Queensland and North Australia Rainfall Variability

Queensland experiences some of the highest rainfall variability in the world. The chart below shows an analysis of the historical rainfall records from 1889–2017 and reveals 9 sequences of wet and dry periods, each lasting from 5 to 13 years. Our variable climate, especially long periods of drought, is one of the biggest challenges when running a successful grazing property in north Australia.

The maps also indicate graphically the situation for north Australia and includes the Northern Territory.

The maps are easier to see if downloaded separately from the original website.

Queensland has had a recent extended period of low rainfall [ see reddish and brown areas], while north and northwest Australia has been wetter than normal [blue and green areas].

There are some indications that at least for Queensland it might be getting wetter. 

Queensland's Extended Wet/Dry Periods (1889-2017) (PDF, 2.1M, last updated 01:48PM, 21 June 2017)*

The Drought and Climate Adaptation Program (DCAP) is an initiative to improve drought preparedness and resilience for Queensland producers. The program aims to do this by delivering a range of research, development and extension projects.

The Queensland Drought Mitigation Centre is a collaboration of national and international climate modelling expertise and has been established to facilitate the research, development and extension projects under the DCAP program. The Centre is a collaboration between the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries (DAF), Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation (DSITI) and the University of Southern Queensland (USQ).  It has a Queensland focus, but data tends to cover north Australia more generally.

Drought and Climate Adaptation Program

The research projects include:

• Managing for climate variability and improving drought preparedness in Queensland grazing enterprises: Rural specialists' perspectives and suggestions
• Quantifying and communicating risks associated with multi-year drought in Queensland
• Customised Pasture Alerts by email
• Redevelopment of the LongPaddock website
• Necessary climate change projections data for quantitative agricultural risk management
• Communicating climate change impacts on Queensland’s agricultural sectors
• Learning from the past – incorporating palaeoclimate data into water security planning and decision-making
• Improving seasonal forecasts
• Predicting multi-year droughts
• Quantifying multi-year droughts
• Enhanced multi-peril crop insurance
• Economic value of risk management from seasonal forecasts
• Developing drought monitoring indices
• Developing crop forecasting models

• Enhancing decision support tools
• Crop production modelling under climate change
• Regional climate change adaptation
• Managing for climate variability workshops

More details on the results of the projects will be available soon.

This type of approach may offer deeper insights for the rural communities in north Australia, as well as mining and other industries in the north.

Sowing Seed of Zoysia Turf - The Weather!

Timeliness is critical in many parts of the Australian mainland for successful sowing of zoysia seed for a turf area.

Not too hot, and not too cold is a good theme.

In northern areas above the Tropic of Capricorn, it is,  in a broad sense okay to sow most times of the year, except for cooler highland areas and inland where nights can be awfully cold in those winter months........avoid them!  We also caution about sowing in most years after April [last year was an exception as it was still very hot at that time] as with cooling and shortening days, while germination and establishment will be okay, it is almost impossible to easily develop a lawn due to cooler conditions with development often delayed until the weather warms after August.

As a best practice guide, sow from early to mid August onwards, when days are warm [above 25C] and nights around 18 -20C, or more.

The amount and quality of light is also important, with the much shorter days prior to August also slowing plant development, even slowing germination as zoysia is very light sensitive at germination.  As days lengthen noticeably from August it provides a boost to young zoysia growth, especially in combination with the arrival of warmer weather.

By October, storm rains are approaching and erosion can be an incredibly tricky issue on a bare site just ready for sowing, so some erosion management on the site is often needed, with a light soil mulch cover often a possible solution. However, it is warmer and germination is often a little quicker.

Ideally, a balance between August through September is mostly the best time to sow, striking a balance between warm enough but also when irrigation to establish the area is most effective and the weather is not so hot that applying water to a new area is often a problem.  It can be that there may even be water restrictions late in the dry season in some locations.

With suitable site management plans in place sowing through to December is certainly feasible, especially using hydroseeding that offers surface protection from the mulch placed on site with the seed.  Avoiding monsoonal weather months is sensible, unless there are very pressing needs, eg experienced landscape professionals.  Even then, more care is needed, and often inter monsoon periods may offer opportunities to get the planting done with less chance of failure.

Elsewhere around Australia in more temperate and sub tropical areas, later sowing is more sensible with September and October more likely to be the appropriate early sowing months.  Avoid late summer [March] and into autumn - there may not be enough time to fully develop the lawn before the cold weather arrives.  Remember that all sites do vary, even with some local minor quirks.

Help is available though,  to allow some strategic planning.........the BOM has excellent long term records for climate statistics for almost everywhere around Australia.  Get online and check your area.

You need daily average maxima to be near or above 20C and minima to be in the 10 - 15C range or more.  If your area is outside this range..........wait until it warms up more.  A prudent two week wait for warmer weather can pay off! 

