarily, some of the adverse consequences of growth, they avoid tackling the fundamental problem, which is to produce a condition of long-term sustainability in a context of no growth."

Check out the full article on The Systems Thinker website where the writer "suggests ways we might solve our economic problems and repair the current destructive global economy that is based on “the way man thinks.” These steps propose a positive future economy based on “the way nature works.”

14) US leads wealthy countries spending billions of public money on unproven ‘climate solutions’.

Here is more info about the big potential for wasting precious resources chasing so-called "climate solutions" rather than getting on with the task at hand - reducing emissions! Humans are so good at wanting to have their cake and eat it too!

The subsidies are a “colossal waste of money”, according to Harjeet Singh, global engagement director for the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative. “It is nothing short of a travesty that funds meant to combat climate change are instead bolstering the very industries driving it.” “The history of CCS is depressing … and no significant innovations have improved CCS’s prospects,” said Charles Harvey, professor of environmental engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who co-founded the first private CCS startup 15 years ago.

“Nonetheless, we are again wasting money on CCS that could be used instead to effectively cut emissions, distracting ourselves from the necessity of moving away from fossil fuels, and perpetuating a polluting industry whose local harms often fall on minority and economically disadvantaged communities.”

15) Pacific islands submit court proposal for recognition of ecocide as a crime.

This article in the Guardian provides an update on the progress of the initiative of some Pacific Island nations to have ecocide classed as a crime. Here is an extract -

"Vanuatu, Fiji and Samoa have proposed a formal recognition by the court of the crime of ecocide, defined as “unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused by those acts”. The proposal was tabled before the ICC in New York on Monday afternoon, and will have to be discussed in full at a later date. Holding full discussions on the proposal is a process likely to take some years, and will face fierce opposition, though much of it will be behind the scenes as most countries will not wish to openly speak out against it.

Philippe Sands KC, a prominent international lawyer and professor of law at University College London, acted as a co-chair of the independent expert panel for the legal definition of ecocide, convened by the Stop Ecocide Foundation. He told the Guardian he was “100% certain” that ecocide would eventually be recognised by the court. “The only question is when,” he said. “I was sceptical at first, but now I am a true believer. There has already been real change, as some countries have put it in domestic law. I think this is the right idea at the right time.”

The Conversation also published an article on the same matter headed "Pacific nations want ecocide to become a crime – here’s why NZ should support the proposal".

16) Global water crisis leaves half of world food production at risk in next 25 years.

Unfortunately this aspect of the polycrisis is probably more critical than many others. Without adequate fresh water to meet the daily needs of all life on the planet we will see the hastening of a collapse of the planetary life support systems. Why are we so blind to the consequences of our actions? Half the world’s population already faces water scarcity, and that number is set to rise as the climate crisis worsens, according to a report from the Global Commission on the Economics of Water published recently.

Five main takeaways from the report -

The world has a water crisis.

More than 2 billion people lack access to safe drinking water, and 3.6 billion people – 44% of the population – lack access to safe sanitation. Every day, 1,000 children die from lack of access to safe water. Demand for fresh water is expected to outstrip its supply by 40% by the end of this decade. This crisis is worsening – without action, by 2050 water problems will shave about 8% off global GDP, with poor countries facing a 15% loss. Over half of the world’s food production comes from areas experiencing unstable trends in water availability.

There is no coordinated global effort to address this crisis.

Despite the interconnectedness of global water systems there are no global governance structures for water. The UN has held only one water conference in the past 50 years, and only last month appointed a special envoy for water.

Climate breakdown is intensifying water scarcity.

The impacts of the climate crisis are felt first on the world’s hydrological systems, and in some regions those systems are facing severe disruption or even collapse. Drought in the Amazon, floods across Europe and Asia, and glacier melt in mountains, which causes both flooding and droughts downstream, are all examples of the impacts of extreme weather that are likely to get worse in the near future. People’s overuse of water is also worsening the climate crisis – for instance, by draining carbon-rich peatlands and wetlands that then release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Water is artificially cheap for some and too expensive for others.

Subsidies to agriculture around the world often have unintended consequences for water, providing perverse incentives for farmers to over-irrigate their crops or use water wastefully. Industries also have their water use subsidised, or their pollution ignored, in many countries. Meanwhile, poor people in developing countries frequently pay a high price for water, or can only access dirty sources. Realistic pricing for water that removes harmful subsidies but protects the poor must be a priority for governments.

Water is a common good.

All of human life depends on water, but it is not recognised for the indispensable resource it is. The authors of the report urge a rethink of how water is regarded – not as an endlessly renewable resource, but as a global common good, with a global water pact by governments to ensure they protect water sources and create a “circular economy” for water in which it is reused and pollution cleaned up. Developing nations must be given access to finance to help them end the destruction of natural ecosystems that are a key part of the hydrological cycle.

Check out this article in the Guardian and this one from CNN for more info about the report.

17) Our leaders are collaborators with fossil fuel colonialists. This is the source of our communal dread - Tim Winton.

Australian author Tim Winton has recently published a book called "Juice". This Guardian interview with Tim highlights the personal cost of writing such a confronting, no holds barred book. The extract below refers to Tim's contribution at the Perth Arts Festival two years ago.

"Two years ago, Tim Winton walked on stage at the Perth festival and delivered a blistering closing address that was, as he puts it now, “a bit like dropping a turd in the pool”. Perhaps some in the room had expected the Australian literary giant, Western Australia’s homegrown hero, to say something pretty and benign about the arts. Instead, Winton tore into fossil fuel giants Woodside and Chevron – both at that time long-term sponsors of Perth festival – with his plain-speaking, moral directness that comes through so clearly on the page.

That fossil fuel companies would – and could – sponsor cultural festivals even as they staged works about the climate crisis, was “really embarrassing”. He told the room: “For, who else in the corporate world, sailing so close to reputational oblivion, could feel that safe and so confident? You reckon a brewery would put itself forward for a show about foetal alcohol syndrome? How about tobacco sponsoring ventilators for lung patients?” As he pointed out, even banks and superfunds were divesting from fossil fuels: “So how is it that the arts community should show less creativity and moral imagination than bankers?”

What no one in that room knew, even some people very close to him, was that Winton was writing a novel about how future generations could react if they knew climate change was the result of choices we made now."

The Guardian published another article when the book was released titled "Our leaders are collaborators with fossil fuel colonialists. This is the source of our communal dread". It's clear to me after reading both articles that the seven years he took to write the book have taken a toll on him and I appreciate the honesty he has shown in confronting the predicament facing all of us. I think we owe a big thankyou to people like Tim who are willing to stand up publicly and talk about the elephant in the room like he has. It can't be an easy road to take.

Here's an extract from the second article -

"Those in power cannot acknowledge what’s right before their eyes because to do so would not only undermine their status but threaten their very conception of reality. Securing a just and sustainable future will require many things to be smashed and cleared away. Not reformed incrementally but removed entirely. The opportunity for ameliorative tinkering has already been squandered.

But here’s the thing: the fossil powers and principalities are afraid. They know the tide has turned against them. Within the younger generations their social licence is in terminal decline. In both hemispheres, young people are educating themselves for struggle. They’re not just finding new cadres of solidarity and resistance – they’re developing sophisticated communications campaigns to expose the occupation and to unpick its layers of deceit. And they’re mounting electoral drives to unseat the quislings of oil and gas who stand in the way of serious climate action in parliaments and congresses everywhere."

18) Exported gas produces far worse emissions than coal, major study finds.

I thought this article would be of interest to NZ, with our politicians thinking of importing LNG.  Turns out, it has a greater carbon footprint than coal according to a new research paper!

Exported gas emits far more greenhouse gas emissions than coal, despite fossil-fuel industry claims it is a cleaner alternative, according to a major new research paper that challenges the controversial yet rapid expansion of gas exports from the US to Europe and Asia. Coal is the dirtiest of fossil fuels when combusted for energy, with oil and gas producers for years promoting cleaner-burning gas as a “bridge” fuel and even a “climate solution” amid a glut of new liquefied natural gas (or LNG) terminals, primarily in the US. But the research, which itself has become enmeshed in a political argument in the US, has concluded that LNG is 33% worse in terms of planet-heating emissions over a 20-year period compared with coal.

“The idea that coal is worse for the climate is mistaken – LNG has a larger greenhouse gas footprint than any other fuel,” said Robert Howarth, an environmental scientist at Cornell University and author of the new paper.
“To think we should be shipping around this gas as a climate solution is just plain wrong. It’s greenwashing from oil and gas companies that has severely underestimated the emissions from this type of energy.”
Drilling, moving, cooling and shipping gas from one country to another uses so much energy that the actual final burning of gas in people’s homes and businesses only accounts for about a third of the total emissions from this process, the research finds.
“This whole process is much more energy intensive than coal,” said Howarth. “The science is pretty clear here: it’s wishful thinking that the gas miraculously moves overseas without any emissions.”

Check out the full article in the Guardian.

19) Tales from the Carbon Pulse | Reality Roundtable 11.

Nate Hagens has a series of Reality Roundtable discussions on his website, "The Great Simplification". His recent discussion from August was with Tom Murphy, a professor of physics and DJ White who is a co-founder of Greenpeace International and founder of EarthTrust. Below is an outline of what they discussed. It is  one and a half hours long so only for those who want to go deeper into this area. It is challenging stuff but I appreciate the focus on why it is "so difficult for society to recognize the scale of ecological destruction, and what needs to change to raise awareness?" and "How could recognizing our kinship with all living beings reshape our relationship with the planet?" For me these are some of the big questions we have to find answers to.

The damaging effects of humanity’s disconnected relationship to Earth’s ecosystems are broad and deep. Yet, despite targeted efforts to address these issues and mitigate risks, our insatiable appetite for fossil hydrocarbons continues to grow at an alarming rate. What will it take to reframe our relationship with nature to move forward in a symbiotic, life-supporting path? In this episode, Nate is joined by longtime colleagues Tom Murphy and D.J. White for an in-depth exploration of the mounting ecological crises driven by human behavior and unsustainable energy consumption. Together, they offer both scientific insights and personal reflections on trends such as the rapid decline in wild animal populations, the rise of microplastic pollution, the overwhelming scale of human-built mass, and many other facets of this unparalleled time in human history. Why is it so difficult for society to recognize the scale of ecological destruction, and what needs to change to raise awareness? In what ways is academia struggling to provide the systems understanding we need to address the pressing environmental challenges of our time? How could recognizing our kinship with all living beings reshape our relationship with the planet?

You can check out the full discussion on YouTube if you're interested.

20) MG to launch solid-state batteries in 2025, leading EV race.

For anyone interested in battery development this information about the launch of solid state car batteries by MG is worth a look at. MG say that "this breakthrough technology will offer a substantial upgrade over existing lithium-ion batteries, boasting double the energy density. As a result, MG's upcoming EVs are expected to have longer ranges, lighter weight, and reduced production costs."

If you're interested in learning more about these new batteries this website has some basic info that's easy to understand.

LOCAL

1) Media articles written by CKM members since the last newsletter. 

25/05/2024 - Temporary rates rises? Don’t count on it.
22/06/2024 - A big bill coming due.
20/07/2024 - Are we ready and willing to adapt?
17/08/2024 - Living with loss and doing it well.

2) CKM presentation to the Select Committee on the Fast Track legislation.

There were 27,000 submissions with 2,900 requests to speak to the committee. The committee chose to hear from 1100 organisations and individuals who made unique submissions. CKM member Don Quick wrote our submission and also spoke to the Select Committee.
You can read both documents on our website.

3) CKM presentation to the MDC Long Term Plan hearings on June 12th.

If you're interested the CKM submission and subsequent presentation to the LTP hearings is available on our website.

We have also received a response from the Mayor to our contribution. In her letter she says - 

"Councillors acknowledge the level of care and partnership Climate Karanga Marlborough has when bringing matters to Council’s attention, this helps Council to stay focussed. Councillors also wanted to assure Climate Karanga that Council does take sustainability considerations seriously in its decision making."

4) CKM submission to the MfE Second Emissions Reduction Plan - ERP2.

Tom wrote our submission with the introduction and conclusions contributed by Don Quick. Here is a brief summary -

While the nation will easily meet the first emissions reduction target, due largely to the previous government’s emissions reductions programs, the termination of those programs and other factors mean that the government is 2 Mt CO2e over the 2nd emissions reduction target unless new additional emissions reductions are proposed. They propose a number of initiatives, but the 3 making the most difference (totally 3.8 Mt   CO2e reduction) are carbon capture and storage (CCS) at two gas fields in Taranaki and two unfunded initiatives for reductions in emissions  from organic waste and landfill. None of these initiatives, however, are beyond the discussion phase.
The overall flavour of the consultation  document was optimistic, although the overall message was quite pessimistic. Carbon prices on the NZ ETS are expected to peak at $75/t  CO2e in 2028, then drop back down to $50/t by 2035. This takes away incentive for businesses and industry to future reduce emissions, since it will quite cheap to just buy the emissions credits and carry on. The low carbon price will also likely inhibit the government’s plans for  private investment in CCS and waste minimisation, which it is counting on to meet the second emissions reduction target.
In addition,  modelling results shown in the plan predicts that we will likely exceed the 3rd emissions reduction plan target, the 2050 target to reduce biologic methane by 24-47% and the 2050 net zero long-lived gases target.

A full copy is available on our website.

NATIONAL

5) Robin Woodsford: Why Boomers should fight for the future.

Robin was interviewed by Kathryn Ryan on Nine to Noon recently. Lesley and I both recommend taking the time to listen to the 20 minute interview, whether you are a boomer or not.  

"It was the greatest generational shift the world had seen. Post-war babies who grew into young people not content to just accept the way things were - picking a fight against the 'isms': racism, sexism, militarism, consumerism. But they didn't realise how much they'd been shaped by the traumatised parents who raised them. Robin Woodsford has examined this in his book, 'Me and my generation: Why Boomers should claim the past and fight for the future'.

He was an activist himself, working for the Young Christian Workers movement in the 70s, before going on to become a youth worker, counsellor and therapist. His book is part memoir, part exploration of what the Baby Boomer generation stood for - and where it ran out of mojo. He makes the argument that the job's not done, and fellow Boomers should be thinking hard about how to make their legacy count."  

6) Climate change: simultaneous views from above and below.

Our Climate Declaration hosted a very interesting webinar with Sir Peter Gluckman in June which you can access on their website.

Below is the abstract giving some info about the topic discussed. I think his focus on the difficulties society faces due to polarisation are very pertinent. We have to find ways to slow and reverse this polarisation. The evidence is more and more compelling that it is driving us towards more and more conflict and fragmentation resulting in more and more damaging outcomes for our planetary life support systems. 

"In 2015 in a much more settled geopolitical era, the United Nations unanimously adopted Agenda 2030 which is largely described in the accompanying Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). 10 years later, both political and scientific progress has been disappointing; this year the multilateral system will gather for the Summit of the Futures. Climate action is detailed in SDG 13 and like actions across the other sixteen goals, progress has been disappointing.   The reasons are multiple; the failure of political systems to think long-term, the increasingly divided and geopolitically tense multilateral stage, and especially the interconnected nature of the SDGs which makes it difficult to progress on one without considering the others.

Science itself has continued to focus largely on describing the problem with less attention to producing actionable knowledge; the latter requires new modes of doing research. Technological progress is being made but it too has spillover costs. Societies, including our own, will have complex choices to make over employing some technologies which may well be needed or would beneficially change the trajectory of warming.

Actionable knowledge needs to impact on citizens locally, create narratives that bring consensual action, effect policy makers nationally, and hopefully drive nation states to collectively understand that it truly is in their self-interest for more effective global action. This is a major challenge for diplomacy and New Zealand needs to rebuild its efforts in science diplomacy.

The challenge is how to address it in a way that maintains societal cohesion rather than promotes fragmentation and reactions and accusations of alarmism. Neither data nor alarmism alone will change the future. We must address the political reality that all citizens need to accept the tradeoffs and choices that need to be made. How to change the conversation while maintaining a democratic ethos is central to progress in addressing climate change."

Sir Peter is also the Director of Koi Tū: The Centre for Informed Futures. This group is an independent, non-partisan think tank and research centre based at Waipapa Taumata Rau, University of Auckland with members throughout New Zealand and the world who focus on critical long-term national and global challenges arising from rapid and far-reaching social, economic, technological and environmental change.

7) Recloaking Papatūānuku

I included an item about the Recloaking Papatūānuku initiative from the Pure Advantage group in the May newsletter. In this article from Dame Anne Salmond published on the Newsroom website she says "Continuing to plant pine forests in response to climate change treats rural Kiwis as collateral and ignores past mistakes. Restoring native forests, however, offers hope to those who have suffered the most".  It is well worth a read if you're interested in this topic. 

Pure Advantage have also published 10 asks of Government as a part of delivering Recloaking Papatūānuku:

Whilst the Government is keen to see the private sector design and Nature-based solutions, ultimately we need the Government to act as a key enabling and implementing partner to deliver a programme, like Recloaking Papatūānuku, at the scale and with the urgency needed.

Some key enablers that Government should urgently address that would unlock progress include:

1. Fast-tracking a high-integrity, internationally reputable ecosystem restoration / nature-positive incentives scheme for landowners.
2. If forestry remains in the Emissions Trading Scheme, exploring the opportunity to qualitatively differentiate forestry credits so as to better reward indigenous forests (and their co-benefits).
3. Driving investor confidence in a robust high-integrity, internationally-aligned domestic Voluntary Carbon Market.
4. Properly recognising our Nationally Determined Contributions on the Crown accounts.
5. Making Recloaking Papatūānuku part of our Global Biodiversity Framework commitments at October’s Convention on Biological Diversity COP in Colombia.
6. Properly recognising and funding the critical role of the Department of Conservation and Predator Free 2050 in landscape restoration, particularly through the  significantly scaling up of animal pest and weed interventions across the conservation and Crown pastoral estate.
7. Enabling Crown Pastoral leaseholders to register indigenous afforestation and restoration efforts in the Emissions Trading Scheme (through legislative amendments).
8. Outlining the role Government sees the private sector performing to support landscape-scale ecological restoration and how it will facilitate nature-positive investments, including by leading the international implementation of Nature-Related Financial Disclosure requirements.
9. Recognising, incentivising, and supporting enhanced measurement techniques in relation to the sequestration effects of pest eradication and other restoration interventions, including additional sequestration gains in pre-1990 forests.
10. An unequivocal, public statement by the Government in support of Recloaking Papaptūānuku for all of its benefits and a commitment to further exploring its implementation as a means to amplify and galvanise collective action.

8) 'You can't plant your way out of this problem': Worry at government's pine-heavy carbon plan.

The government's focus on planting pine trees to solve climate change will only push costs onto remote communities and avoid solving the real problem: fossil fuels, campaigners say. The government's draft Emissions Reduction Plan contains little in the way of spending on reducing emissions, preferring to go for what the government says is the more affordable option of offsetting carbon emissions with low-cost trees.

Polluters can buy unlimited quantities of pine-based carbon credits under the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), and the government intends to lean almost exclusively on the ETS to meet climate targets - with no limit on how much pollution can be offset, versus cut at the source. The draft plan also promises to explore technological solutions like storing carbon dioxide in underground reservoirs, as well as nature-based options such as absorbing carbon by re-wetting peatlands.

"You can't plant your way out of this problem," said WWF's Kayla Kingdon-Bebb. "It's really disappointing that this plan has pivoted so hard away from gross emissions reduction. It's really just kicking the can down the road in a very unhelpful way. We only have so much land in New Zealand that's suitable for planting, and there's a reason that widespread pine plantation has been controversial. If we're going to be pursuing a programme of aggressive afforestation, it needs to be native afforestation."

Check out the full article on the RNZ website.

9) A new ruling says countries – including NZ – must take action on climate change under the law of the sea.

This is another significant milestone achieved through legal action rather than political action. We can't rely on politicians to take the necessary action, as they have little incentive when such actions impact their primary interests of GDP and "growth", so other ways such as this, are important avenues for forcing change. The Tribunals strong support for the request described below is encouraging.

"In a significant development for small island nations threatened by rising seas, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) has found greenhouse gases constitute marine pollution. The tribunal handed down a unanimous advisory opinion this week in its first climate-related judgement. It declared countries must take measures to combat climate change in order to preserve the marine environment under the law of the sea.

The ruling responds to a request from the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law (COSIS). The commission sought to clarify whether obligations to prevent pollution and protect the marine environment under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) apply to climate change and ocean acidification. The tribunal’s answer was an emphatic yes. This means countries, including New Zealand, must now address climate change under both the law of the sea and international climate agreements."

You can check out the full article on The Conversation website.

10) The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea’s Advisory Opinion on Climate Change and Its Implications.

The Opinion is the first in a trio of advisory opinions by international courts that will likely be issued within twelve months of each other.  It is envisaged that next, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (“IACHR”) will deliver its opinion regarding States’ obligations derived from human rights norms in relation to the climate emergency.  The International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) will then opine on the obligations of States under international law to ensure the protection of the climate system from anthropogenic GHGs for present and future generations, as well as the legal consequences for States where they, by their acts and omissions, have caused significant harm to the climate system.  These opinions are expected in early- and mid- 2025, respectively.

