february 2024

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.