While these are averages suitable for planning, daily records are also available for the past 24 months, giving a more accurate near term idea of temperature and rainfall trends.

If the weather is still cold........WAIT.  Zoysia is cold tolerant once established, but small young seedlings can be affected by cold weather.

Seed priming may help speed germination.  Read about it in a recent blog post.

Short Answers to Hard Questions on Climate Change

Short Answers to Hard
Questions About Climate Change

By JUSTIN GILLIS NOV. 28, 2015

Photo

Credit James Yang for The New York Times

The issue can be overwhelming. The science is complicated. Predictions about the fate of the planet carry endless caveats and asterisks.
We get it.
And so, as the Paris climate talks get underway, we’ve provided quick answers to often-asked questions about climate change. You can submit your own questions here.

How much is the planet heating up?

1. 1.7 degrees is actually a significant amount.
   As of this October, the Earth had warmed by about 1.7 degrees Fahrenheit since 1880, when tracking began at a global scale. That figure includes the surface of the ocean. The warming is greater over land, and greater still in the Arctic and parts of Antarctica.
   The number may sound low, but as an average over the surface of an entire planet, it is actually high, which explains why much of the land ice on the planet is starting to melt and the oceans are rising at an accelerating pace. The heat accumulating in the Earth because of human emissions is roughly equal to the heat that would be released by 400,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs exploding across the planet every day.
   Scientists believe most and probably all of the warming since 1950 was caused by the human release of greenhouse gases. If emissions continue unchecked, they say the global warming could ultimately exceed 8 degrees Fahrenheit, which would transform the planet and undermine its capacity to support a large human population.
2. 
   
3. How much trouble are we in?
   For future generations, big trouble.
   The risks are much greater over the long run than over the next few decades, but the emissions that create those risks are happening now. Over the coming 25 or 30 years, scientists say, the climate is likely to resemble that of today, although gradually getting warmer. Rainfall will be heavier in many parts of the world, but the periods between rains will most likely grow hotter and therefore drier. The number of hurricanes and typhoons may actually fall, but the ones that do occur will draw energy from a hotter ocean surface, and therefore may be more intense, on average, than those of the past. Coastal flooding will grow more frequent and damaging.
   Longer term, if emissions continue to rise unchecked, the risks are profound. Scientists fear climate effects so severe that they might destabilize governments, produce waves of refugees, precipitate the sixth mass extinction of plants and animals in Earth’s history, and melt the polar ice caps, causing the seas to rise high enough to flood most of the world’s coastal cities.
   All of this could take hundreds or even thousands of years to play out, conceivably providing a cushion of time for civilization to adjust, but experts cannot rule out abrupt changes, such as a collapse of agriculture, that would throw society into chaos much sooner. Bolder efforts to limit emissions would reduce these risks, or at least slow the effects, but it is already too late to eliminate the risks entirely.
4. 
   
5. Is there anything I can do?
   Fly less, drive less, waste less.
   There are lots of simple ways to reduce your own carbon footprint, and most of them will save you money. You can plug leaks in your home insulation to save power, install a smart thermostat, switch to more efficient light bulbs, turn off the lights in any room where you are not using them, drive fewer miles by consolidating trips or taking public transit, waste less food, and eat less meat.
   Perhaps the biggest single thing individuals can do on their own is to take fewer airplane trips; just one or two fewer plane rides per year can save as much in emissions as all the other actions combined. If you want to be at the cutting edge, you can look at buying an electric or hybrid car, putting solar panels on your roof, or both.
   If you want to offset your emissions, you can buy certificates, with the money going to projects that protect forests, capture greenhouse gases and so forth. Some airlines sell these to offset emissions from their flights, and after some scandals in the early days, they started to scrutinize the projects closely, so the offsets can now be bought in good conscience. You can also buy offset certificates in a private marketplace, from companies such as TerraPass in San Francisco that follow strict rules set up by the state of California; some people even give these as holiday gifts. Yet another way: In states that allow you to choose your own electricity supplier, you can often elect to buy green electricity; you pay slightly more, with the money going into a fund that helps finance projects like wind farms.
   In the end, though, experts do not believe the needed transformation in the energy system can happen without strong state and national policies. So speaking up and exercising your rights as a citizen matters as much as anything else you can do.
6. 
   
7. What’s the optimistic scenario?
8. Several things have to break our way.
9. In the best case that scientists can imagine, several things happen: Earth turns out to be less sensitive to greenhouse gases than currently believed; plants and animals manage to adapt to the changes that have already become inevitable; human society develops much greater political will to bring emissions under control; and major technological breakthroughs occur that help society both to limit emissions and to adjust to climate change.
   The two human-influenced variables are not entirely independent, of course: Technological breakthroughs that make clean energy cheaper than fossil fuels would also make it easier to develop the political will for rapid action.
   Scientists say the odds of all these things breaking our way are not very high, unfortunately. The Earth could just as easily turn out to be more sensitive to greenhouse gases than less. Global warming seems to be causing chaos in parts of the natural world already, and that seems likely to get worse, not better. So in the view of the experts, simply banking on a rosy scenario without any real plan would be dangerous. They believe the only way to limit the risks is to limit emissions.
   
