Welcome to the next CKM newsletter. I have included quite a wide range of items this time with an initial focus on a big question facing humanity. What are the limits to growth for humanity and how close are we to reaching some of those limits?

1) Are there biophysical limits to growth? If so, how should public policy respond?Lesley and I recently sat in on a webinar organised by Victoria University School of Government and the Wise Response Society. The webinar was addressing the following question - Economic growth has become culturally, politically and institutionally engrained at a global scale. Is that sustainable?

The four international speakers who did the presentations were -

• Associate Professor Simon Michaux (Geology)
• Professor Steve Keen (Economics)
• Professor Tim Jackson (Economics)
• Professor Susan Krumdieck (Mechanical Engineering)

We highly recommend making the time to listen to what they have to say about this important issue.
The youtube video is available here -

The following comments from the first speaker Simon Michaux will give you a feel for the topic. 

Current industrialization has a foundation in the continuous supply of natural resources. The methods and processes associated with this foundation have significant momentum. This paradigm will not be undone easily. Human nature and human history make it so. Currently, our industrial systems are absolutely dependent on non-renewable natural resources for energy sources.
Current thinking is that all industrial businesses, will replace a complex industrial ecosystem that took more than a century to build. This system was built with the support of the highest calorifically dense source of energy the world has ever known (oil), in cheap abundant quantities, with easily available credit, and unlimited mineral resources. This task is hoped to be done at a time when there is comparatively very expensive energy, a fragile finance system saturated in debt, not enough minerals, and an unprecedented number of human populations, embedded in a deteriorating environment.
It is apparent that the goal of industrial scale transition away from fossil fuels into non-fossil fuel systems is a much larger task than current thinking allows for. The majority of infrastructure and technology units needed to phase out fossil fuels has yet to be manufactured. Recycling cannot be done on products that have yet to be manufactured. It is clear that society consumes more mineral resources each year. It is also clear that society does not really understand its dependency on minerals to function. Availability of minerals could be an issue in the future, where it becomes too expensive to extract metals due to decreasing grade.

Further info about the speakers and copies of the slides in the video are available here -

2) Rethinking Climate Change.

This recently released paper from RethinkX has a very different view on the possibilities for change in the next 10 - 20 years. The authors believe we can take a path resulting in alternative "Disruptions, Implications, and Choices" from the ones being articulated in the above "Limits to Growth" webinar so some quite major contradictions are apparent if you study both viewpoints. The underlying question of whether "Green Growth" or "Degrowth" is the more realistic path forward also arises.

I like to keep an open mind to possibilities but I have to say both viewpoints portend major ongoing disruptions to life as we know it. I firmly believe we all need to think seriously about these issues and make every effort to look at what changes and preparations for disruption we can make in our own lives and how we can encourage those in our community to do the same. We need more resilience in our families, communities, country and planet if we want to maintain a caring and supportive society on this one little life giving jewel floating in space.

This statement will give you a feel for what is contained in the RethinkX paper.

Humanity Can Choose to Reduce Emissions 90% by 2035 through the Disruption of Energy, Transportation,
and Food with Existing Technologies. Technology disruptions already underway in the energy, transportation, and food sectors have extraordinary implications for climate change. These three disruptions alone, driven by just eight technologies, can directly eliminate over 90% of net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions worldwide within 15 years. Market forces can be leveraged to drive the bulk of global GHG emissions mitigation because the technologies required are either already commercially available and competitive today, or can be deployed to market before 2025 with the right societal choices. The same technologies will also make the cost of carbon withdrawal affordable, meaning that moonshot breakthrough technologies are not required to solve the ‘Last Carbon Problem’ and go beyond net zero from 2035 onwards. Our previous research has shown that disruptions of the energy, transportation, and food sectors are inevitable. Solar, wind, and batteries (SWB) will disrupt coal, oil, and gas. Autonomous electric vehicles (A-EVs) providing transportation-as-a-service (TaaS) will disrupt internal combustion engines and private vehicle ownership. And precision fermentation and cellular agriculture (PFCA) will disrupt meat, milk, and other animal products. The three disruptions are already unfolding simultaneously, and their implications for climate change are profound. Yet it will be up to us to decide whether or not we deploy these technologies worldwide rapidly enough to avoid dangerous climate change.

Here are some useful Q&A’s on the topic of cellular production of animal products for anyone interested.  

Microbial protein factories can process yeasts, bacteria, fungi and algae. It takes years to grow animals, months or years to grow plants, while microbes can double their biomass in a matter of hours. Many microorganisms offer high protein content of over 50% by dry weight. They grow extraordinarily fast, are self-sufficient and require only simple and inexpensive feedstocks.

And here is some good info available on the Prime Minister’s Science Advisor’s website on the same topic.

3) More evidence we may be reaching the Limits to Growth on Planet Earth.

A remarkable new study by a director at KPMG, one of the largest accounting firms in the world has found that a famous, decades-old warning from MIT about the risk of industrial civilization collapsing appears to be accurate based on new empirical data.
As the world looks forward to a rebound in economic growth following the devastation wrought by the pandemic, the research raises urgent questions about the risks of attempting to simply return to the pre-pandemic ‘normal.’ In 1972, a team of MIT scientists got together to study the risks of civilizational collapse. Their system dynamics model published by the Club of Rome identified impending ‘limits to growth’ (LtG) that meant industrial civilization was on track to collapse sometime within the 21st century, due to overexploitation of planetary resources.
Gaya Herrington, a Dutch sustainability researcher and adviser to the Club of Rome, a Swiss thinktank, has made headlines in recent days after she authored a report that appeared to show the controversial 1970s study predicting the collapse of civilization was – apparently – right on time.
Coming amid a cascade of alarming environmental events, from western US and Siberian wildfires to German floods and a report that suggests the Amazon rainforest may no longer be able to perform as a carbon sink, Herrington’s work predicted the collapse could come around 2040 if current trends held.
Research by Herrington, a rising star in efforts to place data analysis at the center of efforts to curb climate breakdown, affirmed the bleaker scenarios put forward in a landmark 1972 MIT study, The Limits to Growth, that presented various outcomes for what could happen when the growth of industrial civilization collided with finite resources.
She says there is nothing inevitable about its predictions – even now.
“The key finding of my study is that we still have a choice to align with a scenario that does not end in collapse. With innovation in business, along with new developments by governments and civil society, continuing to update the model provides another perspective on the challenges and opportunities we have to create a more sustainable world.”
“The necessary changes will not be easy and pose transition challenges but a sustainable and inclusive future is still possible,” said Herrington.
The best available data suggests that what we decide over the next 10 years will determine the long-term fate of human civilization. Although the odds are on a knife-edge, Herrington pointed to a “rapid rise” in environmental, social and good governance priorities as a basis for optimism, signalling the change in thinking taking place in both governments and businesses. She told me that perhaps the most important implication of her research is that it’s not too late to create a truly sustainable civilization that works for all.

You can read more here and here -

The full KPMG report is available here -

4) Marlborough coal users.

Tom Powell and myself have been putting some time and energy into investigating which local businesses and public facilities are currently using coal for process heat. The government has signaled that all coal users have until 2037 to undergo conversion to other fuel sources. Woodbourne Airbase, Marlborough Hospital, Marlborough Girls College and Springlands school are currently using coal and conversion options are being investigated. The main private coal users in our region are Talleys, CMP (Anzco) meat processing plant at Riverlands, Dominion Salt and Thymebank greenhouses. Kinzett greenhouses were early adopters and converted to burn woodchip in 2009.

We recently sat in on a very interesting and informative webinar presented by DETA Consulting with the topic being "South Island Thermal Fuel Transition Impact Assessment".
DETA conducted a survey of process heat users in the South Island. The survey looked at process heat sites of greater than 500KW, which would include most industrial users but exclude small users, such as schools. Users were asked what they had installed and what plans they have to convert from fossil fuel to renewable sources. Due to the low cost and availability of coal on the South Island, most process heat is currently from coal. You can view Tom's notes on the webinar here -  If you want to access the full webinar it is available here - You need to enter your email address to get access and then look for it under 2021 webinars. For anyone who is interested in this topic they have also posted a new webinar on Sep 22 titled "Decarbonising Industrial Process Heat".

5) The delay to New Zealand’s emissions reduction plan is embarrassing – we need action now.

This recent development is not good news. NZ is being seen more and more internationally as a laggard. And this is a Labour - Greens government! Why is the urgent action required taking so long to happen? Is this government too scared to stand up to the agricultural lobby and other vested interests?

The extract below is from an article written by Adam Currie from Generation Zero.

The New Zealand government has announced a five-month delay to the emissions reduction plan (ERP) – its key programme for combatting climate change. This is gutting – climate decisions by many organisations and institutions have been delayed since 2017; first to wait for the Zero Carbon Act, then the advice of the Climate Change Commission, and now the Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP), which won’t be announced until the budget in May. The postponement even requires an embarrassing legislative change to the Zero Carbon Act to get around the December 2021 deadline for the plan, which is currently enshrined in law. Every day of delay makes the transition we will have to make to a low-carbon Aotearoa – and the ability to make it fair for affected communities – more and more difficult. New Zealand now won’t have any part of the emissions reduction plan to declare at the crucially important Cop26 in November (yet again – New Zealand didn’t attend the climate leaders summit last year either because we had no climate policies to announce). It will announce an updated nationally determined contribution (NDC), the emissions reduction target we pledge to the rest of the world. Concerningly, New Zealand last week decided not to do any public consultation whatsoever on the formation of the NDC. A report from Oxfam argued that when considering our historical responsibility, New Zealand’s “fair share” NDC would be a reduction of at least 99% below 1990 levels by 2030 – a far cry from the 11% reduction pledge in our current NDC.

The full article is available here -

6) Bioenergy Association.

The NZ Bionenergy Association have a regularly updated "News" page with useful items for those interested in this topic. Recent ones are on Converting Marsden Point refinery to produce Biofuels, and the New Zealand Forest Service investigating the use of forest waste for a new biofuels industry.

You can check it out here -

7) Nelson City Council challenged on new library plans.

Lawyers for Climate Action New Zealand has written to Nelson City Council on behalf of Zero Carbon Nelson Tasman expressing concerns about the legality of the Council’s recent decision to develop a new Library on a site near the Maitai River.
Zero Carbon Nelson Tasman is calling on Nelson City Council to only make a final decision about the new Library location in conjunction with determining a climate change adaptation plan for central Nelson, to ensure that total costs to ratepayers are minimised. The group asks Council to ensure that any steps taken in relation to the proposed site on the corner of Halifax and Trafalgar Streets in the meantime are legally and practically reversible.

The full article is available here -

8) $3m to save a river.

This item is from December last year but I wanted to include it as an example of the benefits that can be gained from fencing and planting waterways. I'm aware those benefits can vary widely depending on soil types, but there is the potential to not only mitigate stream pollution but also remove carbon from the atmosphere.

A water quality project started by a group of farmers in Otago six years ago has received a major boost with more than $3 million of government funding available to plant 216,000 native riverbank species over the next three years.
Already the first 5000 have been put in along the banks of the Pomahaka River and its tributaries and the group overseeing the project is aiming to have 20,000 in the ground by the end of November.
Project manager Lloyd McCall says the government funding – which will also pay for 100km of riparian fencing on farms in the district – will be awarded under the Jobs for Nature initiative. He says it is a significant development and will help continue work to improve the water quality in the 2020sqkm catchment around the river. The river has suffered degradation over many years – E.coli levels and nitrate leaching into the water are among its most pressing problems - but the work of the PWCG is beginning to turn the tide and restore the river to health.
Tests in the last 12 months show the presence of E.coli has fallen by up to 90 per cent and nitrate by up to 60 per cent.

9) How to fix the Waikato peatlands.

Talking about sequestering carbon this article that was the in the NZ Geographic highlights the huge potential for bogs to store carbon. I found this article fascinating. It makes a very good case for closing drains, shutting off pumps and letting some wetlands revert to bog again.

Don’t call them swamps. Bogs soak up and store more carbon than forests do, but when they’re drained and used for agriculture, that immense amount of carbon is slowly released. The peat at Kopuatai draws down about 200 grams of carbon per square metre each year—which adds up to 18,000 tonnes across the whole bog.But this carbon-storing power applies only as long as a bog remains wet. Once it’s drained, oxygen enters the system, turning once-submerged carbon into carbon dioxide that escapes into the atmosphere. When drained peatland is farmed, fertilisers accelerate the carbon loss, turning a sink into a significant source. The Waikato’s drained peatlands produce between 10 and 33 tonnes of carbon-dioxide-equivalent emissions per hectare each year, depending on how the land is used. These emissions are from the peat itself as it decomposes once it’s exposed to oxygen. What happens if we continue to farm the peatlands currently used for pastoral agriculture? Waikato University wetland scientist and carbon researcher Dave Campbell says “It is equivalent to burning down all forests and not replacing them.”

10) Bernard Hickey: A solar panel for every roof.
I’m ultimately hopeful about the ability of technology to solve this planet’s problems, if only we could dislodge the network monopolies forming into roadblocks at every turn. Markets can be wonderful things, as long as they are regulated to ensure natural monopolists and their ilk don’t do what is natural to them: use their power and scale and connections to stop new competitors eating away at their super profits.
Our electricity industry is a perfect example. If we’re not careful, New Zealand’s natural headstart of having oodles of supposedly free water-powered electricity will turn into a millstone around our neck that stops us from getting anywhere near carbon zero by 2050. It’s not looking good right now. The Climate Commission assumes that car owners will opt en-masse to switch to electric vehicles, in part because it expects electricity costs to drop 30%. Right now, wholesale electricity costs have tripled in 12 months and NZ burned through one million tonnes of coal last year. Meanwhile the independent retailers keeping a lid on retail prices have all gone into their shells because the wholesale market suits the big network gentailers just fine and has burned off the little guys.
Even better, the government could do to the electricity sector what was successfully done to Telecom: break up the “generator” from the “retailer” to remove that network monopoly power. Along with targeted regulatory intervention, it has worked a treat to foster lower prices and industry innovation.
Here’s a big idea from left field. Why doesn’t the government break up the gentailers by holding on to the dams and windfarms with its 51% stakes in Mercury, Meridian and Genesis, and let the private shareholders keep the new independent retailers? The other option would be fund the capital requirements of a massive panel and battery rollout. It would work much faster than new builds and foster competition in one fell swoop.

You can see the full article here -

11) Further information highlighting the dysfunctional nature of the NZ electricity supply system.

I found this paragraph below in a recent paper by Geoff Bertram informative. The paper is titled "Problems with the “Reformed” New Zealand Electricity Market".

Electrification of the economy will be central to New Zealand’s ability to meet ambitious greenhouse-gas emission targets. Again the profit motive has proven International Association for Energy Economics counter-productive in the absence of effective regulatory policy. New Zealand’s main policy instrument to place a price on carbon emissions is its Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) which interacts in a strikingly perverse way with the structure of the wholesale electricity market. The market, by design, sets the spot price at the highest offer price in the generation merit-order stack, which means for most of the time one of the fossil-fuelled generators, whose costs (and hence bids) include the carbon price. Because all generators receive the same price, the effect is that electricity consumers are forced to pay carbon tax on electricity supplied from hydro and wind. But since hydro and wind generators pay no carbon tax on their operations, the resulting revenue flow goes directly to their bottom lines and asset values. The result is that the ETS which is ostensibly aimed to incentivise a move away from carbon instead creates a perverse incentive both to dampen down substitution in final energy uses away from fossil fuels towards electricity (for example, switching from internal combustion cars to electric vehicles) and for electricity generators to ensure that there is always fossil-fuelled generating plant at the market margin.

Molly Melhuish has also done a succinct paper titled “What's wrong with NZ's electricity set-up?”
Here is an extract from that paper.

Both demand reduction and local energy supply threaten the profits and asset values of the electricity corporates. The recent blackouts, and earlier market manipulation that drove high coal generation, create high profits. Government half owns the biggest generators and fully owns Transpower. Their profits benefit Government directly, creating conflict of interest which must be eliminated.
Indeed the extreme profit-driven governance of our electricity sector must be replaced with some system to confirm and promote the public interest in energy supply. There are several options, all incompatible with neoliberal philosophy and finance.
Fossil energy allowed civilization to escape the bounds of local energy supply. Demand grew exponentially, as did the waste products of energy (especially carbon dioxide), agriculture and industry. Now new local energy technologies offer truly renewable and even climate-friendly energy systems, but only at a greatly reduced scale per capita. New Zealand is in a unique position to demonstrate these to a reluctant world.

12) Seven countries join US and EU in methane reduction pledge.

I hope the NZ government has taken note of this recent commitment by some countries to cut their methane emissions. Of course we're all getting used to plenty of words but not much action so we'll have to wait and see what the actual outcome of this latest pledge is. The statement from the American Humane Society in the extract below, at least addresses the real solution to reducing methane emissions from agriculture.

Seven countries have joined the US and EU in committing to cut their methane emissions by 30% over the next decade. On Friday, the US and EU made a joint pledge to slash methane emissions, which are mainly released from abandoned coal mines, oil and gas operations, and farming, by 2030 and encouraged other nations to do the same.
Although it only stays in the atmosphere for around nine years, methane has a warming impact 84 times that of CO2 over a 20-year period. It is responsible for almost a quarter of global warming to date.

A paper in Environmental Research Letters earlier this year found an all-out effort to slash methane emissions could slow the rate of temperature rise by 30% and avoid 0.5C of warming by the end of the century.
Campaigners armed with satellite observations and infrared cameras have shown that the scale of “fugitive emissions” of methane from oil and gas installations is widely under reported. While the EU, for one, is introducing stricter standards for monitoring and reporting emissions under its methane strategy, it will take time for this to result in better data. “We have no access to accurate data and I don’t expect the world to have access to this before 2026-2030,” Kalesi said. “There is currently no consensus in terms of the baseline and measurement methods.”
In fossil fuel sectors, while the data is murky, the technological solutions are clear.

In farming, responsible for more methane emissions than coal, oil and gas industries put together, there are fewer quick fixes. “In the agriculture space, there are existing technologies and practices that can be utilized to get emission reductions, but not on the order of what can be readily cut from oil and gas as well as coal,” said Jonathan Banks of Clean Air Task Force. Biden’s agriculture department is working with farmers to improve practices on a voluntary basis, according to the White House press release. A more culturally sensitive solution is for people to eat less meat, particularly from ruminants like cattle, goats and sheep that belch methane. The Humane Society of the US argues technologies “do little to address the problems inherent in industrial animal agriculture”. “A better strategy – for the environment, climate change mitigation, human health, and animal welfare – is reducing our overall consumption of animal products and making more climate-friendly food choices,” it says.

The full article is available here -

13) Stealthy storage contender Form Energy reveals secret formula: Iron and air.

Here is more new information on evolving battery technology.

Form Energy finally lifted the veil of secrecy over its technology that purports to store clean electricity for days on end. The startup revealed that it is building iron-air batteries, a technology that has been studied for decades but never commercialized for grid storage. The announcement coincided with a profile in the Wall Street Journal and a $200 million Series D raise led by global steel and mining giant ArcelorMittal.
"We felt that we had made enough progress that it was relevant to talk about," Form CEO Mateo Jaramillo told Canary Media Thursday.
While it's common for lithium-ion batteries on the market today to discharge their full power capacity for up to four hours, Form's 1-megawatt project will do so for up to 150 hours, an unprecedented achievement for the storage industry. The ​“iron-air” system stores energy via ​“reversible rusting.” In discharge mode, the battery pulls in oxygen from the air to make the iron rusty. Running the process in reverse releases oxygen and returns the iron to its pre-rusty state, while charging the system. Form wants to store clean power and deliver it over 100 hours or more, which would constitute a whole new type of power plant. Jaramillo describes it as competing with gas plants, not batteries.
The revelation ended a period of speculation about Form, launched as a sort of energy storage supergroup in 2017. Jaramillo built Tesla's energy storage business before joining forces with MIT battery expert Yet-Ming Chiang. Along with co-founders Billy Woodford, Ted Wiley and Marco Ferrara, they systematically examined every material that stores electricity to see if it could reach very low costs for very long durations.