Notably, the Opinion was issued just six weeks after the European Court of Human Rights’ (“ECtHR’s”) judgment in KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland, in which the ECtHR, for the first time in its history, prescribed the content of States’ positive obligations under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”) in the context of climate change.  According to the ECtHR, States have a primary duty to adopt, and to effectively apply in practice, general measures for achieving carbon neutrality—and with a view to achieving neutrality within the next three decades.

You can read more about this opinion on the website of Gibson Dunn, a large corporate legal firm and also in this article published on RNZ.

11)  Unprecedented ocean change may impact key NZ fisheries.

More marine heatwaves likely for NZ this summer; study reveals risk to critical ocean species

"NIWA scientists have seen substantial changes in the ocean to the east of New Zealand, with possible impacts for important fisheries. Since 2006, strong, full-depth ocean warming has occurred south of the Chatham Islands at around 5x the global rate because of the ocean currents moving 120km west."

You can learn more about this research on the NIWA website.

I have a particular interest in this second article from the NZ Herald about the impacts of these marine heat waves. We lived near Punakaiki in the 1970's and '80's and regularly collected bull kelp for our garden and orchard. To see in this article that nearly all bull kelp in the West Coast’s Punakaiki Marine Reserve have been wiped out is very sad. This is confirmation of what we have heard from old friends still living in the area.

12) Environment and economics: A marriage of (in)convenience?

This speech by the Commissioner for the Environment, Simon Upton to the EDS conference on June 12th in Christchurch is well worth a read if you haven't seen it. I find his contributions to the public discourse to be thought provoking and insightful and this speech is no different. Here is a taste of his speech - 

"Environmentalists are very good at pointing out inconvenient truths. They supply a sort of portable plug-in conscience for a society that is only too happy to overlook accumulating environmental pressures in favour of making hay in the short term. They upend John Maynard Keynes’ famous observation that “the long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead.” Environmentalists insist that current affairs provide an excellent guide to where we will end up if we don’t change course.

But I didn’t come here today to talk about what a wonderful job environmentalists do. There is a danger that we all get into a bubble of clear-sighted, righteous agreement that if only other people had sufficient political will and shared our views, we’d be well on our way to the promised land. I’d prefer, instead, to turn the spotlight back on ourselves and address some of the economic elephants in the room that make environmentalism so much harder than a few slogans can make it seem."

AND - "Given that we are a biological economy, the lack of data we have on the claims agriculture makes on soil and water is truly disturbing."

I recommend checking out the full speech.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment office also submitted to the Government's Emissions Reduction Plan.

You can read about it and download their full submission from their website. Below is an extract.

"The Commissioner has made a submission on New Zealand’s second emissions reduction plan (ERP2) outlining how the plan’s ‘least cost approach’ risks passing on undue costs to future generations. He describes ERP2 as a mixed bag of policies designed to deliver the minimum reductions required, and possibly not even achieving that. There is a very real risk that New Zealand won’t even meet the first or second budget with the policy mix that is proposed. The projected reduction only just adds up and margins are thin, with no allowance being made for uncertainties surrounding policy measures. If the budgets are not met, then future generations will carry the burden of meeting those targets. Of greatest concern is the plan’s reliance on the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS), which in its current form suppresses carbon prices, discourages gross emissions reductions and incentivises the planting of large areas of land in pine forests."

An article titled "Draft climate plan risks kicking costs down road," was also published in the Farmers Weekly and gives a good summary of his perspective. This quote from Simon is as usual succinct and to the point.

“There is no guarantee that the cavalry of cheap technology will come charging over the hill as is implicitly assumed by this plan.”

13)  There’s no buying our way out of the environment crisis.

The idea individuals can fix the environment by buying ‘eco-friendly’ products is dangerous. Dr Gabriela Baron explains in this Newsroom article why green consumerism is an oxymoron.

"To genuinely tackle the climate crisis, we need to focus more on cultural, behavioural, and policy changes rather than relying on technological solutions. The sooner we accept the fact that we can’t buy our way out of the situation through ‘green consumerism’, the more effective our policy strategies will be.

In the past half a century, we have been part of a significant shift from a production-focused society to one driven by consumption. Consumer culture and marketing have emerged as dominant forces, driven by consumer confidence and credit availability, rather than production efficiency.

This shift has dramatically altered personal identity and cultural development. Modern advertising has evolved from promoting a product’s practical features to creating symbolic connections between products and consumers’ psychological states, harnessing human psychology, and targeting emotions such as guilt, inadequacy, aspirations, and identity. Often, the strategy involves creating a new crisis in order to sell a product that promises to solve it."

14) An obscure climate accounting decision with billion-dollar consequences.

In June, Minister of Climate Change Simon Watts requested a report from the Climate Commission on the levels of domestic emissions reduction that Aotearoa New Zealand could feasibly achieve as part of its second nationally determined contribution (NDC2). More information is available on the Climate Commission's website.

The information below is from a statement published on the Pure Advantage website in April this year and written by Rob Morrison & Dr. Christina Hood. They say the consultation on the government's plans for domestic policy and NDC implementation is welcome but the issue they are highlighting in this statement could have big implications for NZ in the years ahead.

Here is an extract -

"In a London meeting room recently, the International Accounting Standards Board decided that corporate climate targets are not just about sustainability: they can create direct financial consequences for companies’ balance sheets

And as interpretation decisions from this Board also inform public sector accounting, it also provides guidance for how public entities, councils and countries financially account for the cost of meeting climate targets. It has potential billion-dollar consequences for the New Zealand government’s financial statements. That will be of particular interest to Climate Change Minister Hon Simon Watts, who was recently welcomed into Cabinet and also happens to be an accountant, and to Associate Climate Change and Finance Minister Hon Nicola Willis.

The decision makes two key clarifications. First, that a climate target does not have to be legally enforceable to matter: even an entirely voluntary target can create a financial obligation if the company is sufficiently committed to its delivery (that is, there can be a “constructive obligation” in accounting-speak). Second, when use of carbon credits is part of meeting a target (offsetting a company’s excess annual emissions), the cost of those credits should be financially provisioned for, as a liability, when the emissions occur each year.

These clarifications come at a helpful moment for New Zealand. There has been increasing interest in the legal and financial accounting status of New Zealand’s international emissions reductions target – or nationally determined contribution (NDC) – under the Paris Agreement that covers the 2021 to 2030 period, for example; Risks Hiding in Plain Sight by the McGuinness Institute and the related analysis by Compass Climate.

Based on the International Accounting Standards Board’s interpretation, there should be a provision (liability) in the government’s financial statements now for the portion of this cost that covers excess emissions that have already occurred. Failure to acknowledge this cost is hard to reconcile with the foundational accounting principle of presenting a “true and fair view” of the financial situation."

A recording of a discussion between Environmental Defense Society CEO Gary Taylor and CC Minister Simon Watts, that addresses some of the matters highlighted in this item, was recently made available on the EDS website. This discussion will give you a good idea of the current government's spin on these issues and contrasts somewhat with the views expressed above.

15) Climate Change Commission Delivers First National Adaptation Plan Progress Assessment.

On August 15th the Minister of Climate Change released the Commissions report, which is the first in a series of two-yearly progress assessments against the government’s national adaptation plan. The information below is from a recent media release by the Climate Commission about the report.

• This is our first-ever monitoring report gauging the progress Aotearoa New Zealand is making to adapt to the impacts of climate change.
• The report looks at the first national adaptation plan, which was released in 2022. It provides an evidence-based, impartial assessment of how effective it is and how well it is being implemented.
• The key finding of this report is that currently, adaptation is not happening on the scale, or at the pace, that is needed. The status quo is unsustainable.
• The report includes nine recommendations in total – seven focused on helping the country shift from the current reactive approach to a more proactive one and two on improving national adaptation planning and monitoring.
• These reports are due to be delivered every two years. The timing of the reports is set by the Climate Change Response Act.

Adaptation is not happening on the scale or at the pace that is needed. Aotearoa New Zealand’s first independent assessment of adaptation progress shows urgent action is needed to address the impacts of climate change on New Zealanders’ lives and livelihoods, says Commission Chair Dr Rod Carr.

The full media release is available on the Climate Commission website.

16) Commonwealth Bank stops lending to fossil fuel companies without genuine emissions plan.

This looks like a positive move by the biggest bank in Australia. You can read more about it on the ABC News website.

"The Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA), the country's largest mortgage lender, is the first major Australian bank to start walking away from funding fossil fuel companies without genuine emissions plans. In its latest climate report, released on the same day it posted close to $10 billion in full-year net profit, the bank stated that it had already been ditching clients not aligned with the Paris Agreement.

The real-world effects of the bank's new policy could be put to the test as soon as next week, with a major gas loan reportedly being signed off without CBA at the table. Last year, the bank announced from 2025 it would not provide loans to any coal, oil, or gas companies that did not have a transition plan in line with the Paris goals to avoid dangerous warming. This week's report shows that it is applying that policy early.

CBA's loans to fossil fuels decreased by 92 per cent from 2018 to 2022, from $4 billion to $267 million, according to analysis from Market Forces, a group that campaigns against investments in environmentally destructive projects. The bank also halved its exposure to oil and gas companies in the past two years from $3.3 billion in 2022 down to $1.7 billion."

17) Clean ups are not enough: Government policy incoherent on climate change.

The Public Health Communication Centre Aotearoa released a briefing in July where they question the direction and coherence of the current government's climate strategy. Here is the summary from the briefing -

"Events like the recent storm on the East Coast demonstrate our communities’ vulnerability in the face of climate change. But given what is known about our changing climate, it is important not to simply try to maintain or return to what was. Instead, we need the Government of Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) to use evidence to support communities to rebuild for increased resilience in the face of climate change. Additionally, we need central Government to recognise that policies that increase greenhouse gas emissions put communities in this country and internationally at increased risk from climate change impacts.

However, the current Government appears not to be making these connections, bringing in a range of policies likely to increase the country’s emissions as well as the Fast-track Approvals Bill which will reduce the rigour applied to new developments. Yet there are potentially huge public health, social, and economic benefits in an evidence-informed, coherent mitigation and adaptation policy response to climate change."

They have also made available a recent paper published in the Lancet titled "Health and climate change: adaptation policy in Aotearoa New Zealand" that describes direct and indirect health risks to NZ communities from climate change. In the paper they recommend that the Climate Change Commission engage formally and directly with health bodies to strengthen the Commission's advice on the implications of climate change, and of national climate change policies, on health and equity. They say - "Climate resilient development does not occur without better public health. For this reason, the health sector has a critical role in the development and implementation of adaptation policy."

If you're interested you can also access a copy of their submission on the Government’s Climate adaptation inquiry.

18) Rewiring Aotearoa.

I came across the Rewiring Aotearoa website recently which I thought would be worth sharing. The site is a good source of information about the environmental and economic benefits of going electric in our homes.

Rewiring Aotearoa represents everyday New Zealanders in the energy transition and is working to build an electrified future where every Kiwi saves money on energy bills, reduces their carbon emissions and has the resilience to keep their lights on and homes warm. Let’s make New Zealand more electric!

Chief scientist for Rewiring Aotearoa, Saul Griffith has written an article published in Newsroom about a high-powered report they have released which shows transforming our households, cars and home energy infrastructure to fight climate change would save New Zealanders $100 billion.

The $100 billion figure is one of two headline figures – the other is that this savings translates to the average electrified household spending between $1500 and $4700 less on energy each year. These are big numbers, but they don’t fully tell the story that Griffith has come to New Zealand to share.
New Zealand has a unique opportunity, he says, because its highly renewable power system means the climate savings of electrification are just as significant as the cash savings. Plus, our need to import most of the fossil fuels we use means decarbonisation saves even more money (and helps our trade balance). For decades, policymakers and activists have looked at climate change as a supply problem. The largest emitters – power generators who burn fossil fuels and industry – buy energy at cheaper wholesale prices, meaning solving climate change through investing in new infrastructure was going to be costly.

“If you look at the demand side of the energy economy, which is where we use energy in our cars, in our homes, in small businesses, that whole sector of the economy pays higher retail energy prices. And if you use electrification, because it is much more efficient for all those things on the demand side – and particularly if you use rooftop solar – it is now cost effective,” he says.

INTERNATIONAL

19)  Animal Telemetry.

I've recently read a very interesting book by Australian author James Bradley titled "Deep Water". In the book he provides information about the IMOS tagging project where they fix tracking devices to Elephant Seals, and use them to collect large amounts of very useful data in the Southern Ocean.

"IMOS is Australia’s Integrated Marine Observing System. It is operated by a consortium of institutions as an unincorporated joint venture, with the University of Tasmania as Lead Agent. They also collect data in other areas using penguins and turtles. As the animals move through the ocean, sensors in these devices collect information about location, depth, salinity and temperature. Researcher Mark Hindell says "it's almost as if we have 287 mini-submarines exploring the Southern Ocean." Information was collected from over a million dives in more than 568,000 locations. Another researcher Prof Rob Harcourt says - "This data has improved the accuracy of the IPCC ocean state models by about 15%, which is a huge change in our understanding of how much energy is being pumped into the ocean, and has transformed the IPCC's predictions."
The ICARUS project based in Germany also uses animal telemetry on a wide range of mammals and birds. Their current device weighs only five grams but they are developing a device that will weigh only one gram and be able to be fitted to insects. Despite their miniscule size the current transmitters are equipped with a range of sensors capable of gauging speed, magnetic intensity, temperature, humidity and air pressure."

I find this sort of project fascinating. Here we are facing a predicament where human activity is having major impacts on the habitats and environment that wild animals and insects live in and the very animals being impacted are being utilised in this way to provide large amounts of data that would be incredibly difficult to collect any other way. Hopefully the information can be used to help bring about the changes necessary to ensure their survival.

"Animal Tagging deploys Satellite Relay Data Loggers (SRDL) on several species of Southern Ocean seals including both weddell and southern elephant seals. These data loggers are often equipped with a CTD and fluorometer, collecting high resolution ocean observations in the deep Southern Ocean and Antarctic waters. Data is transmitted in near real-time using the Advanced Research and Global Observation Satellite (Argos) system. Geolocation archival (GLS) tags have also been used in seabirds, such as the short-tailed shearwater, snow petrels and emperor penguins, however the use of these tags was ceased in 2014.    

Fitting seals with these miniaturised loggers provide the ability to collect valuable oceanographic measurements in regions often inaccessible to ship-based researchers, whilst also providing information on seal behaviour. The merging of oceanography and marine mammal ecology advances our understanding of the world’s oceans and its top predators and allow us to predict how these species will be affected by future climate changes. Furthermore, recent technological advancements permit the collection of important data on ocean properties throughout the Antarctic winter – data previously unavailable but crucially important to oceanographic and climate studies."
 
You can learn more about animal tagging on the IMOS website and also on the ICARUS website. Icarus are connected to the Max Planck Institute of Animal Behaviour and are doing similar research working with animals. This connected project from Icarus is doing research with animals to assess the possibility of using them to provide an early warning system of natural disasters.

20)  Debt payments by countries most vulnerable to climate crisis soar.

Debt payments by the 50 countries most vulnerable to the climate crisis have doubled since the start of the coronavirus pandemic and now stand at their highest level in more than three decades, campaigners have warned. The Debt Justice charity said countries at the highest risk of being affected by global heating were paying 15.5% of government revenues to external creditors – up from less than 8% before Covid-19 and 4% at their lowest recent point in 2010.

Using data from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, the charity said its new report showed the urgent need for comprehensive debt relief so that poor countries could invest in measures to tackle the climate crisis. “Record levels of debt are crushing the ability of the most vulnerable countries to tackle the climate emergency,” said Heidi Chow, the executive director of Debt Justice.

“We need a rapid and effective debt relief scheme to cancel debts down to a sustainable level. The UK can play its part by legislating to ensure private lenders take part in international debt relief agreements.”

Check out the full article in the Guardian.

21) The role of ‘blue carbon’ in addressing climate change.

This guest post by Dr Claire Evans, a principal biogeochemist at the National Oceanography Centre lays out the climate opportunities presented by “blue carbon” and the challenges these ecosystems face. Blue carbon is a term that refers to carbon captured by the world’s ocean and coastal ecosystems that has potential to be conserved or enhanced. Blue carbon is stored in vegetated coastal and marine ecosystems such as seagrass, mangroves and salt marshes.

"Within the ocean’s vast expanse lie immense reservoirs of carbon – surpassing those found in either the atmosphere or the land. The ocean actively captures and incorporates carbon through various natural mechanisms, locking in a significant portion that would otherwise circulate within the Earth’s systems, thereby functioning as a continuous carbon sink.

This crucial role mitigates climate change by reducing the amount of carbon which ends up in the atmosphere. If the ocean remains as a net carbon sink, it can aid in offsetting ongoing emissions and slowing global warming. Unfortunately, a longstanding misconception persists that the ocean has an infinite resilience to human exploitation and negligence – likely stemming from the fact that the consequences of our actions are obscured beneath the surface.

Unsustainable use of the ocean’s resources – such as through overfishing – coupled with warming and acidification progressively erode the ocean’s capacity to regulate carbon and heat and its ability to sustain essential resources and services. Consequently, rates of carbon sequestration are weakening and the vast carbon reserves held within marine ecosystems are increasingly susceptible to release."


22) The critical role of ‘grounding zones’ in the retreat of Earth’s ice sheets.

This is an extract from a guest post published on the Climate Brief website from Dr Alex Bradley, an ice-ocean modeller at the British Antarctic Survey and Bryony Freer, a PhD student with the British Antarctic Survey and the University of Leeds.

"The vast ice sheets that cover Greenland and Antarctica have the potential to trigger catastrophic sea level rise as the climate warms. But the ice-sheet models that scientists use to project future changes underestimate how fast sea levels are rising now and how much they have risen in the past. This suggests the models are missing important processes driving ice-sheet retreat.

New research suggests that melting at grounding zones – where the ice transitions from sitting on land to floating on water – could be the missing piece of the puzzle. And it is potentially a big piece. For example, when one study on the Thwaites glacier in west Antarctica included these processes, its projections of ice-sheet loss more than doubled. While scientists have yet to run model simulations with grounding-zone melting included for the whole of Antarctica, studies focusing on specific regions of the continent’s ice sheets project up to twice as much sea level rise.

Current global projections of sea level rise also do not include grounding-zone melting. This means that these projections – including those that inform the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – may be substantial underestimates.Ice-sheet models have “known unknowns” – things we know that we do not know perfectly, but can account for imperfect knowledge of. However, they also have “unknown unknowns” – things that we do not even know are happening and therefore cannot quantify the full effects of.

Although grounding-zone melting might result in higher sea level than we expected, at least we now know that it is happening and can begin to incorporate it into our models. The devil we know is better than the devil we don’t."

23) The Battery Mineral Loop - The path from extraction to circularity.

I've included items in earlier newsletters questioning whether our aim to replace fossil fuel energy with renewable energy will be limited by the availability of enough resources, in particular critical minerals. A report from the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) in the US takes an optimistic perspective on the issue regarding storage batteries and argues that a circular system can be established that will meet our needs. In my opinion there is still a big question of whether we can continue to produce enough energy and minerals to meet the exponentially growing demands of our technological world while at the same time turning around the trajectory of greenhouse gas emissions. If the wish is to keep charging headlong into this brave new world, rather than slowing down and exercising some restraint and discrimination, I think it would be wise to remember Papatuanuku will have the last word.

Here is an extract from the RMI website -

In The Battery Mineral Loop, RMI lays out a comprehensive strategy to address the rising demand for battery minerals. Battery minerals are not the new oil. Even as battery demand surges, the combined forces of efficiency, innovation, and circularity will drive peak demand for mined minerals within a decade — and may even avoid mineral extraction altogether by 2050. These advancements enable us to transition from linear extraction to a circular loop, with compounding benefits for our climate, security, equity, health, and wealth.

Change is already underway. Without the past decade of improvements in chemistry mix, energy density, and recycling, lithium, nickel, and cobalt demand would be 60–140 percent higher than they are today. Continuing the current trend means we will see peak virgin battery mineral demand in the mid-2030s.

Accelerating the trend along six key solutions — deploying new battery chemistries, making batteries more energy-dense, recycling their mineral content, extending their lifetime, improving vehicle efficiency, and improving mobility efficiency — means we can reach net-zero mineral demand in the 2040s.

At that point, end-of-life batteries will become the new mineral ore, limiting the need for any mining altogether. We have enough to get there; our known reserves of lithium, cobalt, and nickel are twice the level of total virgin demand we may require, and announced mining projects are already sufficient to meet almost all virgin demand.

Check out the full article and get access to the full report on the RMI website. This article on the EV Markets Reports website supports the RMI report conclusions.

24)  Governing for the planet - Nation-states are no longer fit for purpose to create a habitable future for humans and nature. Which political system is?