   What’s the worst-case scenario? 
10. There are many.
11. That is actually hard to say, which is one reason scientists are urging that emissions be cut; they want to limit the possibility of any worst-case scenario coming to pass. Perhaps the greatest fear is a collapse of food production, accompanied by escalating prices and mass starvation. Even with runaway emissions growth, it is unclear how likely this would be, as farmers are able to adjust their crops and farming techniques, to a degree, to adapt to climatic changes. Another possibility would be a disintegration of the polar ice sheets, leading to fast-rising seas that would force people to abandon many of the world’s great cities and would lead to the loss of trillions of dollars worth of property and other assets. Scientists also worry about other wild-card scenarios like the predictable cycles of Asian monsoons’ becoming less reliable. Billions of people depend on monsoons to provide water for crops, so any disruptions would be catastrophic.
12. 
    
13. 6. ​Will a tech breakthrough help us?
    Even Bill Gates says don’t count on it, unless we commit the cash.
    As more companies, governments and researchers devote themselves to the problem, the chances of big technological advances are improving. But even many experts who are optimistic about technological solutions warn that current efforts are not enough. For instance, spending on basic energy research is only a quarter to a third of the level that several in-depth reports have recommended. And public spending on agricultural research has stagnated even though climate change poses growing risks to the food supply. People like Bill Gates have argued that crossing our fingers and hoping for technological miracles is not a strategy — we have to spend the money that would make these things more likely to happen.
14. 
    
15. 7. How much will the seas rise?
    The real question is not how high, but how fast.
    The ocean is rising at a rate of about a foot per century. That causes severe effects on coastlines, forcing governments and property owners to spend tens of billions of dollars fighting erosion. But if that rate continued, it would probably be manageable, experts say.
    The risk is that the rate will accelerate markedly. If emissions continue unchecked, then the temperature at the earth’s surface could soon resemble a past epoch called the Pliocene, when a great deal of ice melted and the ocean rose something like 80 feet compared to today. A recent study found that burning all the fossil fuels in the ground would fully melt the polar ice sheets, raising the sea level by more than 160 feet over an unknown period.
    With all of that said, the crucial issue is probably not how much the oceans are going to rise, but how fast. And on that point, scientists are pretty much flying blind. Their best information comes from studying Earth’s history, and it suggests that the rate can on occasion hit a foot per decade, which can probably be thought of as the worst-case scenario. A rate even half that would force rapid retreat from the coasts and, some experts think, throw human society into crisis. Even if the rise is much slower, many of the world’s great cities will flood eventually. Studies suggest that big cuts in emissions could slow the rise, buying crucial time for society to adapt to an altered coastline.
    
    
16. 
    
17. 8. Are the predictions reliable?
    They’re not perfect, but they’re grounded in solid science.
    The idea that Earth is sensitive to greenhouse gases is confirmed by many lines of scientific evidence. For instance, the basic physics suggesting that an increase of carbon dioxide traps more heat was discovered in the 19th century, and has been verified in thousands of laboratory experiments.
    Climate science does contain uncertainties, of course. The biggest is the degree to which global warming sets off feedback loops, such as a melting of sea ice that will darken the surface and cause more heat to be absorbed, melting more ice, and so forth. It is not clear exactly how much the feedbacks will intensify the warming; some of them could even partially offset it. This uncertainty means that computer forecasts can give only a range of future climate possibilities, not absolute predictions.
    But even if those computer forecasts did not exist, a huge amount of evidence suggests that scientists have the basic story right. The most important evidence comes from the study of past climate conditions, a field known as paleoclimate research. The amount of carbon dioxide in the air has fluctuated naturally in the past, and every time it rises, the Earth warms up, ice melts, and the ocean rises. A hundred miles inland from today’s East Coast, seashells can be dug from ancient beaches that are three million years old. These past conditions are not a perfect guide to the future, either, because humans are pumping carbon dioxide into the air far faster than nature has ever done.
18. 
    
19. 9. Why do people question climate change?
    Hint: ideology.
    Most of the attacks on climate science are coming from libertarians and other political conservatives who do not like the policies that have been proposed to fight global warming. Instead of negotiating over those policies and trying to make them more subject to free-market principles, they have taken the approach of blocking them by trying to undermine the science.
    This ideological position has been propped up by money from fossil-fuel interests, which have paid to create organizations, fund conferences and the like. The scientific arguments made by these groups usually involve cherry-picking data, such as focusing on short-term blips in the temperature record or in sea ice, while ignoring the long-term trends.
    The most extreme version of climate denialism is to claim that scientists are engaged in a worldwide hoax to fool the public so that the government can gain greater control over people’s lives. As the arguments have become more strained, many oil and coal companies have begun to distance themselves publicly from climate denialism, but some are still helping to finance the campaigns of politicians who espouse such views.
20. 
    