The full article is available here -

14) IEA:Net Zero Goal Means No More New Oil And Gas Investment Ever. The world doesn’t need any new investments in oil and gas beyond what is already approved if it hopes to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said on 18th May 21, adding that the road to limiting global warming to 1.5 o C involves a rapid and radical shift away from fossil fuels.
According to the IEA’s pathway to net-zero emissions by 2050, the world will not need new oil and gas projects beyond those sanctioned as of this year, the Paris-based agency said in its Net Zero by 2050 report. Instead, all new energy investments should be of the renewable variety in what the IEA refers to as an “immediate and massive deployment of all available clean and efficient energy technologies.”
The agency’s ‘Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector’ also says that no new coal mines or mine extensions are required if the world is to achieve net-zero emissions in 2050.
“The path to net-zero emissions is narrow: staying on it requires immediate and massive deployment of all available clean and efficient energy technologies,” the agency said.
The scenario with the world reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 would mean a sharp decline in demand for fossil fuels, “meaning that the focus for oil and gas producers switches entirely to output – and emissions reductions – from the operation of existing assets,” the IEA said.
“No new oil and natural gas fields are needed in the net zero pathway, and supplies become increasingly concentrated in a small number of low-cost producers”.
“The pathway to achieving net-zero would result in coal demand collapsing by 90 percent by 2050 and natural gas demand slumping by 55 percent”, the IEA noted. Oil demand would plunge by as much as 75 percent to just 24 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2050, from around 100 million bpd in 2019.

Thanks to Energy Watch for this item.

DETA Consulting have put together a Roadmap for NZ similar to the global one from the IEA above.

DETA Consulting say on their website they are an “Award-winning engineering consultancy specialising in identifying, developing and delivering carbon reduction and sustainability projects in the dairy, meat, agricultural, hotels, hospitals, schools and public sectors. Think of us as your green superhero sidekicks,”

This roadmap sets out a series of steps for businesses to help them develop a carbon reduction plan and integrate it into their business.

• These steps are Establishing a Baseline – Development of a Carbon Footprint.
• Carbon Footprint Reporting and Setting a Target
• Developing a Carbon Reduction Plan
• Opportunity Refinement and Business Case Development
• Implementation
• Continuous Improvement – Ongoing Monitoring of Your Carbon Footprint and Refinement of the Roadmap
• Formal Recognition of Carbon Reduction

15) Golden Bay Cement - Tyres in cement reduces carbon footprint of product.
Fletcher Building recently announced the completion of its tyre project at Golden Bay Cement, which will avoid up to three million used tyres going to landfill each year and instead be used in cement manufacturing. The significant upgrade to New Zealand’s only end-to-end cement plant, which is based in Portland, Whangarei, will be officially opened today by the Honourable David Parker, Minister for the Environment.
“This innovative project is a win-win-win for the environment. It reduces a significant waste problem, reuses a valuable resource, and reduces carbon emissions by about 13,000 tonnes a year,” Environment Minister David Parker said. Fletcher Building CEO Ross Taylor says this is a landmark sustainability project for manufacturing in New Zealand.
“Using end-of-life tyres in cement manufacturing helps to solve a significant waste problem in New Zealand as well as improve the sustainability of a key building material. Up to 50 percent of the 6.3 million waste tyres created in New Zealand each year will now be used in cement manufacturing at the Golden Bay Cement plant instead of going into landfill. “Golden Bay Cement supplies more than half the New Zealand market as the only local cement manufacturer. “Our cement already has around 20 percent lower emissions than imported cement and using tyres is part of the decarbonization plan to reduce its footprint even further. It will also reduce our need for natural raw materials like iron sand.
“Local manufacturing must compete fiercely with imports, and this investment allows us to continue doing just that. At the same time, we’re providing local jobs as well as supply chain security for the domestic building, infrastructure, and construction industries,” said Ross Taylor. Fletcher Building has a verified science-based target to reduce its emissions by 30 percent by 2030.Ross Taylor said, “Climate change is an urgent, global priority. The building and materials sector has an important role to play by changing the way that it designs, builds, sources, and manufactures the building materials used in the construction process. We are serious about transforming our business around sustainability to do our part in creating a sustainable future and reducing our carbon emissions.”

The full article is available here and a video of the tyre furnace being installed is available here -

16) More than 200 health journals call for urgent action on climate crisis.

More than 200 health journals worldwide are publishing an editorial calling on leaders to take emergency action on climate change and to protect health. The British Medical Journal said it is the first time so many publications have come together to make the same statement, reflecting the severity of the situation.

The editorial, which is being published before the UN general assembly and the Cop26 climate summit in Glasgow this November, says: “Ahead of these pivotal meetings, we – the editors of health journals worldwide – call for urgent action to keep average global temperature increases below 1.5C, halt the destruction of nature, and protect health.

“Health is already being harmed by global temperature increases and the destruction of the natural world, a state of affairs health professionals have been bringing attention to for decades."
“The science is unequivocal; a global increase of 1.5C above the pre-industrial average and the continued loss of biodiversity risk catastrophic harm to health that will be impossible to reverse."
“Despite the world’s necessary preoccupation with Covid-19, we cannot wait for the pandemic to pass to rapidly reduce emissions."
“Reflecting the severity of the moment, this editorial appears in health journals across the world."
“We are united in recognising that only fundamental and equitable changes to societies will reverse our current trajectory.”

The full article is available here -

17) The myth of government deficits.

This is an excellent Ted talk by the author of the book "The Deficit Myth - Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People's Economy" by Stephanie Kelton.

In the talk she explains clearly why the question that must be asked is not, "How will you pay for it?" but "How will you resource it?" This is the central issue with financing all the environmental challenges facing us, such as global warming, ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss. Most politicians will lead you to believe money is a constraining factor. Listen to this talk and you will realise that is a myth and the actual constraints are the real life resources that nature provides us, not money.

“Government deficits have gotten a bad rap”, says economist Stephanie Kelton. In this groundbreaking talk, she makes the case to stop looking at government spending as a path towards frightening piles of debt, but rather as a financial contribution to the things that matter -- like health care, education, infrastructure and beyond. "We have the resources we need to begin repairing our broken systems," Kelton says. "But we have to believe it's possible."

18) Update from "Stop Ecocide".

There has been considerable activity in different countries around the world since the first legal definition of “Ecocide” was released in June this year. Here is a statement from the “Stop Ecocide” organisation.

So much has happened since the launch of the legal definition of ecocide in June that we’ve decided to provide you with a concise “round-up” of key moments over the last 3 months. We trust this will give a flavour of the political momentum gathering around ecocide law.
Progressing this law is about more than politics.  It serves to reflect, in the global legal system, a simple factual truth: when we damage the Earth, there are consequences.  We see it as a legal guardrail, a health and safety law for the planet, if you will.  And as the law approaches, whatever our age, work, or walk of life, we can treat it as a guidance system, supporting healthy innovation and adjustment in all sectors of industry, society and education.  

We already know that profound changes are needed to bring humanity back within a safe operating space.  Ecocide law provides a clear parameter to help that happen.

You can catch up on the latest stories here -

19) The semiconductor industry has a problem.

I know I continue to highlight consequences of our modern lifestyles. I believe we have a duty to keep ourselves informed of the implications of our decisions. We need to keep our heads firmly out of the sand! 

Demand is booming for silicon chips, which are embedded in everything from smartphones and televisions to wind turbines, but it comes at a big cost: a huge carbon footprint.
The industry presents a paradox. Meeting global climate goals will, in part, rely on semiconductors. They’re integral to electric vehicles, solar arrays and wind turbines. But chip manufacturing also contributes to the climate crisis. It requires huge amounts of energy and water – a chip fabrication plant, or fab, can use millions of gallons of water a day – and creates hazardous waste.

The full article is available here -

20) August Temperature Update & Gas Bag Season Approaches - James Hansen.

Here is an extract from a recent blog update from James Hansen. As is usual with James he doesn’t dodge the tricky subjects. This blog addresses the inability of politicians to follow grand statements with effective actions and also the issue of whether we should be using more nuclear power to reduce fossil fuel use and therefore emissions. The full blog is available here -

First the good news: NOAA’s newest prediction for the tropics has a deeper La Nina, which should keep global temperature near the 1970-2015 trend line for at least several months. That’s not entirely good news – the trend line is not a target to aim for, and a continuing La Nina keeps the tropics ripe for tropical storms. At the next El Nino, global temperature will be far above the trend line and may approach +1.5°C relative to 1880-1920.

The bad news: we approach the gas bag season – the next Conference of the Parties (COP26) is scheduled for November 1-12. Gas bag politicians won’t show you the data that matter because that would reveal their miserable performances. Instead, they set climate goals for their children while adopting no polices that would give such goals a chance. Some of them may have been honestly duped about the science and engineering, but many must be blatant hypocrites.

21) Oxfam report highlights conflict between tree planting and food production.

Governments and businesses hoping to plant trees and restore forests in order to reach net-zero emissions must sharply limit such efforts to avoid driving up food prices in the developing world, the charity Oxfam has warned.
Planting trees has been mooted as one of the key ways of tackling the climate crisis, but the amount of land needed for such forests would be vast, and planting even a fraction of the area needed to offset global greenhouse gas emissions would encroach on the land needed for crops to feed a growing population, according to a report entitled Tightening the net: Net zero climate targets implications for land and food equity.
Nafkote Dabi, climate policy lead at Oxfam and co-author of the report, explained: “It is difficult to tell how much land would be required, as governments have not been transparent about how they plan to meet their net-zero commitments. But many countries and companies are talking about afforestation and reforestation, and the first question is: where is this land going to come from?”

The full article is available here -

22) 1 in 3 sheep and beef farms to forestry.

Beef and Lamb New Zealand is calling for limits on carbon offsetting as new research reveals over a third of sheep and beef farms sold have gone into carbon-only titles.  Beef and Lamb NZ has commissioned this independent research, which shows the transition of pastureland to forestry by carbon farming companies is driven in large part by a speculated increase in the carbon price, and the amount of afforestation here has already exceeded levels recommended by the IPCC to meet the Zero Carbon Act.  Instead, the report recommends an integrated approach, where parts of farms are given over to trees, as a preferable way of meeting climate change targets.Kathryn Ryan is joined by Beef and Lamb NZ's chief executive Sam McIvor.

You can listen to the full RNZ interview here -

23) Trees worth more than cows as carbon price soars.

New Zealand’s carbon price is at a record high, which means planting pine trees will now fetch farmers more money than raising sheep and beef. That’s according to an analysis from interest.co warning that the country’s farmers, as well as its timber industry, now face pressure from a surging carbon price. The result could be that productive land now used for livestock and lumber is turned over to forest plantations that suck up carbon emissions. Dairying, as well as growing fruits and vegetables, is still more profitable than trees. Carbon farming, as it’s sometimes known, isn’t a new idea, but the economics have shifted remarkably in recent years.
The country’s main mechanism for combating climate change (for now) is the emissions trading scheme and it has been acting a little odd in recent weeks. For starters, the price of carbon credits has soared. As Newsroom reports, an auction earlier this month saw the price that polluters needed to pay to buy a credit for a tonne of emissions break through an artificial ceiling set by the government. As a result of going above $50, the government tried to flood the market with new credits to keep prices down. It didn’t quite work and prices are above $60. The country will also need to figure out a way to reduce emissions in the future by 1.6 million tonnes, because those new credits need to come from somewhere.

The full article is available here -

I must admit I find the whole ETS scheme a little tricky to get my head around. This article seems to show that we are, as a country, walking a tight rope. Clearly we need to have a realistic price on carbon to deter emissions so a climbing price is a good thing. The consequences of humanity not reducing our collective emissions fast enough are well documented. But we're trying to make this change in the way we manage our emissions without collapsing our economy in the process. Either way this seems to me to be evidence that more disruptions are inevitable.

24) Rapidly increasing chance of record shattering temperature extremes.

In recent years, heat waves have broken long-standing records by large margins. In spring 2020, Siberia saw exceptional temperatures, and Europe experienced an extreme heat wave in 2003 that killed more than 70,000 people. Now a new study published in Nature Climate Change has found that the probability of extreme record-shattering events is increasing at an alarming rate. These events are unprecedented in the observational record and nearly impossible without climate change. The researchers warned that many places in the world have not yet seen anything close to the intensity of heat waves now possible but should expect them in the coming decades.
As the climate warms, you would expect heat waves to break previous records, but not necessarily by large margins. But when Erich Fischer at the Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science at ETH Zürich in Switzerland and his colleagues looked at large climate model ensembles, they found that simulated events in the near future broke historic records by very large margins. Somewhat surprisingly, the simulations often did not show the intensity of heat waves steadily increasing. Instead, the simulations showed stagnant decades with unbroken or marginally broken records, followed by a sudden record-shattering event.

The full article is available here -

25) Pacific forum leaders set permanent maritime borders, as rising seas shrink islands.

Pacific island leaders have agreed that their maritime borders should be permanent, even if their countries shrink due to a future rise in sea levels caused by climate change.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) sixth assessment report reaffirmed this week that rising sea levels will cause shorelines to retreat along sandy coasts of most small islands, a real threat to the existence of some low lying atoll nations.
“Some think of Pacific islands as small, but Pacific states have sovereign rights across a large swathe of the Earth’s surface. This declaration helps to protect Pacific sovereignty and their rightful ocean domain,” said Morgan.
“Pacific island countries have led global diplomacy on oceans for decades. So this declaration continues to lead, and shape, the global discussion. It is an important diplomatic signal from all of the member states of the Pacific Islands Forum. They are telling the rest of the world, that they will not let their maritime sovereign rights be eroded by climate change”.

You can access the full article here -

26) Biden-backed ‘blue’ hydrogen may pollute more than coal, study finds.

The large infrastructure bill passed by the US Senate and hailed by Joe Biden as a key tool to tackle the climate crisis includes billions of dollars to support a supposedly clean fuel that is potentially even more polluting than coal, new research has found.
The $1tn infrastructure package, which passed with bipartisan support, includes $8bn to develop “clean hydrogen” via the creation of four new regional hubs. The White House has said the bill advances Biden’s climate agenda and proponents of hydrogen have touted it as a low-emissions alternative to fuel shipping, trucking, aviation and even home heating.
But a new study has found surprisingly large emissions from the production of so-called “blue” hydrogen, a variant being enthusiastically pushed by the fossil fuel industry and probably falling under the definition of clean hydrogen in the Senate bill.
Blue hydrogen involves splitting gas into hydrogen and carbon dioxide and then capturing and storing the CO2 to ensure it doesn’t heat the planet. But this process involves the incidental release of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, and uses a huge amount of energy to separate and then store the carbon dioxide, some of which escapes anyway.
This means that the production of this hydrogen actually creates 20% more greenhouse gases than coal, commonly regarded the most polluting fossil fuel, when being burned for heat, and 60% more than burning diesel, according to the new paper, published in the Energy Science & Engineering journal.

You can read more about it here and here -

27) China pledge to stop funding coal projects ‘buys time for emissions target’.

Xi Jinping’s announcement that China will stop funding overseas coal projects could buy the world about three more months in the race to keep global heating to a relatively safe level of 1.5C, experts say. Although the impact will depend on implementation, China’s declaration should also help to kill off coal, which has been humanity’s primary power source for most of the last 200 years.
Xi’s declaration is likely to affect at least 54 gigawatts of China-backed coal power projects, which are in active development but not yet under construction, according to the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air. Lauri Myllyvirta, the centre’s lead analyst, said this was equivalent to about three months of global emissions.
Despite the uncertainties over implementation, Myllyvirta said China’s announcement would accelerate decarbonisation. “Countries now know that going forward, there is no financing on the table for coal. That should clarify things a lot. Chinese delegates are going to visit Indonesia or Vietnam or Pakistan and they will be saying, ‘We don’t do coal any more, but we can help with clean energy.’ That will make a difference.”

The full article is available here -

And some questions arising from the policy announcement are addressed here

28) SunDrive creates sustainable, cheap solar cells with world-record efficiency.

Today, almost 95% of all photovoltaic panels are based on mono- or polycrystalline silicon cells, which use precious silver to conduct electricity.
Now, an Australian solar company, SunDrive, has created super-efficient and cheap solar panels that use more sustainable copper to pull the electrical current from the cells rather than silver. Indeed, the latest tests have shown how copper can serve as a reliable replacement but also can push the technology into new terrain, achieving a world-record efficiency for commercially-sized silicon solar cells of 25.54%. This efficiency surpassed the previous world record of 25.26%, held by LONGi Solar, the world’s leading manufacturer of monocrystalline solar modules.
“In order to limit global warming, we will need to install terawatts of solar panels. This will require a lot of metal,” said Lennon. “Silver is a limited resource, and as it becomes more and more scarce, its price will go up, so the cost of producing solar modules will rise as well. Mining silver from lower-quality ores also produces more emissions, making the problem worse.”
“Copper is much more available as a resource, it’s cheaper, and it’s also easier to recycle. The metal from copper-plated solar modules will be easier to recover from old modules and, therefore, may be more easily recycled in the future. This helps enormously from a sustainability perspective.”

The full article is available here -

Nga mihi nui, Budyong.

Stuart Smith’s talk to an audience in Ashburton in early August raises an important question for New Zealanders. Where does the National Party really stand on the issue of whether we are facing a climate crisis or not. Should we be concerned about the increasing incidence of extreme weather events? You can read about his talk here -
In my personal dealings with Stuart he’s given me the impression that he believes those who warn we are faced with a serious climate crisis are extremists. It is apparent that Stuart believes that the crisis is not nearly as bad as a large majority of the world’s climate scientists are stating. We have to face up to this crisis before we reach an irrecoverable situation. We may be very close to, or have already passed, climate tipping points. We won’t know for sure until we see the evidence in the rear vision mirror – that will be too late unfortunately.
If Stuart was just another local Marlburian who doesn’t accept we’re faced with a crisis I could easily agree to disagree but he is also the Climate Change spokesperson for the National Party and could conceivably end up being responsible for our countries climate change policies sometime in the future. And that is a worry.

So what is he basing his position on? In the above article he uses as evidence for his claim a report titled “The National climate change risk assessment: A case of science denial?” published in June this year by an outfit called “Tailrisk Economics”. Tailrisk economics is a Wellington economics consultancy. It specialises in the economics of low probability, high impact events including financial crises and natural disasters. Their report sets out to challenge the findings of the first National Climate Change Risk Assessment (NCCRA) released by the Ministry for Environment (MfE) in August last year. The full risk assessment is available on the MfE website here –
I’d point out that this assessment was put together with input from more than 400 people. They were from local government, central government, the private sector, primary sector, financial sector, iwi/Māori and universities/research institutes.

In the Tailrisk report they state - “The central message in the assessment is that the climate change risks are very serious, even in the relatively near term. Eight of the 43 sectoral risk assessments found that the consequences of climate change would be extreme by 2050. It is also argued that many risks need to be addressed urgently if the costs are to be mitigated, and that substantial resources need to be made available for additional adaptation research. Our review of the NCCRA found that for the most part, the assessments were not based on the ‘best available evidence’ and often consisted of little more than a recitation of the ‘five horsemen of the apocalypse’: more extreme weather events, more drought, more river flooding, higher sea levels, and more wildfires, followed by unsubstantiated claims that they will have either major or extreme consequences. Contrary to the picture painted in the assessment the science does not show that wind speeds will increase significantly, and river flood risk might actually fall overall. Droughts are likely to become more likely in drought prone areas, and there might be a few more wildfires, but these effects are likely to be outweighed by the positive impacts of climate change, including warmer weather and more fine days in summer, and the impact of carbon fertilisation on primary sector productivity. Sea level rise is a real issue but here the impacts in the NCCRA are overstated.”