Below is an extract from an essay published on the Aeon website. I'm always interested in viewpoints that step back from the specifics of the polycrisis and look deeper into the big picture aspect of what is happening on our planet. This item and the next four, the first on multipolar traps, then two short essays from Martin LeFevre and finally an item about the book "A Darwinian Survival Guide" all give plenty of food for thought and discussion about human beings and their part in the biosphere. 

In politics, there is no ‘world’; only states. Compounding the problem is the fact that for pathogens, there are no ‘states’; there is only the world.

This basic mismatch between the scale of the problem and the scale of possible solutions is a source of many of today’s failures of global governance. Nation-states and the global governance institutions they have formed simply aren’t fit for the task of managing things such as viruses, greenhouse gases and biodiversity, which aren’t bound by political borders, but only by the Earth system. As a result, the diplomats may still come to agree on a pandemic treaty – they’ve committed to keep working – but, so long as the structure of the international system continues to treat sovereignty as sacrosanct, they will never be able to effectively govern this or other planetary-scale phenomena.

An emerging scientific consensus, however, makes clear that not only have we not tamed nature, we can’t tame nature, for the simple reason that we are part of nature. Human beings are inextricably part of the biosphere, part of Earth. These insights emerge from rigorous scientific study, not mystical reflection, and reveal our place within the biogeochemical churn of this planet. A vast and expanding infrastructure of sensors across, above and below Earth, and the networks of software and hardware that process and interpret the mountains of data the sensors produce, have demonstrated, with an accuracy and precision unmatched by previous generations, that humans are embedded in this planet’s system of systems.

What this new and growing planetary sapience is revealing is systematic wreckage. Scientists have determined that human actions (really, some humans’ actions) have pushed Earth past the ‘safe operating space for humanity’ for six of nine ‘planetary boundaries’, including climate change, biosphere integrity and freshwater change. We now understand not only the damage that we are doing to planetary systems but the damage that we are doing to ourselves as elements of those systems. The Earth sustains us, not the other way around. There is no possibility of human thriving unless the ecosystems that we are part of thrive.
The realisation of our planetary condition may insult our narcissistic self-regard, but it also yields a positive possibility: that human flourishing is possible only in the context of multispecies flourishing on a habitable planet. The aim of habitability is meant to diverge from the now-dominant concept of sustainability. While the concept of sustainability treats nature both as distinct from humans and as existing for humans’ responsibly managed instrumental use, the concept of habitability understands humans as embedded in and reliant on the more-than-human natural world. Stripped of sustainability’s anthropocentrism, habitability focuses on fostering the conditions that allow complex life in general – including, but not only, humans – to live well. This vision of multispecies flourishing is at once generous and selfish. Expanding the circle of concern to include the multispecies menagerie is certainly more beneficent than current politics typically allows, but it is also absolutely about ensuring the survival of our species. What’s bad for them is, ultimately, bad for us. These goals – thriving ecosystems in a stable biosphere supporting human lives and nonhuman life – must be our new lodestar.

The central question of our time is: how can we achieve this?

We can’t predict what the galvanising catastrophe might be that brings about new systems of governance. We must focus our efforts instead on defining a clear perspective on what planetary governance could and should be. Holding such a vision in our minds may make it more possible to take advantage of the crisis that will all but inevitably arrive given the inadequacy of the current system. As we enter a period of not just geopolitical but geophysical uncertainty, calibrating our North Star – our vision of where we want to head – will be more important than ever.

Check out the full essay on the Aeon website.

25) Multipolar or Moloch traps.

This is a term I've become aware of recently. Learning about multipolar traps was helpful for me in my efforts to try and understand what it is that drives humanity to keep messing it's own bed.

"The multipolar trap is a term used to describe a situation where self-interest compels multiple parties to act against their collective interest, leading to detrimental outcomes or even destruction."
 
AND - "Escaping from the immensely challenging nature of multipolar traps poses a significant obstacle. It necessitates collective efforts and consideration of the long-term consequences of our actions. To achieve this, industries, governments, individuals, and society as a whole must engage in intensive collaboration to overcome competitive barriers and prioritize long-term sustainability over short-term gains."

You can learn more about this concept from this extract from an online book by David Gurteen called Conversational Leadership.

For anyone interested in this topic there is also a deep dive discussion about this and related topics between Nate Hagens and Daniel Schmachtenberger  on YouTube. The topic of the discussion is "A Vision for Betterment - From Naive to Authentic Progress."

"Current mainstream narratives sell the story that progress is synonymous with betterment, and that the world becomes better for everyone as GDP and economies continue to grow. Yet, this is an incomplete portrayal that leaves out the dark sides of advancement. What are the implications when only the victors of history write the narratives of progress and define societal values? What are the value systems embedded in our institutions and policies, and how do they reinforce the need for ongoing growth at the expense of the natural world and human well-being? Finally, how do we change these dynamics to form a new, holistic definition of progress that accounts for the connectedness of our planet to the health of our minds, bodies, and communities?"

26) A Day Of Contrasts Between Darkness And Light.

Below is an extract from an Opinion item written by Martin LeFevre and published on the Scoop website. I recommend checking out the full text.

"Thousands of years of civilization, and tens of thousands of years of prehistory have culminated in planetary polycrisis. Is there a root cause, and can it be addressed, much less redressed by the living generations? It can if we look below the surface level of current events and national politics, and stop confusing human social and political systems with the natural order. Conflating man-made systems with natural systems only exacerbates man’s decimation of the earth, and does nothing to remedy humankind’s increasing social and psychological pathology. The latter – the human mind and consciousness – is what is destroying the former -- the natural order. Combining them by saying things like, “How rising emissions distort our political ecosystems is not nearly as well understood as the scientific certainty that they are heating our world,” just increases confusion.

It’s true that we need to examine “the feedbacks of the climate crisis on governance.” But if we have no insight into the underlying cause of the fragmentation razing both the earth and human institutions, we cannot deal with either. Placing the climate and ecological crisis in the context of national and international politics, or even politics at all, is to be shortsighted to the point of obtuse. We have to look a lot deeper than “the battle between those who want to fix what is broken and those who want to keep breaking."

27) The Pervasiveness Of Inward Deadness Is Not The Result Of “The Deadening Effect Of The Super-Rich”.

Here is another essay from Martin challenging our perceptions of our predicament.

It’s easy to blame the rich and “the soul-sucking mode of exploitation we call capitalism” for the rapaciousness of the human species. However, “restraining the power of the very rich” is an absurdly inadequate response to the global polycrisis.

Of course the super-rich have added greatly to the hellishness of this world. But it’s facile to maintain they are the cause of the planetary ecological, economic and political crisis, and that constraining them is the remedy to it.
We, those who still care about the viability of the earth and the future of humanity, have to look deeper than boilerplate thinking on the left. That means continuously questioning and observing within, not automatically looking for external remedies.

When we awaken insight and intelligence inwardly, we not only feel wonder and transcendence as human beings, but will find creative outward solutions to the polycrisis that aren’t based on accumulating power.

28) A Darwinian Survival Guide - Hope for the 21st Century.

The final item is about a book I've recently read titled "A Darwinian Survival Guide - Hope for the 21st Century" by Daniel Brooks and Salvatore Agosta. Some of you may remember the discussion I included in the May newsletter between Daniel, an evolutionary biologist and a science fiction writer called Peter Watts. I've included below a short extract from and a description of the book. I was able to borrow the book from the Blenheim library so if you're interested you could check it out.

For those who don't want to read the book, I recommend reading the excellent short research paper titled "Surviving the Anthropocene: A Darwinian Guide" which is a precis of the book. Daniel and Salvatore have made it available on the ResearchGate website and reading it might be a good opportunity to have some of our views of the world we live in, challenged!

Here is an extract from the precis of the book -

"The fundamental theory of the survival of life on this planet is Darwinism. Darwinian evolution is about coping with change by changing, using what you have on hand to survive. The fuel for this process is evolutionary potential, which resides in preexisting variation. This preexisting variation allows living systems to move forward into an uncertain future. The biosphere is a complex evolutionary system that generates, stores, and uses its own potential to survive. This makes ecosystems robust, not fragile. That suggests we can use the biosphere without destroying it, but we need some guidelines. Those guidelines are embodied in the Four Laws of Biotics, which tell us how we can interact with the biosphere without endangering ourselves further.

We can further improve humanity’s chances of survival as a technological species by:

1. Implementing the economics of well-being,
2. Reducing population density by finding space in rural areas and revitalizing them into circularized economies,
3. Regrowing sustainably by creating networks of cooperating circular economies, adding new modules when growth occurs, not consolidating into new densely populated and vulnerable urban centers, and
4. Modifying social institutions to be responsive to the desires of the grassroots, even when those desires do not produce the expected outcomes.

Darwinian principles provide humanity with a middle ground, a third way, between unattainable utopia and unacceptable apocalypse. We can alter our behavior now according to Darwinian principles, at great expense and difficulty, and extend or even improve upon the current state of the Anthropocene, or we can fail to act on our own behalf, experience a general collapse of technological society, and rebuild using those Darwinian principles to provide a more survivable future."

Here is an extract from the book -

"What makes the biosphere robust is not evolution's propensity to maximise fitness but rather its propensity to generate less than maximally fit yet survivable variants (survival of the fit) and a realm of possibilities (sloppy fitness space) to explore. These insights have been around for more than 160 years since Darwin published the "Origin of Species." And yet our modern world has been saturated with a survival-of-the-fittest mentality, which despite what many may think, is the antithesis of how nature works. Our economic systems as well as the ways we interact with each other and the rest of the biosphere are driven by such mantras as "bigger is better" and "growth is good." Darwin understood that growth is a fundamental aspect of biology, but growth alone only produces conflict. Growing as much as possible amounts to maximising short-term profits at the expense of saving for the future. And this is a poor strategy when survival depends on coping with change."

Here is a description of the book from the MIT website -

"How humanity brought about the climate crisis by departing from its evolutionary trajectory 15,000 years ago—and how we can use evolutionary principles to save ourselves from the worst outcomes.

Despite efforts to sustain civilization, humanity faces existential threats from overpopulation, globalized trade and travel, urbanization, and global climate change. In A Darwinian Survival Guide, Daniel Brooks and Salvatore Agosta offer a novel—and hopeful—perspective on how to meet these tremendous challenges by changing the discourse from sustainability to survival. Darwinian evolution, the world's only theory of survival, is the means by which the biosphere has persisted and renewed itself following past environmental perturbations, and it has never failed, they explain. Even in the aftermath of mass extinctions, enough survivors remain with the potential to produce a new diversified biosphere. Drawing on their expertise as field biologists, Brooks and Agosta trace the evolutionary path from the early days of humans through the Late Pleistocene and the beginning of the Anthropocene all the way to the Great Acceleration of technological humanity around 1950, demonstrating how our creative capacities have allowed humanity to survive. However, constant conflict without resolution has made the Anthropocene not only unsustainable, but unsurvivable. Guided by the four laws of biotics, the authors explain how humanity should interact with the rest of the biosphere and with each other in accordance with Darwinian principles. They reveal a middle ground between apocalypse and utopia, with two options: alter our behavior now at great expense and extend civilization or fail to act and rebuild in accordance with those same principles. If we take the latter, then our immediate goal ought to focus on preserving as many of humanity's positive achievements—from high technology to high art—as possible to shorten the time needed to rebuild."

LOCAL

1) Media articles written by CKM member Tom Powell since the last newsletter.

01/03/2024 - Do we really need to fly?
29/03/2024 - Where does the plastic go?
27/04/2024 - We need to stick together.
25/05/2024 - Temporary rates rises? Don't count on it. 

2) The big dry shuts off Wairau River water takes.

This article from Maia Hart published in the Marlborough Express in March reported on discussion at the MDC March Environment and Planning Committee meeting.

I attended the meeting and have put together some comments, which I've added here for those interested in the ongoing situation with the declining Wairau aquifer and the latest update from the Gravel Bed Rivers research team.

Important points to note -

• Wairau Aquifer levels in March were the lowest ever observed by MDC. The indicator monitoring bore at Conders Bend was the lowest ever recorded, as were other bores. Spring recession was significant at all the springs. There will be a public consultation happening later this year to help determine what the community feel is acceptable regarding the health of the springs. Peter Davidson (groundwater scientist) informed me that if the aquifer decline continued and the spring recession was to be minimised that  would eventually mean cutoffs for all 1000 Wairau aquifer water users every year. Fortunately Peter is confident the declining trend can be halted. I hope he is right!
• This reference in the report to the Committee is relevant - "the long-term declining trend is caused by falling Wairau River channel bed levels relative to the most permeable Wairau Aquifer layers." It was reported that a build up of sediment in the river bed of about 0.5m would be needed to slow or halt the declining trend. This will require reduced gravel extraction from certain areas and time for sediments to migrate down the river from higher up.

There are long term factors exacerbating this process.

• Wilding pine infestations particularly in tributaries such as the Branch. Trees were originally planted many decades ago to stabilise large areas of scree. We now know those same scree slopes provided important flows of sediment into the Wairau catchment.
• Land use change on the north bank from historic pastoral farming to plantation forestry has reduced sediment flows.
• The building of the Waihopai Dam in the 1930's greatly reduced sediment flows coming down the Waihopai River.

This document from Peter provides a good summary of the current situation.

An update was also published by MDC on May 3rd. It is a good summary of the situation as it now stands.
                                         You can read the full statement on their website.

3) MDC Long Term Plan consultation -

Consultation on the 2024-34 Long Term Plan closed on May 13th. CKM contributed a submission focusing on the big picture view as we see it, which you can download and read if interested.

Here are a couple of extracts from our submission -

INFRASTRUCTURE STRATEGY –

We know the Plan is for the next ten year period but we note that in the Infrastructure Strategy you project expenditure for the next 30 years (page 54). Rather than attempting to project expenditure for 3 decades, which we believe is an impossible and pointless task, we propose the following –

• Focus resources into anticipating what we might expect in terms of environmental and climatic impacts and disruptions over the next three decades. We believe this would be of much more value to our community that attempting to project infrastructure spending.

We don’t need to remind you that there have been, and will no doubt continue to be, multiple warnings issued by bodies such as the UN, International Energy Agency, international and national environmental NGO’s, climate and environmental scientists etc regarding the major challenges and disruptions we will all have to face together in the decades ahead.

AND

We believe the overwhelming factors impacting the future of Marlborough and our planet as a whole will be environmental and climatic and it appears that the weighting of these factors in the graphs in the LTP document (pg 54) have been excluded or at the least minimalised. Why would we project infrastructure expenditure for 3 decades with the apparent assumption that life will continue as usual and that disasters such as the 2021 and 2022 extreme rainfall events were somehow unusual. It seems to us heroic or maybe wishful thinking to be projecting spending in the 2030’s to be trending downwards from the relative highs of the next five years. Likewise projecting five yearly expenditures from 2029 – 2054 as being less than the next 5 year period fascinates us. Is no one listening to the warnings of what we are to expect in the decades ahead? All those warnings tell us to expect more extreme events and that the time of living in a relatively benign climate has now passed. We do not comprehend how anyone can make financial projections about the next 10 years, let alone 30 years, without at least acknowledging the impacts of further disruptive events.

4) Marlborough to host first all-electric flights -

The country’s first commercial electric plane will fly a Wellington-Marlborough cargo route for mail and parcels, Air New Zealand says.
The cargo-only commercial demonstrator flights, carrying mail for NZ Post, will be up and running in 2026, using the Beta Alia plane ordered by Air New Zealand late last year. At the time they were ordered Air New Zealand hoped electric planes would be carrying passengers in the next decade.

A key element of the deal to acquire smaller aircraft was to get Air New Zealand to the top of the list for more commercially viable passenger aircraft, where it was hoping to replace the 50-seater Q300 regional planes.

You can check out the full article on Stuff and this media release on the MDC website.

5) The family that diverts 1000 tonnes of waste a year.

Motueka couple Merv Hall and Ricarda Scherschel divert 1000 tonnes of waste a year from landfill, an impressive feat for a small business with only four full time equivalent employees. But they are not set at stopping there, and say with funding, they could help reduce Tasman’s waste by 10%. Hall and Scherschel took over Motueka’s Weka Peckers in 2020. The decision, Hall said, was “a bit of Covid thing”. The pair had been traveling back and forth between Scherschel’s native Germany, but with two young children, decided they needed a base.

Passionate about environmental issues, when the business came up for sale, they grabbed it. Since then, it’s grown from a reuse shop to a larger focus on waste diversion areas - including the tricky pieces of recycling that kerbside bins won’t accept.

Check out the full article in Stuff.

NATIONAL

6) Recloaking Papatūānuku -

Pure Advantage have made an impressive infographic available on their website outlining their vision for recloaking Papatūānuku. This is a very positive and uplifting initiative that aims to strategically reforest and restore two million hectares of indigenous forest in Aotearoa. The infographic is available to view and download from their website where they make the following statement.

The Recloaking Papatūānuku infographic highlights the What, Why, How, When, Where and Who of the initiative. It shows that together, we have the tools to weave climate and ecological resilience into our whenua, and invest in the future economic and social prosperity of our country. Pure Advantage is built on a commitment to communicate professional climate and business aligned thought leadership, including support for the Ō Tātou Ngahere programme of work with Tāne’s Tree Trust and increasingly Recloaking Papatūānuku. With all the cuts and changes going on in the science community it is more important than ever for us to keep engaging with professional thought leaders and help to promote their views on the urgency and opportunities for New Zealand to respond to the challenges and opportunities we face with climate change and environment.

7) Fast-track bill could affect NZ's reputation - Transparency International.

Transparency International which campaigns against corruption worldwide has expressed some valid concerns about the proposed "Fast Track" legislation. This article and short interview on the RNZ website gives more info.

Resources Minister Shane Jones has reportedly asked officials for advice on whether oil and gas companies could be offered “bonds” as compensation if drilling rights offered by the present government were extinguished by any future administration. Such a move would have real implications under the government’s proposed Fast-track Approvals Bill, which is designed to “enable faster approval of infrastructure and other projects that have significant regional or national benefits”.

Transparency International says the fast-tracking consent bill could taint New Zealand's international reputation. In March, the government unveiled a plan to fast-track infrastructure projects, giving just three ministers the power to greenlight significant projects. The bill, which is before a select committee, has been criticised for potentially exposing the ministers to corruption allegations. Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Simon Upton said the role of ministers as decision-makers should be scrapped. And the auditor-general had urged that the bill included requirements for better managing conflicts of interest. Transparency International believed public perception around the fast-track bill might be improved by a sunset clause, "so that it doesn't just go on and on" and said the scope was currently "very broad", not just involving the Resource Management Act.

"The bill seems to have exclusion clause for the OIA [Official Information Act] so it's not clear whether people will be able to seek information and gain it, and then there are the legal challenge rights which seem to be curtailed as well." There could be economic consequences if New Zealand's international reputation were to drop further, Haggie said. "The problem is we rely on our international reputation hugely in terms of our trading status... our mana internationally at trading tables, and generally as a good government citizen of the world...

"That's really important for New Zealand to hold its head up high and be able to say its systems are clean, it's a good democracy, it's a safe place... it's running a good, fair system for doing business, and for its people in terms of participation."

On the same theme this article from Jane Kelsey in The Conversation looks at the possible exposure of future NZ governments to expensive trade disputes.

Last year, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment warned that governments could be liable to oil and gas corporations for US$340 billion in future disputes over fulfilling their commitments under the Paris Agreement on climate change. This is a major disincentive to ambitious climate action. States that once championed agreements containing ISDS are now withdrawing from them. This year, the European Commission proposed a coordinated EU withdrawal from the multilateral Energy Charter Treaty because energy companies are using ISDS to challenge new climate change laws and policies.
The New Zealand parliament began to step back from ISDS in 2015, when NZ First MP Fletcher Tabuteau sponsored a private member’s bill “to protect New Zealand laws by prohibiting New Zealand from entering international agreements that include provision for investor-state dispute settlement”.

And finally this article looks at potential impacts on NZ’s biodiversity.

....the proposed fast-tracking process leaves no time for thorough ecological surveys to assess a site’s biological diversity. It restricts consenting to just six months, which means expert panels would have to make their assessments based only on existing ecological information – known as a “desktop assessment”. None of the recent and proposed changes to environmental legislation are responsive to the dual biodiversity and climate crises. They are also inconsistent with the government’s own stated goal of evidence-based decision making. The fast-tracking agenda threatens to undermine New Zealand’s progress on biodiversity protection and other key environmental issues. It erodes rather than sustains the natural capital on which the economy depends. “These are not a replacement for on-the-ground surveys, particularly in New Zealand, where we have limited data on many species and for many parts of the country,” the authors write.

8) ELI has successfully overturned the granting of a nitrogen discharge consent to a major irrigation scheme.

We all need to be thankful for the legal work that groups such as ELI (Environmental Law Initiative) do on behalf of Papatūānuku. This was an important legal challenge that may not have happened at all without ELI's efforts.