21. 10. Is crazy weather tied to climate change?
    In some cases, yes.
    Scientists have published strong evidence that the warming climate is making heat waves more frequent and intense. It is also causing heavier rainstorms, and coastal flooding is getting worse as the oceans rise because of human emissions. Global warming has intensified droughts in regions like the Middle East, and it may have strengthened the drought in California.
    In many other cases, though, the linkage to global warming for particular trends is uncertain or disputed. That is partly from a lack of good historical weather data, but it is also scientifically unclear how certain types of events may be influenced by the changing climate.
    Another factor: While the climate is changing, people’s perceptions may be changing faster. The Internet has made us all more aware of weather disasters in distant places. On social media, people have a tendency to attribute virtually any disaster to climate change, but in many cases there is no scientific support for doing so.11. Will anyone benefit from global warming?
22. 
    
23. In certain ways, yes.
    Countries with huge, frozen hinterlands, including Canada and Russia, could see some economic benefits as global warming makes agriculture, mining and the like more possible in those places. It is perhaps no accident that the Russians have always been reluctant to make ambitious climate commitments, and President Vladimir V. Putin has publicly questioned the science of climate change.
    However, both of those countries could suffer enormous damage to their natural resources; escalating fires in Russia are already killing millions of acres of forests per year. Moreover, some experts believe countries that view themselves as likely winners from global warming will come to see the matter differently once they are swamped by millions of refugees from less fortunate lands.
24. 
    
25. 12. Is there any reason for hope?
    If you share this with 50 friends, maybe.
    Scientists have been warning since the 1980s that strong policies were needed to limit emissions. Those warnings were ignored, and greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have since built up to potentially dangerous levels. So the hour is late.
    But after 20 years of largely fruitless diplomacy, the governments of the world are finally starting to take the problem seriously. A deal that is likely to be reached in Paris in December will commit nearly every country to some kind of action. Religious leaders like Pope Francis are speaking out. Low-emission technologies, such as electric cars, are improving. Leading corporations are making bold promises to switch to renewable power and stop forest destruction. Around the world, many states and cities are pledging to go far beyond the goals set by their national governments.
    What is still largely missing in all this are the voices of ordinary citizens. Because politicians have a hard time thinking beyond the next election, they tend to tackle hard problems only when the public rises up and demands it. 

-----------------------------------------

This is from the NY Times of 28 November as a lead into the Paris Climate meetings, primarily directed at US citizens.

A good short 12 Q and A summary.......

see here for the original - http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/28/science/what-is-climate-change.html?mabReward=A5&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&region=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine&_r=0

And......sorry about the paragraph numbering - it is a bit crazy, and it was not easily fixed..

Early Rainfall or Not - late 2015?

The BOM recently issued the late August 2015 assessment of onset of the rain season across N Australia.  For the Darwin / Daly region, a slightly higher chance now of earlier rain that exceeds the 50mm accumulation. 

Maybe for the Top End it is now somewhat confusing as it could be argued that it is about evenly poised between early and later accumulation of 50mm of rain, as the difference is quite small for earlier rain.  Is there much difference between 5% either side the 50%?

I think there are serious quibbles about the definition used - 50mm of accumulated rainfall after September 1, but that is what they are using at present.  There is no value apparently placed on close events nor size of an individual event or period between events, features that could be more relevant for effective rainfall.  More work needed in this space I think.

However, some progress is being achieved.

Recent analysis is available here - 

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/rainfall-onset/#tabs=About-the-rainfall-onset

with additional links to further mapping on adjacent pages.

The BOM links to this rainfall outlook do seem to indicate a good rainfall situation for central Australia though with more rainfall considered likely for the pre End of year period.

If you think the analysis needs more work, contact the BOM!   The more that do, the greater likelihood of further R and D on this important area.

-----------------

This was written a month ago, and yes, there was some early rain, in some cases more than 50mm.  BUT........it has been extremely dry since and the pattern of continuing dry weather at least around Darwin seems to be likely to continue.  Any pasture growth from those early events is well and truly now dried off.

Would 50mm after 1 October be more appropriate as a measure of early seasonal change, rather than 1 September?

What is Warming the World?

This set of recent data from NASA has been picked up by Bloomberg and spread rather more widely in the business community.

I believe it does provide a lot of easily seen information to rebut the climate change deniers.  Will they accept any data?

It seems the strongest cohort of climate change deniers are located in the US political system along with the lobbyists who gild their cages and support their political campaigns.

While there is leadership around, it needs to do more.

http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/?utm_content=bufferd5d70&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer

The link is to a graphic infographic.  

Well worth watching, clearly showing the overriding effects of greenhouse gases, predominantly, carbon dioxide on global temperatures.