You can see the full report here. It is 269 pages long so there’s a lot of material and I haven’t read it all but the summary gives a good idea of the basic thinking of the author/s of the report. The use of the term “catastrophist narrative” is commonly used in the report to describe the concerns expressed in the NCCRA assessment. I’ve picked out one statement from their report to highlight this difference. “RCP 8.5 is also often described as a ‘business as usual’ scenario, which can also be misleading. For most people business as usual is more likely to be interpreted as something like the current level of emissions not a strong growth in emissions.” For me this statement ignores the obvious. Anyone who honestly analyses the data knows that “business as usual” has seen a steady inexorable growth in emissions for the last hundred years at least. That’s exactly what “business as usual” is! You can check the stats here and here -

Over the past 20 years, global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels and industry have been steadily increasing. At the turn of the century, global emissions were roughly 23 billion metric tons, but by 2019 had reached a record high of 36.44 billion metric tons. Projections for 2020 show a reduction of two billion metric tons. The only other time during this period when emissions have dropped was in 2009, which was due to the economic downturn of the global recession.

So, the only time we haven’t had rising emissions this century was a brief flattening off in 2008/09 during the financial crisis and the current drop which took a full scale global pandemic to achieve. Business as usual is rising emissions! And rising emissions is serious cause for concern.
I’m left wondering why the National Party Climate Change spokesperson places so much weight on the Tailrisk report and chooses to place it’s conclusions ahead of those of the majority of reputable climate scientists and the IPCC, all of which are reflected in the NCCRA. Why does the National Party want to associate themselves with this minority viewpoint? I note that Ian Harrison, the Principal of Tailrisk Economic, was criticised in an article published in Newsroom in April last year in the midst of the hard lockdown. Tailrisk had published another report titled “Corona” in which they were highly critical of the Covid modelling being used by the Government. You can view the article here - and the full Tailrisk paper here -

Ian Harrison has used the same approach in both papers, of playing down the threats and criticising and even denigrating those reputable scientists who are voicing their very real concerns.
I have added this information in an attempt to highlight my deep concern about this sort of approach. Playing down the impacts of the climate crisis does not serve the best interests of our community and our country. The pandemic and the climate crisis are both examples of global threats where we are best advised to listen carefully to the scientists who work in those fields and take the contrary advice from economists and politicians with a grain of salt.

How many times have we heard the word unprecedented in the last few months? The European floods, the heat dome in Canada, the fires in Siberia, Turkey and Greece, the drought in Madagascar. Is this all hyperbole and catastrophism or are Stuart and Ian missing what is right in front of them?
​
This cartoon highlights the central issue. Should we be putting the conclusions of a little known Economics consultancy ahead of the warnings laid out in the National Climate Change Risk Assessment and supported by the findings of the IPCC? I know which view I’ll listen to.
​
I've also added below the cartoon a short further analysis by Tom Powell of the Tailrisk report.  This has some important clarification in it.

Nga mihi, Budyong.
​

​FURTHER ANALYSIS BY TOM POWELL

I’ve figured out how Stuart got so far off the science of climate change induced flooding in his Ashburton talk.
The Tailrisk report he references spends lots of time commenting on a 2019 NIWA report evaluating catchments and river flow in New Zealand.  One of the quantities that they looked at was Mean Annual Flood (MAF) which can be estimated for different rivers based upon rainfall and catchment area and is also an output of the climate models.  MAF is simply the peak flood flow of a river that can be expected in any one year.  It is a statistical quantity that is useful in calculating 50 and 100 year floods, but it is not the same.
Ian Harrison of Tailrisk has confused MAF with flood severity, even though the authors of the NIWA report state that these two are not the same and caution readers about the utility of MAF numbers. They are really only useful to hydrologists who want to calculate flood severity using statistical methods.
The climate modelling in the NIWA report shows that MAF increases for a number of west coast rivers in the coming years (‘the wet get wetter’) but actually decreases in most Canterbury rivers. The decrease is likely due to predicted increasing drought in Canterbury. You can imagine that rivers might undergo a number of years of decreased flow due to drought, lowering their MAF, but still host large floods every few years.
Stuart then carried the misinformation from Tailrisk to the Ashburton meeting. Hopefully, when Stuart questions James Shaw in Parliament about the issue (which, in the article, he said he would do) James will know the mistake Stuart (via Ian Harrison) has made in interpreting the NIWA report. A phone call to a hydrologist would have easily clarified all this!

Tom Powell.

Kia ora 

As everyone will no doubt be aware the Climate Crisis has been getting a lot of attention over the last few weeks. We've had the extreme weather events happening here in NZ with major floods in Canterbury, Buller and Marlborough and also unprecedented floods, heatwaves and wildfires occurring in many places around the planet. The stop banks were topped in several places but Marlborough seems to have dodged a bullet with the flood in the Wairau. This was the biggest flood ever recorded in the Wairau River peaking at just over 6000 cumecs at the SH1 bridge. The very heavy rainfall received in different parts of Marlborough resulted in major damage to roading and other infrastructure but it appears that the outcome could have been a lot worse. We can be thankful for the diligence of those responsible for our river defenses. I guess we are now faced with the next question though? Do we keep building our defenses higher and stronger with predictions for ongoing and more extreme rainfall events due to global warming? Or do we have to change our traditional view of river containment and flood management and give the river more room to move? Our local civil defense controller Richard McNamara was interviewed on Radio NZ on July 19th and had some pertinent words to say -  "I'm not really interested in whether you believe in man-made climate change or not. The fact is our climate is changing, we're seeing wild extremes of weather, not only here, you only have to look overseas, look what happened in Germany in the last 5 days, and obviously the wildfires that have occurred in Australia and the United States and Europe etc. We are subject to the extremes of a changing climate and we as a country need to build resilience into that. We need to look at our infrastructure, we need to look at our lifelines, and we need to look at where our communities are located so that we can do our best to protect them and the livelihood that NZ depends on, so, if you're asking me a political question around whether we need to do more in the climate change space and the lifeline space which includes roading access, of course we do, from an emergency management perspective we need to do more because this isn't going to stop. This isn't the one in a hundred year flood which means we get one in a hundred years. It's not the one in a hundred year fire that you get one in a hundred years. These will be recurring and the legacy that we need to leave is one that we've recognised the danger and albeit we've left it a little late we need to work now."

1) Marlborough District Council Long Term Plan 2021-31.

You can see below the response we've received from Council to our submission and presentation at the LTP hearings.

"At the Council meeting on 8 June 2021 your submission was considered by elected members. The following was the outcome of this consideration and has been confirmed at the Council meeting on 24 June 2021:
There is $483,000 budgeted for Climate Change investigations. The group’s concerns are valid and are being taken account of in Council's planning, whether that be our resource management plan, infrastructure design or the broader planning issues involved in new development area considerations. There will be further work done on the benefits and costs of electric and hybrid vehicles to inform our next fleet renewal. The CE’s Council vehicle is a hybrid."       

2)  MDC June 10th Environment Committee meeting – A report was presented titled “Efficient use of water in Marlborough”.

Purpose of Report
1. To provide an update on addressing efficient use of water in the region through resource consenting and monitoring.

Executive Summary
2. Inefficient allocation and use of water is potentially a significant issue in Marlborough, given that many water resources are at or are approaching full allocation.
3. The main efficient use model used by applicants in Marlborough is IrriCalc, which uses existing soils information and modelled climate data to provide estimates of water use for a list of different crop types and provides a reasonable use volume at daily, monthly and yearly rates.
4. To ensure efficient use of water for irrigation, the Council will generally not grant water permits to use water for irrigation purposes at a rate that exceeds the reasonable use calculation provided by IrriCalc.
5. All water take meters provide data via telemetry, manual submissions or on request. These meters should be verified every five years.
6. There are minimum flow requirements for many Marlborough Rivers, with restriction and rationing provisions included in consents to protect these minimum flows.

Background/Context
7. Inefficient allocation and use of water is potentially a significant issue in Marlborough, given that many water resources are at or are approaching full allocation. Once allocation limits have been reached, the Council is unable to continue allocating water to other users. To give effect to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM), there are a number of Objectives and associated Policies in the Proposed Marlborough Environment Plan (PMEP) aimed to achieve efficient water use for any given activity.

It’s good to see that - “Under the proposed Marlborough Environment Plan the aquifer FMU’s also have minimum levels at which water permit holders can be restricted, and along the coast there are also conductivity limits to protect the aquifers from salt water intrusion.”

It’s also interesting to note that the Proposed Marlborough Environment Plan (PMEP) stipulates, in regard to water balloting that -

    • Policy 5.9.1 of the PMEP outlines that once an allocation limit is reached and that part of the water resource is fully allocated, any water that subsequently becomes free to allocate to other users will only be made available to those users through a system of ballot.
    • A ballot is considered by water users to be the most equitable way to determine who should receive the water given the likely competition for the water amongst existing users. It avoids the situation of a person gaining access to water in preference to other potential users based on the nature of the use or because they were first to make an application. The ballot system is yet to be established.
    • The majority of the regions water resources are fully or over-allocated. The Wairau River is the main resource that has allocation available, as well as high flow water in other rivers that is suitable to be taken and stored in storage dams.
    • It should be noted that some of the allocation limits set in the Proposed Marlborough Environment Plan are under appeal, the outcome of which may have an impact on the status of  water allocation in the relevant Freshwater Management Units (FMU’s) in the future.

The full report is available here.  It is item 10 on the June 10th Environment Committee meeting Agenda.            

3) Registration of interest – Bluegums landfill gas utilisation solutions -

The Marlborough District Council is seeking registrations of interest which offer cost effective and environmentally sustainable solutions for the utilisation of landfill gas. The purpose of this registration process is to ascertain market capability and to inform and assist the Council in making their decision as to the nature of further procurement processes (if any) to follow. The contract involves developing, supplying, installing and operating a system that maximises landfill gas destruction whilst putting the gas to a beneficial use such as electricity production.
The Council has included a report entitled Review of Landfill Gas Destruction Options to provide some background and contextual information. Registrations of interest close at 4.00 pm on Thursday 12 August 2021.

NOTE - The option of sending landfill gas to the hospital is no longer available, so that removes one of the main options. The report identifies issues with other options such as electricity or CNG production and leaves me with the impression that the end result of the process may be that the installation of a secondary flare is the likely outcome due to the size of the resource and issues associated with guaranteeing a reliable clean supply of gas.

Below is an extract from the report -

Background
Landfill gas collected at the landfill is currently directed to an enclosed flare for destruction. We understand that as a result of recent issues with the operation of the flare, and in order to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Standard for Air Quality (NES Air) 1 , MDC is seeking options for an additional destruction mechanism for the site.
MDC has requested that the following options for additional landfill gas destruction at the site be  considered:

• Installation of a secondary flare. A secondary flare would provide destruction capacity when the current flare is down.
• Installation of waste to energy heat exchanger or electricity generator. An electricity generator could destroy the landfill gas while creating a source of electricity and/or heat.
• Landfill gas supply to the Wairau Hospital. Landfill gas could be piped to the hospital for use as a fuel for their boilers.
• Any other beneficial uses of the landfill gas. Other beneficial uses may include fuel for other industries in the vicinity of the site or conversion to CNG as a fuel source for vehicles.

We understand that MDC is aiming to have the second landfill gas destruction option in place by the end of 2021.

The objective of this project is to assess potential options for destroying landfill gas and provide advice on the suitability of each option to the site. We understand that MDC’s drivers for the destruction of landfill gas are:
• Control of odour issues at the site.
• Destruction of methane to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the site.
• Compliance with regulatory requirements and management of ETS obligations.
We also understand that MDC is interested in achieving a beneficial use of the landfill gas, if practicable. This objective has also been built into the assessment.

You can download a copy of the full report here -

4) Climate Change page on MDC website –

The council website has a page here with information about MDC actions and policies in regard to Climate Change.
You can also see their regularly updated "Marlborough Climate Impact Report" which is available here. 
There is also a link to a MfE website page titled “Climate Change Projections for the Marlborough Region” that has some useful information including further pages such as “Adapting to Sea Level Rise” and “Climate Change Adaptation and Central Government”.

5) CKM Co-chairperson Tom Powell in local news -

Tom Powell is an optimist.
The world might be in a climate emergency, but the Climate Karanga Marlborough member says his glass is always half full. “You probably talk to climate activists... there’s those that are pessimists, there’s those that don’t see much hope,” Powell said. “I’m hoping for the best, I’m hoping that we can turn this thing around so our children, and our children’s children, can have a future that was as good, maybe better, than ours was. Although, he admits he thinks it might be hard to grow up in a world better than when he grew up.”

The full article printed in Stuff can be viewed here -

6) Businesses for Climate Action - Climate Solutions for Te Tauihu Businesses -

CKM have been approached by Bruce Gilkison who’s involved with a group called “Businesses for Climate Action” (B4CA) that is based in Nelson/Tasman. We're planning to have a Zoom discussion with representatives from B4CA at our next meeting. Below is some info from their website and you can view the site here -

In Te Tauihu (the top of the south) local businesses are taking the lead in creating a zero carbon Aotearoa within a resilient sustainable economy, adaptable to both the opportunities and disruptions of climate change. Together we can transform our business community to create lasting, positive impact. The best place to start is to measure a business’s carbon emissions, so you know how big they are and where they’re coming from.Our aim is to have 1000 businesses across Te Tauihu measure their carbon footprint by the end of 2021.  This is an ambitious target but slowing climate change is a big challenge.  Businesses that measure their footprints will learn about their emissions – how large they are, and where they come from – and many of these businesses will be inspired to reduce them… perhaps even to ‘net zero’. So the greater the number of businesses that measure their emissions, the closer the whole region could get to zero. To that end, we’re facilitating workshops, seminars and events that provide connection, education and inspiration.

7) Woodbourne NZ Defense Force Coal boilers.

Last year the NZ Defense Force (NZDF) applied to the MDC for a resource consent to renew its permit to discharge to air from its operations at Woodbourne. This includes permission to discharge from two 1,172kW coal fired boilers. According to EECA these are the only two coal fired burners operated by the NZDF in NZ. CKM and Coal Action Network Aotearoa (CANA) have been working together to investigate what plans the NZDF are making to replace these coal fired boilers with more a more suitable low emissions option. The current government agreed in November 2020 to establish "The Carbon Neutral Government Programme" They state - "This is a long-term work programme that aims to make a number of government organisations carbon neutral from 2025, and help them accelerate their emissions reduction journeys." This means these government organisations, including the NZDF will be required to offset emissions after 2025 to achieve carbon neutrality.
In response to an OIA request MBIE released information about progress with this program in June in which it states:
This overall ambition would reflect the intent of the Carbon Neutral Government Programme and our public announcements by:

• showing overall leadership by reducing the government’s own emissions, in order to demonstrate what is possible to other sectors in the New Zealand economy, and
• following best practice of reducing emissions as much as possible first before offsetting.

"Carbon Neutral Government Programme" participants’ gross emissions reduction targets should:

• exclude the use of offsets or removals (e.g. department-owned forests)
• reflect absolute emissions as opposed to intensity-based emissions (e.g. total tonnes of abated emissions rather than emissions per Full-Time Equivalent, FTE)
• use scenarios that lead to the earliest emissions reductions and the least cumulative emissions.

MDC have notified us that the NZDF application will not be publicly notified. With the current state of the RMA this means the resource consent is highly likely to be approved. It is interesting to note the relevant wording from the Act that is referenced in the "Notification Decision" from MDC - Note: Burning coal and diesel fossil fuels will release greenhouse gases. The Council “must not have regard to the effects of such a discharge on climate change . . .” (Section 70A of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA)).

The Government is making changes to resource management legislation which mean that greenhouse gas emissions can be taken into account, but these changes will not come into effect in time to influence the resource consent process.

Tim Jones of CANA has told us that he expects the NZ Defence Force will replace coal burning at Woodbourne with renewable energy sources long before the 35-year term of new resource consent application is up, but nevertheless, it's of great concern that it's still possible in 2021 for the use of coal to be consented for such a long period. "It's time to phase out the mining and use of coal everywhere in Aotearoa," Tim Jones said. "If this Government is serious about the climate emergency it has declared, it has to close the regulatory loopholes that let coal projects slip through the cracks." CANA is calling for the Government to announce a ban on new and expanded coal mines and is working with other groups for an end to exploring, prospecting and mining fossil fuels in New Zealand.

You can sign the "No New Fossil Fuel Permits or Expansions in Aotearoa" petition here -

This is an area we need to follow up on to check what progress has been made with phasing out the coal boilers.

You can view the full MBIE "Report on Implementation and Further Decisions on the Carbon Neutral Government Programme" here - 

8) Forest and Bird report on forest damage caused by browsing animals.

Culling deer, possums, goats, feral pigs and other invasive mammals could let established native forests recover to the point where they sucked in 15 per cent of New Zealand’s yearly greenhouse gas emissions, says a report from Forest and Bird.
The conservation advocacy group has used a report by Crown science agency Scion, as well as independent estimates of the numbers of feral mammals and other information, to estimate how much eradicating pests could benefit the climate.
More than a decade of monitoring at native forest plots scattered the length of the country shows New Zealand’s established forests are in equilibrium – sucking in roughly as much carbon dioxide as they release.

The full article is available here. The scientific research paper is available here.
And you can listen to Kevin Hackwell from Forest and Bird talking about the report on Radio NZ here -

9) EV Enhanced and Kiwi Ingenuity -

I wanted to give a plug for the company "EV Enhanced" in Christchurch to highlight their efforts to extend the life of EV's and reuse EV batteries for solar systems when they are no longer suitable for vehicle use. They are a good example of Kiwi ingenuity.
On their website they state -

We are here to develop and offer upgrades that enable existing electric vehicles(EV) to remain useable, relevant and desirable as they age. By applying current technology, it is very feasible to make these vehicles significantly better, faster and with longer-range than when they were sold new.The intention is to extend the useable lifetime of these vehicles as much as possible, firstly for the early adopters that originally purchased these vehicles and then for the following owners as they are ready to embrace this superior technology.
You can check out their site here -

10) ​ Who's insuring coastal New Zealand and will they continue?