The High Court has found that Environment Canterbury (ECan) unlawfully granted a resource consent for the discharge of nitrogen and other contaminants to Ashburton Lyndhurst Irrigation Ltd (ALIL). In a High Court judgment delivered on Wednesday 20 March, Justice Mander found that the decision to grant the discharge consent breached the statutory bar to consenting discharges likely to cause significant effects on aquatic life:

"On the Commissioner's own findings, it appears indisputable there will likely be continuing significant adverse effects on aquatic life for the time being. I do not consider the grant of a discharge consent on the basis of the conditions imposed, albeit in anticipation that over time there will be a reduction in nitrogen leaching loads and some mitigation of the adverse effects that are likely to continue from the current activity, avoids breaching the s107(1) prohibition.” Based on this finding the judge found that the decision to grant the resource consent was based on a material error of law.

ELI’s Director of Research and Legal, Matt Hall said: "This ruling is hugely significant for freshwater management, both in Canterbury and around Aotearoa New Zealand. The Court has upheld the clear prohibition on the granting of discharge consents that are likely to have significant adverse effects on aquatic life. The Court has also made it clear that where upstream discharges end up causing problems in the coastal environment, the relevant coastal policies apply."

You can read more about the case on the ELI website and also access the full judgement if you are interested.

9) European court rules human rights violated by climate inaction.

This appears to be a bit of landmark court case because "It comprehensively dismisses the argument that courts cannot rule on climate legal obligations because climate change is a global phenomenon or because action by one state is just a 'drop in the ocean'," This could have implications for the case taken by Mike Smith, which I included in the last newsletter.

The court ruled that Switzerland had "failed to comply with its duties under the Convention concerning climate change" and that it had violated the right to respect for private and family life. It also found that "there had been critical gaps" in the country's policies to tackle climate change including failing to quantify reductions in greenhouse gases - those gases that warm Earth's atmosphere when we burn fossil fuels like oil, coal and gas.

Check out the full article on the TVNZ website.

This article on The Conversation website includes discussion about the possible implications of the Swiss case for the litigation that Mike Smith is taking here in NZ where he "....has sued the New Zealand government, claiming (among other things) that its inadequate emissions reductions framework breaches the rights to life and to practise culture under the Bill of Rights."

10) Ecosystems are deeply interconnected – environmental research, policy and management should be too.

Below is an extract from an article in The Conversation authored by Rebecca Gladstone-Gallagher, Conrad Pilditch and Simon Francis Thrush.

Why are we crossing ecological boundaries that affect Earth’s fundamental life-supporting capacity? Is it because we don’t have enough information about how ecosystems respond to change? Or are we unable, even unwilling, to use that information better? We have a lot to learn still, but as we show in our research, using current ecological knowledge more effectively could deliver substantial environmental gains.
Our work focuses on improving links between research and ecosystem management to identify key trigger points for action in a framework that joins land, freshwater and sea ecosystems. Specifically, we investigate solutions to environmental and societal problems that stem from the disparities between scientific research, policy and management responses to environmental issues. We need managers and policy makers to consider ecological tipping points and how they can cascade though ecosystems from land into rivers and lakes and, ultimately, the ocean.

Cyclones as a real-world example - As a result of massive soil erosion on the east coast of the North Island during Cyclone Bola in 1988, steep hillsides were retired from grazing and converted to pine plantations to help stabilise the land. Fast forward three decades and a large proportion of the forest reached harvest at the same time. The exposed soil associated with clear felling was left draped in woody debris to protect it from rain. However, Cyclone Gabrielle hit in February last year, with extreme rainfall washing both soil and woody debris into streams. This destroyed habitats, transported vast amounts of silt and wrecked lowland farms, orchards and critical infrastructure. The debris also clogged harbours and coastal beaches, smothered seafloor habitats, destroyed fisheries and affected cultural and recreational values. This real-world example demonstrates the severe consequences of lags in information flow and management responses. If land-use management decisions had considered the effects on other connected ecosystems and the potential for climate change to intensify those connections, the outcomes could have been different. We could have implemented more diverse strategies in land use and put emphasis on restoring native forest and coastal wetlands.

INTERNATIONAL

11) Granting legal ‘personhood’ to nature is a growing movement – can it stem biodiversity loss?

This article written by Viktoria Kahui and published in The Conversation highlights the importance of giving attention to legally defining who has liability in situations where natural objects are given legal personhood.

Biodiversity is declining at rates unprecedented in human history. This suggests the ways we currently use to manage our natural environment are failing. One emerging concept focuses on giving legal rights to nature.
Many Indigenous peoples have long emphasised the intrinsic value of nature. In 1972, the late University of Southern California law professor Christopher Stone proposed what then seemed like a whimsical idea: to vest legal rights in natural objects to allow a shift from an anthropocentric to an intrinsic worldview. Ecuador was the first country to enshrine rights of nature in its 2008 constitution. Since then, a growing number of countries have followed in awarding rights of nature. This includes Aotearoa New Zealand, where legal personhood was granted to the Whanganui River, the former national park Te Urewera and soon the Taranaki maunga.

At its core, the rights-of-nature movement allows persons to take legal action on behalf of natural ecosystems, as opposed to on behalf of people affected by environmental degradation. Ecosystems can become separate entities with their own agency, in the same way other non-human entities such as charitable trusts and organisations can exist as separate entities in law.

Liability matters - The recent overturning of two rights-of-nature decisions in particular puts the spot light on the importance of liability. In the US, farming operations challenged the Lake Erie Bill of Rights in 2020, which granted Lake Erie the right to “exist, flourish and naturally evolve”. Farmers argued the bill was too vague and would expose them to liability from fertiliser runoff. In India, the Ganges and Yamuna rivers were granted living-person status, where injury to rivers was to be treated equally to injury to human beings. The decision was challenged on the grounds of uncertainty about who the custodians are and who would be liable to pay damage to the families of those who drowned in the rivers.

Both these were legally overturned, meaning these natural entities no longer have rights of nature. This suggests attention to legally defining who has liability for what may be an important building block for the movement to protect biodiversity in the future.
Our recommendation is that future rights-of-nature frameworks need to have well-defined legal rights and include appointed guardians, established as separate legal entities with limited liability, as well as the support of representatives from interest groups.

12) Climate change from a wild animal's point of view: Adam Welz -

I highly recommend this interview with Adam Welz, aired on RNZ on May 11th. In the interview Adam talks about his recent book titled "The End of Eden - Wild Nature in the Age of Climate Breakdown". Adam helps us to view our existence as a part of the greater miracle of life and emphasises how important it is to respect the right of all other lifeforms to coexist with us. I have tried hard to foster this in myself for many years against the constant pressure to consume more and to place our wants before the planet's needs. Are we able to change our mindset and behaviour and ensure we continue to play a part in this amazing cosmic play along with all the other lifeforms that have co-evolved with us? I live in hope that we can.

13) The Collapse Is Coming. Will Humanity Adapt? An evolutionary biologist and a science fiction writer walk into a bar... and mull over survival.

Following on from the previous item here is a couple of extracts from a discussion between science fiction writer Peter Watts and evolutionary biologist Daniel Brooks. They discuss the book recently published by Daniel and his co-author Salvatore Agosta titled "A Darwinian Survival Guide - Hope for the Twenty First Century". You can read the full discussion on the MIT Press Reader website. It is fascinating and provides plenty of food for thought for those who, like me, might be "mulling over our survival".

"....we should not be talking about sustainability, but about survival, in terms of humanity’s future. Sustainability has come to mean, what kind of technological fixes can we come up with that will allow us to continue to do business as usual without paying a penalty for it? As evolutionary biologists, we understand that all actions carry biological consequences. We know that relying on indefinite growth or uncontrolled growth is unsustainable in the long term, but that’s the behavior we’re seeing now. Stepping back a bit. Darwin told us in 1859 that what we had been doing for the last 10,000 or so years was not going to work. But people didn’t want to hear that message. So along came a sociologist who said, “It’s OK; I can fix Darwinism.” This guy’s name was Herbert Spencer, and he said, “I can fix Darwinism. We’ll just call it natural selection, but instead of survival of what’s-good-enough-to-survive-in-the-future, we’re going to call it survival of the fittest, and it’s whatever is best now.” Herbert Spencer was instrumental in convincing most biologists to change their perspective from “evolution is long-term survival” to “evolution is short-term adaptation.” And that was consistent with the notion of maximizing short term profits economically, maximizing your chances of being reelected, maximizing the collection plate every Sunday in the churches, and people were quite happy with this."

AND

"Everything that people did at any point in time seemed like a good idea at the time; it seemed to solve a problem. If it worked for a while, that was fine, and when it no longer worked, they tried to do something else. But now we seem to be at a point where our ability to survive in the short term is compromised, and what we’re saying is that our way to survive better in the short term, ironically, is now based on a better understanding of how to survive in the long run. We’re hoping that people will begin seriously thinking that our short-term well-being is best served by thinking about our long-term survival."

14) Post Carbon Institute.

I've also recently come across the website of the "Post Carbon Institute", which has a view of our predicament with strong similarities to those espoused in the discussion in the previous item. So if you found the discussion between Peter and Daniel thought provoking then I recommend checking out the Post Carbon Institute website where they say -

• Our Mission - Founded in 2003, Post Carbon Institute’s mission is to lead the transition to a more resilient, equitable, and sustainable world by providing individuals and communities with the resources needed to understand and respond to the interrelated ecological, economic, energy, and equity crises of the 21st century.
• Our Vision - We envision a world where resilient, just, and sustainable communities coexist with nature, thrive within ecological bounds, and provide greater protection for both human and non-human lives.
• The Issues We Address - Humanity is experiencing a dangerous confluence of crises in interrelated environmental and social systems—a ‘polycrisis’ that threatens the underpinnings of modern civilization.

Post Carbon Institute believes that the best way to confront this challenge is to build awareness of (a) the polycrisis, its drivers, and its trajectory, and (b) community resilience-building as an ideal response. Our specific areas of focus are:

• The Big Picture - The interrelated crises of the 21st century can’t be solved with simple technical adjustments. Understanding and responding to them intelligently requires us to think in terms of systems.
• The Great Unraveling - Humanity is entering the Great Unraveling—a time which individual impacts are compounding to threaten the very environmental and social systems that support modern human civilization.
• Community Resilience - A resilient community is one that can maintain its essential identity while adapting to change. Building community resilience is a critical response to the sustainability crises of the 21st century.
• The Energy Transition - We can no longer ignore the ever-rising financial, social, and environmental costs of fossil fuels; nor can we ignore questions about what a truly renewable energy future will look like.
• Limits to Growth - The sustainability challenges humanity faces are interrelated facets of one essential truth: the planet can not support ever-more economic growth and resource consumption.

15) Honey, I shrunk my life - Taking “degrowth” seriously.

Finally on the topic of our future survival, here is a long read from Harry Flood for anyone who is wanting more on the theme of survival and the predicament in front of us.

Here are a couple of extracts to give you some flavour -

Of all the problems facing humanity, there’s arguably only one that really matters: how do we achieve carbon-neutrality quickly enough to save our bacon? People who haven’t just flat f...ing given up mostly count themselves as tech optimists; they believe we can science our way out of this mess – by pivoting to renewable energy, and tweaking our consumer behavior in the ways that matter most. But more and more people whose opinions count say such measures are doomed to fail. They amount to tapping the brakes, when there’s just not enough runway left for that. We need to slam on the emergency brake, as the Japanese philosopher Kohei Saito puts it – to avert environmental and social catastrophe. We’re talking about a major, really unprecedented paradigm shift. Which exposes the question under the question: Can it even be done? Is material growth inevitable? Or is it, as Wendell Berry once put it, “evitable”?

AND

The Franciscan monk Richard Rohr has some thoughts about a life well lived. You spend the first half of it acquiring things, and the second half giving them away. And the new space you have in the container, having got rid of your stuff, you fill with other people. If such an idea scales, we might come to think of the last century of escalating consumerism as the first half of life; it was all about acquiring power, consolidating our career, etc. And now we’re entering the second part ... a move from “I” to “we.” From building to sharing. From an ethic of power to an ethic of care.
You have to take an idea like that seriously.
Because the alternative is living with the dis-integration of our very souls.

16) Singing to protect nature's harmony!

The Stop Ecocide team in Finland recently coordinated a 3 day program of press interviews and meetings with diplomats, politicians and eminent experts from various fields. This culminated with an amazing choral mega-concert. The "Choirs for Ecocide Law" concert was a wonderfully positive event. Lesley and I have listened to it and found it uplifting and inspiring. I love the idea of moving people's minds by moving their hearts. What a great initiative to support the cause of establishing Ecocide as a crime under international law.

3 packed days concluded with the extraordinary Choirs for Ecocide Law mega-concert on 27th April at the Helsinki Music Hall - 1000 singers and a completely sold-out auditorium! A recording of the entire glorious occasion, including the full concert and panel discussion is available on YouTube. Singing about something is a very powerful thing - especially with others. Research from the pilot Choirs for Ecocide Law project last year showed that 90% of those learning the songs said their worldview shifted… let's sing ecocide law into place!

Choirs for Ecocide Law is an artistic choral project, whose main purpose is to spread awareness about the need to make large-scale environmental destruction (ecocide) an international crime. Choirs for Ecocide Law provides a sixty minute concert program, “Let us change the rules!”, ready to be rehearsed and performed by your choir – for free. The scores package includes music made by composers from different cultures, along with guidelines for an interactive rehearsal process, and with a script for bringing the concert storyline to stage.

17) Sail-powered cargo ship 'shows potential of wind'
 
Retrofitting giant, rigid sails to a cargo ship has effectively cut its fuel use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, shipping firm data shows.
The Pyxis Ocean tested the British-designed WindWings for six months. Cargill says the data "underscores the potential" of wind to reduce the shipping industry's carbon footprint. Experts describe the results as "very encouraging", but say, at present, only a tiny volume of the international shipping fleet is using the technology. Sails have powered boats for millennia - but the type of sails trialled on the Pyxis Ocean are different to those normally seen on wind-powered vessels. Made of the same material as wind turbine blades, they are folded down in port then opened out to stand at 123ft (37.5m) on the open seas.

Check out the full article on the BBC website.

18) Taxing big fossil fuel firms ‘could raise $900bn in climate finance by 2030’.

A new tax on fossil fuel companies based in the world’s richest countries could raise hundreds of billions of dollars to help the most vulnerable nations cope with the escalating climate crisis, according to a report. The Climate Damages Tax report, published on April 29th, calculates that an additional tax on fossil fuel majors based in the wealthiest Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries could raise $720bn (£580bn) by the end of the decade.

The authors say a new extraction levy could boost the loss and damage fund to help vulnerable countries cope with the worst effects of climate breakdown that was agreed at the Cop28 summit in Dubai – a hard-won victory by developing countries that they hope will signal a commitment by developed, polluting nations to provide financial support for some of the destruction already under way.

Check out the full article in The Guardian.

19) Updates from James Hansen.

For those who wish to keep up with the latest science observations from James and his team here are updates.

Global Warming Acceleration: Hope vs Hopium

Accumulating evidence supports the interpretation in our Pipeline paper: decreasing human-made aerosols increased Earth’s energy imbalance and accelerated global warming in the past decade. Climate sensitivity and aerosol forcing, physically independent quantities, were tied together by United Nations IPCC climate assessments that rely excessively on global climate models (GCMs) and fail to measure climate forcing by aerosols. IPCC’s best estimates for climate sensitivity and aerosol forcing both understate reality. Preservation of global shorelines and global climate patterns – the world humanity is adapted to – likely will require at least partly reversing global warming. Required actions and time scale are undefined. A bright future for today’s young people is still possible, but its attainment is hampered by precatory (wishful thinking) policies that do not realistically account for global energy needs and aspirations of nations with emerging economies. An alternative is needed to the GCM-dominated perspective on climate science. We will bear a heavy burden if we stand silent or meek as the world continues on its present course.
Our paper, Global Warming in the Pipeline, was greeted by a few scientists, among the most active in communication with the public, with denial. Our friend Michael Mann, e.g., with a large public following, refused to concede that global warming is accelerating. We mention Mike because we know that he won’t take this notation personally. Accelerated global warming is the first significant change of global warming rate since 1970. It is important because it confirms the futility of “net zero” hopium that serves as present energy policy and because we are running short of time to avoid passing the point of no return.

Check out the full March 29th update.

Comments on Global Warming Acceleration, Sulfur Emissions, Observations.

Global temperature (12-month mean) is still rising at 1.56°C relative to 1880-1920 in the GISS analysis through April (Fig. 1). [Robert Rohde reports that it is 1.65°C relative to 1850-1900 in the BerkeleyEarth analysis.] Global temperature is likely to continue to rise a bit for at least a month, peak this summer, and then decline as the El Nino fades toward La Nina.

Acceleration of global warming is now hard to deny. The GISS 12-month temperature is now 0.36°C above the 0.18°C/decade trend line, which is 3.6 times the standard deviation (0.1°C). Confidence in global warming acceleration thus exceeds 99%, but we need to see how far temperature falls with the next La Nina before evaluating the post-2010 global warming rate.

Present extreme planetary energy imbalance will limit La Nina-driven temperature decline. Thus, El Nino/La Nina average global temperature likely is about 1.5°C, suggesting that, for all practical purposes, global temperature has already reached that milestone. Temperature is temporarily well above the 50-100 percent increase that we projected (yellow region in Fig. 1) for the post-2010 warming rate. That projected increase is based on evidence that human-made aerosols and their cooling effect are in decline. In other words, we are beginning to realize the consequences of the Faustian bargain, in which humanity partly offset greenhouse gas warming with aerosol (particulate air pollution) cooling. Accurate evaluation of human-made aerosol forcing has double importance because of implications for climate sensitivity, as we have discussed elsewhere. If IPCC has underestimated aerosol forcing, they probably have also underestimated climate sensitivity.

Check out the full May 16th update.

20) Russia reportedly finds vast oil and gas reserves in British Antarctic territory.

Russia has reportedly found huge oil and gas reserves in British Antarctic territory, potentially leading to drilling in the protected region, according to the British publication The Telegraph and several online reports. The reserves uncovered are said to contain around 511 billion barrels worth of oil, equating to around 10 times the North Sea’s output over the last 50 years.
The discovery, per Russian research ships, was revealed in evidence submitted to the British Commons Environment Audit Committee last week. The committee was assessing questions regarding oil and gas research on ships owned by the Kremlin’s Rosgeo, the largest geological exploration company in Russia. In particular, Rosgeo’s Alexander Karpinsky vessel is said to have conducted a number of surveys in the region.

Check out the full article on the "Offshore" website. "Offshore" provides info to the offshore oil, gas and renewable energy industries.

21) Piloting underwater gliders into the heart of Earth's strongest current.

RV Investigator set out from Hobart to investigate why the planet’s strongest current is leaking warm water into the polar seas. The Antarctic Circumpolar Current acts as a buffer between warm water to the north and the icy continent to the south. It helps keep Antarctica frozen. However, its whirling eddies and finer scale dynamics result in warm water seeping through this barrier towards Antarctica.

The science team on board RV Investigator was led by the Australian Antarctic Program Partnership and CSIRO. Researchers wanted to paint a more detailed picture of these eddies and small-scale processes, to better understand the role they play in transporting heat across the current. The voyage sought to validate, for the first time, data of the Southern Ocean taken by the new Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT) satellite. SWOT is revolutionising how scientists observe Earth’s water elevation with 2 kilometres pixel, high-definition, topography. This is 10 times better than previously available.

Check out the full article and excellent infographics on the CSIRO website.

22) Climate Change Is Likely to Slash Global Income.

Here is more research highlighting that the cost of meeting disruptions arising from climate breakdown are far higher than the costs of making serious efforts to mitigate emissions now. It's logical of course, but unfortunately with the economic system we are addicted to, using money and resources today to improve the outcomes for our grandchildren tomorrow doesn't have a very high priority.

Here's an extract from the article on the EOS website. EOS is published by AGU (Advancing Earth and Space Sciences), which is a global community supporting more than half a million advocates and professionals in the Earth and Space sciences.

A new study estimates that climate change could cost $38 trillion per year, but emissions mitigation and adaptation strategies could limit future damages. Worldwide income may fall by 19% by 2049 because of changes in climate. That’s according to a new study published in Nature. Poorer countries in the tropics that have historically contributed the least to greenhouse gas emissions will experience the greatest economic burden, researchers said.

The “huge” $38 trillion annual price tag of climate-related damages is 6 times greater than the cost of mitigating emissions to meet the targets in the Paris Agreement, said Anders Levermann, a climate scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and one of the study’s authors. The treaty aims to limit global average temperatures to 1.5°C–2°C above preindustrial levels by 2100.

23) The Hydrogen Stream: Stadler finalizes longest hydrogen train test.