Interestingly............some very hot weather in Europe right now, with Paris recording the hottest day ever yesterday - over 40C,  and London also having very hot, near record breaking high temperatures.

Pope Francis Pushes for Environment and Climate Change Sensibility - Encyclical 2015

Yes, the Pope has spoken out on the environment.  A link will take you the document in English but it is also available in a number of other world languages including Arabic too.

 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html


Available publicly the day after the Australian document on developing north Australia is ironic. That document continues to foster debate in Australia today, with extensive media coverage and more expected in coming weeks and months.

The Pope does not pull any punches in his encyclical and quite clearly in layman's terms comes out to support the premise that a major cause of climate change has been and is now, atmosphere changes from increased levels of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels also leading to other effects.

He uses clear, easy to read language and does document material, relying on scientific evidence.

There are a few excerpts around with this one which appeared on the ABC web site in Australia a reasonable overview  - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-19/pope-francis-warns-humanity-about-pace-of-consumption/6557822

" Pope Francis has issued a major encyclical on the environment, called Laudato Si (Praise Be), On the Care of Our Common Home. Here are some key excerpts from the official English version:

On climate change and its causes

In recent decades this warming has been accompanied by a constant rise in the sea level and, it would appear, by an increase of extreme weather events, even if a scientifically determinable cause cannot be assigned to each particular phenomenon. Humanity is called to recognise the need for changes of lifestyle, production and consumption, in order to combat this warming or at least the human causes which produce or aggravate it. It is true that there are other factors (such as volcanic activity, variations in the Earth's orbit and axis, the solar cycle), yet a number of scientific studies indicate that most global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides and others) released mainly as a result of human activity. Concentrated in the atmosphere, these gases do not allow the warmth of the sun's rays reflected by the Earth to be dispersed in space. The problem is aggravated by a model of development based on the intensive use of fossil fuels, which is at the heart of the worldwide energy system.

On dangers to the planet

If present trends continue, this century may well witness extraordinary climate change and an unprecedented destruction of ecosystems, with serious consequences for all of us. A rise in the sea level, for example, can create extremely serious situations, if we consider that a quarter of the world's population lives on the coast or nearby, and that the majority of our megacities are situated in coastal areas. Climate change is a global problem with grave implications: environmental, social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods. It represents one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our day. Its worst impact will probably be felt by developing countries in coming decades.

Doomsday predictions can no longer be met with irony or disdain. We may well be leaving to coming generations debris, desolation and filth. The pace of consumption, waste and environmental change has so stretched the planet's capacity that our contemporary lifestyle, unsustainable as it is, can only precipitate catastrophes, such as those which even now periodically occur in different areas of the world. The effects of the present imbalance can only be reduced by our decisive action, here and now. We need to reflect on our accountability before those who will have to endure the dire consequences.

On consumption, sustainable development and wealth disparity

We all know that it is not possible to sustain the present level of consumption in developed countries and wealthier sectors of society where the habit of wasting and discarding has reached unprecedented levels. The exploitation of the planet has already exceeded acceptable limits and we still have not solved the problem of poverty.

We fail to see that some are mired in desperate and degrading poverty, with no way out, while others have not the faintest idea of what to do with their possessions, vainly showing off their supposed superiority and leaving behind them so much waste, which, if it were the case everywhere, would destroy the planet. In practice, we continue to tolerate that some consider themselves more human than others, as if they had been born with greater rights.

On fossil fuels

There is an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the emission of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically reduced - for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of renewable energy. Worldwide there is minimal access to clean and renewable energy. There is still a need to develop adequate storage technologies.

We know that technology based on the use of highly-polluting fossil fuels - especially coal, but also oil and, to a lesser degree, gas - needs to be progressively replaced without delay. Until greater progress is made in developing widely accessible sources of renewable energy, it is legitimate to choose the lesser of two evils or to find short-term solutions. But the international community has still not reached adequate agreements about the responsibility for paying the costs of this energy transition.

On political myopia and bureaucratic inertia

Recent world summits on the environment have not lived up to expectations because, due to lack of political will, they were unable to reach truly meaningful and effective global agreements on the environment.

A politics concerned with immediate results, supported by consumerist sectors of the population, is driven to produce short-term growth. In response to electoral interests, governments are reluctant to upset the public with measures, which could affect the level of consumption or create risks for foreign investment. The myopia of power politics delays the inclusion of a far-sighted environmental agenda within the overall agenda of governments.

On market forces and carbon credits

Once more, we need to reject a magical conception of the market, which would suggest that problems can be solved simply by an increase in the profits of companies or individuals. Is it realistic to hope that those who are obsessed with maximising profits will stop to reflect on the environmental damage which they will leave behind for future generations? Where profits alone count, there can be no thinking about the rhythms of nature, its phases of decay and regeneration, or the complexity of ecosystems which may be gravely upset by human intervention.