That's the question posed by Canterbury University Lecturer of Civil Systems Engineering Tom Logan in a very informative piece for The Conversation. For those living in coastal properties around New Zealand, the threat of climate change is very real and Tom is asking where is the line for insurers? And who will be providing compensation if insurers balk at the risks?
He also talked to Jesse Mulligan on Radio NZ about the issues he's raised in the article. You can listen to the interview here -
This topic has been getting plenty of attention lately. There is also a very good article in the July 17 copy of the Listener. One of the ideas being discussed is that of “climate leases”.
This topic was also addressed in another RNZ interview in February this year.
Here's an extract from that interview -

Belinda Storey is a climate economist who suggests there should be a legal framework for properties to be converted from freehold to leasehold when escalating hazards from sea level rise leave homes suitable only for temporary use, or retreat. Legal frameworks for changing a property from freehold to leasehold haven’t caught up with climate change threat, she says.
“There is a time limit being put on locations that have escalating hazards, but at the moment our legal structures in terms of property rights assume that we can remain in place indefinitely.”
Under leasehold someone else owns the land and the house is owned by the buyer of the leasehold. To convert an at-risk property to leasehold would require some form of compensation to the owner, she says. The buyer of the land would most likely be local or central government – part of her ongoing research is to develop tools to assess what the value of such land is. Currently it is significantly over-valued and coastal properties continue to attract a premium, she says.
“The longer we leave it the worse the problem becomes, so the market isn’t taking into account these risks. “You’ve got this bigger and bigger accumulation of assets and unfortunately there is an expectation that when disaster strikes someone’s going to step in.” Governments feel powerless to not intervene when a disaster strikes, she says.
Even when land is deemed to have a limited life span because of erosion or flood risk – values don’t plummet, she says. “Everyone assumes that it plummets, what’s surprising about this, and this is partly why I think we need to intervene, is that we are really good at ignoring risks.”
Lisa Ellis, professor of philosophy at the University of Otago, told Nine to Noon she agrees with the leasehold idea.
“I love this idea of moving from freehold to leasehold because the fact of the matter is in the face of climate change we are not in fact relating to each other as independent freeholders at all. “We are facing these problems together, we rely on councils and central government for infrastructure.” The kind of transparency offered by leasehold would discourage risky developments, she says. “Right now people who are considering doing new developments in risky areas they are basically playing chicken with the rate payers and the tax payers, expecting that the lovely history of solidaristic support that New Zealand has will bail them out.”

11) NZ's first electric powered aircraft popular in Kapiti -         

With the future of the Kāpiti Coast Airport up in the air and the Climate Change Commission's recent report on its 2022-2025 emissions reduction plan including some electrification of short haul domestic air travel in the demonstration path from 2030 onwards, the visit is hoped to help kickstart New Zealand's electric aviation revolution. The Pipistrel Alpha Electro aircraft Rerenga Hiko ('Flying Electric') arrived disassembled in Kāpiti on Friday, June 11 and has been fully booked by aero club members around the lower North Island and public passenger flights since its arrival.
At a Future of Flying event last Friday, Kāpiti Districts Aero Club president Tony Quayle said, "While this is the end of the aircraft's first trial at Kāpiti, it is only the beginning of electric aviation locally. Designed as a training aircraft, the lithium batteries last up to 90 minutes, and can be charged in under an hour.
With no petrol required and the only liquid in the aircraft being a coolant for the motor, the aircraft costs just $75 an hour to operate. "We are able to operate this aircraft at $75 an hour, whereas a Cessna 152, our standard training aircraft, is $200 an hour.
"There is a dramatic difference in cost in flying this aircraft."
Brought to New Zealand by ElectricAir owner Gary Freedman after finding he couldn't reconcile driving an electric car but flying in a petrol aircraft, Gary has found interest in the aircraft has been huge.
With Aotearoa having one of the highest rates of short haul flights in the world per capita and goals of achieving a 100 per cent renewable electricity grid, ElectricAir sees electric aviation as a no-brainer for New Zealand.

The full article can be viewed here -

12) Sounds Air plan to fly electric plane by 2026 -

Electric commercial passenger aircraft could be landing at an airport near you within five years. Electric aircraft will offer a smoother, quieter ride, with a smaller carbon footprint, and airfares are expected to cost the same as on a comparable gas turbine engine aircraft.
In its final advice to the Government on Aotearoa's roadmap to reducing carbon emissions, the Climate Change Commission said short-haul aviation, such as a trip from Wellington to Nelson, will begin converting to electric aircraft from 2030. Marlborough-based regional airline Sounds Air has even more ambitious plans, with a goal of flying electric passenger aircraft on regional routes by 2026.

To read the full press release, click here.

Below is an extract from the Sounds Air website and here is a recent statement from Sounds Air about the development -

In line with Sounds Air's goal to become the first New Zealand airline to offer zero-emission flights, attached is a 'Press Release from Heart Aerospace' dated 13th July 2021. This is a huge development milestone in the goal of achieving Zero Emission flights world-wide, and in New Zealand.
Sounds Air is very excited to be part of this world leading technology and the order for 200 ES-19’s by United Airlines cements the future of this project.
It is so easy to say "too hard" or "not in my lifetime" but Sounds Air says "if not us - then who"? As a board and company we are dedicated to being at the forefront of this technology in New Zealand and wish Heart Aerospace all success as they lead the way towards Zero Emission flight.

13) Report finds biogas a viable alternative for New Zealand -

This country has the potential to produce enough renewable gas to supply three quarters of all commercial users, writes Nicholas Pointon. A part-government funded report from the country's biggest gas distributor, First Gas, engineering firm Beca, and Fonterra, found that 4 percent of the country's energy related emissions could be avoided by low-emitting, renewable alternatives. One avenue being pursued is anaerobic digestion, whereby organic waste from kitchens and the farm is broken down and turned into biogas, which is then cleaned and upgraded into biomethane. This gas could then be easily transported within the current gas pipeline network, without the need for changes to the infrastructure. Beca's industrial sustainability lead, Eleanor Grant, said widespread use of biomethane would have significant environmental benefits.

The full article can be viewed here -

14) The Anthropocene: Where on Earth are we Going?

Will Steffen is a well respected scientist based at the Australian National University in Canberra. His research interests span a broad range within the fields of climate and Earth System science, with an emphasis on incorporation of human processes in Earth System modelling and analysis; and on sustainability and climate change, with a focus on urban systems. The Royal Society of Victoria recently released a video with Will speaking frankly about the challenges associated with the climate crisis that humanity are facing. I highly recommend you putting aside the 42 minutes required to listen to it. The video is available here - 

Here is the preamble to the video - 

Human pressures on the planet as a whole – the ‘Earth System’ – have now become so great that scientists have proposed that we have left the Holocene, the 11,700-year geologic epoch that has been humanity’s accommodating home, and have entered a new geologic epoch, the Anthropocene, characterised by extremely rapid changes to the climate system driven primarily by human emissions of greenhouse gases and growing degradation of the planet’s biosphere, driven by a range of direct and indirect human pressures. Where is the Anthropocene headed? The current trajectory of the Earth System is a rapid exit from the Holocene, accelerating towards a much hotter climate system and a degraded, ill-functioning biosphere. Perhaps most concerning is a possible ‘fork in the road’ beyond which lies ‘Hothouse Earth’. The key element of this trajectory is a ‘tipping cascade’, in which a series of interlinked tipping points – the melting of polar ice, the conversion of forest biomes to grasslands or savannas, changes in ocean and atmospheric circulation – take control of the trajectory of the Earth System and move it to a much hotter, biodiversity-impoverished, but stable state. Professor Will Steffen (Climate Council of Australia, Australian National University) argues that avoiding this possible tipping cascade requires fundamental changes to human societies. These changes include not only advances in technologies but also more fundamental changes in societal structures and core values.

And here is a quote on the topic from the book “The Systems View of Life” by Fritjof Capra and Pier Luigi Luisi.

“...Our world today is dominated by a global economic system with disastrous social and environmental impacts – ‘predatory capitalism’…. We are the only species on Earth who destroys its own habitat, threatening countless other species with extinction in the process.”

15) Aboriginal Wisdom shared -

The previous item asking "Where on Earth are we going" and this item are strongly linked. I grew up in West Australia from the age of 3 until I left as an 18 year old. My early schooling was in a small country town in the wheatbelt called Pingelly where there was a large reserve on the edge of town where the local Noongar people lived. Noongar people are the traditional owners of the south west region of WA, but in our town were banished to the "Reserve". I knew the road that went to the "Reserve" but never went down that road. A white person couldn't go there without a permit.
We would all do well to listen to the simple but profound wisdom being shared by the aboriginal people. Humanity must rediscover it's "connection to Country" as they call it.  Here is a quote from a Noongar elder published in the book, “Elders: Wisdom from Australia’s Indigenous Leaders.”

"We’re only here for a short amount of time to do what we’ve been put here to do, which is to look after the country. We’re only a tool in the cycle of things. ...(we) go out into the world and help keep the balance of nature. It’s a big cycle of living with the land, and then eventually going back to it…”
Here is a short 15 minute video clip with Marlikka Perdrisat giving her keynote address on "Country" to the recent Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) Summit in Adelaide. Her presence is powerful and her message moving.

Here is a brief bio -
Marlikka Perdrisat is a Nyikina Warrwa and Wangkumara Barkindji woman and has attained her Bachelor of Commerce, completing her Juris Doctor in Law, with the promise of starting her Postgraduate Doctorate in 2022. Marlikka works across academia, film, and law to spread awareness of First Law, the guiding principles that First Peoples generated over aeons to govern the diverse bioregions within the land mass currently known as Australia.  
Marlikka has been employed for the past four years with Gilbert + Tobin an award-winning Australian law firm, she is currently on secondment to the Environmental Defenders Office. Marlikka is also a digital storyteller and researcher with the Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council, an alliance of Traditional Owners who have come together to stand with One Mind and One Voice as a united Council of Senior Elders from Traditional Owner Groups of the King Sound, Fitzroy River, and its Catchment.

16) Proposed Legal Definition of Ecocide released by Stop Ecocide Foundation -

The Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide convened by our foundation has completed its deliberations.  The proposed definition of ecocide as a 5th crime under the Rome Statute is now available for states to consider - and for civil society to demand. 
We think the drafting panel has achieved something remarkable - we love this legal definition!  It’s well pitched between what needs to be done to protect ecosystems and what will be acceptable to states - it’s both bold and workable at same time.  Governments and activists alike will take it seriously. 

Here is a copy of the draft definition of Ecocide.

1. For the purpose of this Statute, “ecocide” means 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.
2. For the purpose of paragraph 1:
a. “Wanton” means with reckless disregard for damage which would be clearly excessive in         
relation to the social and economic benefits anticipated;
b. “Severe” means damage which involves very serious adverse changes, disruption or harm
to any element of the environment, including grave impacts on human life or natural,             
cultural or economic resources;
c. “Widespread” means damage which extends beyond a limited geographic area, crosses
state boundaries, or is suffered by an entire ecosystem or species or a large number of             
human beings;
d. “Long-term” means damage which is irreversible or which cannot be redressed through         
natural recovery within a reasonable period of time;
e. “Environment” means the earth, its biosphere, cryosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere and         
atmosphere, as well as outer space.

This is a very encouraging development after a lot of effort from many people. Hopefully this draft is adopted and the people of our planet get the opportunity to hold to account those who do serious and long lasting damage to the environment that all life depends on for survival. You can read more about this on the Ecocide Law website here -

17) The upcoming moon wobble and what we can expect -

I found this item from RNZ recently very interesting. Research shows that the regular moon "wobble" will exacerbate sea level rise impacts for a period of about 18 years after 2035.

A new study on high tides and flooding in the US made headlines this past week.
But rather than blaming the usual villain, climate change, coverage of the study instead pointed the finger at the Moon - the study has mentioned a "wobble" in the moon's orbit that could have a significant impact on the number of natural disasters the world faces. The Moon wobble is a regular occurrence climate scientist Professor David Noone told Jesse Mulligan.“The idea of the wobble is not that the moon itself actually wobbles, but the way in which the moon influences and affects our tides that changes with time,” Prof Noone says. It’s part of a regular cycle that happens every 18 to 19 years, he says.
“On that 18-year cycle there are times when the high tides and low tides are much more different from one another. “And there are other times in that cycle where the high tides and low tides are quite similar so the magnitude of the tides are large or small.” We are currently on a downward trend, he says. “The difference between our high tides and low tides, it's actually quite large at the moment.  So, we're headed into a period where the difference between a high tides and low tides will be more modest.” What the researchers at the University of Hawaii have done is connect this natural phenomenon and seas level rise, he says. “The idea there is quite simple that if sea level is slowly but surely rising, and then on top of that the high tides are particularly high. They're the moments when we would expect coastal flooding to be most likely.” Because we are going into a phase of decreasing high tides at the moment, it almost exactly offsets the increase in tidal height overall by sea level rise, Prof Noone says.
“What's really quite problematic that this new research has pointed out is that after about 2035, these two effects sea level rise and the now increasing rates of high tides will combine and we get a double whammy. “The higher tides are increasing, as well as the tides overall are increasing because of sea level rise. And we see a dramatic change in the likelihood of flooding because of that combination.”

You can listen to the full interview here -

18) World ‘must step up preparations for extreme heat’ -

The world needs to step up preparations for extreme heat, which may be hitting faster and harder than previously forecast, a group of leading climate scientists have warned in the wake of freakishly high temperatures in Canada and the US.
Last week’s heat dome above British Columbia, Washington state and Portland, Oregon smashed daily temperature records by more than 5C (9F) in some places – a spike that would have been considered impossible two weeks ago, the experts said, prompting concerns the climate may have crossed a dangerous threshold.
“We thought we knew what was going on … Then this heatwave came which was way above the upper bound. With the knowledge of last year this was impossible. This was surprising and shaking,” he said. “We are now much less certain about heatwaves than we were two weeks ago. We are very worried about the possibility of this happening everywhere but we just don’t know yet.”

The full article can be viewed here -

19) Climate Reality Check 2020.I had an item in the March newsletter earlier this year about the Breakthrough National Centre for Climate Restoration based in Australia. They have now set up a website called CLIMATE REALITY CHECK which has some very good information and resource material available on it.

Climate Reality Check 2020 draws together current climate research from around the world to present 20 critical observations, insights and understandings to help inform and guide the stark choices that now stand before us.

Here are a couple of quotes from scientists who have endorsed the Climate Reality Check information.

“If we continue down the present path "there is a very big risk that we will just end our civilisation.  The human species will survive somehow but we will destroy almost everything we have built up over the last two thousand years.”
PROF. HANS JOACHIM SCHELLNHUBER. DIRECTOR EMERITUS OF THE POTSDAM INSTITUTE.

“Ten years ago, this Climate Reality Check report would have been seen as alarmist. The fact that it would now be seen as a reasonable statement of the current situation should be a wake up call for all the Nero’s watching as Rome burns. The Climate Reality Check brings together multiple lines of evidence that together point at a Climate Emergency. A significant part of an appropriate response to this emergency is to reach net zero emissions as soon as possible, not as soon as convenient”.
​Professor A.J. Pitman. Director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes, The University of New South Wales, Sydney.

Recognise the Impact | Recalculate the Risk | Reframe the Action

Climate Reality Check draws together current climate science research to present 20 critical understandings, observations and insights to help inform and guide the stark choices that now stand before us.
Climate Reality Check is a resource designed to help climate practitioners, advocates, journalists, business leaders and policymakers better understand and address the alarming mismatch between the current climate risks and considerably inadequate level of climate action.
The underestimation of the seriousness of the climate reality today poses grave consequences for the safety, health and well-being of our societies, the capacity of governments to protect the people, and regional and global stability.

SUMMARY
    • Presents a sound scientific foundation to increase vital awareness and help frame effective strategy.
    • Highlights major trends and impacts to emphasise urgent and severe vulnerabilities.
    • Confronts risks and threats with rigour and unrestrained honesty.
    • Identifies critical action gaps essential for global security and protection.

The full report is available to download or view online here -

20) UK failing to protect against climate dangers, advisers warn.

The UK government is failing to protect people from the fast-rising risks of the climate crisis, from deadly heatwaves to power blackouts, its official climate advisers have warned.
The climate change committee said action to improve the nation’s resilience is not keeping pace with the impacts of global heating, many of which are already causing harm. The CCC’s experts said they were frustrated by the “absolutely illogical” lack of sufficient action on adaptation, particularly as acting is up to 10 times more cost-effective than not doing so.
They said climate change was here now. In 2020’s heatwave, 2,500 people died in the UK, but the CCC said the government had not heeded their warnings for more than a decade that homes must be made easier to cool, such as by using shutters.
Cutting carbon emissions remained vital to avoid the worst climate impacts, the CCC said, but some were inevitable. It highlighted a series of risks that required action within two years at the latest. These included damage to woodlands and peatlands by high temperatures and drought that would prevent the UK meeting its goal of net zero emissions by 2050, because these areas would be unable to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.

The full article is available here -

21) Joint NASA, NOAA Study Finds Earth's Energy Imbalance Has Doubled.

Researchers have found that Earth’s energy imbalance approximately doubled during the 14-year period from 2005 to 2019.
Earth's climate is determined by a delicate balance between how much of the Sun's radiative energy is absorbed in the atmosphere and at the surface and how much thermal infrared radiation Earth emits to space. A positive energy imbalance means the Earth system is gaining energy, causing the planet to heat up. The doubling of the energy imbalance is the topic of a recent study, the results of which were published June 15 in Geophysical Research Letters.

The full article can be found here -

22) Carbon Fee and Dividend support -

The famous climate scientist James Hansen has been a strong proponent of the Carbon Fee and Dividend approach to carbon management. He recently posted this item. Fareed Zakaria is a presenter from CNN.

"Fareed Zakaria attracts high level guests to his program because of its reach and objectivity.  He lets his guests have the last word on their topic.  Yet Zakaria’s interpretations of issues of the day – which he labels as “his take” – stand out as especially penetrating and insightful.
On Sunday this week Zakaria ended his program with a concise description of an effective approach to address climate change – in just a few minutes he described how carbon fee-and-dividend could be made near-global.  I won’t try to summarize his take – it’s impossible to match his clarity and brevity, which includes great illustrations.
In contrast to carbon fee-and-dividend, most governments prefer the “red-tape” approach: increased government regulations with the government picking technology winners and losers.
Governments have followed the red tape approach for three decades, ever since the Framework Convention on Climate Change was approved by almost all nations in 1992.  The 1997 Kyoto Protocol and the 2015 Paris Agreement are designed to allow all nations to follow the red tape approach within their countries.  As a result, global carbon emissions have continued to rise.
The red tape approach cannot work because it ignores economics.  It lets the fossil fuel industry continue to use the atmosphere – somewhere – as a free dumping ground for carbon waste.  Fossil fuels might be regulated away in some nations, but the fuels will be burned elsewhere.
Fossil fuels are amazingly effective in raising living standards; one gallon (3.7 liters) of gasoline (petrol) contains the work equivalent of 400 hours of labor by a healthy adult.  That beneficial property of fossil fuels – we now realize – carries with it an existential threat.

Continued carbon emissions will make low latitudes of Earth uncomfortable if not uninhabitable­.  Coastal cities worldwide will begin to go underwater during the lifetime of today’s young people.  Emigration pressures from low latitudes and coastal regions may make the planet ungovernable, and autocratic governments will be more likely to gain and retain power."

The full statement by Fareed can be viewed here -

The full release from James Hansen can be downloaded here -  It is available under the heading “Public Square – Global Problems require a Global Solution.” posted on June 24th.

23) Bottom Trawling and carbon dioxide -

New science shows that bottom trawling is not only extremely damaging to ocean biodiversity but it also releases more carbon dioxide than global aviation (at pre-Covid levels)
It’s been well established by now that the agricultural systems producing our food contribute at least one fifth of global anthropogenic carbon emissions—and up to a third if waste and transportation are factored in. A troubling new report points to a previously overlooked source: an industrial fishing process practiced by dozens of countries around the world, including the United States, China, and the E.U.
The study, published in the scientific journal Nature, is the first to calculate the carbon cost of bottom trawling, in which fishing fleets drag immense weighted nets along the ocean floor, scraping up fish, shellfish and crustaceans along with significant portions of their habitats.
According to calculations conducted by the report’s 26 authors, bottom trawling is responsible for one gigaton of carbon emissions a year—a higher annual total than (pre-pandemic) aviation emissions. Not only does the practice contribute to climate change, it is extremely damaging to ocean biodiversity—the “equivalent of ploughing an old-growth forest into the ground, over and over and over again until there is nothing left” according to lead author Enric Sala, a marine biologist who is also National Geographic’s Explorer in Residence.