Stadler says it has wrapped up a hydrogen train test, while Ballard has secured a long-term agreement to supply 1,000 hydrogen fuel cell engines through 2027. Stadler said that the FLIRT H2 has made it into the Guinness World Records database for the longest distance traveled by a pilot hydrogen fuel-cell, electric multiple-unit passenger train without refueling or recharging, covering 1,741.7 miles (2,803 kilometers). The Swiss company presented the train at InnoTrans 2022 in Berlin. “A significant number of detailed solutions were developed to integrate fuel cells and hydrogen storage systems into the modern FLIRT commuter train product line,” said Stadler. “These solutions have since been tested thoroughly, first in Switzerland and more recently on a dedicated test ring in Colorado in the United States.”

Check out the full article on the PV Magazine website for other H2 developments, if you're interested. 

24) Plastic-production emissions could triple to one-fifth of Earth’s carbon budget - Report.

By the middle of the century, pollution from plastic industry could ‘undermine world’s effort’ to control climate crisis. The production of plastic, which is made from fossil fuels, is greenhouse gas-intensive. Coal, oil or gas must first be mined or extracted, and then those materials must be refined and processed in another emissions-heavy procedure. In some cases, other chemical compounds such as formaldehyde must also be produced, creating more pollution. Fully decarbonizing the power grid – a key focus of global climate plans – could limit this climate impact, yet would still leave the world on a perilous path. As much as 70% of the fossil fuel used in plastic creation comes from the raw materials used in production – not the electricity used in processing – the authors write.

The report was released before the 4th Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC4) meeting for a global plastics treaty set to start next week in Ottawa, Canada. Neil Tangri, science and policy director at the environmental justice group Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, who reviewed the report, said the findings made it clear that plastic production was a “wrecking ball for our climate” and that he hoped it would influence the forthcoming negotiations. “This report provides negotiators with the strongest scientific evidence to date on the need to stop and reverse the expansion of plastic production,” he said.

Reading this article in the Guardian was a bit of an eye-opener, as I hadn't realised the GHG impacts of plastics production were quite so significant!

25) 77% of top Climate Scientists think 2.5°C of warming is coming – and they’re horrified.

I know readers of this newsletter don't need reminding that we are facing a major crisis with climate breakdown and biodiversity loss, and that we don't have time to prevaricate. I've included this one article published on the Australian website "Pearls and Irritations." because I think the views expressed by a variety of climate scientists are worth sharing.

Nearly 80% of top-level climate scientists expect that global temperatures will rise by at least 2.5°C by 2100, while only 6% thought the world would succeed in limiting global heating to 1.5°C above pre industrial levels, a survey published Wednesday by The Guardian revealed. Nearly three-quarters blamed world leaders’ insufficient action on a lack of political will, while 60% said that corporate interests such as fossil fuel companies were interfering with progress. “I expect a semi-dystopian future with substantial pain and suffering for the people of the Global South,” one South African scientist told The Guardian. “The world’s response to date is reprehensible—we live in an age of fools.”

NASA climate scientist Peter Kalmus shared the article with a plea to “please start listening.” “Elected and corporate ‘leaders’ continue to prioritise their personal power and wealth at the cost of irreversible loss of essentially everything, even as this irreversible loss comes more and more into focus. I see this as literally a form of insanity,” Kalmus wrote, adding that “capitalism tends to elevate the worst among us into the seats of power.” However, he took issue with the idea that a future of unchecked climate change would be only “semi-dystopian.”
“We’re also at risk of losing any gradual bending toward progress, and equity, and compassion, and love,” Kalmus said. “All social and cultural struggles must recognise this deep intersection with the climate struggle.”

LOCAL

1) Media article written by CKM member Tom Powell since the last newsletter.

03/02/2024 - Who are Climate Karanga Marlborough?

Ian Allen at the Marlborough Express has invited us to contribute one article a month for their weekend edition so you will be seeing regular contributions from Tom in the future. Click on the link above to check out the first one published early in February.

2) Marlborough District Council Climate Change sub-committee.

The CC sub-committee that was formed after the local body elections in 2022 finally met on January 30th. Two reports were presented at the meeting. Firstly the Emissions Inventory Report for 2022/23 which shows in detail the calculated emissions of activities that contribute to MDC’s direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions from its operations. You can read the staff report to the sub-committee and/or study the full Greenhouse Gas Inventory report  from consultants WSP if interested.

After the presentation of reports and some committee discussion CKM were invited to make a short presentation. I spoke to the committee and shared a couple of slides highlighting the latest report from the Stockholm Resilience Centre on the 9 identified Planetary boundaries, of which 6 have now been exceeded, and the 4 Laws of Ecology first expressed by Barry Commoner in the 1970's. Our contribution was well received and there was some useful informal discussion once the meeting was closed. You can check out my presentation if you're interested which has links to the material mentioned above. You can also read Penny Wardle’s article about the meeting published in the Express.

I recommend "Earth beyond six of nine Planetary Boundaries" if you are interested in the details of the latest Planetary Boundaries report.

3) Climate Action Week - 2024.

Catherine van der Muelen who is the driving force behind the Climate Action Marlborough group organised the second Climate Action Week from February 19 - 23. The program for the week covered the themes of Financing the Future for Post Growth and Impact, Transitioning to a low Carbon Emissions Economy, Energising Marlborough's Future, A bio-diverse Marlborough and Regenerative and Emerging economies.  Hopefully you will have seen the comprehensive Weekend Express from February 17th which contains a "conversation about climate" between Kathryn Cannan and Marlborough Girls' College environmental prefect Alex Phelps plus a range of essays on climate and environment related topics.

If you're interested in learning more about what happened over the week check out this summary put together by Tom who attended all 5 days.

I managed to track down three of the essays published in the Weekend Express on the PressReader website -

• "Is there an elephant in the room."
• "Still work to do to protect our biodiversity".
• "How to degrow your business".

4) Kelp Blue.

One of the speakers on the first day of Climate Action Week was Daniel Hooft from Kelp Blue. They are a company that farms giant kelp in Namibia and are also starting farms in Akaroa Harbour and in Alaska. Daniel happened to be in Marlborough and was able to attend the first morning for a couple of hours. It was great to have the opportunity to hear about their achievements growing giant kelp and the potential it has for carbon sequestration. You can learn more about this venture from their website.

"Kelp draws down more CO2 than terrestrial forests. By planting large scale Kelp Forests we can both restore the natural ocean wilderness, and capture carbon and throw away the key, keeping it locked away. As custodians of the planet we have a responsibility towards its preservation and protection. But excess human-made atmospheric CO2, the acidification of the oceans and the resulting destruction of marine ecosystems are just some of the areas where urgent action is needed to reverse the damage we have done. We believe cultivating kelp can be an important tool, together with carbon mitigation measures, to help restore planetary health.

At Kelp Blue, we’re optimists and know action is possible. By planting large scale Kelp Forests we can both restore the natural ocean wilderness, and capture carbon and throw away the key, keeping it locked away forever. Kelp is one of the fastest growing organisms on the planet and can grow up to 60 cm in a day and reach lengths of up to 40 meters. To fuel this rapid growth, kelp performs photosynthesis. Through this process, carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere and converted and stored (“sequestered”) into various parts of the organism (the stipe, the fronds, the bladders, the holdfast etc).

Kelp continuously releases organic material, some of which is minuscule and dissolves in water, called Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC), and some larger material not able to dissolve in water. Any part of the kelp that breaks off and in size is larger than a pinhead is called Particulate Organic Carbon (POC). DOC released by the kelp is immediately consumed by microbes or is transported out to sea where it sinks to the bottom of the ocean floor. Because the bottom of the ocean is unlikely to be disturbed and has very little human contact, the risk of the carbon being released is effectively zero, it can therefore be considered “permanently sequestered”

Here also is the website of a Kiwi organisation interested in seaweed farming called Blue Carbon. The "Climate Change" page on their website makes for some interesting reading.

Tom Powell has also provided the following information learned during the Climate Action Week activities. 

One of the other benefits of kelp farming is that it raises the pH (lowers the acidity) of surrounding seawater by removing CO2 for photosynthesis.  I’ve written the chemical reaction below.  Remove CO2 on the right and it forces the reaction to the right, removing hydrogen ions, which constitute acid.
 
HCO3- + H+ => H2CO3 => H2O + CO2
 
It may be in coming years that mussel farms will need to intercrop kelp just to allow the mussels to build healthy shells.

5) Government announce plan for Fast Track legislation.

A letter was released to the public on January 31st by the Minister Responsible for RMA Reform Chris Bishop, announcing the governments intention to introduce Fast Track consenting legislation and make changes to the National Policy Statement on Freshwater. They also intend to progress changes to how the hierarchy of obligations contained in the Te Mana o te Wai provisions of the NPS-FM apply to consent applications and consent decisions. CKM are deeply concerned about the implications of these proposed changes for the environment in NZ. Don Quick wrote a response for CKM that was sent to the minister.

If you are interested you might also like to read this hard-hitting response from Gary Taylor of the Environmental Defence Society.

6) Another missile launched in Government’s war on nature.

This media statement released by the Environment Defense Society (EDS) is another hard-hitting statement from Gary questioning the priorities of this new government and showing what we can expect. I have to say it is alarming to see some of the quickfire decisions they are making, which appear to show a complete lack of understanding that it is the environment, good old Mother Nature, that we rely on 100% for our continued lifestyles. Taking for granted what she gives us every day is arrogant and self defeating. This latest decision is particularly applicable to us here in Marlborough where marine farming is such an important part of our local economy.

Here is an extract.

"The Government’s arrogant disregard for the natural world is again on display, this time threatening coastal waters and the ocean, as it plans to automatically extend the duration of all marine farm consents in the country. And it is giving stakeholders just one week to provide feedback. There are approximately 1200 marine farms in New Zealand and the proposal is to enable all of those, without exception, to continue operating for another 25 years (in addition to what they’re already consented for, which may be as long as 35 years). The extensions will be legislated for, without any substantive community input or assessment of environmental effects.

“This is a preposterous proposal,” says EDS CEO Gary Taylor.

“We know our seas are warming and acidifying and sites that may have been suitable for marine farming in the past will not necessarily be so in the future. We are already seeing the die-off of hundreds of salmon in the Marlborough Sounds during the warm summer months. “Aquaculture is a good way of feeding people, but it has the potential to cause significant adverse effects on marine ecosystems if located in the wrong place. In particular, farms located in shallow, low flow sites can significantly impact the water column and seabed habitats through the discharge of uneaten food, excrement and shell drop-off."

7) Marlborough Airport Ltd (MAL) public consultation - "A Sustainable Future."

I reported in the last newsletter about my participation in one of several focus groups organised by MAL and MDC with the aim of trying to identify the "most important issues to foster a sustainable future, including environmental, social, economic and cultural issues."  From these focus groups they identified 20 topics that they think are important to their operations now and in the future. The next step of the process was an invitation to interested people to participate in a survey which closed early in February. CKM made a group submission plus several members contributed individual submissions. These submissions challenged the dominant narrative that flying is something to be encouraged and put the idea to MAL that they should be actively discouraging unnecessary flying wherever possible if they are truly interested in a sustainable future. You can check out our group submission if you're interested to see more details.

8) Will water users from the Wairau Aquifer face their first ever cutoff this summer?

CKM have had an ongoing interest in the situation with the long term decline in the Wairau Aquifer and the research trying to understand the causes of this and what might be the best ways to manage future water allocation.

Here is an extract from my last report on this matter in August last year.

Some limits were set when the draft Marlborough Environment Plan (pMEP) was first released in 2016 along with limits on all other rivers and aquifers in Marlborough. It is relatively simple to manage limits in rivers by measuring river flows and applying appropriate cut-offs to  retain adequate flows in the rivers to meet environmental needs. As it is not possible to measure flows into the aquifer this method is not  available. It can only be done by monitoring the fluctuating aquifer levels. With the Wairau aquifer being so dynamic, these fluctuations can  be large in short time periods. The Wairau aquifer did have an annual maximum extraction limit set of 73,000,000 M3. The latest data on  extraction indicates up to about half of that amount (about 35,000,000 M3) is currently being extracted annually depending on the season.  Additional limits aiming to protect the springs were also set on three sub-zones adjacent to the springs where cut-offs apply once the aquifer  drops to pre-set levels. As I’ve reported before, with the knowledge gained from the GBR research, it is now accepted that neither of these  options are seen as being fair and equitable for users or adequate for optimum springs protection. In other words the hard cut-offs in the  MEP are now seen as not viable. The water users in these sub-zones all objected but after discussions have agreed to accept the current limits as defined in the pMEP pending the completion of the process described in this paper. An annual allocation is also seen as too crude for  managing seasonal variations.
 
The three sub-zones referred to above are named Northern Springs, Central Springs and Urban Springs. They are all trending downwards at the moment due to the current extended dry period on top of the identified long term decline and are likely to reach the MEP limits in the next week or two without significant rain in the Wairau catchment. This would be the first time this has ever happened. If it does happens MDC have made the decision not to apply the limits this summer as the ongoing research and planning process aims to produce a new management regime before next year. There are only about 60 commercial users in the three sub-zones out of the total of about 1000 for the whole aquifer zone and placing limits on them would be unfair and not make a significant difference. As explained in my August report the new regime will likely treat all consent holders using water from the aquifer equally, but the final model has still to be decided.

9) GNS research on historic lower Wairau Plains sea levels.

I reported in the November newsletter that Paul White and Martin Crundwell from GNS Science were giving a talk at the Marlborough Research Centre on December 11th. The topic was “Coastal Wairau Plain geological evolution in the last 10,000 years and what this could mean for the future.” Paul and Martin, through their research have identified where the coastline was during the Holocene about 8,000 years ago, when sea levels were roughly 1 to 1.5 metres higher than now. For anyone interested in this topic who didn't make it to the talk you can have a look at the powerpoint presentation. Slides 45 to 48 are of interest showing different historic coastlines. At 7700 years ago the coastline was roughly where SH1 currently runs between Blenheim and Tuamarina. The file is too large to include in this newsletter but if you email me I can send you a copy.

10) Earth Day 2024.

The annual Earth Day will again be run by members of Envirohub with support from CKM. The date has been set for April 21st at Pollard Park on the usual site. Put it in your diary and watch out for more info about the activities being planned for the day.

11) Report says top of the south could be powered mostly by biomass.

This article from Stuff is a follow up on items we've shared in the past looking at the potential for using wood as a major source of energy in Te Tauihu.

'Wood could be the next big thing powering the top of the south, a new report says. Published by the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) on Friday, the Regional Energy Transition Accelerator (RETA) report said the forestry sector could play a key role in powering Nelson, Tasman and Marlborough in future years.

The report showed that up to 72% of the top of the south’s energy needs could be met using biomass by 2037, pushing more fossil fuels out of the energy system and increasing the demand for wood residues. EECA group manager for business Nicki Sutherland said Te Tauihu was a forestry-rich area, and Nelson, Tasman and Marlborough were “well positioned” to use their resources to “bring in a clean and clever approach to industrial processing”.'

NATIONAL

12) Closing Time: Why Aotearoa needs a just transition from fossil fuel production now.

This Oxfam report shows that we urgently need a just transition to end production of oil, gas and coal in Aotearoa, as part of a full, fast, fair and funded global phase out of fossil fuels.

• Fossil fuel production has to end everywhere as fast as possible, with countries like New Zealand taking the lead.
• Overturning New Zealand’s ban on new offshore oil and gas would be a costly and short-sighted mistake, and quite frankly embarrassing for the whole country.
• The New Zealand Government needs to manage a decline in fossil fuel production, with a just transition to protect our communities.

Our fossil fuel-dependent economy in Aotearoa New Zealand has been founded on the violent dispossession of tangata whenua and ongoing breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Moving beyond fossil fuels can be part of our journey to a just future from an unjust past.

Oil and gas production in New Zealand is already declining at exactly the rate needed for an  average share of the global phase out needed for 1.5 degrees. Doing our fair share would mean closing existing fields early.
• Production from  New Zealand’s currently developed oil and gas fields is projected to decline by 62% and 43% respectively by 2030. This represents a combined reduction of 48% in the annual emissions embodied in the produced fuels, which is the average global reduction in carbon dioxide emissions that the IPCC says is needed to keep global average temperature increases below 1.5 degrees.
• As a developed economy, with historical responsibility for past carbon emissions and with a high capacity to transition, New Zealand needs to end fossil fuel production earlier than the global average. To contribute our fair share, New Zealand needs to close existing oil and gas fields early as part of a managed decline with a just transition. There is no way that exploring for new oil and gas fields can be consistent with the 1.5 degrees limit.

The section headed "A just future from an unjust past" (page 15) talks about the "economies of mana" and gives some very good food for thought about ways we could change and adapt our economic system if we chose to.

It states - "In economies of mana, people, land and resources are bound together by whakapapa, and this carries significant obligations. Manaakitanga drives escalating reciprocal exchanges of taonga and resources that create and maintain social obligations, determined and regulated by tikanga, and conducted within a web of whakapapa. In these exchanges, mana is attained by how much passes through one’s hands rather than how much accumulates in one’s hands. The focus on reciprocal exchange rather than accumulation in economies of mana makes a deep difference to how people interact with each other and with the natural world. Because economies of mana are not based on a drive for accumulation, there is not the same incentive to pursue growth at all costs. This means that economies of mana are more able to adapt when confronted with ecological and social limits. In an economy of mana, natural resources are not treated as property to be exploited, but are governed by tikanga that recognise the interconnected mana of people and nature. Similarly, rather than labour being an exploitative relationship controlled by those who have accumulated the most wealth, mahi has dignity and forms part of reciprocal relationships and collective efforts."

13) We could forecast floods better. Why don’t we?

"Floods are New Zealand’s most frequent disaster, and one of the most costly. But regions have varying abilities to predict floods depending on local councils’ ability to buy weather data. And though that data is publicly funded, scientists who have created a national flood-forecasting system cannot put it into practice without free access to the same information. Should we prioritise profitability of our research institutes, or public safety?"

This article in the NZ Geographic highlights another ridiculous outcome of the profit driven revolution in the 1980's and '90's that took perfectly well functioning public institutions that served the people of NZ and mandated that making a profit was their priority. Now we all pay the real price! I do wonder how some of the people who made these ideologically based decisions sleep at night? I recommend reading this article.

14) Mike Smith's court case against seven large NZ corporates.

This extract from the Simpson Grierson website gives an outline of the case and the Supreme Court's decision.

"After almost 18 months of deliberation, the Supreme Court has issued its landmark decision in Smith v Fonterra and has allowed all claims against a number of major corporates to proceed to trial. In finding that the Court of Appeal was wrong to strike out claims in tort against companies responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, the judgment will shape the future of climate change litigation in Aotearoa New Zealand.

KEY TAKEAWAYS -

• The Court of Appeal’s decision that Mr Smith’s claims were not legally tenable has been resoundingly overturned. All three claims have been reinstated and are allowed to proceed to trial.
• The Court’s refusal to strike out is not an assessment that the claim will succeed at trial. At this point, the Court has ruled simply that the claims are not bound to fail. The Court demonstrated a reluctance to strike out a claim that is novel, if it is founded on seriously arguable non-trivial harm - even if attribution to individual respondents remains difficult. Liability will now be a matter for the High Court to determine, following consideration of complex legal issues and factual and expert evidence. 
• The Supreme Court’s judgment focussed primarily on the claim of public nuisance (being that the defendant companies are substantially and unreasonably interfering with rights to public health, safety, comfort, convenience and peace). Whether or not they are actually liable in nuisance remains a fundamental issue for trial, with the battleground between the parties focussed on causation, substantiality and reasonableness, as well as what - if any - remedy Mr Smith should be granted.
• The Court said that there was no need to consider the other two tort claims - there was no efficiency in striking them out given that the public nuisance tort was being reinstated. As such, the claim for negligence and the novel climate system damage claim will also go through to trial. 
• As the harm claimed by Mr Smith invoked tikanga-related interests, the High Court will also need to address and assess matters of tikanga at trial. In reaching this view, the Supreme Court has further cemented the role of tikanga as a fundamental aspect of the laws of New Zealand."

The article concludes with the statement - "Overall, the judgment will be met with enthusiasm and optimism by climate activists, not just in New Zealand but around the common law world. However, until the High Court hears full argument and evidence, the real significance of the decision, and its ramifications for corporate emitters, remains unknown. Given the number of parties and complexity of issues the High Court trial and subsequent judgment is likely to be some time away and, regardless of result, will almost certainly be the subject of appeals."

You can read the full report on the Simpson Grierson website plus further info from RNZ and an article on the Stuff website.

The RNZ item states - "An important feature of the case is the role of tikanga Māori, and how it determines Smith's relationship to coastal land and waters which are being flooded and damaged. The Supreme Court noted it was not ruling on whether the case had a good chance of succeeding, only that "Mr Smith now gets his day in court". Smith said he hoped the ruling would mean he would get a court date soon, but he did not know yet. "No we don't but it needs to be fast because the judgement spoke to the windown of opportunity closing fast., It's really good they picked up on that. So hopefully they'll hear the case soon on the strength of that."

Smith was not seeking money, he just wanted a safer world. "It is our sacred duty to protect the future for our children and our grandchildren and the generations yet to be born. It doesn't matter what nationality they are or what ethnic culture or religion whatever, they're entitled to be on this Earth and to live safely."