The strategy of buying and selling "carbon credits" can lead to a new form of speculation, which would not help reduce the emission of polluting gases worldwide. This system seems to provide a quick and easy solution under the guise of a certain commitment to the environment, but in no way does it allow for the radical change which present circumstances require. Rather, it may simply become a ploy which permits maintaining the excessive consumption of some countries and sectors.

On relationship between banks, environment and production

Saving banks at any cost, making the public pay the price, foregoing a firm commitment to reviewing and reforming the entire system, only reaffirms the absolute power of a financial system. A power which has no future and will only give rise to new crises after a slow, costly and only apparent recovery. The financial crisis of 2007-08 provided an opportunity to develop a new economy, more attentive to ethical principles, and new ways of regulating speculative financial practices and virtual wealth. But the response to the crisis did not include rethinking the outdated criteria which continue to rule the world.

Production is not always rational, and is usually tied to economic variables which assign to products a value that does not necessarily correspond to their real worth. This frequently leads to an overproduction of some commodities, with unnecessary impact on the environment and with negative results on regional economies.

The financial bubble also tends to be a productive bubble. The problem of the real economy is not confronted with vigour, yet it is the real economy which makes diversification and improvement in production possible, helps companies to function well, and enables small and medium businesses to develop and create employment.

On effect of mining on the environment and local people

Underground water sources in many places are threatened by the pollution produced in certain mining, farming and industrial activities, especially in countries lacking adequate regulation or controls. It is not only a question of industrial waste. Detergents and chemical products, commonly used in many places of the world, continue to pour into our rivers, lakes and seas.

The export of raw materials to satisfy markets in the industrialised north has caused harm locally, as for example in mercury pollution in gold mining or sulphur dioxide pollution in copper mining. There is a pressing need to calculate the use of environmental space throughout the world for depositing gas residues which have been accumulating for two centuries and have created a situation which currently affects all the countries of the world.

In this sense, it is essential to show special care for indigenous communities and their cultural traditions. They are not merely one minority among others, but should be the principal dialogue partners, especially when large projects affecting their land are proposed. For them, land is not a commodity but rather a gift from God and from their ancestors who rest there - a sacred space with which they need to interact if they are to maintain their identity and values. When they remain on their land, they themselves care for it best. Nevertheless, in various parts of the world, pressure is being put on them to abandon their homelands to make room for agricultural or mining projects which are undertaken without regard for the degradation of nature and culture.

On public pressure on companies and boycotts

A change in lifestyle could bring healthy pressure to bear on those who wield political, economic and social power. This is what consumer movements accomplish by boycotting certain products. They prove successful in changing the way businesses operate, forcing them to consider their environmental footprint and their patterns of production. When social pressure affects their earnings, businesses clearly have to find ways to produce differently. This shows us the great need for a sense of social responsibility on the part of consumers.  "

------

The full document is about 82 pages and if interested in the environment is essential reading, covering ethical issues about the environment and how it has influenced social and moral issues.

I am sure it will not be forgotten as ordinary citizens, scientists and politicians pore over the document in the coming weeks and months.

The Pope carries a bit of clout, and the document and various extracts will be widely read .......worldwide.

Will it influence the world's politicians?  Early days, but the US President has reacted positively to the material.

Lets hope that a decent outcome can be achieved later in 2015 at the climate summit in Paris.  The Pope seems to believe that significant change is needed..........for the world and us.

Crops - Critical Role in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide

Each year, the planet balances its budget. 

The carbon dioxide absorbed by plants in the spring and summer as they convert solar energy into food is released back to the atmosphere in autumn and winter, in the northern hemisphere. Levels of the greenhouse gas fall, only to rise again, as summer crops in the south take up more CO2.

But the budget has gotten bigger. Over the last five decades, the magnitude of this rise and fall has grown nearly 50 percent in the Northern Hemisphere, as the amount of the greenhouse gas taken in and released has increased. Now, new research shows that humans and their crops have a lot to do with it, highlighting the profound impact people have on the Earth’s atmosphere.

In a study published Wednesday, Nov. 19, in Nature, scientists at Boston University, the University of New Hampshire, the University of Michigan, the University of Minnesota, the University of Wisconsin-Madison and McGill University show that a steep rise in the productivity of crops grown for food accounts for as much as 25 percent of the increase in this carbon dioxide (CO2) seasonality.

It’s not that crops are adding more CO2 to the atmosphere; rather, if crops are like a sponge for CO2, the sponge has simply gotten bigger and can hold and release more of the gas.

With global food productivity expected to double over the next 50 years, the researchers say the findings should be used to improve climate models and better understand the atmospheric CO2 buffering capacity of ecosystems, particularly as climate change may continue to perturb the greenhouse gas budget.

We need to remember that plants are a critical feature in the CO2 balance.  Grow more of them!!