The full article can be viewed here -

24) Mining holds the key to a green future – no wonder human rights activists are worried -

The extract below is from an article written by Kevin Watkins who is chief executive of Save the Children UK and highlights one of the issues we all need to face as we try to decarbonise. For me it also highlights the fact that we can't keep consuming unhindered on the assumption that the energy required to feed our addiction can be replaced from renewable sources. The question has to be asked "can we reduce our consumption and effectively manage a program of energy descent to save our planet?" 

"Can we decarbonise power and transport in time to avoid climate catastrophe? That will depend partly on the governance of a global mining sector tarnished by accusations of human rights abuse, environmental damage and financial corruption.
Expanding renewable energy is a mineral intensive enterprise. Nature might provide the solar radiation and wind providing renewable energy, but the arteries through which the electricity flows are made of copper – and lots of it. Wind turbine gearboxes need manganese, platinum and rare earth magnets. EV batteries are made with lithium, cobalt and nickel. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), a mid-century zero-carbon world will take a sixfold increase in the production of these and other transition minerals by 2030. Prices are already surging.
The supply chains through which transition minerals flow are highly concentrated. Small groups of countries – the Democratic Republic of the Congo (cobalt), Indonesia and the Philippines (nickel), Australia and Chile (lithium) – dominate production. But Chinese mining companies are rapidly increasing investments.
In processing, China is the main game in town. Its refining companies account for more than half of the world’s cobalt and lithium production. Global value chains for EV batteries are dominated from top to bottom by Chinese suppliers. They account for more than 80% of the raw materials for advanced battery materials.
Cop26 provides an opportunity for the EU, US and China to forge a new multilateralism. The starting point should be a shift towards mandatory human rights due diligence reporting. The EU has already announced an intent to move in this direction, potentially opening the door to sanctions against companies for breach of due diligence and legal redress for communities. The US Securities and Exchange Commission is similarly planning to make environmental and human rights disclosures mandatory.
None of this is a substitute for effective national governance. But mandatory human rights reporting, allied to strengthened disclosure on shell companies and ownership of offshore enterprises, would help raise reporting standards and strengthen the hands of local communities and others defending human rights. The alternative is a wave of activist protest, legal challenge and investor hesitancy that will slow the development of the mineral resources needed to secure our climate future.
That is an outcome none of us can afford. With the right governance we can ensure that the green revolution in energy does not become a new resource curse for the poor – without it, we all lose.

The full article can be viewed here -

25) Big oil and gas kept a dirty secret for decades. Now they may pay the price -

After a century of wielding extraordinary economic and political power, America’s petroleum giants face a reckoning for driving the greatest existential threat of our lifetimes.
An unprecedented wave of lawsuits, filed by cities and states across the US, aim to hold the oil and gas industry to account for the environmental devastation caused by fossil fuels – and covering up what they knew along the way.
Coastal cities struggling to keep rising sea levels at bay, midwestern states watching “mega-rains” destroy crops and homes, and fishing communities losing catches to warming waters, are now demanding the oil conglomerates pay damages and take urgent action to reduce further harm from burning fossil fuels.
But, even more strikingly, the nearly two dozen lawsuits are underpinned by accusations that the industry severely aggravated the environmental crisis with a decades-long campaign of lies and deceit to suppress warnings from their own scientists about the impact of fossil fuels on the climate and dupe the American public.
The full article can be viewed here -

26) How to Live in a Climate ‘Permanent Emergency’ -

This is a very interesting article written by David Wallace-Wells looking at the Permanent Emergency that is now happening around us and the challenges of adaptation arising from the emergency. Here’s an extract from the article.

Simply because tens of millions of people in Canada and the U.S. are living through the heat dome, however many thousands die from it, and will survive the fire season to come, however much they choke on its smoke, it would be criminal to look back on what is happening now and will happen in the months ahead and think, “We managed.”
For years now, hyperbolic headliners have used those kinds of disasters of warming to declare that the age of climate change had arrived. This year suggests the possibility of a new arrival — the age of adaptation, or what climate-and-energy researcher Juan Moreno-Cruz yesterday called “climate realism.” Alarmism, he said, was “useless,” and even efforts to decarbonize have served as a kind of distraction. “Stop dreaming up climate solutions, think of climate managing strategies,” he admonished.”
“Talking climate solutions has left us unprepared for actual climate change. We keep running models and fighting over which “solution” is the best, but we have done nothing to address the impacts of climate change. Managing climate change is not as sexy as solving climate change, but it’s what we need. Yes, we need real action to achieve deep decarbonization in our economy. There is no amount of adaptation we can do if we don‘t get emissions under control. But we already baked in so much warming we need to deal with it now. We painted ourselves into this corner, and we need to navigate our way out of it. Dreaming about a future carbon-free system will do nothing for people in India and Pakistan today.”

The full article is available here -
​
That's it for this newsletter.
Nga mihi nui, Budyong.

Here is a mid-year newsletter with plenty of material if you have a wet day and want to browse. You may find one or two items of interest for you?

1) Marlborough District Council Long Term Plan 2021 - 2031 -

CKM made a submission to the LTP and also took the opportunity to speak at the LTP Hearings. Councillors were attentive and respectful and our input seemed to be well received. You can view the submission and the presentation made at the LTP Hearings session here -

2) NIWA Report presented to MDC councillors and staff -

This report on Climate Change projections and impacts for Marlborough was prepared for Council by NIWA (NIWA report 2121031WN) in order to inform Council of areas where Climate change impacts may require further investigation and actions. The report summarises likely changes in temperature, rainfall, drought, and sea level rise in the Marlborough District over the remainder of this century, and discusses the probable impacts of these changes on river flows, droughts, forestry, horticulture, and ecosystem and human health.
It was presented to the Environment Committee by Gregor Macara on April 22nd, 2021.

It's well worth looking at just to see the the Executive Summary. Drought potential is projected to increase across Marlborough, with annual accumulated Potential Evapotranspiration Deficit (PED) totals increasing with time and increasing greenhouse gas concentrations. By 2040, PED totals are projected to increase by 50-150 mm. By 2090, PED totals are projected to increase by 50-200 mm (medium concentration pathway) or 75-250 mm (high concentration pathway). Another significant projection is that mean annual low flow (MALF) magnitudes are expected to decrease across both greenhouse gas concentration pathways and future time periods for most catchments. A decrease in MALF is expected to exceed 50% for most of the river systems in the region with increased greenhouse gas concentration and time.

The full pdf file can be downloaded here -

3) Gravel Bed Rivers National Project Update to Council -

A declining trend in Wairau Aquifer levels has been observed at western Wairau Plain MDC monitor wells since 1973, which pre-dates the Marlborough wine industry. While the declining trend of around 1 metre over 50 years may not appear large at an average of 20 mm/year, the risk is if it continues over the very long-term, groundwater springs may dry up and ultimately there could be seawater intrusion of our coastal aquifers. Given the depleted storage volume of the Wairau Aquifer after a series of dry summers since 2014 and minor Wairau River activity through the past winter recharge period, current levels of consented abstraction are also compounding the issue. Identifying the drivers via the Gravel Bed Rivers Project (GBR) is a priority project for MDC, given the longer term regional scale implications for flood control, reliability of consented water consents, wetland health and security of coastal groundwater supply. The causes of the decline are known to be incremental and long-acting. These drivers have been actively investigated over the past decade, but research is challenging because most of what goes on is hidden beneath the surface with measurements often indirect in nature.

This is very interesting research for anyone concerned about the future reliability of water supplied from the Wairau Aquifer, as the impacts projected in the NIWA report take effect in the next few decades.

You can see the original report to the MDC Environment Committee from June 2020 on the MDC website here (Agenda item 5) and the update is available from the April 2nd, 2021 Environment Committee meeting here (Agenda item 4)

4) Another Stuff article from Tom -

Tom has just had another article printed in the local paper and on Stuff. The latest one is titled "Have you heard about the Climate Emergency?". It's well worth a read if you haven't already seen it.
You can check it out here -  

5) Does Petroleum Industry Spying Really Matter?
Some of you will know Dr Terrence Loomis who was a CKM member until recently before moving back to the Gisborne area. He recently had an Opinion piece printed on the Scoop website of which there is an extract below.

Nicky Hager’s latest revelations about security firm Thompson and Clark’s ‘spying’ on climate activists and environmental organisations on behalf of the oil and gas industry and big GHG emitters makes entertaining reading.
But it does beg the question “So what?”
After all, most of this was already known from media coverage and academic research. Certainly environmental groups knew they were being watched and their communications monitored. Responses to Hager’s report seem to suggest this kind of clandestine information gathering was repugnant, immoral, even dangerous because the spies were photographing school children. Or because petroleum companies used it to thwart protest actions.
It IS about the exercise of power, I’ll grant you that.
The real reason such practices are dangerous and deserve exposure is what petroleum companies and PEPANZ actually do with the information besides preventing disruption to their conferences and business operations.
You can read the full Opinion piece here -

6) Our food is an existential threat beyond climate change -

This article was written by Jack Santa Barbara from Tasman who is a active member of the Nelson/Tasman Climate Forum.

Studies show our food system is unsustainable; it will not endure. We will only embrace the solutions if we first recognise the serious dilemma we have created with our economic success. The Climate Change Commission has received over 15,000 replies to its Draft Advice Report regarding how NZ can deal with climate change. This level of response bodes well for how many of us are engaged with this important issue.

But what about all the other existential threats that we continue to face which are not getting attention? In point of fact, there is not a single mainstream human designed system we rely on daily that is sustainable.
If something is unsustainable it means it will not last. If none of the systems we rely on daily are sustainable, what are the implications for our wellbeing if they cannot endure?

Take our most basic energy needs – food production. It takes more energy to produce our food than the food provides. Think about that for a moment. Our food system is unsustainable; it will not endure. This conclusion was reached by both a United Nations study, and another by the World Business Council for Social Development.

The full article is available here -

7) Food and Fossil Fuels -

The fossil fuels required to grow, harvest, process, and distribute food makes up a significant part of the food Footprint. Although it wasn’t always the case, today we are firmly in the age of fossil fuel. The fossil fuels used to grow our food are invisible when we are enjoying our meals, which is why we use infographics to reveal how much fuel it takes to provide the food on our plates. They depict how many calories of fossil fuel are used, from farm to store, for every calorie of food we consume. This does not include the additional energy required to transport the food from the store nor to power your lights, stove, refrigerator, or dishwasher at home.

Fossil fuels are everywhere, and they are one of the main reasons that humanity is in ecological overshoot. In industrial agriculture, crops are dependent on large amounts of nitrogen fertilizers, petroleum-based agricultural chemicals, pumps that run irrigation, diesel for machinery, and oil for food distribution across the world. The green revolution focused on creating exponentially higher crop yields with decreased dependency on human labor, but it also boosted our food system’s dependence on fossil fuels.

While our food system can provide more food, it is now more dependent than ever on finite resources and inexpensive fossil fuel energy. It is no wonder that, in many cases, our food is embedded with more “fossil fuel calories” than nutritional calories. For example, in Slovenia it takes 7 calories of fossil fuel to provide every 1 calorie of meat consumed. The number of calories of fossil fuel required varies by food group and among countries.
What does moving away from fossil fuel-dependent agriculture mean for us? It starts with recognizing that we cannot take our current situation for granted. Our current food and resource security is heavily subsidized by cheap and versatile fossil fuel, which has a “shelf life” that is about to expire. We can take our future into our own hands. With our forks. We can choose what food we’ll eat and the types of agriculture we’ll support. Together we can opt for a future where those who feed us are fairly compensated for their work, including the work of protecting and maintaining nature’s regenerative power.
You can read the full article and see the comparison between different countries here -
Unfortunately NZ is not one of the countries included on the list but it is still very interesting to check it out.

8) Better Futures Forum (BFF) Climate Commission submission.

I was very impressed with the BFF submission to the Climate Commission and highly recommend reading it. In their Overview they state -

"The impression we have from the advice report is that the Climate Change Commission is proposing a more or less ‘business as usual’ scenario, in which we simply replace our vehicle fleet with electric vehicles, use a bit more public and active transport, reduce the number of dairy cows on farms without changes to farming approaches, marginally reduce inorganic waste to landfill and increase  carbon stores by planting native trees.

None of these ideas are revolutionary, nor transformative. We recognise that they do represent some level of change, that change can be challenging, and that there may be some public and, therefore, political resistance to transformative, systemic change. But the report must avoid contributing to a ‘cooling discourse’ on climate action, described by Sarah Monod de Froideville as communications that “settle concerns about harmful  activity that are gathering momentum through acknowledging the harm and appearing to address the activity in some manner...so that harmful activity can continue or resume unopposed.” BFF’s view is that a ‘business as usual’ approach will not ensure our survival; particularly viewed in the context of the wide range of environmental challenges that stem from climate change. Transformative, systemic change is required for humans to continue to survive and thrive on this planet. That message, however difficult to hear, must be communicated: and it is the Commission that must do that."

You can access the full submission here -

9) Climate change activists' Mill Rd legal challenge 'a sign of things to come' -

Auckland councillor Chris Darby says a legal challenge against the $1.4 billion Mill Road project by climate change advocates All Aboard Aotearoa is a sign of what's to come. The group applied for a judicial review of the Waka Kotahi NZTA-led project in the High Court in Wellington on Thursday. (March 25th) The 21.5km proposed Mill Rd arterial route, which would provide an alternative road between Manukau and Drury, would run parallel to and east of State Highway 1. Construction was expected to start next year and be completed by 2028.

The proposed route of the $1.4 billion Mill Rd project. All Aboard Aotearoa is a coalition made up of Generation Zero, Lawyers for Climate Action, Bike Auckland, Women in Urbanism, Movement and Greenpeace and its stated goal is to decarbonise the country's transport by 2030. The group asked the High Court to set aside the decisions to fund and build Mill Rd, arguing it undermines the Crown’s commitments under the Paris Agreement and Zero Carbon Act, and because the Government and Waka Kotahi did not properly consider the greenhouse gas emissions impacts of the project.
“Allowing the status quo – climate inaction - is in fact direct action towards an unsustainable future in which our children face severe environmental degradation and exponentially rising costs,” said Jenny Cooper of Lawyers for Climate Action.
You can read two articles about the "All Aboard Aotearoa" group action here and here -
This project has now been dropped by the government, as of June 4th. More info here -

10) Some more myths busted about pollution associated with construction and operation of EV's compared to ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles -

This animated video produced by Mark Linthicum is very informative and at times quite funny. It illustrates how much energy is required for the drilling, pumping and transport of oil. It gives you the exact figures of how wasteful it is to make petrol cars. In the US, there are an estimated 435,000 oil wells that use pump jacks. The estimated energy for these wells is 4300 GWh each month. That's a lot of energy to only extract the oil out of the ground. If you were to use this electricity to power electric cars directly, you could power 15 million electric cars for a month. What about lithium mining? The video highlights that Australia is the number one mining country in the world. Australia’s concern is with oil mining that pollutes and causes more damage to the planet than any lithium mining that takes place. 

You can see the YouTube video here -

11) Australian government refuses to address future liquid fuel risks -

This article looks at the unsustainability of the Australian oil-fuelled transportation system. It identifies major impacts to the Australian economy from inadequate recognition of the challenges arising from the transition away from fossil fuels.

The Commonwealth Government is planning to spend $90 billion on submarines. Submarines that may never be used in conflict, and in the event of a major war, are unlikely to change the outcome. Yet only a measly $200 million is allocated for something as important as powering/fuelling the nation’s future transportation system which we all depend upon every day in perpetuity. Clearly, there is an issue with the Government’s priorities.

The Commonwealth Government has recently released a Discussion Paper on its Future Fuels Strategy. It is perhaps reasonable to expect that such a strategy may seek to reduce Australia’s oil consumption, improve fuel security and reduce emissions in a timely fashion. The current strategy, even if successful in meeting the vague and ill-defined objectives contained therein, is unlikely to achieve any of these imperatives. Two words can describe the proposed strategy: woefully inadequate!

It is now apparent, based on the Future Fuels Strategy and other documents such as the Interim Liquid Fuels Security Report, that the Commonwealth Government has little understanding of the liquid fuel predicament that Australia faces. A predicament perhaps best described by Dr Simon Michaux:

“We think we are going to replace a complex industrial ecosystem that took more than a century to build with the support of the highest calorifically dense source of energy the world has ever known (oil) in cheap abundant quantities, with easily available credit, and unlimited mineral resources. At a time when we have very expensive energy, a fragile finance system saturated in debt, not enough minerals, and an unprecedented human population, embedded in a deteriorating environment.”

The full article can be viewed here -

12) Heat slows down plants - The implications for reduced carbon sequestration from growing trees highlighted in this article are sobering.

The results are a wake-up call, says one of the study’s authors, University of Waikato soil scientist Louis Schipper. “The biosphere has been harvesting our emitted CO2 and we assumed that would carry on. But this data shows the size of this terrestrial carbon sink will go down. It blows me away how near this is.” Add to this the increasing risk of wildfire and drought, and stressed plants’ lessened resilience to pathogens, and it’s clear, says Schipper, that we can’t count on “this idea of just planting trees”.

Plants are our best technology for soaking up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, but a new study shows the world’s forests and grasslands could flip over to become a source rather than a sink of CO2. Currently, the world’s green spaces absorb about a third of the emissions we produce by burning fossil fuels. But at the current rate of warming, plants’ ability to inhale more carbon dioxide than they exhale will slow down, then reverse, shrinking the carbon sink to almost half its size by as early as 2040.

A study published in Science Advances in January looked at the link between temperature and photosynthesis (the process plants use to turn carbon dioxide and the sun’s energy into oxygen and sugars for their growth) and respiration (which releases carbon dioxide). Researchers analysed datasets from a global network of meteorological sensors known as FLUXNET, which tracks a suite of atmospheric variables, including carbon fluxes above different biomes.

The study found that photosynthesis has a much lower ideal temperature, between 18°C and 28°C depending on the type of plant, than respiration, which means that as global temperatures continue to climb, photosynthesis will slow while respiration keeps rising. Some ecosystems in warmer parts of the world, including the Amazon, already reach this threshold during certain times of the year. Earlier studies on specific trees suggested that some would grow faster at higher atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, but this wider study found no such effect. Nor did it find any evidence that plants adjust to perform higher rates of photosynthesis at higher temperatures.

The Science Advances study can be viewed here -
And the full NZ Geographic article can be viewed here -

13) New battery technology for large scale renewable energy storage -

I’m very interested in new battery technologies. This video looks at the liquid metal battery which appears to have great potential for large scale storage for renewable energy production from wind farm and solar farms. They are very efficient and can cycle thousands of times and still retain over 99% efficiency. Also component parts are all readily recyclable.

You can watch the YouTube video here -

14) Some home truths about why divestment pays-

In a few months, a small British financial think tank will mark the tenth anniversary of the publication of a landmark research report that helped launch the global fossil-fuel-divestment movement. As that celebration takes place, another seminal report—this one obtained under the Freedom of Information Act from the world’s largest investment house—closes the loop on one of the key arguments of that decade-long fight. It definitively shows that the firms that joined that divestment effort have profited not only morally but also financially.

The original report, from the London-based Carbon Tracker Initiative, found something stark: the world’s fossil-fuel companies had five times more carbon in their reserves than scientists thought we could burn and stay within any sane temperature target. The numbers meant that, if those companies carried out their business plans, the planet would overheat

“Any investment fund looking to protect itself against losses from coal, oil, and gas companies now has the largest investment house in the world showing them why, how, and when to protect themselves, the economy, and the planet.” In short, the financial debate about divestment is as settled as the ethical one—you shouldn’t try to profit off the end of the world and, in any event, you won’t.