15) Waitangi Tribunal to hold inquiry into climate change policy.

The following statement was published earlier in February on the Voxy website.

“The Crown will finally be held to account in front of the Waitangi Tribunal for its failure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and being complicit in the destruction of our natural world and rising harm to communities across the country from climate chaos ” says Tuhi-Ao Bailey, claimant for WAI3262 on behalf of Climate Justice Taranaki.

The Waitangi Tribunal has decided to hold a priority kaupapa inquiry into climate change policy. In its recent decision, the Waitangi Tribunal noted that “climate change is an existential threat not only to the claimants, but to Māori and the nation. All credible evidence points to climate change as a significant and potentially irreversible threat unless governments take urgent action. Māori have a unique and significant relationship with te taiao and the Tribunal can provide advice and guidance to the Crown as to interpretation of Treaty principles in this context.”

This means that the climate change hearing will sit alongside other significant kaupapa inquiries such as the Mana Wāhine inquiry and the Constitutional kaupapa inquiry. “Together with the other claimants, we are ready to make our case in front of the Waitangi Tribunal to demonstrate how successive governments have generated inadequate climate change policy that has favoured polluting industries such as dirty dairying and oil, coal and gas mining over protecting communities and the planet. The Waitangi Tribunal noted our Toitū Taranaki 2030 plan which is a community powered strategy for a fast and just carbon neutral transition as an alternative approach to mitigation that aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi” says Tuhi-Ao Bailey.

“With Mike Smith suing big polluters like Fonterra, Genesis Energy and Z Energy in the High Court for public nuisance and negligence for their contributions to climate change, we are now able to open another legal front in the quest to protect future generations from harm perpetuated by the crown and dirty companies. Across Aotearoa, hapū, iwi, community groups, students, workers unions and migrant organisations are mobilising and working together in the quest for climate justice. In 1854, our people in Taranaki collectively said ‘te tangata tōmua, te whenua tōmuri” – we will keep fighting to protect our land and our people. Collectively, we are upholding this legacy. Together, we rise for system change to ensure a just and peaceful future for all our tamariki and mokopuna” concludes Tuhi-Ao Bailey.

16) Five climate lessons from Māori communities (that are guaranteed not to depress you).

This article from the Spinoff carries on with a focus on the role of Tikanga Māori and how it can help to guide us here in NZ, as we deal with the consequences of our actions. This extract gives plenty of food for thought.

In environmental spaces, you’ll often hear the phrase “climate change is going to hit indigenous communities first and worst”. Invariably, it isn’t Māori saying it. That’s because the climate crisis isn’t imminent. Ever since the arrival of settlers and the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, marae, hapū and iwi have been responding to catastrophic environmental changes caused by human activities. The only difference now is the consequences have become so widespread and severe, governments can no longer deny it is a crisis.

The tendency to diagnose climate change solely by environmental symptoms – rising seas, extreme weather, drought, biodiversity loss – is a dangerous blind spot. Not only does it position the environment as the enemy, it shifts responsibility for global warming away from those who benefit from the hierarchies that privilege a few at the expense of every other living thing on the planet.

These hierarchies are the same hierarchies that dispossessed Māori of their land, destroyed native forests, subjugated Māori knowledge, and created dependence where once there was sovereignty and self-sufficiency. To put it in plain language: climate change and colonisation share the same whakapapa.

As Qiane Matata-Sipu, who works with Bishop and Newton in the Te Ahiwaru team, said: “We forget that the atua made us. We are the pōtiki. That’s the essence of the whakatauki ‘whatungarongaro te tangata, toitū te whenua’. We could all drop dead tomorrow and these things will thrive without us. We are the ones who need the whenua and the moana and the awa, not the other way around. That’s why it’s a bit egotistical to say we’re going to help the atua, because it’s us who need their awhi. We are the ones who need healing. Our mental wellbeing, every thread of our being, is tied into the health of te taiao.”

17) The ordinary rock we drive on holds a planet-saving secret.

This is a follow up from an item I put in the January 2022 newsletter (item 20). Aspiring Materials have further developed their plan to use olivine rock, which is abundant in different places around the world including in the South Island to sequester carbon. They are making big claims about what they believe they can achieve.

Below is an extract from an article on the Stuff website which gives a good outline of their work and you can also check out their website for more info. The scientists developing the process are clearly feeling very positive about the hugh potential they believe is there for sequestering large amounts of carbon.

Here also is another article from the Scoop website

"Olivine is found across the South Island and contains iron, silicon and magnesium – all sought-after materials. Typically, vast amounts of planet-heating carbon emissions are produced mining and refining these minerals around the globe.

Now, Christchurch scientists Chris Oze and Megan Danczyk have a carbon-free way to pull them from olivine. The pair needs $10 million to build their first plant before their idea could “reverse” climate change, Oze said. But first, Oze and Danczyk will need to take the process from the lab to small-scale production. From next year, the proposed $10m pilot plant could transform one tonne of olivine per day into refined minerals – saving up to three tonnes of carbon pollution.

Olivine – “the most abundant rock on Earth” – is combined with acidic liquid, and transformed into an elemental soup using renewable electricity, Danczyk said. The iron, silica and magnesium are separated and can be sold – replacing other mining operations.

“People are making this stuff already… We’re just making them without carbon,” she said. “People are trying to condense carbon dioxide to have it react with the rock. We’ve done the exact opposite… we’re freeing up the magnesium to do its job naturally. It wants to react with the carbon dioxide.” A carbon-capture device could vacuum up emissions from a high-polluting factory before they leave the smokestack, or be used to bring down the amount of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere.

The final product, magnesium carbonate – a “totally stable”, fire-retardant substance – could be used in the construction industry, Danczyk said, for example to make drywall.The team wants a zero-waste process. After the iron, silica and magnesium is removed, a “salty solution” remains, Oze said. That liquid can be split using electricity to make oxygen and hydrogen gas – two more desirable products, he added. “Everything gets recycled.”

Putting everything to good use also makes the process cost-effective, he said. “If we sold all the other products – the hydrogen, the iron, the silica – … we can offer direct-air or industry carbon capture for free.” Oze and Danczyk, who both shifted from the US to Aotearoa to develop this technology, find optimism in their work’s ability to save emissions and the planet. Oze added: “The future is going to be amazing. We can’t lose sight of that.”

INTERNATIONAL

18) “A Miracle Will Occur” Is Not Sensible Climate Policy.

In our last newsletter I had an item about the "Warming in the pipeline" paper from James Hansen (Item 25). This info below is a follow up from James published in December. Here is the first paragraph of this paper titled “A Miracle Will Occur” Is Not Sensible Climate Policy".

'The COP28 Chairman and the United Nations Secretary General say that the goal to keep global warming below 1.5°C is alive, albeit barely, implying that the looser goal of the 2015 Paris Agreement (to keep warming well below 2°C) is still viable. We find that even the 2°C goal is dead if policy is limited to emission reductions and plausible CO2 removal. IPCC (the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which advises the UN) has understated global warming in the pipeline and understated fossil fuel emissions in the pipeline via lack of realism in the Integrated Assessment Models that IPCC uses for climate projections. Wishful thinking as a policy approach must be replaced by transparent climate analysis, knowledge of the forcings that drive climate change, and realistic assessment of policy options. The next several years provide a narrow window of time to define actions that could still achieve a bright future for today’s young people. We owe young people the knowledge and the tools to continually assess the situation and devise and adjust the course of action.'

In the blog James and his colleagues give a good outline of the science laid out in the "Warming in the pipeline" paper. As usual for his blogs it is technical but I believe very significant for those who wish to delve into the science. The most significant new information analysed in the paper is related to a decision made by the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

"Separating cloud feedbacks from aerosol induced cloud changes might be a Sisyphean task, if not for the “experiment” initiated by the  (IMO) when it placed a constraint on sulfur content of ship fuels beginning January 2015 and tightened it in January 2020.
The IMO experiment and implications.
The most informative diagnostic for interpretation of the IMO aerosol experiment is change of absorbed solar radiation. Earth radiation budget data are acquired by CERES 16 (Clouds and Earth’s Radiant Energy System) launched early this century. CERES measures solar radiation reflected by Earth and thermal (heat) radiation emitted by Earth. Reflected solar radiation declines coincident with imposition of the IMO sulfur rules. We graph the increase of absorbed solar radiation (Fig. 2); it reveals a decrease of Earth’ albedo (reflectivity) of 0.4% (1.37/340). This reduced albedo is a BFD (a big deal). It is equivalent to a sudden increase of atmospheric CO2 from 420 ppm to 525 ppm. This large change of Earth’s albedo accelerates global warming. We will infer that most of the increased absorption of solar energy following the IMO rule change is aerosol forcing. This added forcing also spurs “fast” feedbacks, which come into play not in immediate and direct response to the forcing, but in response to global temperature change, which lags the forcing."

This further extract from his blog outlines what he believes is needed to address the serious nature of the position we are now in regarding the growing Earth Energy Imbalance (EEI). You will note it includes the controversial use of "modern nuclear power". This is a reflection of just how serious James sees the crisis we are faced with.

• A rising price on GHG emissions, enforced by border duties on products from nations without a carbon fee; but that is not enough – long-term energy planning consistent with phaseout of fossil fuel emissions over the next few decades is needed, which in many nations, if not most, implies the need for rapid development of modern nuclear power.
• Real global cooperation, in particular between the United States and China, countries with the two largest economies and the greatest GHG emissions; the present politically-driven choice to define China as an enemy, rather than negotiate fair relationships, threatens the future of young people.
• A multitude of actions are required within less than a decade to reduce and even reverse Earth’s energy imbalance for the sake of minimizing the enormous ongoing geoengineering of the planet; specifically, we will need to cool the planet to avoid consequences for young people that all people would find unconscionable.

None of the three fundamental policy actions are presently occurring. Nor are they even on the agenda of the COP (UN Conference of the Parties) meetings. Our ex-student and research  scientist, Surabi  Menon, now a staff member of ClimateWorks on leave of absence to work six months for COP28, tried to get me on the agenda there. Unsurprisingly, given the Pipeline message that I would have been carrying, she did not succeed.

On page 13 of the blog there is reference to significant differences between the general IPCC views, some climate scientists (Zeke Hausfather, Johan Rockstrom and Michael Mann) and James and his team. Those differences indicate that when James tried to speak to their paper at COP28 he was not accepted as a speaker. It is normal for most people to think the mainstream conclusions are more likely to be correct. My inclination is to go with the outlier views. History shows that they are often closer to the truth. Here is a comment from James in the blog to finish with.

"Why am I optimistic about the possibility of a happy ending to the climate crisis? Mainly because of all the bright young people who can understand what is needed and are willing to work to make it happen. Young people can see and understand that the old geezers running the world are geoengineering the planet to destruction."

This article from the Conversation about the difference in views between Mann and Hansen is worth a read if you're interested in their different perspectives. It is written by two scientists Robert Chris from The Open University and Hugh Hunt from University of Cambridge and they say -

"We are scientists who study the feasibility and effectiveness of alternative responses to climate change, addressing both the engineering and political realities of enabling change at the scale and speed necessary. We find Mann’s rebuttal of Hansen’s claims unconvincing. Crucially, Mann does not engage directly with Hansen’s analysis of new data covering the last 65 million years.

Hansen explains how the models used by IPCC scientists to assess future climate scenarios have significantly underestimated the warming effect of increased greenhouse gas emissions, the cooling effect of aerosols and how long the climate takes to respond to these changes. Besides greenhouse gases, humanity also emits aerosols. These are tiny particles comprising a wide range of chemicals. Some, such as the sulphur dioxide emitted when coal and oil are burned, offset the warming from greenhouse gases by reflecting sunlight back to space.

Others, such as soot, have the opposite effect and add to warming. The cooling aerosols dominate by a large margin.

Hansen projects that in coming months, lower levels of aerosol pollution from shipping will cause warming of as much as 0.5°C more than IPCC models have predicted. This will take global warming close to 2°C as early as next year, although it is likely then to fall slightly as the present El Niño wanes.

Underpinning Hansen’s argument is his conviction that the climate is more sensitive to greenhouse gases than previously reported. The IPCC estimates that doubling atmospheric CO₂ raises Earth’s temperature by 3°C. Hansen calculates it to be 4.8°C. This, and the much longer climate response time that Hansen calculates from the historical record, would have a significant impact on climate model projections."

James has published two more blogs in January both of which provide further concerning information. The first is titled "Groundhog Day. Another Gobsmackingly Bananas Month. What’s Up?"

The abstract states - "December was the 7th consecutive month of record-shattering global temperature, driven by the combination of a  moderately strong El Nino and a large decrease of Earth’s albedo. The El Nino will fade in the next few months, but we anticipate that the string of record monthly temperatures will continue to a total of 12 and possibly 13 months because of Earth’s unprecedented energy imbalance. By May the 12-month running-mean global temperature relative to 1880-1920 should be +1.6-1.7°C and not fall below +1.4 ± 0.1°C during the next La Nina minimum. Thus, given the planetary energy imbalance, it will be clear that the 1.5°C ceiling has been passed for all practical purposes."


19) Here’s a question Cop28 won’t address: why are billionaires blocking action to save the planet?

This article in the Guardian by George Monbiot, was published before COP 28 and shines a light on the huge inequality on our planet with a very big proportion of the resources and finance being controlled by a very small number of people. The final paragraph in this extract is one I'm 100% in agreement with. I believe that until we can collectively face this extreme imbalance and rectify it we have no chance of seriously making the big changes that have to happen if we are to maintain a viable life-supporting biosphere.

"But we cannot discount the possibility that some of these people really don’t care, even about their own children. There are two convergent forces here: first, many of those who rise to positions of great economic or political power have personality disorders, particularly narcissism or psychopathy. These disorders are often the driving forces behind their ambition, and the means by which they overcome obstacles to the acquisition of wealth and power – such as guilt about their treatment of others – which would deter other people from achieving such dominance.

The second factor is that once great wealth has been acquired, it seems to reinforce these tendencies, inhibiting connection, affection and contrition. Money buys isolation. It allows people to wall themselves off from others, in their mansions, yachts and private jets, not just physically but also cognitively, stifling awareness of their social and environmental impacts, shutting out other people’s concerns and challenges. Great wealth encourages a sense of entitlement and egotism. It seems to suppress trust, empathy and generosity. Affluence also appears to diminish people’s interest in looking after their own children. If any other condition generated these symptoms, we would call it a mental illness. Perhaps this is how extreme wealth should be classified.

So the fight against environmental breakdown is not and has never been just a fight against environmental breakdown. It is also a fight against the great maldistribution of wealth and power that blights every aspect of life on planet Earth. Billionaires – even the more enlightened ones – are bad for us. We cannot afford to keep them."

20) Richest 1% bag nearly twice as much wealth as the rest of the world put together over the past two years.

This Oxfam media release from January contains some pretty astounding statistics, as a follow on from the previous item, and confirms the urgent needed to redress this unjustifiable imbalance for the sake of all life forms on our beautiful planet. It identifies how that imbalance grew even larger over the Covid period.

"Billionaire fortunes are increasing by US$2.7 billion (NZ$4.2 billion) a day even as at least 1.7 billion workers now live in countries where inflation is outpacing wages. A tax of up to 5 percent on the world’s multi-millionaires and billionaires could raise US$1.7 trillion a year, enough to lift 2 billion people out of poverty.

The richest 1 percent grabbed nearly two-thirds of all new wealth worth US$42 trillion created since 2020, almost twice as much money as the bottom 99 percent of the world’s population, reveals a new Oxfam report. During the past decade, the richest 1 percent had captured around half of all new wealth."

21) The new ‘scramble for Africa’: how a UAE sheikh quietly made carbon deals for forests bigger than UK.

This is a very interesting article which raises some important questions around the use of carbon credits and their validity as a way of trying to reduce GHG emissions. I struggle with the whole idea of forests being used to offset carbon. We've destroyed so much forest over the centuries that used to be an important part of the natural planetary carbon cycle. How can we claim that existing and regenerating forests are offsetting fossil fuels emissions when millions of hectares of forests need to be regenerated just to replace what has been destroyed. To suggest we can offset the carbon emission from fossil fuels that is from forests that grew millions of years ago when we haven't even replaced what we've destroyed over the last few centuries is magical thinking in my opinion.
For some time now I've also had this big question in my mind about countries claiming they will meet their Paris commitments by buying credits from other countries. NZ is a prime example. The thing that has bothered me is no one says who these other mythical countries are that are going to have so many excess credits above their own commitments, that they will be able to come to the rescue of rich countries like us. In this article I was interested to note that it appears some African countries will sell credits to get desperately needed funds and then not be able to meet their own Paris commitments. They will only succeed in pushing indigenous people off their traditional lands, which seems very much like another colonial land grab. Have a read of the article and decide for yourself if this seems like a fair way to address the whole emissions problem. 

This extract from the article highlights my concern.

"David Obura, founding director of Cordio east Africa and head of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), said: “Carbon is one of the only contributions from nature to people that is easily monetised. So, it means that all those (contributions from nature) that are not monetised get excluded or forgotten about. There are such high risks of exclusivity and obtaining access and rights away from people.”

22) Greenhouse gas emissions soar – with China, US and India most at fault. Satellite tracking data shows many countries and firms do not provide accurate figures.

I believe information like this is important for people to see and think about. The use of satellite data to identify real gains or losses with emissions is a great use of technology. It is perfectly understandable for people to want to believe that renewable energy, etc are turning the tide on GHG emissions but I personally believe that a lot of what passes as evidence for emissions reductions is too often due to creative accounting rather than actual emissions reductions. We have a very simple way of checking. The inexorable rise in CO2 levels in our atmosphere is the final evidence of which direction we are going in. The trajectory keeps increasing - until that trajectory starts flattening out I take announcements of emission reductions with a grain of salt. Basic maths tells me that if reductions are achieved in one area but cancelled out by some new development elsewhere then the CO2 curve will keep getting steeper with all the consequences that entails.

'Electricity generation in China and India, and oil and gas production in the US, have produced the biggest increases in global greenhouse gas emissions since 2015, when the Paris climate agreement was signed, new data has shown.

Emissions of methane, a greenhouse gas 80 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, have also risen, despite more than 100 countries signing up to a pledge to reduce the gas, according to data published on Sunday by the Climate Trace project.

The data shows that countries and companies are failing to report their emissions accurately, despite obligations to do so under the Paris agreement. At the core of the Cop28 UN climate summit in Dubai is a process known as the “global stocktake” – an assessment of progress towards meeting the emissions cuts needed to stay within the 1.5C limit. Many countries, however, have failed to make updates.
Gavin McCormick, a co-founder of Climate Trace and executive director of environmental nonprofit WattTime, said: “By harnessing the power of AI and machine learning paired with the right data from satellites and beyond, our models are giving us a picture of the world we’ve never seen before. And it’s allowing us to make climate progress in a way some never believed possible.”

There was also good news. Deforestation is dropping in key regions, with emissions from the degradation and destruction of forests in the Congo Basin dropping by up to 19% in 2022, compared with the previous year.'

23) Giant batteries drain economics of gas power plants.

This article has something positive to say about the disruption to using gas-fired peaker power plants, that giant batteries are having in some parts of the world. It does bother me a little that there is no mention of the issues around supply of critical minerals required for large scale battery uptake, that I have included in previous newsletters. I'm wary when it appears people might be making assumptions that good old Mother Nature will be able keep supplying an endless amount of whatever we think we need.

"Giant batteries that ensure stable power supply by offsetting intermittent renewable supplies are becoming cheap enough to make developers abandon scores of projects for gas-fired generation world-wide. The long-term economics of gas-fired plants, used in Europe and some parts of the United States primarily to compensate for the intermittent nature of wind and solar power, are changing quickly, according to Reuters' interviews with more than a dozen power plant developers, project finance bankers, analysts and consultants. They said some battery operators are already supplying back-up power to grids at a price competitive with gas power plants, meaning gas will be used less.

Electric vehicles are a further disrupter as they can be charged when demand is weak and then power homes or send power back to the grid during peak demand periods. A typical EV sits parked 90% of the time with a battery capable of storing enough energy to power the average modern home for two days, energy software platform Kaluza said in a report published in December. In Europe, 40 million electric vehicles are expected by 2030, capable of displacing around one third of the region's gas power capacity, according to Kaluza.

"There are lots of things the grid can look to when it starts to look away from conventional generation," Carlton's Clarke said."

Summary - 

•    Data shows 68 gas plant projects cancelled or put on hold
•    Assessing economic case for new projects much harder
•    EVs could also reduce need for standby gas generation.

24) Humanity declares war on its children.

This article from the Pearls and Irritations website is hard-hitting and judging by the small number of signatures in support is not seen by many as an important issue. I signed it because it rings true for me.

Here is an extract -

"If climate were the world’s only problem, this would be bad enough. But there are nine other major risks to human civilisation. Together they add up to the greatest threat humans have ever faced in three million years of our existence. These threats cannot be separated, or dealt with singly. Some of them are even deadlier in impact than climate, though they receive much less publicity. And, in many cases, industry, wealth and governments now work hand-in-glove to make them worse.