There is more here - [ where this info came from] - http://www.news.wisc.edu/23298

Sunflowers - an iconic crop

Composting - Vital for Better Soil Health, Fertility and Reducing Erosion

Composting reduces waste and builds healthy soil to support local food production and protect against the impacts of extreme weather, from droughts to heavy rainfall. That’s the message of two new reports from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR):

State of Composting in the U.S.: What, Why, Where & How <http://www.ilsr.org/state-of-composting/> and

Growing Local Fertility: A Guide to Community Composting<http://www.ilsr.org/size-matters-report-shows-small-scale-community-based-composting/>

Compost is the dark, crumbly, earthy-smelling material produced by the managed decomposition of organic materials such as yard trimmings and food scraps. Compost is valued for its ability to enhance soil structure and quality. It adds organic matter to soil, improves plant growth and water retention, cuts chemical fertilizer use, and stems stormwater run-off and soil erosion. In the U.S., 40 million hectares (28% of all cropland) are eroding above soil loss tolerance rates, meaning the long-term productivity of the soil to support plant growth cannot be maintained.  

It might be worse comparatively in Australia, and China certainly has major problems!

compost production- commercial scale

Applying a meagre 12mm of compost to the all of the severely eroded cropland in the USA would require about 3 billion tonness of compost,” says Brenda Platt, the lead author of both reports and director of ILSR’s Composting Makes $en$e Project. “There is not enough compost to meet that need.  No organic scrap should be wasted.”

Compost also protects the climate:  it sequesters carbon in soil and it reduces methane emissions from landfills by cutting the amount of biodegradable materials disposed. (Methane is a greenhouse gas with a global warming potential 72 times more potent than CO2 in the short-term.) A growing body of evidence demonstrates the effectiveness of compost to store carbon in soil for a wide range of soil types and land uses.

Yard trimmings composting programs are fairly well developed in the U.S.

Of the 4,914 composting operations identified in the U.S. for State of Composting in the U.S., about 71% compost only green waste / yard trimmings (based on 44 states reporting). Food scrap recovery is slowly growing. More than 180 US cities and counties are now collecting residential food scraps for composting, up from only a handful a few years ago.  “There is more demand for composting, especially from businesses and institutions that want to source separate food scraps and not throw them in the landfill,” says Nora Goldstein, Editor of BioCycle, which conducted the state-by-state assessment of composting infrastructure and policies, “We not only need more infrastructure to compost these materials, we need more infrastructure to manufacture high quality compost that our soils — and climate — desperately need.”

 

compost berm used in erosion control

State of Composting in the U.S. is the first comprehensive review of composting basics, national and state statistics, job generation data, model programs, and policy opportunities.

The report calls for a national soils strategy and for new rules and programs to grow composting, especially at the local community level: including streamlined permitting for facilities, training programs, technical and financing assistance, strong recycling and composting goals, disposal bans, compost procurement policies, and more.  “The beauty of composting is that it can be small-scale, large-scale and everything in between,” says Brenda Platt. “Why send resources out of the community when our neighbourhoods need food and our soils are starved for organic matter?”

I would imagine that the report for Australia and the NT in particular would be quite similar.  However, around Darwin mulched green waste is widely used in domestic areas but much less so commercially and for landscape rehabilitation where it can be especially useful in restarting organic processes on damaged soils.

A sneak peek inside State of Composting in the U.S.: What, Why, Where & How:

·      Section 1, What Is Composting and Compost, describes the composting process, what materials can be composted, composting systems, and the many uses for compost.

·      Section 2, Why Compost?, identifies the key benefits of composting to create jobs, protect watersheds, reduce climate impacts, and improve soil vitality.

·      Section 3, Where Is Composting Happening, provides a national snapshot of composting infrastructure, current policies, and model programs that could be replicated.

·      Section 4, How to Advance Composting, outlines new rules and initiatives to grow composting, and describes the importance of a diverse and locally based infrastructure.

ILSR’s companion report, Growing Local Fertility: A Guide to Community Composting, features successful community-scale composting initiatives, their benefits, tips for replication, key start-up steps, and the need for private and public sector support. 

Produced by ILSR’s Composting Makes $en$e Project and the Highfields Centre for Composting, this guide highlights more than 30 diverse urban and rural small-scale locally based composting programs in 14 states and the District of Columbia.  They include schools, pedal-powered collection systems, worker-owned cooperatives, community gardens, and farms employing multiple composting techniques.

To download both reports, visit  www.ilsr.org/initiatives/composting

New Ideas - Where do Winds Come From?

Not only do trees fix carbon and produce oxygen; a new and controversial paper says they collectively unleash forces powerful enough to drive global wind patterns and are a core feature in the circulation of the climate system.

If the theory proves correct, the peer-reviewed international paper co-authored by Australian scientist Douglas Sheil will overturn two centuries of conventional wisdom about what makes wind. And it will undermine key principles of every model on which climate predictions are based.