What would happen if the world’s largest investment firm issued that advice and its clients followed it? Fifteen trillion dollars plus twenty-five trillion is a lot of money. It’s roughly twice the size of the current U.S. economy. It’s almost half the size of the total world economy. It would show that a report issued by a small London think tank a decade ago had turned the financial world’s view of climate upside down.

The full article is available here -

15) Chasing Carbon Unicorns -

According to a new report, net zero targets many governments are pursuing are distractions from the urgent need to drastically reduce carbon emissions. Net zero targets rest on carbon capture and storage technologies. These technologies include direct air capture, bioenergy capture, mineralization, and enhanced weathering.
But net zero targets described by NDCs and businesses are “deceptions” and “distractions,” according to a new report by Friends of the Earth International (FoEI).

“Net zero is a trick because the assumption is that you can emit carbon so long as you have some solution to sequester the carbon,” said Meena Raman, legal adviser and senior researcher at the Third World Network (TWN).

“Corporations, especially those in the Global North that are already making billions off the climate crisis, get to take cover under ‘net zero’ to continue polluting,” added Jaron Browne, organizing director at the Grassroots Global Justice Alliance (GGJ).

A recent, unrelated commentary published in Nature supports the same conclusions: “Sometimes the [net zero] targets do not aim to reduce emissions, but compensate for them with offsets.”

A foundational fallacy in net zero targets, the FoEI report claims, rests in a misrepresentation of the carbon cycle. The carbon cycle can be divided into two parts based on timescale. One is the biogenic cycle, in which carbon circulates between the atmosphere, land, and oceans. The other is the slower, nonbiogenic cycle in which carbon circulates between fossil fuels stored underground and the atmosphere. The biogenic cycle can occur within hours, days, and years. The nonbiogenic cycle takes hundreds of thousands, even millions, of years.

Net zero targets conflate the two cycles, the FoEI report claims. Targets assume all the carbon that’s already circulating in the atmosphere as well as all the carbon that will be emitted by fossil fuels can be safely and effectively sequestered. In other words, carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted from fossil fuel use is in addition to “the carbon that is already cycling between the active pools. We are putting significant stress on all these pools by pushing them to take up additional fossil CO2.…We cannot just stuff the geosphere (i.e., CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels) into the biosphere,” the report says.

The FoEI report notes misrepresentations of science and technology, as well as the prominent presence of politics in determining net zero targets. It also identifies fundamental questions about whether such technologies can actually be developed at the required scale, identifying them as “carbon unicorns, fanciful imaginings of how we might solve the climate crisis without needing to eliminate the burning of fossil fuels” while warning that there are “no saviour ecosystems around the planet, nor fairy godmother technologies, that will suck up continued fossil fuel emissions.”

Check out the full article here -

16) Is ammonia a way to store hydrogen instead of storing it in it's pure H2 form.

Chemical engineers at UNSW Sydney have found a way to make 'green' ammonia from air, water and renewable electricity that does not require the high temperatures, high pressure and huge infrastructure currently needed to produce this essential compound. The new production method -- demonstrated in a laboratory-based proof of concept -- also has the potential to play a role in the global transition towards a hydrogen economy, where ammonia is increasingly seen as a solution to the problem of storing and transporting hydrogen energy.

You can read two different articles about this research here and here -

 17) A wind turbine with a difference -

The giant windfarms that line hills and coastlines are not the only way to harness the power of the wind, say green energy pioneers who plan to reinvent wind power by forgoing the need for turbine towers, blades – and even wind.
“We are not against traditional windfarms,” says David Yáñez, the inventor of Vortex Bladeless. His six-person startup, based just outside Madrid, has pioneered a turbine design that can harness energy from winds without the sweeping white blades considered synonymous with wind power.
The design recently won the approval of Norway’s state energy company, Equinor, which named Vortex on a list of the 10 most exciting startups in the energy sector. Equinor will also offer the startup development support through its tech accelerator programme.
The bladeless turbines stand at 3 metres high, a curve-topped cylinder fixed vertically with an elastic rod. To the untrained eye it appears to waggle back and forth, not unlike a car dashboard toy. In reality, it is designed to oscillate within the wind range and generate electricity from the vibration.

The full article is available here -

18) Changes to giant ocean eddies could have ‘devastating effects’ globally.

Swirling and meandering ocean currents that help shape the world’s climate have gone through a “global-scale reorganisation” over the past three decades, according to new research. The amount of energy in these ocean currents, which can be from 10km to 100km across and are known as eddies, has increased, having as yet unknown effects on the ocean’s ability to lock-away carbon dioxide and heat from fossil fuel burning. Anchor One expert said the changes described in the research could affect the ability of the Southern Ocean, one of the world’s biggest natural carbon stores, to absorb CO2.

You can find the full article here -

19) The Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The Dalai Lama and 100 other Nobel Prize laureates have signed an open letter calling on world leaders to end the expansion of coal, oil and gas. In it they state -

We write today, on the eve of Earth Day 2021 and the Leaders’ Climate Summit, hosted by President Biden, to urge you to act now to avoid a climate catastrophe by stopping the expansion of oil, gas and coal.
We welcome President Biden and the US government’s acknowledgement in the Executive Order that “Together, we must listen to science and meet the moment.”  Indeed, meeting the moment requires responses to the climate crisis that will define legacies. Qualifications for being on the right side of history are clear.

For far too long, governments have lagged, shockingly, behind what science demands and what a growing and powerful people-powered movement knows: urgent action is needed to end the expansions of fossil fuel production; phase out current production; and invest in renewable energy. This is a global initiative to phase out fossil fuels and support a just transition. Climate change, like nuclear weapons, is a major global threat.

Bold and immediate action is needed to address the climate emergency. The main cause of the climate emergency is fossil fuels. Coal, oil and gas are responsible for almost 80% of all carbon dioxide emissions since the industrial revolution. Phasing out fossil fuel production, and fast-tracking progress towards safer and more cost-effective solutions, will require unprecedented international cooperation in three main areas – non-proliferation, global disarmament and a peaceful, just transition.You can read a copy of their letter here -

20) Cut methane emissions to avert global temperature rise, UN-backed study urges -

Methane emissions caused by human activity can be reduced by up to 45 per cent this decade, thus helping to keep global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius in line with the Paris Agreement on climate change, according to a UN-backed report published on Thursday. The Global Methane Assessment outlines the benefits of mitigating methane, a key ingredient in smog, which include preventing some 260,000 premature deaths and 775,000 asthma-related hospital visits annually, as well as 25 million tonnes in crop losses. The study is the work of the Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC), a global partnership of governments and non-State partners, and the UN Environment Programme (UNEP).

“Cutting methane is the strongest lever we have to slow climate change over the next 25 years and complements necessary efforts to reduce carbon dioxide. The benefits to society, economies, and the environmental are numerous and far outweigh the cost”, said Inger Andersen, the UNEP Executive Director.
Methane is an extremely powerful greenhouse gas, responsible for around 30 per cent of warming since the pre-industrial era. Most human-caused methane emissions come from three sectors: fossil fuels, such as oil and gas processing; landfills and waste; and agriculture, chiefly related to livestock.

The full article is available here -

21) May 26th, 2021 was a big day for Big Oil -

The environmental movement won so many campaigns against Big Oil companies on Wednesday 26th May, that it may go down in history as one of the most significant days of ending the age of fossil fuels! Here’s a round-up of what has happened:

• The climate movement took Shell to court in the Netherlands, and WON! The court ruled in a landmark case that the oil giant Shell must reduce its emissions. By 2030, Shell must cut its CO2 emissions by 45% compared to 2019 levels.
• At an ExxonMobil shareholder meeting, a small activist investor Engine No. 1 with just a 0.02% stake, secured two seats on Exxon’s board with candidates dedicated to decarbonizing the company. They’re part of a campaign challenging the company’s energy transition strategy and response to climate change.
• Chevron faced a similar shareholder rebellion, where 61% of shareholders voted for the company to reduce its emissions from all the fossil fuels it sells.

In the Netherlands case the court has ruled that Shell must cut its CO2 emissions by 45% by 2030 compared to 2019 levels, the civil court ruled. The Shell group is responsible for its own CO2 emissions and those of its suppliers, the verdict said. It is the first time a company has been legally obliged to align its policies with the Paris climate accords, says Friends of the Earth (FoE). The environmental group brought the case to court in 2019, alongside six other bodies and more than 17,000 Dutch citizens.

Though the decision only applies in the Netherlands, it could have wider effects elsewhere. BBC Netherlands correspondent Anna Holligan tweeted that it was a "precedent-setting judgement". A Shell spokesperson said they "fully expect to appeal today's disappointing court decision" and added that they are stepping up efforts to cut emissions.You can read about these actions here, here and here -

22) Latest Sea Level Rise research extrapolating from the historical record - 

Sea levels will probably rise faster than most climate models predict, according to a new study.
In 2019, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a United Nations scientific body that reports on climate change, said that the global sea-level average would likely rise at least 2.00 feet (0.61 meters) by the year 2100, but no more than 3.61 feet (1.10 m). Those numbers come from models that account for climate change and ocean heating, ongoing greenhouse gas emissions and potential changes in human behavior to prevent more warming.

In this new study, researchers examined models of sea level through the lens of historical data. They looked at how fast sea levels rose in the past as Earth warmed and extrapolated to predict sea-level rise forward in time. They found that existing sea-level models tend to lowball sea-level rise when compared with more straightforward extrapolations from the historical record.

"This comparison suggests that the likely upper level of sea-level projections in recent IPCC reports would be too low," the researchers wrote in a paper published Feb. 2 in the journal Ocean Science.

The full article is available here and the research paper is available here -

23) The climate crisis requires a new culture and politics, not just new tech – Peter Sutoris

We are living through what scientists call the Anthropocene, a new geological age during which humans have become the dominant force shaping the natural environment. Many scientists date this new period to the post-second world war economic boom, the “great acceleration”. This rapid increase in our control over the Earth has brought us to the precipice of catastrophic climate change, triggered a mass extinction, disrupted our planet’s nitrogen cycles and acidified its oceans, among other things.

Our society has come to believe that technology is the solution. Electricity from renewable sources, energy-efficient buildings, electric vehicles and hydrogen fuels are among the many innovations that we hope will play a decisive role in reducing emissions. Most of the mainstream climate-change models now assume some degree of “negative emissions” in the future, relying on large-scale carbon capture technology, despite the fact that it is far from ready to be implemented. And if all else fails, the story goes, we can geoengineer the Earth.

But the problem with this narrative is that it focuses on the symptoms, not the causes of environmental decay. Even if the technologies on which we pin our hopes for the future deliver as expected and do not lead to much collateral damage – both of which are huge assumptions – they will not have fixed our mindsets. This is a crisis of culture and politics, not of science and technology. To believe that we can innovate and engineer ourselves out of this mess is to miss the key lesson of the Anthropocene – that dealing with planetary-scale processes calls for humility, not arrogance.

Our civilisation is underpinned by extractivism, a belief that the Earth is ours to exploit, and the nonsensical idea of infinite growth within a finite territory.

The full article is available here -

24) Untax labour and tax resource use.

To finish off I recommend this short animated video which makes lots of sense to me. Check it our here -

Taxing non-renewable resource use instead of human labour is a cure for many problems plaguing the world today. It looks at runaway consumption of scarce materials, pollution and climate change, as well as low wages and unemployment.

Kia Ora

It's only 6 weeks since I sent out the last newsletter but I have a range of material I'm accumulating that I think is worthwhile sharing so here is some more reading for those who are interested.

Before we get into that material I wanted to let everyone know Earth Day Picnic is again going to be celebrated here in Marlborough after a break last year due to the Covid lockdown. The local event will be held from 10am to 3pm on April 18th at Pollard Park next to the playground. Thanks to Envirohub from Picton who are taking a lead role this time with the organising of the day. So please make a packed lunch and come along with family and friends on the day. There will a range of activities and interests for children.

1) Climate Commission submission extension -

The Climate Commission has extended the deadline for submissions to their Report, by 2 weeks to March 28th. If you haven't already done so we encourage you to put in a submission however brief. If you feel uncertain about submitting there are some good guidelines and advice you might find helpful on the Generation Zero website here or you can go direct to the Climate Commission website and make a submission here -

CKM has drafted a submission and a copy is available here if you're interested. You may find material in our submission that you can use in your own.
Feel free to send us feedback if you wish - info@climatekaranga.org.nz

2) Nelson/Tasman Climate Forum "Climate Action Book" -

Tom and I attended the launch of the Climate Action Book in Richmond last month. This has been a huge collaborative effort by the people of Nelson and Tasman and a testament to the commitment of a lot of people from their region. 
In the introduction to the Book they say "The Nelson Tasman Climate Forum is a large, open group of volunteers dedicated to bringing our communities together to respond to this long emergency and create a positive future for us all. We also try to be a voice for all other elements of the biosphere in this region, seeing ourselves as part of the web of life."

The Book has sections on -

• WHAT WE GROW AND EAT - Actions for a Resilient, Climate Responsible Food System     
• WHAT WE MAKE, BUY AND WASTE - Actions for a Resilient, Climate­ Responsible Economy   
• HOW WE GET ENERGY - Actions for a Resilient, Climate­ Responsible Energy System  
• WHERE WE LIVE AND WORK - Actions for Resilient, Climate­ Responsible Settlements   
• HOW WE MOVE OURSELVES AND OUR STUFF AROUND - Actions for a Resilient, Climate­ Responsible Transport System   
• HOW WE SUPPORT NATURE AND STORE CARBON - Actions for Resilient Natural Ecosystems and Nature­ Friendly Carbon Storage
• HOW WE STAY HEALTHY AND CONNECTED - Actions for a Wellbeing­ Centred Transition.   

You can download a copy of the 24 page book here -

3) Open Letter to Boris Johnson -

James Hansen has written an open letter to Boris Johnson with a challenge for him to stand up and be counted at the next UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) COP 26 (Conference of the Parties) in Glasgow, hopefully this November.

In the covering note to his letter James says - "Young people are fed up – rightfully so.  Boris Johnson has a choice.  He and the COP can offer soothing ambitions, while continuing business-almost-as usual – in which case global emissions will rebound after Covid and remain high or even grow – and he will be vilified in the streets of Glasgow, London and around the world.

Or he can use his emergent humanity to help turn the world onto a different path, one dictated by science.  The UK, where the industrial revolution and coal burning began, could now provide the blueprint by which other nations may proceed.  The science shows that fossil fuel use will be phased out rapidly via a rising carbon fee with all funds distributed uniformly to the public.  The effect is anti-regressive, as most wealthy people have a large carbon footprint.  Seventy percent of the people come out ahead.  Fee & dividend is a base that aids all other carbon policies.

The UK (like the US) is 5X more responsible for global warming than the average nation.  With strong leadership from the PM, the UK parliamentary system is capable of adopting this year such a science-based system.  Just as the industrial revolution moved from the UK to the US, so too could a proper way to put a price on carbon.  The PM has the opportunity to earn a special place in history and the gratitude of young people.  Let’s see if he can grasp it.

Note: with a sufficient, rising price on carbon, steel production need not be done with coal."

A full copy of the letter to PM Johnson is available here -

4) More on The Dasgupta Review -

I included information in the last newsletter about this recently released review in the UK.

Here is one small extract from a Guardian article that drew my attention and I wish to share - "The review is full of alarming statistics, of which perhaps the scariest is that in little more than two decades, between 1992 and 2014, there was a 40% fall in the stock of natural capital per person. That is the water we drink, the air we breathe, the soil we grow food in, and all living things shared among the global population. This really is capitalism for dummies, because any company that was as cavalier about its inventories of all other forms of capital – its machines, its IT systems, its buildings and its people – would soon go out of business.
Yes, the report notes, there has been growth. Measured by gross domestic product (GDP), the global economy is 14 times bigger than it was in 1950. There has been a massive increase in prosperity but it has come at a “devastating” cost to nature: the extinction of species; the depletion of fish stocks; the destruction of coral reefs; the shrinking of the rain forests. At current levels of consumption, we require an Earth 1.6 times larger than its actual size."

The full article is available here -

Kathryn Ryan from Radio NZ's Nine to Noon also did a half hour interview with Sir Partha Dasgupta, which is available here - In the interview he highlights that GDP is not fit for purpose.

“The problem with GDP is that it doesn’t include the depreciation of capital and one of the natural capital, or nature, which is somewhat different from buildings and roads in that you can really depreciate it very fast."
"We could depreciate building very fast too if we chose too, they do get depreciated if there is a war, but since we don’t think of war as being an actual state if affairs we think of about 4 to 5 percent as a depreciation allowance.
“But when it comes to natural capital you can actually completely wipe out natural capital pretty fast.”
We tend to subsidise the use of natural capital, he says. Nature’s goods and services are not free in fact the price is often negative.
“To the extent that it’s now about 4 to 5 percent of global GDP is in the form of subsidy."
“Now that is absolutely outrageous, you are not only regarding nature to be valueless, but you are saying it is actually a pest. You are paying yourself to destroy it.”

5) Will this be the end for Coal in Pakistan?

350.org had an item noting this recent announcement in Pakistan. It is clear from reading the article that there are unanswered questions about this new policy. Let's hope it results in real action that reduces emissions.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister announced during the virtual Climate Ambition Summit last weekend that the country won’t approve any new coal plants and by 2030, 60% of the energy produced in Pakistan will be generated through renewable resources.
Pakistan has taken steps to increase the role of renewables in its energy mix. In 2019 it reversed a three-year ban on investing in solar and wind that was put in place by the previous government. The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) predicts that the share of renewables in power generation will rise to 86% globally by 2050, compared to 25% today, with 60% of that share coming from solar and wind.
Will Pakistan’s new statement pave the way for more countries in South Asia to declare No coal policies? Will India and Bangladesh follow suit? Only time will tell but we will keep a watch and keep fighting until the region embraces 100% renewable energy.

Full article available here -

6) Our Great Reckoning - Eileen Crist On The Consequences Of Human Plunder.

Eileen Crist is the author of a book titled "Abundant Earth: Toward an Ecological Civilization". She was interviewed late last year about the book and the full text of that interview is available here - 

Here is an extract from the prelude to the interview.

Eileen Crist knows more than a person should, more than seems healthy, about dying birds and dying watersheds. She’s keenly aware of the global crisis of biodiversity loss and ecological collapse, and she sees what’s driving it: direct causes like climate change and what she calls the “ultimate causes” — population growth, over consumption, and technological power. But the thing that really interests Crist, the thing that she’s been studying and publicizing for the past three decades as a professor and radical environmental thinker, is an even deeper question: Why is so little being done to address this planetary emergency?
She attempts, with a mix of intellectual rigor and lyrical passion, to provide an answer in her 2019 book, Abundant Earth: Toward an Ecological Civilization. The cause of our inaction, she says, is “human supremacy,” a largely unconscious belief that Homo sapiens are the masters of creation rather than just one humble species among millions. This worldview sanctions not only factory farming, clear-cut logging, mountaintop-removal mining, and bottom-trawl fishing, but also more commonplace behaviors such as cruising along in cars that slaughter wildlife and emit carbon dioxide. As long as human supremacy prevails, Crist writes, “humanity will remain unable to muster the will to scale down and pull back the burgeoning human enterprise that is unraveling Earth’s biological wealth.”

7) Update on Ecocide campaign.