One answer, for all those who do not wish to be destroyed by this evil confederation, is an Earth System Treaty, a global legal agreement signed and ratified by all the decent people and countries left on Earth to save a habitable planet for our children. An agreement with the power to rein in the wreckers, state or corporate. The reasons for such a treaty are many – but one thing is clear: without global agreement to overcome our existential crisis, nothing can prevent it. The petrolobby and its puppets will see to that.

Thanks to their continued sabotage of the last, best hope for humanity exemplified at COP27 and COP28 it is clear that the petrolobby is willing to sacrifice a habitable Earth and its young people to their ungoverned lust for short-term riches. Riches that will vanish as soon as the global economy collapses.

Now is the time for all good citizens of Earth to stand together, speak out and act to prevent the ruin of our world. The people who are causing it must be brought to justice for crimes against humanity."

You can check out the Earth System Treaty and watch a short youtube clip about it if interested -

25) Changing climate casts a shadow over the future of the Panama Canal – and global trade.

Isn't it ironic that oil tankers are being held up from passing through the Panama Canal due to climate change induced reduced rainfall!

To quote from this Guardian article -

"The canal authority says it is “implementing operational and planning procedures, innovative technologies, and long-term investments to mitigate [the] impact and safeguard [the canal’s] operation”. It says that the current situation is unprecedented and it “could not have predicted exactly when the water shortage would occur to the degree that we are experiencing now”.

But while the authority says it could not have predicted the crisis, others did. For years, experts have warned that the changing climate will have far-reaching effects on global supply chains and the systems that govern them.

Structures like the Panama Canal are miracles of the modern world – solid totems of engineering wonder that were responsible for accelerating the economic boom of the 20th century, pulling up living standards across the globe and ushering in a revolution in technology, healthcare and consumer culture. The tacit implication was that the natural world had been tamed. But as the seas rise and temperatures soar, those assumptions are falling like dominoes."

There is hope that things will improve when the wet season is due to start in the next month or two.
I also note in a recent update that the Canal Authority was receiving increasing demand for transits through the waterway due to the crisis in the Red Sea, but they say changes to transit restrictions will depend on water availability which has restricted the canal from accommodating rerouted traffic.

26) "Where is everybody?": The Fermi Paradox, the Drake Equation, and climate change.

This is a worthwhile read from the Climate Brink website which looks at the question "Where is everybody", asked by the famous scientist Enrico Fermi. This is in relation to the likelihood of other forms of intelligent life being out there somewhere. The conclusion the author reaches might well be close to the mark?

"Thus, one plausible answer to Fermi’s question, “Where are they,” is that their own stupidity and greed killed them. It’s conceivable that climate change is a threat that most civilizations need to deal with. Advanced civilizations civilizations inherently require energy, which initially might be sourced from the combustion of carbon-based materials. That would lead to the emission of greenhouse gases, which would lead to climate change. So perhaps, in climate change, we’re facing the same test that most or all advanced civilizations need to pass.

But climate change is just one challenge. We also need to deal with threats of nuclear war, pandemics, economists, and many potential disasters, all of which could knock humanity off its pedestal. If we fail any of those tests, then some future alien society might one day wonder where we are."

27) Genomic evidence for West Antarctic Ice Sheet collapse during the Last Interglacial.

This study was a fascinating and innovative way to confirm the last major collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. If their conclusions are correct this is more sobering confirmation of the difficult consequences our grandchildren and their grandchildren will be dealing with.

"How the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) responded to warmer climates in the geologic past has obvious relevance to our understanding of what its future could be as global temperatures rise due to human activities. Using genetic analyses of a type of circum-Antarctic octopus, Pareledone turqueti, Lau et al. showed that the WAIS collapsed completely during the last interglacial period, when global sea levels were 5 to 10 meters higher than today and global average temperatures were only about 1°C warmer. The implication of this finding is that major WAIS collapse and the consequent rise in sea level could be caused even by the minimal temperature rises projected for stringent climate change mitigation. —H. Jesse Smith

Abstract
The marine-based West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) is considered vulnerable to irreversible collapse under future climate trajectories, and its tipping point may lie within the mitigated warming scenarios of 1.5° to 2°C of the United Nations Paris Agreement. Knowledge of ice loss during similarly warm past climates could resolve this uncertainty, including the Last Interglacial when global sea levels were 5 to 10 meters higher than today and global average temperatures were 0.5° to 1.5°C warmer than preindustrial levels. Using a panel of genome-wide, single-nucleotide polymorphisms of a circum-Antarctic octopus, we show persistent, historic signals of gene flow only possible with complete WAIS collapse. Our results provide the first empirical evidence that the tipping point of WAIS loss could be reached even under stringent climate mitigation scenarios."

These two articles from CBS News and from the Smithsonian Magazine provide more info.

The scientific paper can also be purchased if you're interested.

28) Video shows research ship's "incredibly lucky" encounter with world's largest iceberg as it drifts out of Antarctica.

Check out the drone video footage which is linked to the CBS article. It's an impressive iceberg!

29) Human Behavioural crisis at root of climate breakdown say scientists.

This is a follow up to the final item in our last newsletter in November. The question of how irrational human behaviour is driving the climate and biodiversity crises and how we might change that human behaviour is an area of research that I personally find fascinating. That this work is being undertaken by the Merz Institute, which is a Kiwi company is encouraging and wonderful to see. I'm interested to note on their website that Mike Joy and Simon Michaux are two of the Institute's Trustees.

Their Mission statement says -

"Age Quod Necesse Est' literally translates to 'Do What Is Necessary'. Our broad mission ensures our continual relevance in a world where the only constant is change."

Below is an extract from an article printed in the Guardian in January.

The team calls for more interdisciplinary research into what they have dubbed the “human behavioural crisis” and concerted efforts to redefine our social norms and desires that are driving overconsumption. When asked about the ethics of such a campaign, Merz and Barnard point out that corporations fight for consumers’ attention every second of every day. “Is it ethical to exploit our psychology to benefit an economic system destroying the planet?” asks Barnard. “Creativity and innovation are driving overconsumption. The system is driving us to suicide. It’s conquest, entitlement, misogyny, arrogance and it comes in a fetid package driving us to the abyss.”

The team is adamant that solutions that do not tackle the underlying drivers of our growth-based economies will only exacerbate the overshoot crisis.

“Everything we know and love is at stake,” says Barnard. “A habitable planet and a peaceful civilisation both have value, and we need to be conscious about using tools in ethical and justice-based ways. This is not just about humanity. This is about every other species on this planet. This is about the future generations.” “I do get frustrated that people sit in paralysis thinking, what do I do? Or what must we do? There are moral hazards everywhere. We have to choose how to intervene to keep us working on a path forward as humanity, because everything right now is set up to strip us of our humanity.”

30) In memory of Barry Commoner.

Barry Commoner was credited as being a founder of the modern environmental movement and was among the world’s best known ecologists in the 1960s, 70s and 80s. He was famous for his public campaigns against nuclear testing, chemical pollution and environmental decay.

In 1970, Time featured Commoner on its cover, calling him “The Paul Revere of Ecology” (after the American revolutionary hero Paul Revere, who famously warned the rebel militia about approaching British forces before a decisive battle). Time said he had “probably done more than any other US scientist to speak out and awaken a sense of urgency about the declining quality of life”.

The Australian "Green Left" website published an article when Barry died at 95 in 2012. In this extract from the article they give a nice clear description of his Four Laws of Ecology, which I thought it worthwhile revisiting 12 years later.

"Commoner addressed the environmental crisis and humans and nature’s interaction on many different aspects: including population growth, consumer demand, politics, capitalism, greed, and other factors. He sums it up with this quote:

 In the book, he formulated the Four Laws of Ecology.

The first of these informal laws, Everything is connected to everything else, indicates how ecosystems are complex and interconnected. This complexity and interconnectedness are not like that of the individual organism whose various organs have evolved and have been selected based on their contribution to the survival and fecundity of the whole. Nature is far more complex, variable, and considerably more resilient than the metaphor of the evolution of an individual organism suggests. An ecosystem can lose species and undergo significant transformations without collapsing. Yet, the interconnectedness of nature also means that ecological systems can experience sudden, startling catastrophes if placed under extreme stress. “The system,” Commoner writes, “is stabilized by its dynamic self-compensating properties; these same properties, if overstressed, can lead to a dramatic collapse.” Further, “the ecological system is an amplifier, so that a small perturbation in one place may have large, distant, long-delayed effects elsewhere.”

The second law of ecology, Everything must go somewhere, restates a basic law of thermodynamics: in nature, there is no final waste, matter and energy are preserved, and the waste produced in one ecological process is recycled in another. For instance, a downed tree or log in an old-growth forest is a life source for numerous species and an essential part of the ecosystem. Likewise, animals excrete carbon dioxide into the air and organic compounds into the soil, which helps sustain plants upon which animals will feed.

Nature knows best, the third informal law of ecology, Commoner writes, “holds that any major man-made change in a natural system is likely to be detrimental to that system.” During 5 billion years of evolution, living things developed an array of substances and reactions that together constitute the living biosphere. However, the modern petrochemical industry suddenly created thousands of new substances that did not exist in nature. Based on the same basic carbon chemistry patterns as natural compounds, these new substances enter readily into existing biochemical processes. But they do so in ways that are frequently destructive to life, leading to mutations, cancer, and many different forms of death and disease. “The absence of a particular substance from nature,” Commoner writes, “is often a sign that it is incompatible with the chemistry of life.”

There is no such thing as a free lunch. The fourth informal law of ecology expresses that the exploitation of nature always carries an ecological cost. From a strict ecological standpoint, human beings are consumers more than they are producers. The second law of thermodynamics tells us that in the very process of using energy, human beings “use up” (but do not destroy) energy, in the sense that they transform it into unworkable forms.

For example, in the case of an automobile, the high-grade chemical energy stored in the gasoline that fuels the car is available for useful work while the lower grade thermal energy in the automobile exhaust is not. In any transformation of energy, some of it is always degraded in this way. The ecological costs of production are, therefore, significant.

LOCAL

1) Media article written by CKM member Tom Powell since the last newsletter.

15/10/2023 - Opinion article: Technology to the Rescue

2) CKM submissions.

Tom has continued putting together some excellent submissions that you can view if you are interested.

Regional Hydrogen Transition submission.

In this submission he said - "We have serious concerns with this program and request a change in direction.  We support a subsidy for green hydrogen used in industrial processes and aviation & ship fuel but we do not support the use of green hydrogen for heavy transport. Considering its low efficiency, ready alternatives, lack of infrastructure, explosivity, limited industrial benefit and climate impact of leakage, green hydrogen for transport should not be given preferential price support."

MBIE Interim Hydrogen Roadmap energy strategy submission.

Review of the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme submission.

A Redesigned NZ ETS Permanent Forest Category submission.

MDC also recently publicised the second round of public consultation for the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management (NPSFM). This was an opportunity to respond to the proposed values, visions and environmental outcomes as defined after the first round of consultation. Budyong put together a brief submission with an emphasis on our concern that the needs of Nature are given the highest priority when making decisions about our freshwater resource. You can check out the full submission below if interested.

 NPS-FM 2020 Community Engagement - round two submission.

3) Students letters to incoming Prime Minister.

Climate activist group Climate Karanga Marlborough invited Marlborough school pupils to write a letter based on the theme of caring for Papatūānuku, the Earth Mother, to be sent to the incoming prime minister following the General Election.

The aim was to give the citizens of tomorrow the opportunity to voice their ideas in regard to protecting the health and well-being of our environment.

You can read the Stuff article about it and see two of the letters received.

4) Talk at Marlborough Research Centre (MRC).

Paul White and Martin Crundwell from GNS Science are giving a talk at the Marlborough Research Centre on December 11th in the evening. The topic is “Coastal Wairau Plain geological evolution in the last 10,000 years and what this could mean for the future.”

Here is an asbtract of the content of the talk.

“Today’s Lower Wairau Plain (LWP) geology and geomorphology developed (mostly) during two climatic periods: the last glacial (cold) and the current interglacial (warm). This development will be described in a ‘virtual’ tour of today’s LWP geology and with new geological research that models past environments, approximately: 10,000 years ago, as sea level rose rapidly; 6,000 years ago when sea level was probably a little higher than today; and pre-European. LWP geology is a major control on numerous local resources (e.g., groundwater, soils, and rivers). The talk will conclude with geological perspectives on LWP resource futures to 2100.”

When : Monday 11th December 2023, 6:30-8:00 pm
Where : Marlborough Research Centre lecture theatre, Budge Street campus Blenheim
Audience: Open to public – no need to register.

Here also is a link to a powerpoint of some current work they are doing (some of this will be discussed in the above meeting.) In it they make a case that pre-historical (i.e., Holocene) geology is a proxy for climate-change-induced sea level rise to 2100.

Lesley and I met with Paul, Martin and several of their colleagues in May after Paul had contributed to another talk at the MRC, along with James Renwick. Paul had asked to meet with CKM to talk about a project where they are planning to do some research in the Lower Wairau to do with climate change adaptation.

Paul and Martin will be staying on in Marlborough for a few days after their talk and are keen to meet with us again to further discuss this research project. I’m looking for others who will be willing to participate in a meeting. Paul has suggested we could meet anytime on Thursday, Dec 14th or Friday morning, Dec 15th. He says “I’d like to discuss some research ideas that could possibly involve CKM members, if they wish.”                     If anyone is interested please let me know.

5) Letter to MDC Mayor regarding replacement Chief Executive.

We put together a letter which we sent to the mayor. The letter was also supported by Marlborough Forest and Bird. In it we said - "We encourage you to spread your search for a new CEO wider than the places that local bodies might traditionally advertise. Marlborough needs a leader that is fully committed to supporting the transition and shift to a low carbon emissions economy where the needs of the environment are given top priority. He or she will need to inspire existing Marlborough residents and businesses and attract organisations and industry’s into our region that want to help create a thriving, diverse and most importantly, sustainable local economy. An effective CEO needs to lead by example, and show that the visions and values expressed for our  region aren’t just lip-service but are core to all our local decision making."

Check out our full letter if you're interested. In our letter we referred to the Headline Messages of the Dasgupta Report of 2021. Maia Hart also wrote a very good article for Stuff outlining the discussion around the Council table on this issue.

Here is the response received from Nadine. Nadine also told me in conversation at the Environment and Planning Committee meeting recently that she had received a letter with a similar message from local Iwi.

Tēnā korua Budyong and Helen,

Thank you for writing to us and sharing your thoughts on the importance of weighting being given to environmental experience in the selection of our new Chief Executive.
A view I very much agree with. As a Unitary Authority which covers the roles and responsibilities of a Regional Council as well as a Territorial Authority, our new Chief Executive will need to provide leadership across all Council functions and all areas of responsibility. To find such a CE we are undertaking a nationwide search, led by Mike Stenhouse of Shefield Consulting.
Mike is currently drafting the new CE specification documents for Councillors to review, so I have forwarded your letter on to Mike for his reference.
We are very aware the appointment of a new Chief Executive is not only a significant decision for Council, it is also significant for many individuals, organisations, groups and communities within Marlborough – it is a decision all Councillors will be focusing on with great care.

Ngā mihi
Nadine

6) Coastal Water Temperature Trends Report Card 2015 – 2023.

In this report presented to the MDC Environment and Planning Committee on November 16th it states -

• The coastal water quality was monitored monthly at 22 sites across Tōtaranui/Queen Charlotte Sound and Te Hoiere/Pelorus Sound.
• As a result of several remarkably intense heatwaves in the Cook Strait, the Marlborough Sounds have experienced unusually warm ocean temperatures in recent years. Our monitoring data shows that both Pelorus Sound and Queen Charlotte Sound exhibit record-breaking high temperatures in 2022 and 2023.
• Using monitoring data from the past eight years, statistical analysis revealed a highly significant upward trend in water temperatures for especially outer- and mid- Pelorus sites. Moreover, temperature anomaly trends show that most Queen Charlotte Sound sites have warmed significantly from 2015 to 2023.
• Warming temperatures in the Sounds can have devastating effects on marine species and habitats.

Check out the full report on the MDC website. It is item number 3 on the Nov 16th agenda.

Here are some of my reflections after reading the sea temperature report -

• It took many decades of heating due to emissions from fossil fuels being absorbed by our oceans, to result in the extreme marine heatwaves over the last two La Nina years. I'm concerned that the magnitude of issues like this are underplayed.
• It takes 2000 joules to heat 1m3 of air by 1C. It takes 4.2 million joules to heat 1M3 of water by 1C. Without the oceans absorbing 93% of the excess heat due to global heating this planet would be well and truly unliveable. The global average temperature is now 15C. Our planet would be unliveable at 50C average without this ocean heat sink.
• The marine heat waves we are experiencing are warnings. It took decades to get here and it can only get worse. This is basic physics. Turning around this trend is a major challenge for humanity. "The oceans have stored the problem, but it's coming back to bite us!"

Maia Hart also wrote an article published on the RNZ website about the report.

This Guardian article from May 2023 provides a very good overview of the causes and implications of ocean heating.

7) Marlborough Airport (MAL) focus group.

Budyong was invited to join a focus group to share his thoughts about Marlborough Airport and material issues relating to sustainability, now and into the future. The group he joined had two other local people with environmental perspectives, Bev Doole and Helen Ballinger, along with the organiser Stephanie Flores from MDC and resulted in a wide ranging discussion.

If you're interested you can also read a paper Budyong submitted expressing some big picture views consistent with CKM's values.

8) Marlborough business CarbonScape is revolutionising how we produce graphite.

"One Marlborough company is on the path to commercialise a sustainable graphite alternative that overseas companies can use to produce lithium-ion batteries and now a new investment will see them grow their team at home and overseas.
CarbonScape is a business that uses timber and forestry industry by-products and waste to make biographite, a carbon-negative graphite product for EV and grid scale battery supply chains.
They are the first to market this sustainable option and this week the company announced an US$18 million investment led by Stora Enso, a leading provider of renewable products around the world, and Amperex Technology Limited (ATL), a global lithium-ion battery producer and innovator."

Check out the full article on Stuff.

9) Climate Positive grape growing.

This article in the NZ Winegrower magazine looks at the efforts of the Holdaway Family, Lowlands Wines operation to grow climate positive grapes on their land in the Lower Wairau/Dillons Point area.

10) Climate Action Week 2024.

Catherine van der Muelen is all fired up again organising the Climate Action Week activities for next year. It is scheduled to run from February 19 - 24. "Climate Action Week Marlborough has been designed to create awareness, develop our Marlborough business community's knowledge by embracing education, and take action towards creating a low carbon emissions, highly productive, and thriving community, no matter what stage of the journey you are at." 

You can check out the full week agenda and purchase tickets if you're interested.

National

11) Emergency Weather.

Emergency Weather is a new novel  by Tim Jones and is available in bookstores nationwide. The book’s synopsis is: “Three people find themselves in Wellington as the climate crisis crashes into their lives. A giant storm is on its way – what will be left of the city when it’s over?”

Tim is a member of CKM and a key person in the Coal Action Network Aotearoa.

In this article in Newsroom Tim talks about his childhood in Mataura and two of the big floods he experienced there. He says "All my life, Mataura has been living in Nature’s shooting gallery. But as the climate warms and the weather gets more extreme – drier, hotter, wetter, wilder – more and more of us are in the firing line. The cyclone, fuelled by warming seas, that sweeps across your city. The forest slash that slides across the highway at just the wrong time. The exotic forest that, dry and windswept, ignites from a single spark. Beneath it all, the rising of the sea, starting slow and growing faster, raising the baseline of storms. Papatūānuku isn’t to blame. We’re in the world made by the fossil fuel companies, by industrial dairying, by the accumulation of capital at the expense of everything else. Will we act to save ourselves, like the people of Mataura acted, or will we shut our eyes and pretend the danger is not real? Emergency weather is now on every doorstep."

12) Updated forestry regulations increase council controls and require large slash removal.

The outgoing government announced new regulations on October 3rd. I thought it was interesting to note that non-indigenous forests planted for carbon sequestration will now have to be managed in the same way as plantation forests. Hopefully this will survive under the new government.

"Local councils will have more power to decide where new commercial forests – including carbon forests – are located, to reduce impacts on communities and the environment. New national standards give councils greater control over commercial forestry, including clear rules on harvesting practices and new requirements to remove slash from erosion-prone land."

You can check out the full media release on the Beehive website.

13) Recloaking Papatūānuku: A nation-wide indigenous forest initiative.

Once, New Zealand was cloaked in a rich array of indigenous forests, alive with the song of birds, and our rivers and streams ran clear. Yet, since settlement began 800 or so years ago, we have progressively removed 82% of the natural forest cover, destroying the habitat of many plant and animal species, and increasing the vulnerability of our landscapes at great cost to our economy, our biodiversity, and our future.