The paper, Where do winds come from? A new theory on how water vapour condensation influences atmospheric pressure and dynamics, is not designed to challenge the orthodox view on climate science. But Sheil, a professor of forest ecology and conservation at Southern Cross University's School of Environment, Science and Engineering, says he is not surprised that is how the paper has been received internationally.

Boiled down, he says, bad science is protecting shoddy climate models.

The paper, lead authored by Anastasia Makarieva, sparked a long-running and furious debate about whether it should be published at all. At the end of a bruising assessment process the editorial panel of the prestigious journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics chose to publish and be damned.

This above is a brief extract from the Weekend Australian article on the subject.

It is controversial, but then so was Copernicus's assertion that the earth rotated about the sun, while Galileo also had a few controversial ideas and theories, since often proved true.  Science advances by new ideas being developed and then tested........let's wait and see what occurs as a result of this paper.

See more here - http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/branching-out-on-climate/story-e6frg6xf-1226566999146

and the paper is here - http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/13/1039/2013/acp-13-1039-2013.pdf  including a brief abstract.

and more comment here - http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2013/02/02/makarieva-et-al-make-the-headlines-with-where-do-winds-come-from-paper/

Certainly generating a lively debate so far.  Data though, is plausible......will be more to come for sure.

Climate Change Reprise

Unfortunately the Australian Financial Review newspaper usually has a pay firewall. But they seem to have relented over this article now available here -
http://afr.com/p/lifestyle/review/rethinking_climate_scepticism_2oSrxbSmLf4FhjNRyzAQpN

By Mark Lawson, and in the AFR on Friday November 25 2011 it is an excellent overview of the current state of climate debate and climate science as well as climate change issues, and worth reading.

There has been a lot of editorial comment about the article, mostly positive, over the past few days.

Take the chance and read it......... free.

Carbon Science - There is More Phytosynthesis Occurring!

It is not all doom.....recent experiments and measurements have shown that current phytosynthesis - globally - is about 25% more than has previously been calculated.

The work is based on isotopic analysis of atmospheric carbon dioxide, but essentially follows flows of oxygen and carbon dioxide in and out and through the atmosphere.

Plants take up CO2 and emit oxygen, and from that, using isotope analysis total phytosynthesis is estimated..........and it is a lot more than previously thought.

It will have considerable effect on the performance of the climate change models, but this nett phytosynthesis increase still has to be incorporated into the large and complex models used.

Read more details here in a CSIRO media release-
http://qcl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/agribusiness-and-general/general/new-leaf-turns-for-carbon-science/2308093.aspx?storypage=0

BUT.....is it possibly related to more CO2 in the atmosphere boosting plant utilisation, seen as a response to more CO2 in the atmosphere? That is not mentioned.

And there is more as well - http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/43340 with this story also reporting an increase in plant productivity via uptake of carbon - essentially the same data as above but reported in a different way, referring to productivity of land plants. Remember, they produce oxygen!

Climate Change - Are Renewables Going to Make a Difference

The Dane, Bjorn Lomborg is a well known, and respected climate sceptic.......or he was. I recall reading that he was now accepting of climate change, but the following article does call into question the economic pathways most suitable to achieve a lot' with using renewable energy. Especially the economic policies used to achieve take up of the concepts.

Read here - http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/commentary/bootleggers-hijack-climate-change-debate/story-e6frgd0x-1226099304031

He seriously questions the role that renewable energy systems can play in reducing fossil fuel use, and ultimately carbon emissions. Particularly the economic costs of using renewable energy such as wind and solar. Many others might agree directly with this view, and others strongly support the same general view by suggesting that carbon capture and storage must be made to function, as coal will need to play a role in stationary energy production, including electricity, for many years yet.

Here in Australia, a monster user and producer of coal, there has been a degree of support for the develpment of the zero emissions stationary energy plans developed over the past several years and formalised in a document available here -http://beyondzeroemissions.org/zero-carbon-australia-2020

I would agree they do seem economically and conceptually feasible, but significant changes must be implemented in regard to distribution networks for example. And more investment is now going into that area, but not necessarily to meet this concept plan. Lack of vision is a serious impediment to implementation of this concept. Spain has been investing in base load solar systems successfully, as shown in the photo.

Many would argue that nuclear energy will be needed around the world to meent energy needs. And that is low carbon emissions. Recent events eg Fukishima in Japan, will affect ideas on that too.

The Chinese are moving to develop thorium nuclear reactors. They have several notable features that could lead to wider interest. They do not generally have self sustaining fission- ie need some nuclear fuel to keep them going, and they produce very modest radioactive level and relatively short half life waste products [a strong point]. Curiously, Australia has a lot of thorium resources, and even more curiously it can occur with rare earth minerals and Chinese are investing in some of the mines with rare earth/ thorium resources too. Is this coincidence??