In an amendment to its report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2019, the European Parliament has voted to urge “the EU and the Member States to promote the recognition of ecocide as an international crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC)”. 
MEP Marie Toussaint, long-term campaigner for EU recognition of ecocide, said: “This is a real victory, a first major step towards the recognition of ecocide by the European Union. Member states must now speak out at the ICC and on the international stage. Climate change is accelerating, the loss of biodiversity is leading to planetary pandemics, the sea is rising: let’s move forward fast!”
Chair of the Stop Ecocide Foundation Jojo Mehta says: “This European parliamentary vote is hugely encouraging.  The political world is rapidly waking up to what scientists have been telling us for decades and the indigenous world has been telling us for centuries: that humanity cannot destroy the natural world with impunity.  There are consequences.  We know now that tipping points are being crossed and we have a short time to act.  Making ecocide a crime recognises this, providing a practical guardrail to prevent the worst excesses of damage that are pushing Earth’s life-support systems towards breaking point.”

Full item is available here -

Jojo Mehta from "Stop Ecocide" also co-authored an Opinion piece published in the Guardian last month which highlighted that only two countries in the world are on track to meet the 1.5C target.

"The science is clear: without drastic action to limit temperature rise below 1.5C, the Earth, and all life on it, including all human beings, will suffer devastating consequences.
Yet only two countries – Morocco and the Gambia – are on track to meet the 1.5C target. The largest emitters, including the United States, China, Russia and Saudi Arabia, are putting the world on course for 4C. At that rate, the polar ice caps will melt, causing dramatic sea level rise that will – in combination with other devastating effects like strengthening storms and droughts – cause mass famine, displacement and extinction.
Currently, much of humanity feels hopeless, but the establishment of ecocide as a crime offers something for people to get behind. Enacting laws against ecocide, as is under consideration in a growing number of jurisdictions, offers a way to correct the shortcomings of the Paris agreement. Whereas Paris lacks sufficient ambition, transparency and accountability, the criminalization of ecocide would be an enforceable deterrent. Outlawing ecocide would also address a key root cause of global climate change: the widespread destruction of nature, which, in addition to increasing greenhouse gas emissions, has devastating impacts on global health, food and water security, and sustainable development – to name a few.
Ecocide shares its roots with other landmark concepts in international law, including genocide. Indeed, ecocide and genocide often go hand in hand. Around the globe, ecological destruction is also decimating indigenous communities. Indeed, the meaning of ecocide is fully encapsulated by its etymology. It comes from the Greek oikos (home) and the Latin cadere (to kill). Ecocide is literally “killing our home”.

The full article is available here -

8) Climate Action Tracker -

The Climate Action Tracker website is a useful resource for identifying how well different countries around the world are progressing towards meeting their Paris Climate Accord targets. They have a useful analysis of how NZ is doing with their efforts.

9) Another legal win for the biosphere -

A court in Paris has ruled that France's government is guilty of climate inaction in a ground-breaking legal case.
The decision comes after a group of NGOs, with the support of two million citizens, filed a lawsuit against the French government for failing to meet the country's commitments to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
The legal claim was hailed as the "L'Affaire du siècle" or "the case of the century" by activists, who first started the dispute in March 2019.
Today, the court ruled that France has not done enough to meet its mandated goals to reduce greenhouse gases.
"Justice has just recognised that the state's climate inaction is illegal," said the campaigners behind the lawsuit. "This is a historic victory for the climate!"
France's commitment to curb global warming comes from the Paris Agreement, which was signed at COP21 in 2015. This international accord holds countries responsible for limiting global warming to less than 2 degrees more than pre-industrial levels.
The lawsuit is not about punishing the government now, but instead about ensuring French leaders are found to be legally culpable over climate inaction.
France already has an existing legal precedent of 'ecological prejudice', which was added to the French Civil Code in 2016. In cases relating to ecological prejudice, companies can be ordered to pay for the clean-up or repairs from whatever environmental damage has taken place.
Last year France took this a step further and made 'ecocide' a crime, punishable by fines of up to €4.5 million and up to a decade-long prison sentence.

The article is available here -

10) Nairobi Entrepreneur recycling plastic waste into bricks that are more durable than concrete.

Collectively, we use a staggering amount of single-use plastic each year—we buy one million plastic bottles each minute around the world—most of which ends up in landfills, oceans, and other natural spaces. Nzambi Matee, a 29-year-old entrepreneur from Nairobi, is combatting this global crisis by recycling bags, containers, and other waste products into bricks used for patios and other construction projects.
Prior to launching her company, Gjenge Makers, Matee worked as a data analyst and oil-industry engineer. After encountering plastic waste along Nairobi’s streets, she decided to quit her job and created a small lab in her mother’s backyard, testing sand and plastic combinations. Matee eventually received a scholarship to study in the materials lab at the University of Colorado Boulder, where she ultimately developed a prototype for the machine that now produces the textured bricks.
Made from a combination of plastic and sand, the pavers have a melting point higher than 350°C and are more durable than their concrete counterparts. Matee and her team source much of the raw product from factories and recyclers, and sometimes it’s free, which allows the company to reduce the price point on the product and make it affordable for schools and homeowners. So far, Gjenge Makers has recycled more than 20 tons of plastic and created 112 job opportunities in the community.
“It is absurd that we still have this problem of providing decent shelter – a basic human need,” Matee said in a statement. “Plastic is a material that is misused and misunderstood. The potential is enormous, but its afterlife can be disastrous.”

The full article can be seen here with another article about similar developments in Colombia here -

11) Tiny Costa Rica wants the world to take giant climate step.

In January, more than 50 countries committed to the protection of 30% of the planet’s land and oceans as part of the High Ambition Coalition (HAC) for Nature and People, spearheaded by Costa Rica, which is a co-chair alongside France and the UK.
The coalition hopes the target will become the headline aim for an international agreement on halting biodiversity loss for this decade, set to be negotiated in Kunming, China, later this year.
“Our approach is to lead by example. As Mandela said, ‘It always seems impossible until it’s done’,” Costa Rican president Carlos Alvarado Quesada told the Guardian. “Conservation is one of the key factors that scientists point out as relevant for protecting biodiversity and also for addressing the climate crisis. But working alone, it’s not as effective.”
The world has never met a single target to stem the destruction of wildlife and life-sustaining ecosystems. But the 41-year-old leader believes this time might be different.

The full article can be seen here -

12) Navigating Energy Descent Pathways.

Wikipedia - "Energy descent is a process whereby a society either voluntarily or involuntarily reduces its total energy consumption." 

Here is an extract from a paper published last year looking in some detail at the whole issue of Energy Descent. This may well be something we all need to face in the years ahead so better to be informed than keep our heads in the sand.

"Much mainstream energy and sustainability discourse is based on a series of highly optimistic assumptions about future energy supply in a carbon-constrained world. The improbability of conditions aligning such that all necessary assumptions are borne out implies that the energy futures ahead will likely diverge significantly from those envisaged within this established discourse. This has potentially profound implications. The availability of energy in the right forms at sufficient rates is the lifeblood of any particular form of social organization. Energy-related factors are fundamental to how we shape our societies and pursue our goals, yet it seems most individuals and societies are making plans based on precarious expectations. One of the goals of the present analysis is to encourage readers to treat the prospect that these expectations will not be realized as, at the very least, a matter of plausibility.
In the event that mainstream expectations are thwarted, the consequences could range from the disruptive to the catastrophic. This is not a case against optimism, but rather of channelling it in directions that lie within humanity’s scope of influence.
All human societies exist interdependently with natural systems that are ultimately beyond human control. It is far preferable, we contend, that societies retain the greatest degree of agency possible in getting to grips with the dilemma of fossil fuel dependence. The alternative is to have our futures dictated to us by breakdown in natural systems that are beyond our capacity to control. Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs) offers a means for societies to manage the reduction in fossil fuel use in an orderly and coordinated way, so that citizens retain as much scope as possible for choosing the forms that their post-carbon futures might take."

The full paper can be viewed here - 

13) Tradable Energy Quotas.

In the paper from item 12 above TEQs are referenced. The Fleming Policy Centre in the UK has done considerable work on this method. They claim introduction of such a system would ensure fair access to energy for all, guarantee that a nation meets its emissions reductions targets, and support the active participation and cooperation of citizens and all other energy users in rapidly reducing reliance on fossil fuels.

Here is a brief outline of the main points about TEQs from their website.

• TEQs (Tradable Energy Quotas) is an electronic system for fairly reducing consumption of carbon-intensive energy, at the national scale.
• There are two main reasons why policy to introduce TEQs may be desirable:                                      a) maintaining a fair distribution of fuel and electricity during challenging times.                            b) providing a method to guarantee achieving national carbon reduction targets.
• TEQs (pronounced “tex”) are measured in units.
• Every adult is given an equal free Entitlement of TEQs units each week. Other energy users (Government, industry etc.) bid for their units at a weekly Tender, or auction.
• When you buy fuel or energy, such as petrol for your car, units corresponding to the amount of energy you have bought are deducted from your TEQs account, in addition to your money payment. This is the only time you need TEQs units, and transactions are generally automatic, using credit-card or direct-debit technology.
• All fuels and electricity supplies carry a “carbon rating” in units; one unit represents one kilogram of carbon dioxide – or the equivalent in other greenhouse gases – released in the fuel’s production and use. This determines how many units are needed to make a purchase (thus giving a competitive advantage to low-carbon energy).
• If you use less than your Entitlement of units, you can sell your surplus. If you need more, you can buy them. All buying/selling takes place at a single national price, which rises and falls in line with demand. Buying and selling is as easy as topping up an Oyster card or mobile phone.
• The total number of units available in the country is set out in advance in the TEQs Budget. The size of the Budget goes down year-by-year – step-by-step, like a staircase.
• The Budget is set by the Committee on Climate Change, which is independent of the Government. The Government is itself bound by the TEQs system; its role is to support the country in thriving on the available carbon/energy.
• Since the national TEQs price is determined by national demand, it is transparently in everyone’s interest to help each other to reduce their energy demand, and to work together, encouraging a national sense of common purpose.

More info is available here -

14) The Breakthrough National Centre for Climate Restoration -

• The National Centre for Climate Restoration (Breakthrough) is an independent think tank that develops critical thought leadership to influence the climate debate and policy making.  
• Breakthrough’s mission is to develop and promote strategy innovation and analysis that is essential to deliver safe climate restoration.
• Safe climate restoration is defined as actions to re-instate natural climate processes that generate global average temperatures and ocean acidity that are safe for all species and for civilisation.  (ie. pre-industrial temperatures & acidity.
• Time has run out for half measures and it is now imperative that work begins to restore safe climate conditions as fast as humanly possible - this will require action at emergency scale and speed.
• Breakthrough has been formed on a non-political party platform and is based in Australia.

You can learn more about them here -

They have some very interesting papers on their website including a recent one titled "CARBON BUDGETS FOR 1.5 & 2°C" which is available here -

The SUMMARY of this paper says -

• IPCC carbon budgets underestimate current and future warming, omit important climate system feedback mechanisms, and make dangerous assumptions about risk-management.
• 1.5°C of warming is likely by 2030 or earlier, a product of past emissions.
• There is no carbon budget for the 1.5°C goal; such “budgets” rely on overshoot, with unrealistic reliance on speculative technologies.
• The current level of greenhouse gases is enough for around 2°C of warming, or more.
• 2°C of warming is far from safe, and may trigger the “Hothouse Earth” scenario.
• There is no carbon budget for 2°C if a sensible risk-management approach is taken.
• Even accepting the IPCC carbon budget for 2°C at face value, emissions need to be zero before 2030 for developed countries with higher per capita emissions.

15) Bitcoin and energy use -It’s not just the value of bitcoin that has soared in the last year – so has the huge amount of energy it consumes.
The cryptocurrency’s value has dipped recently after passing a high of $50,000 but the energy used to create it has continued to soar during its epic rise, climbing to the equivalent to the annual carbon footprint of Argentina, according to Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index, a tool from researchers at Cambridge University that measures the currency’s energy use.
Recent interest from major Wall Street institutions like JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs probably culminated in the currency’s rise in value and an endorsement by Tesla’s Elon Musk helped drive its recent high as investors bet the cryptocurrency will become more widely embraced in the near future.
You can see the full Guardian article here and here is another article from Stuff on the same topic. 

16)  350.org and their petition calling for ACC to stop investing in fossil fuels.

In the past week, ACC’s investments have made news headlines, following the story that Minister of Finance Grant Robertson has written to chairs of the Super Fund and ACC. The letters ask them to adopt ethical investment policies and sets an expectation that Government funds lead the way to achieve our shared target of being carbon-zero by 2050.
Grant Robertson hasn’t explicitly outlined where our public funds should or shouldn’t be investing. This means that as key stakeholders of ACC, through receiving care or contributing levies, all of us have an opportunity to raise our voices and set the standard we expect for ACC’s ethical investment approach.
Together we can use this moment to strengthen our call for ACC to stop investing in climate-wrecking fossil fuel companies.
ACC’s current investments funnel over $200 million of our public money into the hands of the fossil fuel industry. The most effective way we can stop the worst impacts of the climate crisis is by keeping polluting fossil fuels in the ground. In order to do this, we need to stop the flow of money that enables fossil fuel projects to go ahead.

If you want to support this campaign you can sign their petition here -

17) Earth Day 2021

I wanted to finish with a link to a short video trailer from a film by Joe Gantz called "The Race to Save the World" which is being released on International Earth Day, April 22nd. The trailer is available here  and highlights the critical role that activists play in raising awareness of the major issues threatening the biosphere. The one and only biosphere that supports Earth's miraculous web of life.  

Remember the local Marlborough Earth Day Picnic is on Sunday, April 18th at Pollard Park from 10am to 3pm.

Nga mihi nui, Budyong.

Kia ora,

Welcome to a new year. 2020 was one to remember. I suspect 2021 will also have it's fair share of surprises. It seems to be the times we are living in. So "Expect the Unexpected!"

I feel a need to apologise in advance for the tone of some of this newsletter. On completing it I felt some of the items have a "doomster" feel to them. Unfortunately, when analysed they appear to be very real and well supported by scientific evidence so we need to take them seriously. I believe they do reflect the very real challenges we all face in regard to the wide ranging threats to the planetary ecosystems and climate. Thankfully all the items are not negative and I have been able to finish with something beautiful. So, if you choose to read none of the items below I encourage you to at least go to number 9 if you feel like being uplifted. There is a link to a 4 minute YouTube clip of Amanda Gorman, who is the current "Youth Poet Laureate of the United States" where she recites a poem about Climate Change. She has the ability to move people's hearts and bring tears to your eyes on an issue that is so critical to the future of our beautiful planet Earth.
As she says so eloquently - "The time is now, now, now..."

1) MDC has secured funding for the Te Hoiere Catchment Project.

Funding totalling $1,000,000 has been allocated from the Ministry for the Environment’s Freshwater Improvement Fund over the next five years. This funding provides start-up funds for the Te Hoiere Project and will enable the completion of a Catchment Condition Survey and commencement of on-ground restoration work.Council applied in December 2020 to the Freshwater Improvement Fund to enable work to begin on the Te Hoiere Project. The application was successful in receiving $1,000,000 in funding to accompany $100,000 of existing Council funding. Ministry funding is spread over five years from June 2021 (although a Deed of Contribution will enable work to commence immediately).
On-ground work will include up to 30 km of riparian and significant Wetland fencing work, 6 hectares of riparian planting, planting of 20,000 riparian plants, four education workshops per year and introduction of up to 50 farm packs of dung beetles.9. The funding is expected to generate approximately 22,000 person hours of work (11 FTE) as part of the Jobs for Nature programme. The funding also provides for a part-time project manager to implement the work.

More info is available here if you're interested. It is item 4 on the Environment Committee agenda.

2) Global Temperature in 2020 - Analysis from James Hansen and others.

Global surface temperature in 2020 was in a virtual dead-heat with 2016 for warmest year in the period of instrumental data in the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) analysis.  The rate of global warming has accelerated in the past several years.  The 2020 global temperature was +1.3°C (~2.3°F) warmer than in the 1880-1920 base period; global temperature in that base period is a reasonable estimate of ‘pre-industrial’ temperature.  The six warmest years in the GISS record all occur in the past six years, and the 10 warmest years are all in the 21st century.  Growth rates of the greenhouse gases driving global warming are increasing, not declining.

Full article available here -

3) Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of EcocideThe Stop Ecocide Foundation, at the request of parliamentarians from the governing parties in Sweden, has convened an Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide. The Panel is tasked with drafting a definition which may be considered by interested state parties for possible proposal to the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, as a potential 5th crime under that Statute.
The Panel is seeking to consult interested stakeholders in all regions, in order to obtain a wide range of perspectives to inform the drafting process.

Responses are being sort by February 18th. More info available here -


4) Global ice loss accelerating at record rate, study finds.

The melting of ice across the planet is accelerating at a record rate, with the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets speeding up the fastest, research has found.
The rate of loss is now in line with the worst-case scenarios of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world’s leading authority on the climate, according to a paper published on Monday in the journal The Cryosphere.
Thomas Slater, lead author and research fellow at the centre for polar observation and modelling at the University of Leeds, warned that the consequences would be felt around the world. “Sea level rise on this scale will have very serious impacts on coastal communities this century,” he said.
About 28tn tonnes of ice was lost between 1994 and 2017, which the authors of the paper calculate would be enough to put an ice sheet 100 metres thick across the UK. About two thirds of the ice loss was caused by the warming of the atmosphere, with about a third caused by the warming of the seas.
Over the period studied, the rate of ice loss accelerated by 57%, the paper found, from 0.8tn tonnes a year in the 1990s to 1.2tn tonnes a year by 2017.

Full article available here - 

I'm always interested when reports such as this come out providing evidence which is in line with IPCC worst case scenarios. Of course it goes without saying that if we continue to follow worst case scenario trends the outcomes will be serious for the planet's future. This is something those reading this newsletter all understand. When these scenarios were first laid I suspect many people made the inference that there is a low chance of worst case scenarios eventuating and yet, as time passes and more evidence accumulates. the trends continue in the wrong direction. Very sobering!5) Release of first Climate Commission advice.

Most people will be aware The Climate Commission released their first package of advice for public consultation on February 1st. The advice covers the first three carbon budgets (out to 2035) and provides a detailed plan on how to achieve them.
Robert McLachlan, who is a professor in applied mathematics at Massey University, has written a good article in the Guardian here -  It is headed, "New Zealand will need a policy revolution to meet climate commission's brief", and covers the main issues in the release. It concludes that the changes called for will require rapid and sweeping regulation in all areas of society from transport to forestry.

If you are interested in more detail you can listen to Dr Rod Carr (Chair of the Climate Commission) delve into the detail of the Commission’s advice on the steps Aotearoa must take to reach its climate targets, and what this could mean for New Zealanders. The Climate Commission has this webinar and an excellent range of other sessions available on their website here -

Some of those sessions are -

•  Agriculture and forestry in the transition to low emissions.
• Reducing emissions and perspectives from Iwi/Maori.
• Getting to 1.5°C and the NDC. (Nationally Determined Contributions)
• The impacts of climate action – mitigation and adaptation.

Public consultation is open until March 14th.

6) A useful article was printed on the Stuff website a week before the Climate Commission release.

It was headed "The change that'll make Rogernomics 'look like a trial period'" and in it they said -

"The biggest economic transformation since the 1980s is coming – and many of us don’t even know it.
The shifts required to run our economy without fossil fuels will make the economic changes of the late 1980s “look like a trial period”, in the words of Climate Change Commission chair Rod Carr.
This time, Carr and his fellow commissioners (and the governments that receive their advice) will need to succeed where leaders of the 1980s failed, by transforming the country without the mass pain and job losses that accompanied Rogernomics.
That’s the plan, but how will we do it? We’ll get our first glimpse on February 1, when the Climate Change Commission releases a draft blueprint to the public.
The headline of next week’s release will be three draft carbon budgets, each putting a cap on how much greenhouse gas the entire country can emit during a five-year period, starting this year and ending in 2035.
Climate Change Minister James Shaw has said he thinks many people will be shocked by how much New Zealand needs to cut its emissions.
But the alternative – inaction and climate catastrophe – would be worse."