At the same time we have introduced deliberately or by accident a multitude of invasive plant animal and fungal species that are further impacting our Indigenous biodiversity. And these impacts will only get worse with climate change.

Today, we face a climate and biodiversity crisis. In 2020, Aotearoa’s Government declared a climate emergency, recognising climate change as “one of the greatest challenges of our time”. Since then, the risk of surpassing irreversible climate and ecological tipping points has continued to increase, and we are already witnessing the devastating effects of increasingly frequent and severe weather events, prompting the United Nations Secretary General to announce recently that “the era of global boiling has arrived”.

Despite this alarming context, our current regulatory settings and incentives for mitigating climate change are failing to:
(a) Drive urgent gross emissions reductions at source and at scale;
(b) Secure enduring, biodiverse and resilient long-term carbon sinks for future generations;
(c) Reverse the catastrophic decline of our indigenous flora and fauna;
(d) Protect our freshwater and marine ecosystems;
(e) Encourage land-use diversification over intensification; and
(f) Harness opportunities to weave climate and ecosystem resilience into our landscapes and our communities.

Check out the full proposal on the Pure Advantage website.

14) Methane myths come up against textbook science.

I included an item (#14) in the last newsletter titled "A new paradigm shift, indeed." It was about an article published in the Rural News, which claimed that the climate impact of methane is so low as to be disregarded. The item included a rebuttal written by our own Tom Powell. We've now been informed by one of our members of another very thorough rebuttal published in the Farmers Weekly on November 6th. If you are interested in this discussion the article by Professor Dave Frame from Canterbury University is a must read. I have to say, to see Farmers Weekly publishing such a well written, informed and cogent article on this contentious topic and to know that farmers all over NZ receive this publication presenting them with such good science is encouraging.  All those open minded farmers, of which I'm sure there are many, get the opportunity to make their own decisions about what is myth and what are clear well presented facts.

15) Huge insurance cost increases hit farmers.

This item from the Farmers Weekly is a sobering look at one of the significant consequences of extreme weather events. What impact will this have on the viability of farming operations as we experience more of these major weather events?

Insurance premiums for farmers are going up by as much as 30% after a number of very high-cost adverse weather events in the past year.
FMG, which has a rural market share of about 55%, said Cyclone Gabrielle was the biggest single event in the company’s 118-year history. Dave Kibblewhite, FMG’s chief financial, investment and risk officer, said for Cyclone Gabrielle, reinsurers will be paying approximately 90% of the total claims cost of FMG clients.
“Not only are these weather events from the last year the most significant in our history, but they also coincided with the hardest reinsurance market in over 40 years following a number of large global natural disaster events.
“These factors have resulted in large price increases for reinsurance, in excess of 30%, and also global capacity has been reduced.”
Farmers and orchardists can take small comfort in the knowledge that their premium cost increases are similar to those right across the insurance industry, and in towns and cities.

Check out the full article.

16) IAG says it has paid out more than $1 billion in insurance claims for the North Island floods & Cyclone Gabrielle.

New Zealand's biggest insurer is urging the incoming government to push on with natural hazard risk reduction, climate change adaptation and managed retreat work to help keep insurance available and affordable in the face of stark impacts, and rising costs, from extreme weather and natural hazards.
The previous government last year released NZ's first national adaptation plan, which set out that the Ministry for the Environment and Treasury would lead a programme of work on how NZ meets the costs of climate change and invests in resilience. Banks have told a subsequent parliamentary inquiry into climate adaptation that insurance withdrawal would leave them with stark options.

Check out the full article on the interest.co website.

17) Climate Action Tracker (CAT) NZ rating for climate action.

I thought with a new government taking over the reins of power that it would be an appropriate time to review the current assessment for NZ on the Climate Action Tracker website. This assessment was released in March this year and a new one is due soon. As we can expect our climate policies to be watered down with the new government we can also expect our rating to get worse.

Overall rating -
The CAT rates New Zealand’s climate targets, policies and finance as “Highly insufficient”. The “Highly insufficient” rating indicates that New Zealand’s climate policies and commitments are not stringent enough to limit warming to 1.5°C and need substantial improvements. New Zealand’s NDC target is rated “Critically insufficient” when compared with its fair share contribution to climate action and “Insufficient” when compared to modelled domestic pathways. Its policies and action do not put it on track to meet this target and its climate finance is inadequate. New Zealand should increase both its emissions reduction target and climate policies, and provide additional, predictable, finance to others to meet its fair share contribution.

Policies and action against modelled domestic pathways -
New Zealand’s current policies are “Highly insufficient” when compared to modelled domestic pathways. The “Highly insufficient” rating indicates that New Zealand’s policies and action in 2030 are not at all consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C. If all countries were to follow New Zealand’s approach, warming could reach over 3°C and up to 4°C.

You can check out the full report on the CAT website.

GLOBAL

18) COP-out: Why the petrostate-hosted climate talkfest will fail.

"After a succession of record-breaking months of record heat including 1.8°C in September, global warming for 2023 as a whole will likely tip 1.5°C, with 2024 even hotter as the effect of the building El Nino is felt more fully. Already hundreds of thousands have died and millions displaced, primarily in countries least responsible for climate change. The annual economic cost globally is in the hundreds of billions. So what will the 28th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP28) of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), starting 30 November in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), say about this? And in particular what will Sultan Al Jaber, the CEO of the UAE state oil company ADNOC, who will preside over the international negotiations, say? Probably nothing; instead there will be much blather about reaffirming the commitments at the Paris COP in 2015 “to hold the increase in global average temperature to well below 2°C, and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C”. And lots of “net zero” posturing based on sham Integrated Assessment Models, and farcical assumptions about bodgy carbon offsets, carbon capture and storage (CCS), bioenergy with CCS, machines to draw carbon from the atmosphere, and the like. All given unwarranted credibility by the Sultan’s advisers, Mckinsey & Co.

Many of the petrostates are highly dependent on fossil fuel revenue to fund their strategic ambitions, so there is every reason to believe they will pump all the oil and gas they can. So it is unsurprising that a new UN report says the world is heading towards 3°C and perhaps a good deal more, bringing down the curtains on contemporary civilisation. Eight years after Paris, the evidence is overwhelming that “net zero 2050” was always a bad target, that there is no carbon budget left, and that major system tipping points have already been passed, or are now within range in the short-term. COP28 will not produce a statement that says a word about any of this. If there is to be a modicum of truth-telling, front and centre of the COP outcome would be recognition that fossil fuel expansion is a death trap, that zero emissions fast is absolutely necessary, and that unprecedented interventions to mitigate 1.5°C climate overshoot are now required. That is the focus of another new report The Overshoot: Crossing the 1.5C threshold and finding our way back, from the Climate Crisis Advisory Group. The report again emphasises the need for a three-pronged strategy to reduce, remove and repair.

In the Gulf, petrostates are now installing floodlights on beaches and encouraging night-time use because it is simply becoming too hot to use during the day. “In a city where weather that would constitute a deadly heat wave in Europe is just a typical summer day, official ‘night beaches’ have become a popular way to cool down”, reports the New York Times. Perhaps the COP delegates could adjourn for a midnight skinny dip, and experience first-hand what the future holds."

Check out the full article from David Spratt and Ian Dunlop on the Pearls and Irritations website.

19) Inside the new climate assault on the oil majors.

Climate litigation against American Oil Majors is being taken on by bigger legal firms in the US. Firms that have large war chests after winning cases against big pharmaceutical firms over their role in the US opioid abuse crisis.

"The infernal heat that began killing people in the normally temperate north-west of the United States in June 2021 began with unusually heavy rain over China, which drove energy into the jet stream which crosses the Pacific and set off a cascading set of climatic events resulting in a heat dome that settled across parts of the US and Canada. In Multnomah County, Oregon, temperatures reached 42 degrees Celsius, 44.5 degrees and 46.6 degrees over successive days. Before that week began, the county’s record temperature was 41.6 degrees, and its average high temperature was just 21 degrees. By the time it subsided, the heat had killed 69 people. At the time an event like it was inconceivable. But due to rapid global warming, it is predicted similar heatwaves will strike the region once a decade or so.
Climate litigation is increasing around the world, but the Multnomah case is attracting significant attention.

How these cases will play out is not yet clear, but in April, some of the jurisdictions bringing them had a win when the US Supreme Court ruled that they should remain in state courts, where they are thought to have more chance of success than in federal courts. Kysar says the (oil) companies are drafting an “army” of lawyers to fight every case in every jurisdiction around the world because “every one of them feels like an existential threat” to the industry. In Ango-American political systems, governments are constrained from taking overarching action, he says. The trade-off is that when people are injured, courts can intervene.
“That means when there’s some big social harm that’s not being addressed, people turn to the courts, and the courts have to give an answer.
“You could call your MP 100 times a day and say ‘I’m worried about climate’, they might never call you back.”

Cases like this one have the potential to have significant impacts on the major oil companies. Check out the full article on the Sydney Morning Herald website.

20) Ban private jets to address climate crisis, says Thomas Piketty.

"Questions of social and economic class must be at the centre of our response to the climate crisis, to address the huge inequalities between the carbon footprints of the rich and poor and prevent a backlash against climate policies, the economist Thomas Piketty has said. Regulations will be needed to outlaw goods and services that have unnecessarily high greenhouse gas emissions, such as private jets, outsized vehicles, and flights over short distances, he said in an interview with the Guardian. Rich countries must also put in place progressive carbon taxes that take into account people’s incomes and how well they are able to reduce their emissions, as current policies usually fail to adjust for people’s real needs. “We have to put class and the studies of inequality between social classes right at the centre of our analyses of environmental challenges in general,” Piketty said. “If you don’t, you will just not be able to get a majority [of people in favour of strong action] and will not be able to make it.”

Check out the full article.

21) EU to criminalise severe environmental harms "Comparable to Ecocide".

"The EU has agreed to enshrine in law a new offence that aims to punish the most serious crimes against the environment. The final text emerged following several months of negotiation (“trilogues”) between the European Council, Commission and Parliament considering, inter alia, the establishment of a “qualified offence” aimed at preventing and punishing the gravest environmental harms including, as the accompanying recitals specify, “cases comparable to ecocide”.

Check our the full report on the Ecocide website.

22) Hydrogen Leakage: A potential risk for the hydrogen economy.

Here are three items to contribute to the ongoing material I've included in the last few newsletter regarding the pros and cons of hydrogen as a GHG free fuel. This first one highlights that hydrogen leaking into our atmosphere does have an indirect climate forcing.

"Hydrogen is expected to play a key role in the decarbonization of the energy system. As of June 2022, more than 30 hydrogen strategies and roadmaps have been published by governments around the world. Hydrogen has been identified as a potential safety issue based on the fact that it is the smallest molecule that exists and can easily pass through materials. To date, however, very little attention has been paid to the potential contribution of hydrogen leakage to climate change, driven by hydrogen’s indirect global warming effect through mechanisms that extend the lifetime of methane and other greenhouse gases (GHG) in the atmosphere (Paulot et al. 2012; Derwent et al. 2020). A literature analysis turns up very little data on hydrogen leakage along the existing value chain, and that which does exist comes from theoretical assessments, simulation, or extrapolation rather than measures from operations. As the production methods and uses of hydrogen evolve over time, there is even less data available on what could represent key parts of the hydrogen economy going forward. In the future, leaked hydrogen will likely be concentrated in a few key processes (e.g., green hydrogen production, delivery, road transport, and chemical production). There is a risk of increased leakage rates in the future mostly because the leaking processes that will be key by 2050 do not exist at scale today. A high-risk scenario based on hydrogen demand from the International Energy Agency (IEA) net-zero scenario (528 million tons [Mt] by 2050) (IEA 2021) could potentially lead to a 5.6 percent economy-wide leakage rate, compared with an estimated 2.7 percent in 2020."

Check out the full research paper for more info.

23) Plastic Waste Becomes Clean Hydrogen Goldmine.

"A technique called flash joule heating at Rice University can convert plastic waste, even unsorted and unwashed, into clean hydrogen and valuable graphene. If sold at just 5% of its market value, the graphene produced could make the hydrogen essentially free, provided the process is powered by renewable energies. While green hydrogen offers significant potential for decarbonization, especially in high-heat industrial applications, its production requires vast amounts of clean energy, necessitating a balanced approach to its adoption."

Tom's comments - Sounds interesting.  I’ll wait to hear what the fishhooks are, though.  I would imagine there would be lots of “interesting” waste products from such a process - gases and solids.

Check out the full article if you want to learn more.

24) Solar energy storage breakthrough could make European households self-sufficient.

"One of the biggest issues with solar energy is that it is inconsistent over days and over seasons. Many startups have focused on trying to smooth energy supply over the day — saving up energy during the day for use during the night-time or outside peak hours. But few have tackled interseasonal storage of solar energy. What if homes could save abundant solar energy created in sunny months to be used for heat and electricity in winter? So far, this vision has been impossible to achieve. Batteries are too expensive and have short lifespans, and high costs and poor efficiency have crossed hydrogen, which does not emit greenhouse gases when burned, off the list of solutions.
Now, one startup from Norway — a country in a region that probably hopes it could save a little sunlight for cold winters — says it could bring a solution to market in the next couple of years, using solid hydrogen."

Check out the full article on the Sifted website.

25) To Understand and Protect the Home Planet.

This is the title of a blog published by James Hansen on October 27th. I have had a longtime respect for the perspectives presented by James and his willingness to present a contrary view from the IPCC reports is a reflection of his independent view. There are sure to be those who dispute the conclusions of him and his team. For readers of this newsletter who have studied reports from James Hansen before you will know that they are technical so it is just for nerds who want to get into the nitty gritty of the science. The new paper he is talking about is titled "Global Warming in the Pipeline". He says in the blog -

"GLOBAL WARMING IN THE PIPELINE will be published in Oxford Open Climate Change of Oxford University Press next week. The paper describes an alternative perspective on global climate change – alternative to that of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which provides scientific advice on climate change to the United Nations.
Our paper may be read as being critical of IPCC. But we have no criticism of individual scientists, who include world-leading researchers volunteering their time to produce IPCC reports. Rather we are questioning whether the IPCC procedure and product yield the advice that the public, especially young people, need to understand and protect their home planet.
Discussion of our paper will likely focus on differences between our conclusions and those of IPCC. I hope, however, that it may lead to consideration of some basic underlying matters."

Here is the full blog for those interested. It is not long and gives you a good summary of the content of the paper.

This YouTube video is a 43 minute discussion about the paper between James and Paul Beckwith, another climate scientist. If you are like me and really want to get down to some of the nitty gritty of why 2023 is now the hottest year in the last 100,000 years then this video is a must to listen and watch.

For the real nerds the paper is available on the Oxford Open Climate Change website.

Alternatively you can read a subsequent blog from James on November 10th titled "How We Know that Global Warming is Accelerating and that the Goal of the Paris Agreement is Dead", which gives a good overview of the science in the paper.

26) Hallucinatory world: Governments blind as multiple catastrophes besiege human civilisation.

• Life on Earth is under siege. A chain of tipping points with catastrophic consequences for everyone are being unleashed.
• Yet governments worldwide remain indifferent to the danger. Indeed, many continue avidly to stoke the very furnaces that will consume our civilisation.

The first two statements above are from two new scientific reports, issued this week – one from the United Nations and another from the same group of 15,000 scientists who gave us the world climate warning in 2020. Yet governments globally didn’t bat an eyelid. It was as if they do not occupy the same planet as the rest of us, but some hallucinatory world where everything is fine."

You can read the full article on the Pearls and Irritations website.



FUTURE OPTIONS?

I have added an extra section to this newsletter. It is focussed on discussion about alternatives to the dominant Capitalist Growth economy. I think this quote from Donella Meadows, one of the original authors of the 1972 "Limits to Growth" report says it all really.


























26) "Beyond Growth" Conference.

I participated (online) in an excellent conference held in Wellington over the weekend of September 16/17. The topic was "Beyond Growth" and the people from the "Degrowth NZ" group who organised it put together some thoroughly interesting and stimulating sessions with some excellent speakers. All the sessions are available on their YouTube channel.

I recommend the opening talk from Sahra Kress. The first session "Beyond Growth - what can we learn from the International Movement?" was good value, in particular the contributions from Mike Joy (session 1.3) and Timothee Parrique (1.2). Also the session with Prof Jonathon Boston (3.2).
The afternoon session "How do we mainstream degrowth in NZ" is worth checking out. It was very interesting to hear the views of the three business people involved as it was clear they consider the current economic model is not sustainable. (sessions 4.1 - 4.5.)
Others worthwhile sessions were the presentations by Nate Hagens (1.1) and Rick Williment (5.1). 

There is plenty of other good stuff to explore if you're interested in the topic.

27) Reconsidering our Economic System.

Dr Catherine Knight also did a session (3.1) at the Beyond Growth conference. This RNZ interview with her is worth a listen.

28) Vaclav Smil: ‘Growth must end. Our economist friends don’t seem to realise that’.

I recommend this interview between Jonathon Watts and the author Vaclav Smil about his latest book "Growth: From Microorganisms to Megacities." – an epic, multidisciplinary analysis of growth – and why humanity’s endless expansion must stop.

Here is his first question - "You are the nerd’s nerd. There is perhaps no other academic who paints pictures with numbers like you. You dug up the astonishing statistic that China has poured more cement every three years since 2003 than the US managed in the entire 20th century. You calculated that in 2000, the dry mass of all the humans in the world was 125m metric tonnes compared with just 10m tonnes for all wild vertebrates. And now you explore patterns of growth, from the healthy development of forests and brains to the unhealthy increase in obesity and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Before we get into those deeper issues, can I ask if you see yourself as a nerd?"

Check out the full Guardian article.

29) Critics of ‘degrowth’ economics say it’s unworkable – but from an ecologist’s perspective, it’s inevitable.

This article by Mike Joy with input by Jack Santa Barbara provides an excellent, well explained description of the state of overshoot humanity has created - "The climate crisis is seen as a problem requiring a solution rather than a symptom of overshoot. The problem is generally formulated as looking for a way to maintain current lifestyles in the wealthy world, rather than reducing overshoot. The ecological perspective accepts that we exceed biophysical boundaries and emphasises the importance of reducing energy and material consumption – regardless of how the energy is provided.
The scope of human disruption of the biosphere is now global. This ecological perspective highlights the current magnitude and closeness of significant and unwelcome changes to Earth systems. The reduction of humanity’s demands on the biosphere is an overriding priority.
Ecological economics, with its emphasis on a steady-state economy, is perhaps the most rigorous existing economic framework with specific proposals for determining priority actions. We urge scholars of all disciples to examine these."

Check out the full article in the Conversation.

30) Richest 1% emit as much planet-heating pollution as two-thirds of humanity.

This report released by Oxfam on November 20th highlights the theme of this extra section. Those of us in the developed world need to consume much less - some of us a lot more than others!

•     Carbon emissions of richest 1 percent surged to 16 percent of world’s total CO2 emissions in 2019.
•     Their carbon emissions are enough to cause 1.3 million excess deaths due to heat.
•     Unequal countries suffer seven times more flood fatalities than more equal countries.
•     Fairly taxing the super-rich would help curb both climate change and inequality.

The richest 1 percent of the world’s population produced as much carbon pollution in 2019 than the five billion people who made up the poorest two-thirds of humanity, reveals a new Oxfam report. It comes ahead of the UN climate summit in Dubai, amid growing fears that the 1.5°C target for curtailing rising temperatures appears increasingly unachievable. These outsized emissions of the richest 1 percent will cause 1.3 million heat-related excess deaths, roughly equivalent to the population of Dublin, Ireland. Most of these deaths will occur between 2020 and 2030.

“The super-rich are plundering and polluting the planet to the point of destruction, leaving humanity choking on extreme heat, floods and drought,” said Oxfam International interim Executive Director Amitabh Behar.
“For years we’ve fought to end the era of fossil fuels to save millions of lives and our planet. It’s clearer than ever this will be impossible until we, too, end the era of extreme wealth,” said Behar.

Check out the full article on the Oxfam website.

31) New Paper Identifies ‘Behavioural Crisis’ Driving Overshoot.

Ground-breaking academic paper, led by a New Zealand conservationist, reveals the behavioural crisis driving anthropogenic ecological overshoot and immediate actions needed.

A ground-breaking peer-reviewed paper has been published today (20/09/2023) by a collection of well-known scientists, academics and behavioural science practitioners led by New Zealand-based conservationist, Joseph Merz, of the Merz Institute.

The paper, published by Sage on 20 September 2023, details how our modern human behaviour is causing us to consume our natural resources at rates faster than they can be replenished, while also creating waste in excess of what the Earth can assimilate. The authors name and frame this existential threat the “Human Behavioural Crisis” and propose that the crisis, which stems from maladaptive human behaviours, be recognised globally as a critical intervention point for tackling ecological overshoot (and its symptoms like climate change).

The authors, led by Merz, demonstrate that our previously adaptive human impulses have been exploited for-profit to the point that the resultant behaviours have become extremely maladaptive, threatening complex life on Earth.

You can read the full media release on the Merz Institute website.