The full article is available here -

7) The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review.

Here is an article about another report released in the UK on February 2nd, highlighting that a worst case scenario outcome is imminent for our planet's biodiversity and that if we are to have any chance of addressing this challenge we must completely change our economic systems."Our economies, livelihoods and wellbeing all depend on our most precious asset: nature. We are part of nature, not separate from it.” These are the opening lines of a newly published landmark review of the economics of biodiversity.
Biodiversity is declining faster than at any time in human history and the review aims to create a new economic framework, grounded in ecology, that enables humanity to live on Earth sustainably. “Our demands far exceed nature’s capacity to supply us with the goods and services we all rely on. We would require 1.6 Earths to maintain the world’s current living standards,” says Prof Sir Partha Dasgupta in the review, which was commissioned by the UK Treasury.
“Humanity faces an urgent choice,” he says. “Continuing down our current path presents extreme risks and uncertainty for our economies. Choosing a sustainable path will require transformative change, underpinned by levels of ambition, coordination and political will akin to, or even greater than, those of the Marshall Plan [under which Europe was rebuilt after the second world war].”
Jennifer Morris, CEO of the Nature Conservancy, said: “Science shows us that nature is teetering on a knife-edge. The upcoming UN summits on climate and biodiversity in 2021 provide an unparalleled opportunity to redefine the relationship between people and nature. Our shared planet is counting on all of us to step up and protect our natural world for generations to come.”
Nina Seega, at the University of Cambridge’s Institute for Sustainability Leadership, said: “The review’s focus on completely rewiring mainstream economic and financial models is key to moving the nature debate on to the agenda of governments, financial regulators and individual financial firms.
“It is especially pertinent to take the opportunity presented by the Covid-19 crisis to align the underpinnings of our economic and financial system with a sustainable future.”
The Dasgupta review concludes: “To detach nature from economic reasoning is to imply that we consider ourselves to be external to nature. The fault is not in economics; it lies in the way we have chosen to practise it. Transformative change is possible – we and our descendants deserve nothing less.”

The full article is available here -
Online copies of the full 600 page review and an abridged version are available here -

8) Top scientists warn of 'ghastly future of mass extinction' and climate disruption.

The planet is facing a “ghastly future of mass extinction, declining health and climate-disruption upheavals” that threaten human survival because of ignorance and inaction, according to an international group of scientists, who warn people still haven’t grasped the urgency of the biodiversity and climate crises.
The 17 experts, including Prof Paul Ehrlich from Stanford University, author of The Population Bomb, and scientists from Mexico, Australia and the US, say the planet is in a much worse state than most people – even scientists – understood.
"The scale of the threats to the biosphere and all its lifeforms – including humanity – is in fact so great that it is difficult to grasp for even well-informed experts,” they write in a report in Frontiers in Conservation Science which references more than 150 studies detailing the world’s major environmental challenges.
The delay between destruction of the natural world and the impacts of these actions means people do not recognise how vast the problem is, the paper argues. “[The] mainstream is having difficulty grasping the magnitude of this loss, despite the steady erosion of the fabric of human civilisation.”
“Ours is not a call to surrender – we aim to provide leaders with a realistic ‘cold shower’ of the state of the planet that is essential for planning to avoid a ghastly future,” it adds.
Dealing with the enormity of the problem requires far-reaching changes to global capitalism, education and equality, the paper says. These include abolishing the idea of perpetual economic growth, properly pricing environmental externalities, stopping the use of fossil fuels, reining in corporate lobbying, and empowering women, the researchers argue.

The full article is available here - And the report itself is available in full here -

9) 24 Hours of Reality: "Earthrise" by Amanda Gorman.

I'm relieved to be able to finish this newsletter with something so positive and heartwarming.
You can listen to her poem here -

"It is a hope that implores us at an uncompromising core to keep rising up for an Earth more than worth fighting for."

Nga mihi nui, Budyong.

Here are a few items of interest from over the last three months. (the bold type is my emphasis).

1) A report was presented to the MDC Environment Committee on October 8th titled –
Wairau Offshore Groundwater Geological Assessment.

It was prepared for Council by BECA in March 2020 and is – “a re-examination of the possibility of an ocean outlet for the Wairau Aquifer by an external technical expert showing that, based on recent offshore geophysical surveys, the geological formation hosting the aquifer extends well out into Cloudy Bay/Cook Strait and is exposed at the seabed, potentially allowing drainage of fresh groundwater to the sea.”

In the presentation it states – “An improved understanding of how groundwater exits the Wairau Aquifer was overdue given sea level rise and the declining levels in the Wairau Aquifer providing less throughflow to maintain the seawater interface in its current position.”

If anyone wants to see the full summary you can check it out here under Item 5 –

2) A presentation was also made updating the Committee on the recent Resource Management review undertaken by the Government.

The presentation outlined that key concerns promoting the review were:

• The way that we have used our land and water has proven to be unsustainable for the natural environment, and as a result New Zealand’s natural environment is under significant pressure.
• Our urban areas are struggling to keep pace with the increasing population and poor management.  
• Climate change has had significant impacts on where we live and how we use our environment. There is an urgent need to reduce carbon emissions, adapt to climate change, and change our land and resource use patterns to mitigate the effects of climate change in a manner that supports our county’s commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The review has also recommended two new major pieces of interrelated legislation:

First to repeal the RMA and replace it with the Natural and Built Environment Act (NBEA). This would have a substantially different approach but would incorporate some of the key principles of the RMA that are appropriate.
The focus of the NBEA would be on: enhancing the quality of the environment; and
achieving positive outcomes to support the wellbeing of present and future generations.

Introduction of new legislation called the Strategic Planning Act (SPA). The SPA would:
set long-term strategic goals; and facilitate the integration of legislative functions across the resource management system.  

The concept of Te Mana o te Taiao (which refers to the importance of maintaining the health of our natural resources, such as air, water, and soil, and their capacity to sustain life) will also be captured in the NBEA.

Recognition of Maori and their rights in our freshwater resources has been reviewed. As a result, the Panel has recommended that the Crown and Māori address and resolve issues sooner rather than later as without such a solution, the allocation and use of water rights will continue to pose significant difficulties for all those involved in the system.

The Panel has emphasized that while the legislative changes proposed are vital, the success of the new resource management system will depend critically on the capacity and capability of all those involved in it. As a result, they have concluded that increased funding and resources need to be provided by both central and local government. The lack of sufficient resources and build capability has been noted as being one of the important reasons for the failure of the RMA to deliver its intended outcomes in the first place.

The Amendment Act also supports the need to improve freshwater management and respond to climate change in New Zealand. This is brought by way of a new freshwater planning process that regional councils and unitary authorities, like Marlborough District Council, must use for proposed freshwater provisions in regional policy statements and regional plans (excluding regional coastal plans). These new freshwater planning process provisions have been introduced to enable regional councils to make changes to their freshwater plans in a robust but more efficient way than those outlined in the current RMA planning process.

The full summary of the presentation can be seen here under Item 13.

3) Here is the summary of the updated report to council on the NZ Biodiversity Strategy.

Te Mana O Te Taiao, the Aotearoa New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy 2020 (the Strategy) was launched in August 2020 and sets out a framework for the protection, restoration and sustainable use of biodiversity or natural resources.
The document has been developed by the Department of Conservation, with specific input from other agencies, including councils and external experts. It is a compilation of existing data and published information in indigenous biodiversity, supplemented by examples from a matauranga Māori perspective.

The Strategy will guide the way all Aotearoa works to protect and restore nature and supersedes the Action Plan published in 2016.

The Strategy sets out a strategic framework for the protection, restoration and sustainable use of biodiversity or natural resources in New Zealand and makes direct connection to a thriving nature, ecosystem health and wellbeing of people and sustainable business. In terms of background, despite the importance of biodiversity, it continues to decline. Biodiversity faces a global crisis, as well as New Zealand, and our own region is not immune.

While there are success stories in conservation the main biodiversity pressures come from:

• Changes in the use of our land and ocean.
• Invasive species
• Pollution
• Harvesting/extraction
• Climate change

The Strategy sets out five key outcomes to be achieved and central to implementation are three pou or pillars which provide direction and will guide towards a transformational change that is needed to achieve the outcomes and 13 key objectives.

The three pillars are:

• Getting the system right
• Empowering action
• Protecting and restoring.

The next phase of the Strategy is the development of an Action Plan which is intended to be undertaken in a collaborative environment involving agencies, iwi and stakeholders.

Te Mana O Te Taiao - Aotearoa New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy 2020 is available here on the Department of Conservation’s website.

Reports such as the three I've highlighted in this newsletter are regularly given by MDC staff to the councillors. These reports are often very useful summaries for the lay person to get their head around particular issues.

4) Here is an interesting graph recently received from James Hansen. It shows an acceleration in global warming. In the past five years global temperature has jumped well above the trend which has been stable at about 0.18°C per decade for the past half century. This deviation is too large to be explained by unforced climate variability. James analyses various possibilities for why this is happening and excludes solar irradiance, ocean heating imbalance, an increase in the magnitude of fast feedbacks and sea ice cover. His conclusion is that it is due to a decrease in atmospheric aerosols. This is the one large unmeasured forcing that climate scientists are aware of. He highlights that it is intentionally unmeasured. I think that is due to inadequate funding and the complexity of the science required to quantify the effect of atmospheric aerosols.

You can find the full analysis here –

5) I listened to an interesting online talk on Pumped Storage organised by “Engineers for Social Responsibility” on October 21st. It was presented by Dr Alastair Barnett who says that recent proposals for pumped hydro storage ignore thorough planning work done in the 1970s. I must say his talk was enlightening and left me wondering whether people with his experience and knowledge are being listened to.

Here is an abstract of his talk for those who are interested.

Until the recent flurry of publicity about the Lake Onslow proposal, pumped hydropower storage had not been seriously considered in New Zealand since the 1970s. At that time the Tekapo canal was under construction to link the two main storage reservoirs (Lakes Tekapo and Pukaki) in the Upper Waitaki power development, and an obvious option was to design the canal to take pumped flow from Pukaki to Tekapo as well as gravity flow from Tekapo to Pukaki. The canal design was duly analysed, constructed and tested to have the required reverse flow capacity, but meanwhile developments of the recently discovered Maui gas field were found to favour use of the gas at a high extraction rate, making a strong case for expanded national reliance on thermal power generation at the new Huntly power station.        
Accordingly design and installation of the necessary pumps at each end of the canal (the Tekapo A and B stations) was discontinued until the end of the productive life of Maui gas supplies, then projected to be at least thirty years away.        
Subsequently the entire public works hydropower design team was disbanded, leaving no-one with institutional memory of a large scale hydro design team planning for the end of Maui gas supplies, although this continued to occur at close to projected rates. Even if a replacement can now be found for the Maui field, the threat of climate change demands an end to thermal generation. Yet until now a lack of action on hydropower development has forced our generators to resort to desperate measures such as large scale importation of coal for the first time, actually increasing our thermal emissions. Wind power and solar power offer a partial solution as new sustainable energy sources, but these continually fluctuate between surplus and deficit, making the smoothing effect of pumped storage even more critical.    
Finally the disastrous outcomes of poor power planning seem to have been recognised this year, but the reaction appears to be one of panic, adopting the first scheme which comes to mind without any comparison with alternatives. In particular, paying to complete the final 10% of the exhaustively studied Tekapo-Pukaki linkage seems not to have been considered.        
The contrast between the deliberate, intensively researched power planning of the 1970s     and the impulsive gambles of the early 2020s was the subject of the presentation.

Here is a link to his submission to the Zero Carbon Act in 2018 focussed on Pumped Storage.
and here is a link to a very informative and relevant article my Molly Melhuish.

6) The Aussies are planning the largest solar and wind energy project in the world in the Pilbara region of WA with the aim of exporting renewable energy to Asia. It is planned to cover 6,500 square kilometres. The first stage would be capable of generating 100 terawatt-hours of renewable electricity each year. That equates to about 40% of Australia’s total electricity generation in 2019.

"The project is backed by a consortium of global renewables developers. Most energy from the Asian Renewable Energy Hub (AREH) will be used to produce green hydrogen and ammonia to be used both domestically, and for shipping to export markets. Some energy from AREH will also be exported as electricity, carried by an undersea electrical cable.
Another Australian project is also seeking to export renewable power to Asia. The 10-gigawatt Sun Cable project, backed by tech entrepreneur Mike Cannon-Brookes, involves a solar farm across 15,000 hectares near Tennant Creek, in the Northern Territory. Power generated will supply Darwin and be exported to Singapore via a 3,800km electrical cable along the sea floor."

It does make me wonder about the impacts on the fragile desert environment in that area. Is this really the solution to our climate disruption problems? I’m sceptical of the whole push for “green” hydrogen production with some of the information available about its limitations. (more in the next item) It raises the whole issue of energy descent and the need to change our consumer lifestyles. (Energy descent is a process whereby a society either voluntarily or involuntarily reduces its total energy consumption.)

You can read more about this project here if interested.

7) I recently heard Susan Krumdieck from Canterbury University talking on National Radio about green hydrogen in the context of the proposed Tiwai Point closure. As usual she didn’t mince her words. Some CKM members are familiar with Susan as we did an online Transition Engineering course that she offered earlier this year.

Here’s a summary of the item.

The government should stop focusing on unproven hydrogen energy technology to tackle climate change, says an expert. Canterbury University professor of mechanical engineering Susan Krumdieck said the government was enthusiastic about the development of green hydrogen, but it was a waste of time and money. Proven technologies could be used to meet New Zealand's zero carbon goal by 2050 - and address transport needs at the same time, she said. Surplus energy from Manapouri should be used to develop a national transport system starting from Invercargill and extending throughout the South Island, before crossing Cook Strait. KiwiRail could be a key part of the development, which would provide thousands of jobs.
"The South Island becomes a net zero (carbon) island, one of the first ones in the world," Krumdieck said. "We have the capability in New Zealand to beef up our rail engineering and our power electric power engineering for transport."
She said it would take about 10 years to electrify the South Island's transport network.

Good to see her getting airtime on National Radio presenting a different view to the popular narrative about “green” hydrogen.

7) I was interested in this analysis of the possible impact of the recent White House action in the US where scientist Michael Kuperberg was removed from his job.

The White House has removed the scientist responsible for the National Climate Assessment, the federal government’s premier contribution to climate knowledge and the foundation for regulations to combat global warming, in what critics interpreted as the latest sign that the Trump administration intends to use its remaining months in office to continue impeding climate science and policy. Dr. Kuperberg’s dismissal appears to be the latest setback in the Trump administration for the National Climate Assessment, a report from 13 federal agencies and outside scientists that the government is required by law to produce every four years. The most recent report, in 2018, found that climate change poses an imminent and dire threat to the United States and its economy. A biased or diminished climate assessment would have wide-ranging implications.
It could be used in court to bolster the positions of fossil fuel companies being sued for climate damages. It could counter congressional efforts to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, where it contributes to global warming. And, ultimately, it could weaken what is known as the “endangerment finding,” a 2009 scientific finding by the Environmental Protection Agency that said carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions pose a threat to human health and therefore are subject to government regulation. Undercutting that finding could make it more difficult to fight climate change under the terms of the Clean Air Act.

Here is a good article about it.

8) Following on from the item in our last newsletter about France's action in this area Belgium has also pledged diplomatic action to halt ecocide crime and Sweden is also discussing the issue. Wouldn't it be good to see our current government getting active in this area and taking some real and effective action.

The pledges follow Green (Ecolo) MP Samuel Cogolati’s proposal in July that the government support the initiative of Vanuatu and the Maldives, which both called last year for serious consideration of amending the International Criminal Court’s Rome Statute to include ecocide. Cogolati is pleased with the government’s commitment, underlining the urgency of the global situation: “We must protect nature and future generations in much stronger, more enforceable ways... Because without water, without forests, without clean air, we cannot survive on Earth. The planet is our common home. It’s time for criminal law to urgently come to the rescue.”

Jojo Mehta from Stop Ecocide explains more about Ecocide: “While our working definition is in essence mass damage and destruction of ecosystems, committed with knowledge of the risks, an expert panel of international criminal lawyers, advised by top climate and environmental scientists, is currently being convened by the Stop Ecocide Foundation. The panel’s remit is to draft a clear and legally robust definition which can be considered for proposal by states at the International Criminal Court. A full list of panel members will be made available in due course."

Sweden has become the latest European state this year to discuss criminalising ecocide. Two separate motions have been submitted to the Swedish parliament by a combination of three political parties.

MEP (Member of European Parliament) Marie Toussaint has also launched an initiative connecting parliamentarians around the world in a coalition for the recognition of ecocide crime. Beginning with 10 parliamentarians from Brazil to Belgium, this group is set to grow fast, and the Stop Ecocide group is looking forward to working together on progressing ecocide law.

If interested you can see more info here and here.

9) Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Orr spoke at the Pacific Ocean Pacific Climate Conference recently where he said –

“Climate change is a key risk to the financial stability of the New Zealand economy.  There was a need for transformational change and a collective and urgent response to climate risks. There is a lot to do and we are late in leaving port. Climate change is a risk that requires a collective response. Grounding a response in our collective knowledge, data and expertise will strengthen and compound the effects of our actions.”
He said assessing risks to banks and insurers, and the financial system as a whole, was the Reserve Bank’s core business and climate risk would sit within that. That would include the effect of drought and rising sea levels on the value of houses and farms.
“There are also risks associated with the transition to a low carbon economy, such as changing investor appetite and consumer demand. New Zealand being a small island nation with an agricultural-based economy means we will be impacted differently than others. And thus, we must keep our preparations in tune with our environment and resources, for our economy to prosper.”

10) The company Solidia has developed a new low carbon cement which looks promising. In 2016 world cement production generated around 2.2 billion tonnes of CO2 - equivalent to 8% of the global total. With current technology for every tonne of cement produced a tonne of CO2 is released into the atmosphere. Because the cement is cured by CO2 rather than water the process has the added bonus of saving water resources.

Here’s an extract about it:

By changing the chemistry of cement, Solidia both lowers emissions at the cement plant and consumes CO2 in the production of concrete. Our cement reacts with CO2 instead of water. During curing, the chemical reaction with our cement breaks apart the CO2 molecules and captures the carbon to make limestone that glues the concrete together.
For production of precast concrete that is cured in kilns, when you combine the emissions reduction during cement production with CO2 consumption during curing, we reduce cement’s carbon footprint by up to 70%.
There is a different carbon delivery system developed for ready-mix. Since we can’t use CO2 gas at a construction site, we had to introduce it into our concrete in solid or liquid form. We are partnering with companies that are turning waste CO2 into a family of chemicals, like oxalic or even citric acid – the same one in orange juice. We use these acids to react with our cement and pack in as much as four times more carbon, resulting in carbon-negative concrete.
That means that, in just a few hours, one kilometre of road could permanently consume the same amount of CO2 that nearly 100,000 trees absorb in one year. Thanks to chemistry and waste CO2, we have the potential to transform concrete – the second most utilised material on the planet – into a carbon sink for the planet.

Sounds promising. Let's hope this results in real changes in cement production around the world. It's not clear to me what the economic comparisons are between the new and present technologies and how fast change might happen.
You can read more about this technology here


Did you know 50 – 60% of annual CO2 from fossil fuel emissions adds to atmospheric CO2 increases. 30% goes into the water and the remainder goes to soil and plants.

Nga  mihi, Budyong